What came first: the chicken or the egg

[Buster Hemlock]

As far as seat depth or powder charge first, I've done both. Lately I've been in the set it .010" off figure out powder charge and then refine the seat depth after I've determined charge. I'm currently doing some more involved testing to substantiate some ideas i have.
Now, since this has taken a slight turn to chronographs, how many running one have seen book loads match book velocities? I have used a few chronos over the years, currently using a Lab Radar and find book max charges yielding velocities under what the book says, sometimes considerably. Likely because they are using minimum spec barrels that pressure up faster and get them to these velocities. What have you seen?
Also not to point out the obvious but this is a long range site and not knowing your actual velocity will greatly limit your ability to make hits at distance with out some serious time at the range gathering DOPE at known distances

 

[Calvin45]

As far as seat depth or powder charge first, I've done both. Lately I've been in the set it .010" off figure out powder charge and then refine the seat depth after I've determined charge. I'm currently doing some more involved testing to substantiate some ideas i have.
Now, since this has taken a slight turn to chronographs, how many running one have seen book loads match book velocities? I have used a few chronos over the years, currently using a Lab Radar and find book max charges yielding velocities under what the book says, sometimes considerably. Likely because they are using minimum spec barrels that pressure up faster and get them to these velocities. What have you seen?
Also not to point out the obvious but this is a long range site and not knowing your actual velocity will greatly limit your ability to make hits at distance with out some serious time at the range gathering DOPE at known distances

An excellent point about the often massive difference between test barrels and the barrels we actually use. And of course as is always said, each rifle is a law unto itself, there are indeed fast and slow barrels out there.

I've also seen, counter to what you're told to expect, a shorter barrel run faster. Not much, but still notable. My 22 inch savage 270 surprises me, the federal blue box is advertised at 3060 fps and it chronos right at 3050. In my friends 24 inch rem 700 same ammo was right at 3000. In my savage 99 243 22" the rem Corlokt 100g advertised 2960 and, get this, chronographed 2780!!!! I haven't shot factory ammo in years now but this shows that if your trying to shoot to any real distance, you need to know the actual velocity, from a chronograph, as even factory numbers don't always check out.
As a side note, while many call noslers load data optimistic, it was spot on in my old weatherby vanguard with 150 grain bullets and imr 4350, getting a chronographed 3400 fps with the exact same charge weight they used to get that speed. I thought it was weird actually, that never happens.

All in all you're right, it's the exception. The difference in capacity between brass manufacturers alone, and even from lot to lot, ensures all data is for reference, a guideline to be used responsibly, not starting with max, and I've never regretted how I went about getting into reloading. Before I bought a press or any components, on what was at the time a college student budget, I bought a chronograph. I had come to the conclusion in my research it was probably the most important piece of equipment I would need, I think of it as safety equipment.

 

[Calvin45]

And as far as hot rodding goes, as mentioned in earlier posts about seeing how hard you can push something, I agree it gets foolish at a point and I've never tried turning my 270 into a 7mag, but on the flip side one of the satisfying things about hand loading is the prospect of achieving the highest performance safely possible with your particular rifle. Don't try making it into something it's not of course, but I do like to think of it as trying to make it all it's meant to be. If you want a 300 win mag don't try making one out of your 30-06. But if you own a 300 win mag, why wouldn't you want more than the barely above 30-06 performance it's commonly loaded to?

 

[5.56×250]

As far as seat depth or powder charge first, I've done both. Lately I've been in the set it .010" off figure out powder charge and then refine the seat depth after I've determined charge. I'm currently doing some more involved testing to substantiate some ideas i have.
Now, since this has taken a slight turn to chronographs, how many running one have seen book loads match book velocities? I have used a few chronos over the years, currently using a Lab Radar and find book max charges yielding velocities under what the book says, sometimes considerably. Likely because they are using minimum spec barrels that pressure up faster and get them to these velocities. What have you seen?
Also not to point out the obvious but this is a long range site and not knowing your actual velocity will greatly limit your ability to make hits at distance with out some serious time at the range gathering DOPE at known distances

In regards to this being a long range site which is obviously true, like you stated....not everyone is able to take advantage of long range shooting in their present situation, but it doesn't mean they dont aspire to eventually do so. As the original poster on this thread, my question was simply , what do you do first , charge or depth, in finding an accurate load for a new gun . I'm not going to shoot past 150 yds for a while, mainly because I dont have access to a range that allows longer shots. In my opening post, I stated I didnt have a chrono, so that meant the question was independent of any testing, or maybe more simplistic than finding a node or ES.
I used a chrono 20 yrs ago to give full disclosure. I had worked up a pet load for my little 223 crow gun that shot REALLY well and I wanted to see how fast it shot. It had an ES of around 5fps , if memory serves. I didn't know what ES/SD was and I was upset that I had that much fluctuation. It was a little fast, but I was moly coating my bullets and didnt see any pressure signs ,so I didnt change anything. I found that load without a chrono, through testing and very anal attention to detail . The chrono verified the quality of my effort. I am looking forward to using the same anal attention to detail to find a load for this new gun. Before I attempt to shoot at distances beyond my little range in the yard, I will get some shots through a graph so I can work out my dope. For now, I'm gonna focus on the mechanics of the actual load and let the holes in the paper be my guide.

 

[BallisticsGuy]

Or, more to the point, what do you do first when starting a new load for a new rifle ? Do you run seating depths at a median charge weight or do you set the bullet .0XX off the lands and find your powder charge first. I dont have a chrono, so I can't hunt for a node . I'm shooting a 6.5 creed, 24" sendaro contour barrel, rem 700 action, h4350 and rl16, Berger vld 130s, cci br LR primers, if that matters. I know the vlds are a little unique on seating depth.

The amniote egg has been in use for over 300 million years. Gallus Gallus (the chicken) has been around about 58,000 years as near as anyone can tell.

I use the BoxToBench method. Start off either .010 or .040 off the lands and work up a powder load that gives good groups and has livable SD's. Refine it with seating depth by going .010, .040, .080, .120 off and looking for the trend. Once you spot the trend you can elect to get into the weeds refining.

 

[BallisticsGuy]

Neither! Shouldn't be concerned about which came first, but how they get there?! Without investing in a simple chronograph, you living dangerous! It's part of your reloading kit too!

DON'T BLOW YOUR FACE OFF!

Without a chronograph you're guessing at your safety and that of the people around you. Warning signs don't always show themselves in obvious ways. If you can't afford one, you may not be able to afford to handload.

 

[Buster Hemlock]

In regards to this being a long range site which is obviously true, like you stated....not everyone is able to take advantage of long range shooting in their present situation, but it doesn't mean they dont aspire to eventually do so. As the original poster on this thread, my question was simply , what do you do first , charge or depth, in finding an accurate load for a new gun . I'm not going to shoot past 150 yds for a while, mainly because I dont have access to a range that allows longer shots. In my opening post, I stated I didnt have a chrono, so that meant the question was independent of any testing, or maybe more simplistic than finding a node or ES.
I used a chrono 20 yrs ago to give full disclosure. I had worked up a pet load for my little 223 crow gun that shot REALLY well and I wanted to see how fast it shot. It had an ES of around 5fps , if memory serves. I didn't know what ES/SD was and I was upset that I had that much fluctuation. It was a little fast, but I was moly coating my bullets and didnt see any pressure signs ,so I didnt change anything. I found that load without a chrono, through testing and very anal attention to detail . The chrono verified the quality of my effort. I am looking forward to using the same anal attention to detail to find a load for this new gun. Before I attempt to shoot at distances beyond my little range in the yard, I will get some shots through a graph so I can work out my dope. For now, I'm gonna focus on the mechanics of the actual load and let the holes in the paper be my guide.

I have been reading along since you started this thread and read you don't have a chrono, wasn't taking a shot at you or anyone else who decides not to use one for whatever reason. Was simply stating it's a valuable tool that like many others I see as essential. It has saved me money during load development and has revealed to me and a lot of buddies that you can't trust book data due to all the variation in components that goes into reloading and shooting. I myself used to not have one when I started reloading 17 years ago and spent a lot of time believing the numbers in the books or on the ammo box, using those numbers and not making hits on targets or game that I believe now I would have made with better data from a chrono. If your shooting shorter distances and not pushing the published data you will "most likely" be fine.

 

[5.56×250]

Shot a few of my hand loads today. 41.8 of rl16 showed promise and happened to be the load before I saw very slight primer cratering with a magnifying glass at 22.1grs. I'm gonna mess with seating depths while I fire form some more brass at 41.8grs. I already pulled the bullets on all the loads above that charge weight.
Chamber seems pretty tight. Loaded ammo is .292 neck diameter. Fired cases were at .2945.

 

[Calvin45]

Shot a few of my hand loads today. 41.8 of rl16 showed promise and happened to be the load before I saw very slight primer cratering with a magnifying glass at 22.1grs. I'm gonna mess with seating depths while I fire form some more brass at 41.8grs. I already pulled the bullets on all the loads above that charge weight.
Chamber seems pretty tight. Loaded ammo is .292 neck diameter. Fired cases were at .2945.

That tight chamber should be great for long case life!

 

[5.56×250]

That tight chamber should be great for long case life!

Yea, I was kinda thinking the same thing. I turned the case necks just enough to cut the high side. It would have been even tighter if I hadent knock .001 off the necks ! Still about .0145 thickness on neck wall.

 

[nicholasjohn]

Yea, I was kinda thinking the same thing. I turned the case necks just enough to cut the high side. It would have been even tighter if I hadent knock .001 off the necks ! Still about .00145 thickness on neck wall.

That sounds like darn-near perfect to me. Lots of guys go to great lengths to build rifles to dimensions & clearances like those. Did you build the gun to these specs, or did it just work out real pretty like that ?

 

[5.56×250]

It's a remage build that I " assembled " myself , but, no, I did nothing other than buy a barrel from an individual that does a few barrels for others, but mainly for himself and a few close friends. He got tired of waiting for Smith's to turn his barrels and invested in some nice machines to take out that wait time. He uses a toolroom lathe to turn threads and cut chambers to no more than .0001 runout . He calls this a his match chamber. It's on an x caliber blank in a sendero profile. Shoot really good so far, but I'm expecting better once I get a load nailed down.

 

[5.56×250]

Played with seating depth a little bit today. Man, this rifle shoots good. Easily 1/2" rifle. Shot 3 different depths, but just one 5 shot group each. Wind was bad, gusting and variable. I tried to wait for it to settle and squeeze shots in the calm between shifts, but I'm sure there was some effect from wind.
First group was .025 off lands , .534, 4 in .272......second group was .045 off lands, .450 with 4 in .240.......third group was .065 off lands, .690 but one shot was out pretty bad w 4 in .268. Far from ideal conditions and just the first firing on new brass.
I'm liking .045 off the lands, but I'm still gonna try .085 because I have it already loaded .
Really enjoying doing this again.

 

[Frog4aday]

The wind is so frustrating when trying to dial in something precise; you can't ever "know" if a flyer was wind, you, or some quirk in the reloading or settings you chose. But it does seem like 0.45" off the lands has some definite potential.