Home Forums Reloading Big Game Rifles H 414

I don't care if y'all think I'm full of s hit or not. What works for my needs works for me. I've no overwhelming desire to prove anyone's methods are less superior to mine.

I just stumbled across this blog looking for a time frame that Creighton Audette first started up his ladder tests. I don't know when this guy started doing this but it's dated 2017. I wouldn't imagine he kept it a secret very long being a blogger thriving on internet attention.

http://www.65guys.com/10-round-load-development-ladder-test/

I've watched a video on the YouTube, I believe by the same guy in the blog, at some point along the way and remember saying hey, WTF? That's pretty much what I do.

I first started messing with Newberry's OCW in 2003 or 2004 or whatever. And over time tried to figure out why it was working, and I'm always looking for a better way to do something better. So I bought a s hitty chrono and dug in. What I've stated on this thread is what OCW and Audette have evolved into for me (of course with a better chrono that I can trust).

This was all prior to me getting involved in PRS and solely because I liked shooting steel on my own range that goes a bit past 1000 yards. When I got into PRS things just fit together nicely.

I'm not a speed junkie, I'm not a load development junkie, and I'm not claiming to reinvent any wheels. Obviously I'm also not the ONLY one thinking this way. My only claim is that this works for my needs and that's all that matters to me.

As far as Mule Deer's 3 inch lateral shift. By my criteria for a load, the explanation is ridiculously simple. Zero degrees proved it to be a steaming pile of s hit and therefore NOT a load to begin with. Scrap it, move on.

I'm new here, so I don't have all the players figured out yet, but this is what y'all remind me of. I can EASILY decide I have better things to do than waste my time arguing with y'all bunch of hateful bitter old women.



Y'all just do you, and I'll keep on doing me.

F UCK IT.

Feral American,

There's hardly ever any measurable wind when I test at zero degrees--which is common here in Montana, since I usually do it first thing in the morning. Such temperatures often occurs after a high pressure system moves in, and I prepare for the test by letting the rifles chill overnight, since I want to reproduce hunting conditions. (Have also found that the common method of freezing ammo at zero, and then testing at "normal" temperatures is unreliable, since as soon as a round's chambered in a warmer rifle, that changes things, partly because the bolt face warms the primers.) In fact zero degree mornings are usually reasonably pleasant, since they often occur during clear skies, so aside from being windless it's often sunny.

Have also found that just about any modern smokeless rifle powder is consistent from about 25 to 80 degrees. Below and above that things can get wonky, and even the most temperature-resistant powders tend to gain velocity above 80--though not as much as "standard" powders.

Which is why I also test in hot temperatures, usually at 95-100 degrees which is about as hot as it gets right here--though I also often "greenhouse" rounds by putting them inside a clear Ziploc bag with a small thermometer until they get to around 115-120. Also frequently test in a barrel that's shot enough quickly to get very hot, mimicking what often occurs during prairie dog shooting. This also indicates whether a certain rifle's barrel maintains its accuracy and POI when hot.

All of this is done partly because Montana has the widest range of recorded temperatures of any of the 50 states, but also because many readers deal with cold and heat when hunting elsewhere. I'm in the information business, not just loading for myself.

Also noticed about this statement from one of your posts:

"Compressed loads. I never advocate for them. Mainly because I don't like crunching kernels and potentially (and unpredictably) changing the burn characteristics of the powder. There are plenty enough powder choices out there to achieve an 85% to 100% load density without compressing a load. If that's something that doesn't bother you then who am I to argue. I won't do it though, and that's all there is to it."

In reality some powder compression tends to improve consistent burning, and also improves temperature-resistance--even in powders designed to be temperature-resistant. I know this partly by experimentation, but also plenty of information gleaned from powder manufacturers, distributors, and bullet/ammo companies, all of which had electronic pressure labs which I visited.

One of the most informative guys in the business was Rob Reiber, who was in charge the pressure testing at Hodgdon for decades before retiring a few years ago. He was a wealth of information on powder, including info on how to load to make it burn more consistently.

But there have been many others as well--including the owner of one powder distributing company (since purchased by Hodgdon) who helped me run tests in their piezo lab for article information. (As an example, one session involved seeing how accurate various "pressure signs" were in estimating safe pressures. Turned out most weren't of much use.) After several such sessions he even offered me a job in the lab, but I was already making more writing than he could offer.

Will be looking forward to more of your posts.

I once believed you were a new guy who was just trying to act as if he had experience. I do not buy that anymore. You're an old poster who has taken on a new ID, because he had wore out his welcome here under his old name. At any rate, you just need to chill out and realize that your opinions are yours and yours alone, and that others with a ton of experience have their own opinions on things. Quit being so argumentive, otherwise you're going to be on everyone's ignore list.

No idea who that is but that's a common problem here? A bunch y'all worry a LOT about who somebody might be.

I'm just a random irrelevant anonymous guy on the internet that's apparently too feral for the popular social media scene. Figured I'd fit right in with this shi t show of a forum.

Starting to rethink that now.

Can we start with yours?

PLEASE?

So, who's on first?!

Click.

I was hoping to continue debating with you, and I have several questions I would still like to see you answer. But I'm done. Too much white noise. Sorry for the bother.

Does "white noise" mean actual information on powder compression from professional ballisticians?

By the way, the .270 load that shifted 3" right at zero degrees used RL-22 powder, and grouped into 1/2-3/4" at 70 degrees. I also worked up a load with the old mil-surp H4831 in the same rifle, and it shot similarly and right to the same POI at 70 degrees. In fact, if my memory is correct a 6-shot group--three with each load--would go under an inch.

But the old H4831 was also not very temp-resistant, as it lost over 150 fps from 70 to zero. POI didn't shift as much, but accuracy went south.

I shot both loads later in more normal temperatures, and they both returned to being very accurate--and shot to the same POI.

Is that the sort of information you were looking for?

I still believe my question has merit. If we shoot a velocity ladder to look for flat spots in the charge vs velocity relationship with only one shot per charge, how do we account for the fact that at a given charge weight the resulting velocity is a random variable? When we shoot we are sampling from the distribution of its possible outcomes.

I would be more inclined to believe we've found a flat spot if we shot five or more rounds at each charge weight and then averaged the results to get our estimate of the velocity at that charge. Then if we see a flat spot in the charge-velocity relationship it would be more believable.

Companies such as Hornady and Sierra shoot many more shots at a given charge weight than just about any handloader will. I mention these two because they publish results for several charge weights, not just a min and max. Examination of their data doesn't reveal flat spots in the charge-velocity relationship.

I’d like to just touch base on temperature one more time. Cold is more than just temperature gentlemen. I ran lots of tests about twenty years ago with some stiff loads of 243AI ball that was placed in the freezer overnight in a double freezer Ziploc bag. Put them in a cooler went to the range and my Oehler 35 showed no more than 25 fps spread. To my way of thinking it wasn’t enough to worry about as the chances of hunting in Alaska or the NW Territory was slim and certainly not with that cartridge.

Then I read one of Creighton Audette’s articles, and I believe Hatcher discussed this also, which revealed the real problem shooting is real cold weather and I should have known this as a former sailor. Cold air is denser and thus creates more aerodynamic resistance and drag. Hot air is the opposite. Food for thought

Rick

Chill the rifle as well.

He puts out info about temperature and load shift changes but never loaded except in mild weather and admitted that, and when gets called out on it, can't back it up other than.....


or this


Why does he Need Barsness to prove him wrong ?? LOL



That's all I said..... And in my experience that was the only issue I ever have at say 200 yards at times. I shot further, not at the ranges shot by some here, but I do not believe a "load" shifts a POI verses the wind having more to do with it. When I change a load is when POI changes and that's the only time I have to re zero.

but your POI changes......
Sounds like you're on a roll


If the POI stays the SAME. And if there is no lateral movement from effected barrel harmonics effect by pressure spikes. I think that's easy enough to understand without getting to wordy in a salad ? LOL



Lay off all the topping and goofy Feral goofy slangs and maybe you can come across better.


Hmmm admits about temp effecting POI

But admits that....

Which I gave as an example of summer and winter POI and has NOTHING to do with development or component choices JUST temp for my 35 Rem.

effect POI.. can't make up his mind at all TOSSED salad. I think he should change his name to Tossed Salad.


How would he know if he never developed loads save in mild weather....


again to reinforce what I said earlier....

Uhhh, there's a goodly amount of time spent in not contributing anything substantive.

Personally I got some food for thought after reading all the cognitive replies here. I'm not inclined to give a hoot about temperature sensitivity as I'm more and more a fair weather shooter the older I get - but there's never a downside to learning more about the art and science of directing a bullet through the air. Now how about underwater ballistics, or the flight of a bullet on Mars maybe.

Oh, and to reference the original question, I dislike H-414/760 in general due to some admittedly haphazard trials long ago in forgotten rifles. How's that for an irrational statement?!

Your initial question certainly does have merit it’s just unfortunate the channel is being lost in static.

I’d like to ask what I, and I’m sure others, would like to know. Is there a site monitor or any verbal navigation rules here or are we just going to continue to fetch up on the rocks

Rick

Good god , trying to pick through all this is mind boggling., espeacially with nit picking
My question is , Is anybody getting great accuracy from 760 ?
I am on my last bottle of H414 and have a couple of 760
But haven’t seen great groups with it
Best being around 1,5”
So how about it , anyone getting great accuracy from 760 ?
Thanks , Kenneth

Hijacking is a major problem on this forum.... but at least there's no moderators ! LOL

I get awesome accuracy from 760

Please be respectful of other posters at all times. That's the only "rule" posted in forum rules ! LOL

I guess if you don't know that now, you never will.

mainly coming form you... but with your massive ego, you'll be back !

So are you running about same wieght with both powders ?
Shooting 150 gold dots and getting groups in .3’s and .4’s with H414 308
Thanks , Kenneth