Pyroducksx3,
With the wildcats that I designed and use, it is important to get through the load development stage as quickly as possible. When I started doing load development for my first three Allen Magnums, the 257, 6.5mm and 270, I did the whole in depth load development thing. I have 6 barrels sitting on the rack to prove it, all with the throats burnt up in less then 500 rounds each simply because of paper punching and tinkeritis trying to find that magic load.
As such, I had to develop a faster method so that is how I came up with my simplistic method of load development. The theory is that most rifles will perform most consistantly at or very near top working pressures. When dealing with very extreme performance chamberings, this is nearly always the case and it is generally also where these chamberings perform the CLEANEST at as far as powder burning. You put 95 grains of ball powder behind a 25 cal bullet, you want it to burn as clean as possible.
That said I do not endorse over loading any chambering and infact, most of my customers that do develop their own loads for rifles chambered in my wildcats often load them to significantly higher pressures and velocites then I do. I have always been a bit on the conservative side when working with these very low expansion ratio wildcats.
because they like upper pressure loads, it became clear to simply shoot over a chrono and let the rifle tell you when your at max working loads instead of trying to figure out if that group is actually a virbation node or if its chance or what. I used to use the ladder test and in all honesty, unless you have an EXCEPTIONALLY accurate rifle that is that way day in and day out, it really means nothing. Now before those out there that sware by the Ladder test method reach through their computers to choke me, let me explain my comment and ask that you honestly consider what I have to say.
To those that have tested their rifles and developed a load using one of the ladder test methods, how many of you have taken your rifles out on several different days and performed the same ladder test and HONESTLY gotten repeatable results with those tests.
I have done ladder tests over and over to test this theory and to be bunt, they are seldom if EVER consistant from day to day even with the same load. At least not consistant enough to say that you can pick one load that will be THE most consistant day in and day out.
This becomes even more true as the intensity and performance level of the chambering being tested increases. Take a 6mm BR and sure you will have a much better chance at finding a consistant pattern, take a 7mm AM and I would say good luck. But even with the 6mm BR, take your testing out over several days repeating the test and you will most likely see inconsistancies from day to day.
Also, add to that us humans and that totally complicates the test proceedure of the ladder test. Rifles really need to be in the 1/4 moa class consistantly to be able to give any meaningful, repeatable ladder test data. On top of that, the shooter must be capable of perfect, consistant shooting for all the shots fired during the test. One flinch and your trying to decide if your looking at THE load or a flinch.....
To my way of thinking, 1/2 moa is great for groups, smaller the better but VASTLY more important to long range shooting and hunting is the ability for a shooter/hunter and rifle/load combo to put that first shot within 1/2 moa of your point of impact at any range you decide to shoot out to.
Now many will say, "do you realize your talking about a 1 moa diameter group if your goal is to put your first shot within 1/2 moa of your point of aim?"
I certainly do, and if most would honestly evaluate their shooting ability and their rifle capability in field conditons, most would admit that putting your first shot within 1/2 moa of your point of aim is PRETTY **** GOOD and MORE then enough for any big game hunting even out to 1000 yards. In most cases, if your point of impact is 1/2 moa off of your point of aim, even out to 1000 yards, you will never know you were off because you will still easily harvest your animal.
Consider this, a whitetail buck at 880 yards. Using my 1/2 moa of point of aim rule give you an 8.8" diameter impact zone. IF you hold properly on a whitetails front shoulder, you will have MORE then enough room to get well inside the vital zone of this big game animal.
Of course the best accuracy you can get is always better but in reality, a 1/4 moa rifle on the bench will likely be a 1/2 to 3/4 moa or even 1 moa rifle in the field so why waste your barrel life trying to get that magical 1/4 moa load when 1/2 moa and often times a 3/4 moa rifle will perform just as well in real world hunting conditions.
This comes back to the same discussion about using ballistic holdover compared to dialing up for each shot. Certainly, if you plug in the exact data correctly for your shooting conditions, dialing up for each shot will be more accurate, but how much more. How much of that data that we log into our handhelds is an educated guess??? How much error is there in our shots from that compared to the error in using a ballistic reticle.
Now for extreme range hunting, past 880 yards and certainly past 1000 yards, dialing up is recommended but for big game hunting out to 1/2 mile. IF your rifle and drop chart are set up for say 4000 ft elevation and a nominal bar pressure and say 40 degrees air temp and 30% humidy, you could cover probably 90% of all hunting in north America with a single drop charting using the reticle for hold over shooting out to 1/2 mile ranges and never know your drop chart was off because of changes in the environment your shooting in.
Again, could you tell the difference between a 1/4 moa rifle and a 3/4 moa rifle on the bench when you take those same rifles out in the field????? I probably could not most days.
Just the thought process I have come up with over the years playing with these extreme chamberings and getting them set up to hunt with with as few rounds down the barrel as possible.
Certainly not set in stone, certainly not the only way to get things done. Just my way and it works as do MANY other methods. Just differnet roads to get to the same place is all.
