Question about a load development method ....

[solo1]

Over on Snipers Hide forum a recommended load development approach is to first chose a velocity and then adjust seating depth to tune the load. From your experience, does this a actually work?

I suppose if you were using compatible powder for the cartridge and bullet, and chose an appropriate velocity, it could work.

Do a test it will work for you.find your max load and max col. and back up from max col.0.030 and 0.5 to 1 grain.from max load.reload 20 rounds and adjust the col.in increments depending the proyectile.for me on Barnes works 0.010. Eld x 0.005.Barnes groups at 450y are with In 1 inch.this procedure works for hunting .

 

[SSgt G Cody]

In my 300WSM I've developed 2 loads, a 180 VLD and a 143 Hammer, using N565 powder, Win brass, and Win LRM primers. I really like the Hammer load better (.38 mil, vs .54 w/VLD). Used ladder to refine loads. Settled at .025" off lands. First developed loads at 80-85 degrees (summer), then refined loads at 40-45 degrees (Late fall). I'm very happy with both loads now!

 

[DoneNOut]

Everyone who believe that a low ES load is the most accurate is fooling themselves.
I have a short coarse load that has a 100fps ES, yet it will shoot to 100y into .1's.


Cheers.

Amen to that. Finally somebody else has experienced this!

 

[QuietTexan]

Even the best quality hand loads for ELR and longer will have an ES of 30+ FPS. Depends entirely on how many shots you capture to build the data set - single digit ES comes from not shooting enough to get a strong population. ES being at least 6x of SD is a statistical certainty if you shoot enough shots, so even if you have a basically perfect SD of 5fps for 100 shots, you'll eventually shoot the 99.9% and 0.1% shots and have an ES of at least 30. And all it takes is a single shot being a true outlier to get that 100+ FPS max spread no matter how good you are, and that's if the spread even makes an impact. At 100 yards no way the ES shows up on paper.

Lies, **** lies, and statistics!

 

[homerthebeeman]

This was a goood read! Thank you all for sharing your knowledge.
Just need to digest your experiences and see what works for me

 

[fabarm]

Do a test it will work for you.find your max load and max col. and back up from max col.0.030 and 0.5 to 1 grain.from max load.reload 20 rounds and adjust the col.in increments depending the proyectile.for me on Barnes works 0.010. Eld x 0.005.Barnes groups at 450y are with In 1 inch.this procedure works for hunting .

Excuse me, I did not understand well also why I am using google translate, can you explain me better how I should proceed?
Thank you if you want to clarify me better.

Do a test it will work for you.find your max load and max col. and back up from max col.0.030 and 0.5 to 1 grain.from max load.reload 20 rounds and adjust the col.in increments depending the proyectile.for me on Barnes works 0.010. Eld x 0.005.Barnes groups at 450y are with In 1 inch.this procedure works for hunting .

 

[fabarm]

Excuse me, I did not understand well also why I am using google translate, can you explain me better how I should proceed?
Thank you if you want to clarify me better.

Excuse me, I did not understand well also why I am using google translate, can you explain me better how I should proceed?
Thank you if you want to clarify me better.

 

[milo-2]

Over on Snipers Hide forum a recommended load development approach is to first chose a velocity and then adjust seating depth to tune the load. From your experience, does this a actually work?

I suppose if you were using compatible powder for the cartridge and bullet, and chose an appropriate velocity, it could work.

On snipers hide the tendency to simplify things goes too far IMO. One needs to realize we all desire different levels of accuracy. So no one type of load dev will ever be the standard. I doubt many on Accurate Shooter or bench rest forums are developing loads based off velocities alone.

All this started after a program called AB WEZ came out, probability of a hit, so people think that by SD & ES numbers alone, that with enough spread in numbers, it equates to vertical dispersion down range. A ladder test alone can prove this theory wrong, the ladder test gives your scale system a margin of error if needed. The numbers alone method just guarantees we will spend 1K plus on our powder delivery systems, weighing to .02gr.
I think even the 10 shot velocity ladder guy himself said his system was geared towards known loads, components and rifles. Not all powders yield flat spots as you increase charges, esp if you are shooting more than 2 charges of the same weight for testing.
If you are sincere about learning if this method works, try it, gauge your results against your known methods. If you can live with, it is viable.
I myself have found that reading on how to improve every aspect of my life is counter productive when what i have going works.

 

[nksmfamjp]

I know many oppose my method, but it works pretty well…
Find max oal, into lands, mag length, into lands minus something….then load with it to start.
1) a ladder to find bolt lift shot 1 round per charge into separate bullseyes….find groupings and flat spots in velocity curves.

2) 5 shot groups at different charge weights….look for best groups and best sd. Fine tune until decent sd is found. Group is #2 priority.

3) 3 shot groups at max oal back ~0.050" in 0.005" increments…go back to 0.150" if you have to in order to see groups open and tighten. Select tightest group.

If this isn't pretty darn good, it is likely time to start over with a new bullet.

4) Starting at your current charge weight, shoot 2-3 weights above and below it looking for a combination of best accuracy and sd….5 shot groups….

Fine tune as needed…this is the time to try more and less neck tension, look for bad cases, look at runout, consider a short development skipping #3 trying an alternate powder or primer.

 

[DoneNOut]

I've amassed many different powders over the last 20 some years. I've load developed for 20 + cartridge types. I get 1/4 MOA 5 shots at 50yds. Typically whatever I see at 50yds, the groups shoot better at distance anyway. ES and SD don't mean anything to me for I've some of my most accurate loads shoot double digit SD.

How I do it and stay sane:

1. Pick 3-4 of the most popular powders listed for the new cartridge.
2. Load each powder 1.5 grain under average listed max loads referencing the multi company published data
3. Keep load developing with the powders that show initial promise with 5 shot groups with desired velocity
4. Load .3gr increments till a certain load hits same hole or sub minute at desired velocity. Choose the best recipe
5. Load a bunch of that recipe, go shoot great groups to a mile in some cases, and live my life

There are times a certain velocity range just works in some barrels so I will sacrifice velocity for accuracy. Its happened a few times over the years. Things still die quick when hit.

 

[ARlife4me]

I work in a totally different manner. My earliest load work comes from a win mod70 264wm '61. Reloaded that gun for 32 years before reloading any other cartridge. I started at contact with the lands if possible (bullet having enough contact with the neck) and worked backwards (going shorter) and changed powders and weight 3 times. Ended up with (according sierra #5) back at their coal using 140spbt, but with 1/2gr over their max. I've never tried too shoot anything over 600 yards (prairie dogs). That is an approach only with heavy per caliber bullets.

 

[westgreysharborblacktail]

In my 300WSM I've developed 2 loads, a 180 VLD and a 143 Hammer, using N565 powder, Win brass, and Win LRM primers. I really like the Hammer load better (.38 mil, vs .54 w/VLD). Used ladder to refine loads. Settled at .025" off lands. First developed loads at 80-85 degrees (summer), then refined loads at 40-45 degrees (Late fall). I'm very happy with both loads now!

What's the charge for n565 and 180s

 

[SSgt G Cody]

Personally, with a highly desirable bullet, on a new loading project, I start with the upper 25% of listed loads, on its lower end. After full-length sizing and loading to standard specs, I find best node by 3-shot groups, increasing 1 gn at a time until pressure max appears. Then, at best node load, I start testing 3-shot groups, starting with bullet barely touching lands, then back-off .010" per group until I reach .080", then select best group headspace. Next I check light, medium, and firm crimps. Then test for best primer response. Then, … I start the whole process again, just on a much smaller scale, … and fine tune the whole process at about 1/10 the scale, until best load for THAT gun develops. After first firing all my brass, I clean, trim, and fine-tune every case, and will have all my brass prepped and ready to load. I usually have at least 200 cases allotted and ready for each of my guns. Accuracy validates my method.

 

[Charles Duke]

A ladder test only tells you a flat spot exists, or in other words a node where different powder charges shoot to the same POI.
If I took that info, loaded 100 rounds and fired 10 10 shot groups, how would I know that that 'velocity window' was the most precise without validating group size?
Everyone who believe that a low ES load is the most accurate is fooling themselves.
I have a short coarse load that has a 100fps ES, yet it will shoot to 100y into .1's.
I also do seating depth tests first with a middle load, because the seating depth does not change once found regardless of powder/primer combo. I follow exactly what Ryan does and have been doing so long before he started doing videos on the subject.
I have not shot a ladder in a long time, I use the OCW method and shoot groups, validation is done with 10 shot groups at 600m on several occasions, then overlapped to see actual group size.
One 3 or 5 shot group on one day is not a good way of determining aggregate and you are fooling yourself if you think that is validation on the precision of your load.
I don't care what anyone thinks, but I know that atmospheric conditions change a load over a weekend or sometimes even in one day. Have seen it too many times and it has nothing to do with temp sensitivity of the powder.

Cheers.

Well said!