There has been quite a discussion up in the Gunwriter's forum about ES and SD. I was shooting some ladders with different powders for a 6.5 Creedmoor with 143ELD-X and I found these results interesting. While not statistically significant by any means, the following were shot at 300 yards with a range of 1.5 grains in charge weight and just over 100fps variance in velocity. Do you think we worry about a tenth of a grain in charge weight a little too much? Both H4831SC and Superformance will get more load development. The other 2 powders were StaBall 6.5 and IMR4350 which each gave groups of about 6 inches with the shots landing closer to POA as the velocity increased and showed no significant nodes.
Note that this rifle exceeds max velocity about 1 full grain under Hodgdon's max charge weight so the top loads will be reduced.
Do you think we worry about a tenth of a grain in charge weight a little too much?
For many purposes I would say yes. Here's a pic of a five round, 300 yard group I shot with one of my 308s using thrown charges of IMR 4064. Shot it with a 4x scope too.
I suppose it depends on what you intend to do with the rifle. Hand me that rifle and a handfull of those cartridges with mixed charges from 44-45.5 and I'll go forth and fill my freezer with venison without the least hesitation or concern.
From my short time of observations here, I think too many obsess over insisting things don't matter.
For those people, may they be forever blessed with only half sharpened hunting knives, and trucks stuck in limp mode......
Yes, that has been true since the beginning, but it won't ever stop. It's akin to searching for your four leaf clover while your car, with you in it, is sinking in 50 feet of water.
From my short time of observations here, I think too many obsess over insisting things don't matter.
For those people, may they be forever blessed with only half sharpened hunting knives, and trucks stuck in limp mode......
Yes, that has been true since the beginning, but it won't ever stop. It's akin to searching for your four leaf clover while your car, with you in it, is sinking in 50 feet of water.
Or fretting over .002 of runout.
This is supposed to be about Big Game Rifles after all.
This is supposed to be about Big Game Rifles after all.
That's a funny dynamic, the "hunting rifle", almost to the point of hilarity. I never quite understood why a "hunting rifle" is excused from being the best it can be, or why a mediocre rifle is even tolerated. Some really well known famous gun guy somewhere back in the day said only accurate rifles are interesting. I say only accurate rifles are worth having around. I personally enjoy the challenge, and crafting good and righteous ammo is just that, a craft.
Do I NEED that level of accuracy or precision to kill a deer or any other big game animal? Dude, I hunt with a long bow and cedar shafts, a flintlock and roundballs, a stable of Marlin lever guns, a couple of single action pistols.....and my precision bolt rifles.
Each platform has its own level of limitations and are well understood by me. That doesn't mean, oh well, it's just a flintlock I hunt with and it doesn't matter. No, it has the best barrel and lock I could afford when I built it, I use one type of powder and patch, and I cast my own roundballs, because I WANT to make it do the best it can do. Anything less is a failure of the challenge.
It's no different at the reloading bench. Over the decades I've learned what matters and what doesn't. It's not hard to make a rifle shoot worth a damn within its inherent limitations. Killing an animal is only the ending of the entire journey to get to that point. It's all about what you personally want to invest in it to get there. If I didn't enjoy making the firearms I own perform to their level best then I would just buy cheap factory ammo and call it a day. I would probably have to take up golf too, and bass fishing, and fooling with high maintenance wimmin, just to burn up my money and waste my time.
If you can spend just a little more effort to build a cartridge that shoots more accurately, why not do it?
Totally agree but when+- a grain of powder yeilds sub MOA I'm not chasing that rabbit very far down the hole.
That there is the most important thing right there. It's what YOU can live with. For a "hunting" rifle, I shoot for sub moa 5 shot groups. Sub moa for 10 shot groups is even better. What some guys don't get though, is you have to confirm those loads. A single 3 shot group doesn't tell you anything, except for maybe you got lucky.
Then the question will follow, "well then why do you shoot 3 shot groups at 400 yards???" Listen very carefully, that is a "confirmed" load. This load is one that I've checked with 5 and even 10 shot groups multiple times. That's why I know what it's going to do. "Well, why shoot 3 shots?". They ask. My answer: To conserve components dummy!!!! I know I'm not the only one that does this either. There is a damn ex camp perry guy here, that says he only shoots 2 shot groups, "because the first shot is the only one that matters"... You guys have heard that before too, right?
You have to do what makes you happy, but be smart about it. Make sure the load is consistent enough that you can trust it. If it's not, you are just pizzin in the wind. Literally.. Make sense?
This is supposed to be about Big Game Rifles after all.
That's a funny dynamic, the "hunting rifle", almost to the point of hilarity. I never quite understood why a "hunting rifle" is excused from being the best it can be, or why a mediocre rifle is even tolerated. Some really well known famous gun guy somewhere back in the day said only accurate rifles are interesting. I say only accurate rifles are worth having around. I personally enjoy the challenge, and crafting good and righteous ammo is just that, a craft.
Do I NEED that level of accuracy or precision to kill a deer or any other big game animal? Dude, I hunt with a long bow and cedar shafts, a flintlock and roundballs, a stable of Marlin lever guns, a couple of single action pistols.....and my precision bolt rifles.
Each platform has its own level of limitations and are well understood by me. That doesn't mean, oh well, it's just a flintlock I hunt with and it doesn't matter. No, it has the best barrel and lock I could afford when I built it, I use one type of powder and patch, and I cast my own roundballs, because I WANT to make it do the best it can do. Anything less is a failure of the challenge.
It's no different at the reloading bench. Over the decades I've learned what matters and what doesn't. It's not hard to make a rifle shoot worth a damn within its inherent limitations. Killing an animal is only the ending of the entire journey to get to that point. It's all about what you personally want to invest in it to get there. If I didn't enjoy making the firearms I own perform to their level best then I would just buy cheap factory ammo and call it a day. I would probably have to take up golf too, and bass fishing, and fooling with high maintenance wimmin, just to burn up my money and waste my time.
Many here try to apply benchrest loading techniques to a hunting rifle, they're not built to the specs of a benchrest rifle and won't respond to worrying over minutae. Keep it simple, most loading manuals list a most accurate load, my preference is the late Ken Waters Pet Loads, using these loads a lot of the leg work has already been done.
Many here try to apply benchrest loading techniques to a hunting rifle, they're not built to the specs of a benchrest rifle and won't respond to worrying over minutae. Keep it simple, most loading manuals list a most accurate load, my preference is the late Ken Waters Pet Loads, using these loads a lot of the leg work has already been done.
It's gotta be said.....
I would tend to think that in many cases it's just a hunting rifle, because in many cases people can't shoot worth a fu ck, because in many cases people buy a cheap dog shi t rifle and it won't shoot worth a fu ck no matter what, because in many cases people are just too damn lazy to understand the basic science of making a rifle shoot worth a fu ck.
Etc.....
It's just a hunting rifle saves a lot of faces in an alpha dog internet world.
If you can spend just a little more effort to build a cartridge that shoots more accurately, why not do it?
Totally agree but when+- a grain of powder yeilds sub MOA I'm not chasing that rabbit very far down the hole.
That there is the most important thing right there. It's what YOU can live with. For a "hunting" rifle, I shoot for sub moa 5 shot groups. Sub moa for 10 shot groups is even better. What some guys don't get though, is you have to confirm those loads. A single 3 shot group doesn't tell you anything, except for maybe you got lucky.
Then the question will follow, "well then why do you shoot 3 shot groups at 400 yards???" Listen very carefully, that is a "confirmed" load. This load is one that I've checked with 5 and even 10 shot groups multiple times. That's why I know what it's going to do. "Well, why shoot 3 shots?". They ask. My answer: To conserve components dummy!!!! I know I'm not the only one that does this either. There is a damn ex camp perry guy here, that says he only shoots 2 shot groups, "because the first shot is the only one that matters"... You guys have heard that before too, right?
You have to do what makes you happy, but be smart about it. Make sure the load is consistent enough that you can trust it. If it's not, you are just pizzin in the wind. Literally.. Make sense?
Conversely, one can't get better at long range without actually practicing at long range... with a load that provides adequate feedback of course.
From my short time of observations here, I think too many obsess over insisting things don't matter.
For those people, may they be forever blessed with only half sharpened hunting knives, and trucks stuck in limp mode......
Stuck in limp mode, that sir is just pure evil!
LOL
At least a truck in limp mode throws an error code(s). If only rifles would do that.
Absolutely
They do, and just like fixing a truck, just gotta know where to go and what to do. Sadly, I know more about rifles than I do about trucks. That's what my one mechanic son is for. He reads the codes and knows exactly where to go and what to do. Pretty handy feller to have around.
If you can spend just a little more effort to build a cartridge that shoots more accurately, why not do it?
Totally agree but when+- a grain of powder yeilds sub MOA I'm not chasing that rabbit very far down the hole.
That there is the most important thing right there. It's what YOU can live with. For a "hunting" rifle, I shoot for sub moa 5 shot groups. Sub moa for 10 shot groups is even better. What some guys don't get though, is you have to confirm those loads. A single 3 shot group doesn't tell you anything, except for maybe you got lucky.
Then the question will follow, "well then why do you shoot 3 shot groups at 400 yards???" Listen very carefully, that is a "confirmed" load. This load is one that I've checked with 5 and even 10 shot groups multiple times. That's why I know what it's going to do. "Well, why shoot 3 shots?". They ask. My answer: To conserve components dummy!!!! I know I'm not the only one that does this either. There is a damn ex camp perry guy here, that says he only shoots 2 shot groups, "because the first shot is the only one that matters"... You guys have heard that before too, right?
You have to do what makes you happy, but be smart about it. Make sure the load is consistent enough that you can trust it. If it's not, you are just pizzin in the wind. Literally.. Make sense?
One can't get better at long range without actually practicing at long range... with a load that provides adequate feedback of course.
Would you agree that threading a shot 175 yards through the woods full of branches and blow downs is probably equally as tough a shot as what most would consider "long range", and require just as much precision and predictability?
I passed on a VERY nice buck 2 years ago at 68 yards in that type of woods because I was not confident I could thread that needle with my flintlock and iron sights. Just too much crap along the way and the holes were SMALL. Had it been rifle season and armed with any of my lever rifles or bolt actions that deer would be on my wall right now.
In my opinion "long range" isn't the only qualifier for an accurate hunting rifle/load.
It’s just not MOA and bullet construction that’s important anymore. Now it’s change of POI due to temperature changes. Wind is something that can be dealt with. Application programs can help with that. Perhaps what is most important after POI is bullet construction. Then there’s those with better eyes than me that insist a $700 scope is required.
Before this, it was Lake City brass, H4831 or IMR4350, 180 grain Core Lokts in a semi-custom 03 Springfield with an El Paso K4. 1 to 1.5 MOA was fine.
Yep, guilty as charged!
I suppose to a golfer it’s one less stroke - I wouldn’t know about that because when I played a few rounds of golf keeping score just pissed me off.
Fishing with a cane pole and a worm was fine enough but now…
If you can spend just a little more effort to build a cartridge that shoots more accurately, why not do it?
Totally agree but when+- a grain of powder yeilds sub MOA I'm not chasing that rabbit very far down the hole.
That there is the most important thing right there. It's what YOU can live with. For a "hunting" rifle, I shoot for sub moa 5 shot groups. Sub moa for 10 shot groups is even better. What some guys don't get though, is you have to confirm those loads. A single 3 shot group doesn't tell you anything, except for maybe you got lucky.
Then the question will follow, "well then why do you shoot 3 shot groups at 400 yards???" Listen very carefully, that is a "confirmed" load. This load is one that I've checked with 5 and even 10 shot groups multiple times. That's why I know what it's going to do. "Well, why shoot 3 shots?". They ask. My answer: To conserve components dummy!!!! I know I'm not the only one that does this either. There is a damn ex camp perry guy here, that says he only shoots 2 shot groups, "because the first shot is the only one that matters"... You guys have heard that before too, right?
You have to do what makes you happy, but be smart about it. Make sure the load is consistent enough that you can trust it. If it's not, you are just pizzin in the wind. Literally.. Make sense?
One can't get better at long range without actually practicing at long range... with a load that provides adequate feedback of course.
Would you agree that threading a shot 175 yards through the woods full of branches and blow downs is probably equally as tough a shot as what most would consider "long range", and require just as much precision and predictability?
I passed on a VERY nice buck 2 years ago at 68 yards in that type of woods because I was not confident I could thread that needle with my flintlock and iron sights. Just too much crap along the way and the holes were SMALL. Had it been rifle season and armed with any of my lever rifles or bolt actions that deer would be on my wall right now.
In my opinion "long range" isn't the only qualifier for an accurate hunting rifle/load.
Yes Archery is even more difficult in brush. Self restraint is required in all types of hunting.
Ha! Nothing like poking the 'fire! In all honesty I have chased a few rabbits down the accuracy hole. Spent a lot of dollars and it was sometimes worth it and always educational. We'll see how far this hole goes.... and if we catch the rabbit!
Ive been HL for about 10 years. The small amount of ammo I make shoots better than store bought stuff. I don’t make it quickly but it’s on the gnats ass consistent.
First thing that has to start if you wanna shoot small is the gun, shooter, scope, knowledge and components capable and I mean not at just 100 yards. Any one of those missing you will never shoot under .5 moa probably even at 100 yards certainly not 500-700. .25-.5 moa accuracy is some work especially in brass prep and testing its not an obsession its the willingness to to do it. Find a mentor who is successful at precision shooting like BR and F- Class and do alot of listening and few questions and will save yourself alot of time and money, there's alot of them are more than willing to help. You can't take a 1 moa gun and turn it into a .5 moa by your ammo but you certainly can turn a .5 moa gun into a 1 moa gun
Horses for courses. The work is only worthwhile it its benefits can be realized by the user. For example, the minutiae of brass prep for benchrest or F-class rifles would be largely wasted on still hunting deer ammo for Grandpa's Savage 99 with a 2.5x post reticle scope.
I'm glad the long range and obsessive group shooters have brought their knowledge and equipment to the hunter's world. Where and how I hunt, I don't need it...my time would be better spent practicing offhand...but just the confidence gained in knowing what your well developed rifle and optics are capable of, gives the hunter an edge he never had 30 or 40 years ago. As equipment improved, hunters demanded more of suppliers than ever before. Many of us geezers remember the late 50's, not so fondly sometimes. The poorer among us had a bubba sporter Mauser or Springfield, maybe a box of factory Remington or Winchester, topped with a Weaver 4X...we'd fire a couple shots off the hood of the pickup, hopefully hitting a 4" white rock a hundred paces away...goood 'nuff. They weren't the good old days. These are the good old days, whether you choose to obsess or not.
Horses for courses. The work is only worthwhile it its benefits can be realized by the user. For example, the minutiae of brass prep for benchrest or F-class rifles would be largely wasted on still hunting deer ammo for Grandpa's Savage 99 with a 2.5x post reticle scope.
Most with half a lick of sense would realize that, but grandpa's gun is still not a good enough excuse to get sloppy and not find it's full potential. Unless not giving a shi t is your standard operating procedure.
Horses for courses. The work is only worthwhile it its benefits can be realized by the user. For example, the minutiae of brass prep for benchrest or F-class rifles would be largely wasted on still hunting deer ammo for Grandpa's Savage 99 with a 2.5x post reticle scope.
Most with half a lick of sense would realize that, but grandpa's gun is still not a good enough excuse to get sloppy and not find it's full potential. Unless not giving a shi t is your standard operating procedure.
I disagree to a certain extent. If I am hunting at modest ranges with something like the rifle/scope mentioned above, using a hunting bullet of my choosing, and I'm getting the accuracy I deem necessary for the use, I'm not sure that searching out additional precision is always a good use of my time. I'm also not likely to put my pocket pistol in a Ransom Rest and burn through $200 of defensive ammo to see what shoots best at 50yds. Good enough can be good enough. It's not necessarily "not giving a shi t".
Horses for courses. The work is only worthwhile it its benefits can be realized by the user. For example, the minutiae of brass prep for benchrest or F-class rifles would be largely wasted on still hunting deer ammo for Grandpa's Savage 99 with a 2.5x post reticle scope.
Most with half a lick of sense would realize that, but grandpa's gun is still not a good enough excuse to get sloppy and not find it's full potential. Unless not giving a shi t is your standard operating procedure.
100% truth right there. Obviously he didn't read what I said about 100 yards, or guns capability.
Years ago, when I was younger and reloading components were readily available, I obsessed a great deal more than now!
Fast forward to present, my last load development was with a case nearly double that of a .308 Win., I was increasing powder charges in 1 full grain increments. With each subsequent charge increase, the velocities increased slightly and the group sizes (only 3 shot groups) reduced slightly. I would shoot one group per day, with two to 3 groups per target. The groups were nearly superimposed over each other. This continued until I reached a point at which the pressures were a concern. I then backed down, again in a 1 grain increment, to what appeared a safe level.
Years ago, I would have likely went from that point each direction in .1 grain increments to try and attain the best possible group size. However, at this point the group was pretty darn good, trying to improve would have only resulted in a waste of components and very likely much frustration! All to what end…..perhaps reducing the group another 1/8”. It’s a darn hunt’n rifle!
The group (s) are very likely within the parameters of both the rifle and my shooting capabilities!
I stopped right there……I slept very peacefully that night! It appears that those years of therapy really did help! 🤪 memtb
Horses for courses. The work is only worthwhile it its benefits can be realized by the user. For example, the minutiae of brass prep for benchrest or F-class rifles would be largely wasted on still hunting deer ammo for Grandpa's Savage 99 with a 2.5x post reticle scope.
Most with half a lick of sense would realize that, but grandpa's gun is still not a good enough excuse to get sloppy and not find it's full potential. Unless not giving a shi t is your standard operating procedure.
I disagree to a certain extent. If I am hunting at modest ranges with something like the rifle/scope mentioned above, using a hunting bullet of my choosing, and I'm getting the accuracy I deem necessary for the use, I'm not sure that searching out additional precision is always a good use of my time. I'm also not likely to put my pocket pistol in a Ransom Rest and burn through $200 of defensive ammo to see what shoots best at 50yds. Good enough can be good enough. It's not necessarily "not giving a shi t".
Why even bother then.....
Buy a box of factory ammo to last you the next half dozen seasons or so, and go bass fishing with all the time and money you saved.
Grandpa's gun is gonna max out at some point, likely a lot less than what could be defined as "precision", but probably a little more than what I would realistically expect from my Marlin levers. I would find out, if only for shi ts and giggles.
Horses for courses. The work is only worthwhile it its benefits can be realized by the user. For example, the minutiae of brass prep for benchrest or F-class rifles would be largely wasted on still hunting deer ammo for Grandpa's Savage 99 with a 2.5x post reticle scope.
Most with half a lick of sense would realize that, but grandpa's gun is still not a good enough excuse to get sloppy and not find it's full potential. Unless not giving a shi t is your standard operating procedure.
This is funny actually. For most on here its gotta buy this gadget, now I need this gadget and after another gadget and several hundred or thousand dollars later I have everything needed to speed up my operation, I havent got time to do this or that so let the machine do it. Now its a not give a sh*t operating procedure to not wasting your time doing Benchrest or competition brass prep on a hunting rifle that has but 1 job, put 1 bullet in the boiler room and go home, not 25 or 30 rounds into an x size 10 ring in x amount of time at x distance. Funny place this is.
Horses for courses. The work is only worthwhile it its benefits can be realized by the user. For example, the minutiae of brass prep for benchrest or F-class rifles would be largely wasted on still hunting deer ammo for Grandpa's Savage 99 with a 2.5x post reticle scope.
Most with half a lick of sense would realize that, but grandpa's gun is still not a good enough excuse to get sloppy and not find it's full potential. Unless not giving a shi t is your standard operating procedure.
This is funny actually. For most on here its gotta buy this gadget, now I need this gadget and after another gadget and several hundred or thousand dollars later I have everything needed to speed up my operation, I havent got time to do this or that so let the machine do it. Now its a not give a sh*t operating procedure to not wasting your time doing Benchrest or competition brass prep on a hunting rifle that has but 1 job, put 1 bullet in the boiler room and go home, not 25 or 30 rounds into an x size 10 ring in x amount of time at x distance. Funny place this is.
You think it's funny here, try keeping up with the Joneses in the PRS circle.....
Buy a box of factory ammo to last you the next half dozen seasons or so, and go bass fishing with all the time and money you saved.
Fair point and I agree, although in some cases you might have a lot of components on hand or be facing a lack of available factory ammo, so you are just trying to cobble together a decent load that will shoot and kill like factory ammo.
I'll be damned if I'll waste components/barrel life/ time/money in persuit of superfluous accuracy. Handloading bores the ever livin shyt out of me. Good enough is good enough. I just want to go kill stuff.
Most with half a lick of sense would realize that, but grandpa's gun is still not a good enough excuse to get sloppy and not find it's full potential. Unless not giving a shi t is your standard operating procedure.
100% truth right there. Obviously he didn't read what I said about 100 yards, or guns capability.[/quote]
I was typing my post while you added that part in your edit.
There's a lot of room between getting sloppy, not giving a shit and 1000 yard rmatch rifle brass prep.
Most with half a lick of sense would realize that, but grandpa's gun is still not a good enough excuse to get sloppy and not find it's full potential. Unless not giving a shi t is your standard operating procedure.
100% truth right there. Obviously he didn't read what I said about 100 yards, or guns capability.
I was typing my post while you added that part in your edit.[/quote] The part that I posted about 100 yards and capabilities were in the original post very first paragraph. The only thing I edited was about taking a 1 moa gun and making it .5 moa or you certainly can a .5moa and making it 1 moa with ammo.
First thing that has to start if you wanna shoot small is the gun, shooter, scope, knowledge and components capable and I mean not at just 100 yards. Any one of those missing you will never shoot under .5 moa probably even at 100 yards certainly not 500-700. .25-.5 moa accuracy is some work especially in brass prep and testing its not an obsession its the willingness to to do it. Find a mentor who is successful at precision shooting like BR and F- Class and do alot of listening and few questions and will save yourself alot of time and money, there's alot of them are more than willing to help. You can't take a 1 moa gun and turn it into a .5 moa by your ammo but you certainly can turn a .5 moa gun into a 1 moa gun
I didn't think this part was in the original. Apologies if I missed it.
Every single Competitive shooter i know preps there brass 90% and reloads same way they do there 1,000 yard BR guns it does translate over whether you believe it or not. Like I've said if you never shoot mostly past 100-300 the results don't show up very little. It will to some degree at 300 but very little at 100 some things more than others. Why do you think 99% use Lapua, ADG brass, Berger or custom bullets? there is a reason. Listen to some of these guys talk about how 5 years ago what they shot in the top 5 will be in the bottom 5 today, there's always room for improvement you just gotta be willing and open your mind up what you were doing 5 years ago isn't as good as you were doing. Arguing about the use of components is an excuse like I posted above questions and seeking help is free.
I wonder if we would have books full of pet loads, and load manuals with "accuracy loads" if the old gun gurus had just said screw it, it's just a hunting load.
I come from a time and place apparently forever lost to this world where reloading your hunting ammo saved you money and let you shoot more.
That's gone, and the justification has to change. So I'll justify it with accuracy and pride in crafting good ammo for good rifles, as that's pretty much all that's left anymore.
Some things matter, and some things don't, but it's sure entertaining to watch folks argue over it all.
Many here try to apply benchrest loading techniques to a hunting rifle, they're not built to the specs of a benchrest rifle and won't respond to worrying over minutae. Keep it simple, most loading manuals list a most accurate load, my preference is the late Ken Waters Pet Loads, using these loads a lot of the leg work has already been done.
It's gotta be said.....
I would tend to think that in many cases it's just a hunting rifle, because in many cases people can't shoot worth a fu ck, because in many cases people buy a cheap dog shi t rifle and it won't shoot worth a fu ck no matter what, because in many cases people are just too damn lazy to understand the basic science of making a rifle shoot worth a fu ck.
Etc.....
It's just a hunting rifle saves a lot of faces in an alpha dog internet world.
Every single Competitive shooter i know preps there brass 90% and reloads same way they do there 1,000 yard BR guns it does translate over whether you believe it or not. Like I've said if you never shoot mostly past 100-300 the results don't show up very little. It will to some degree at 300 but very little at 100 some things more than others. Why do you think 99% use Lapua, ADG brass, Berger or custom bullets? there is a reason.
You're making my point with the highlighted section. That covers a high percentage of people's applications.
If you dont believe BR loading practices cross over to hunting rifles take your best 100 yard load set up a 700 yard target shoot it change the seating depth .003 shoot it again and post results.
If you dont believe BR loading practices cross over to hunting rifles take your best 100 yard load set up a 700 yard target shoot it change the seating depth .003 shoot it again and post results.
My point is what shows up at 700 (but not 100 and not very much at 300) means very little to what a lot of people are doing.
I wonder if we would have books full of pet loads, and load manuals with "accuracy loads" if the old gun gurus had just said screw it, it's just a hunting load.
I come from a time and place apparently forever lost to this world where reloading your hunting ammo saved you money and let you shoot more.
That's gone, and the justification has to change. So I'll justify it with accuracy and pride in crafting good ammo for good rifles, as that's pretty much all that's left anymore.
Some things matter, and some things don't, but it's sure entertaining to watch folks argue over it all.
Buddy, I shoot a lot, so I still have to search out those good deals!!!! It is far less expensive for me to load up my ammo though, vs. buying it at the store. It always has been and always will be. Here's what I bought the other day, in regards to reloading components:
Then a couple months back:
A few months before that:
And some just to have on the shelf because they are rare: Both of those boxes cost me $15/each, and were full boxes.
By buying cheap like that, it allows me to shoot as much as I want, and test as much as I like, and find good/great loads. I have always liked to "tinker" with my rifles, to make them shoot as well as they can. I view that as a mechanical obstacle, that needs to be crossed and that every rifle needs to be mechanically sound. Every rifle, whether hunting or precision has to be "mechanically sound". That means properly glass bedded, good scope bases, rings, scope, trigger, freefloated barrel or otherwise.
It's not just about the load, as that is probably the most simple process in the whole equation. Also, those that rely on others to tell them what pet loads work for them are fu cking ridiculous. Those that really want to find the rifles true potential need to be loading for that rifle in particular, because they are all individuals. Some here get that, and others are left scratching their azz. It's like the followers and leaders, and I know where I stand...
I don't lack components, I have a good supply, and I too buy what I can when I get the best bang for the buck.
But, the reality is, my sons and I shoot less now than we ever did because it's that much harder to replace it. I hope with all my heart I'm wrong, but I don't see good times again anywhere in the near future. I'll just stick to my conservative principles and not waste what I have.
One reason I'm going back to casting bullets again......
How many obsess over runout? I never measure it. Quality dies set up properly will all but eliminate case run out. How many use " Competition " seating dies that costv150-200.00 or more. How many BR or F- Class guys use " Competition " seating dies, none that I know there's a reason. They all use Inline dies. Why because when you take the seating stem out and drop the bullet in it starts into the neck almost perfect as close to it as you can get. The other reason is changing seating depth at the range. Take one of your loaded rounds seated with a " Competition " die like a Redding measure the runout now seat one with a Wilson inline die now measure runout its why I and most I know dont even bother anymore measuring it.
I've seen a test of runout with various seating dies. The Wilson did not beat the Redding, and in raw numbers actually looked a bit worse. I think it was statistically indistinguishable though.
Was it the brass prep, bullet or die. Everytime I have measured it inline die wins everytime. Look at the people who are successful at there discipline there is a reason they do what they do I can guarantee you they have tested many times. There is no way you can start a bullet in a Redding, RCBS seating die into the neck as straight as a wilson by dropping the bullet down through the stem. I every bullet set on top of a case before it is seated in a c" conventional die is crooked no matter how good your chamfer is
There's a lot of room between getting sloppy, not giving a shit and 1000 yard rmatch rifle brass prep.
One more time it matters. It all does. Try it at 300 you probably will see.
I shoot at 300 quite often. On the target I posted earlier I made notes to include the head to ogive length including a Sinclair nut comparator. The rifle I was shooting that day likes its bullets seated a bit shorter than some of my other 308s. I know this because I tested for it.
I'm not taking the extreme position of "nothing matters for hunting rifles".
How many obsess over runout? I never measure it. Quality dies set up properly will all but eliminate case run out. How many use " Competition " seating dies that costv150-200.00 or more. How many BR or F- Class guys use " Competition " seating dies, none that I know there's a reason. They all use Inline dies. Why because when you take the seating stem out and drop the bullet in it starts into the neck almost perfect as close to it as you can get. The other reason is changing seating depth at the range. Take one of your loaded rounds seated with a " Competition " die like a Redding measure the runout now seat one with a Wilson inline die now measure runout its why I and most I know dont even bother anymore measuring it.
You don't want to be removing the seating stem on your Wilson to drop a bullet in from the top. That will only result in excess wear and used to be cautioned against in their instructions.
How many obsess over runout? I never measure it. Quality dies set up properly will all but eliminate case run out. How many use " Competition " seating dies that costv150-200.00 or more. How many BR or F- Class guys use " Competition " seating dies, none that I know there's a reason. They all use Inline dies. Why because when you take the seating stem out and drop the bullet in it starts into the neck almost perfect as close to it as you can get. The other reason is changing seating depth at the range. Take one of your loaded rounds seated with a " Competition " die like a Redding measure the runout now seat one with a Wilson inline die now measure runout its why I and most I know dont even bother anymore measuring it.
You don't want to be removing the seating stem on your Wilson to drop a bullet in from the top. That will only result in excess wear and used to be cautioned against in their instructions.
There's a lot of room between getting sloppy, not giving a shit and 1000 yard rmatch rifle brass prep.
One more time it matters. It all does. Try it at 300 you probably will see.
I shoot at 300 quite often. On the target I posted earlier I made notes to include the head to ogive length including a Sinclair nut comparator. The rifle I was shooting that day likes its bullets seated a bit shorter than some of my other 308s. I know this because I tested for it.
I'm not taking the extreme position of "nothing matters for hunting rifles".
Thats your choice, ive shot atleast a dozen hunting rifles off of bipods at 650-700 that will shoot 1.5-2" groups consistently in good conditions its why I only shoot load development in good conditions after that I dont care about some wind.
Was it the brass prep, bullet or die. Everytime I have measured it inline die wins everytime. Look at the people who are successful at there discipline there is a reason they do what they do I can guarantee you they have tested many times. There is no way you can start a bullet in a Redding, RCBS seating die into the neck as straight as a wilson by dropping the bullet down through the stem. I every bullet set on top of a case before it is seated in a c" conventional die is crooked no matter how good your chamfer is
If you're not ham-fisted using a sliding sleeve support die like the Redding or Forster the bullet will be aligned with the neck before the actual seating begins.
Do you think we worry about a tenth of a grain in charge weight a little too much?
For many purposes I would say yes. Here's a pic of a five round, 300 yard group I shot with one of my 308s using thrown charges of IMR 4064. Shot it with a 4x scope too.
And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that, either.................& it doesn't sound like you were obsessing over it at all.
This thread has gotten totally distorted, driven by FA's comments & into oblivion & off the edge of reality, regarding handloading.
The OP showed a nice illustration of the effect of 1.5 gr variation in a nominal 41 grain load..........................but I'd be willing to be a LOT of money that mathman's loads didn't have that much variation..................& neither do anyone else's that are worthy of being called a HL'er.
And all w/o obsessing....................over SD & ES.
If you accept that, to a significant degree, SD/ES are driven by powder charge variation, most HL'er are not going to accept a combination of powder, equipment & technique that gives 1.5 gr powder variation within a lot of handloaded ammo.
And given today's types of powders available, the equipment available & much more than basic handloader know-how, there's no need to get that kind of variation in performance on target due to velocity variations (SD/ES) that would drive the kind of on-target variation with a reasonably good shooting hunting rifle.
But using coarse powders, with a schitty powder measure, combined with sloppy technique will surely give far more than "good" results in powder charge variability, & subsequently poor ES/SD, & probably less than desired performance on the target.
But in today's world, you don't have to obsess to fix most of that.
There are lots of relatively fined grained powders that flow well for virtually any application.
There are plenty of good powder feeders that are verry accurate & repeatable in their performance.
And there are even more sophisticated tools like an RCBS ChargeMaster.....................if you still want to use a stick powder & not trickle to load by hand.
Or in the worst case, if you insist on using coarse powders, you can always manually trickle to load weight. (That's getting close to obsessive & stupid, today)
And you can learn better & more consistent loading techniques.
And best of all, none of that is "obsessive"........................
But FA did get one thing right; you can't overcome whatever the inherent, baseline capability of the rifle might be..................but you can make it as good as it can be.
And that's not obsessive.
Obsessive & anal retentive is BR shooting. And BR handloading. For discussion.
Do you think we worry about a tenth of a grain in charge weight a little too much?
For many purposes I would say yes. Here's a pic of a five round, 300 yard group I shot with one of my 308s using thrown charges of IMR 4064. Shot it with a 4x scope too.
And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that, either.................& it doesn't sound like you were obsessing over it at all.
Exactly. In the notes it says thrown charges of IMR 4064, which is a relatively coarse stick powder in case a reader of the thread doesn't know. I'd be weighing charges in obsessive mode.
What is so obsessive about BR shooting? Is it because there competive? Its no different than fishing, racing, golf or any other sport they want shoot the smallest group or biggest score. Do you go fishing with your buddy to catch the smallest fish?
What is so obsessive about BR shooting? Is it because there competive? Its no different than fishing, racing, golf or any other sport they want shoot the smallest group or biggest score. Do you go fishing with your buddy to catch the smallest fish?
No, but I don't use a Formula 1 car to run down to the corner grocery either.
What is so obsessive about BR shooting? Is it because there competive? Its no different than fishing, racing, golf or any other sport they want shoot the smallest group or biggest score. Do you go fishing with your buddy to catch the smallest fish?
No, but I don't use a Formula 1 car to run down to the corner grocery either.
Neither do I, drove a 93 chevy pickup for 20+ years.
What is so obsessive about BR shooting? Is it because there completive?
I didn't say there was anything wrong with it.
But I called it obsessive, because, compared to everyday handloading, all aspects must be far more detailed with even more specialized, special purpose hardware and it not, then you will not be competitive.
Weighed, specially produced bullets, etc., blah, blah, blah.
What is so obsessive about BR shooting? Is it because there completive?
I didn't say there was anything wrong with it.
But I called it obsessive, because, compared to everyday handloading, all aspects must be far more detailed with even more specialized, special purpose hardware and it not, then you will not be competitive.
Weighed, specially produced bullets, etc., blah, blah, blah.
MM
You are completely wrong, I have no specialized anything all my Bergers are pulled straight out of the box and seated absolutely no measuring. Its all about the right tools, procedures, components and willingness. As far as rifles most all mine and relatives and friends I load for 80% are Rem 700 actions no 'truing" custom barrels and decent triggers and stocks i have bedded myself. Most scopes are atleast 18x or more not 1 is anything close to a 4,000' full on custom gun
Then you're not a real BR shooter, & you said that you don't compete.....................I have a friend who was & did. Quite successfully. Been although all his procedures & equipment & supplies.
"Everybody is screwy about something, some more so than others and about different things, which is their right. The problem comes when one puts his obsessions above the obsessions of others."
Then you're not a real BR shooter, & you said that you don't compete.....................I have a friend who was & did. Quite successfully. Been although all his procedures & equipment & supplies.
MM
I dont and never have, go to the Missoula Deep Creek range at there last match of the year and see what the 10.5lb hunting rifles shoot at 1,000 you will see what I'm talking about.
It seems some have problems with some that can and will and some that don't and won't which is fine with me, just don't tell me it takes this specialized this that or the other anytime you wanna see my "specialized" tools your in Havre more than willing to look.
I meant that more or less TIC................the real competitors (in my mind) who take it 120% seriously, are obsessive..................maybe not to themselves,
but what they do is what it takes to be competitive.
There's no reason to do what they do for hunting rifles needs. & short of neck turning, I do as much as is needed to get as much as I can out of my gear.
Its really ironic some of you that wanna portray me as obsessed with my reloading and shooting which is farthest from the truth. You wanna ASSUME I have all the pricey rifles and equipment just makes it even more Hillarious. I dont give 2 [bleep] about runout or E.S and S.D simply because target tells everything.
Might be mistaken, but I think a few years ago Muledeer did an an article about the larger the cartridge the less impact small increments of powder matters. Personally, I am happy if load shoots 1 &1/2 " at 100 yards although I have few rifles that do better. That will kill a deer or an elk out further than I can shoot.
An "obsession" like squeezing every ounce of accuracy out of a rifle is what some of us do. Knowing the limits of the rifle, ammo, and shooter are what some of us can't comprehend. Some of us will get to a point where we are pulling our hair out, and then quit. Accepting it for what it is.
I will say that every used rifle I've bought over the last few years (and maybe even more) has been more than capable enough to shoot a big game animal at a measly 400 yards. Groups at 100 yards sub 1" for 5 shots. That can be achieved, but it does take work, in most cases.
My most recent centerfire rifle, being an older Sako that I really like. Is one such critter. Haven't even worked on loads too much with the rifle, but had to get the mechanicals down pat. It needed proper glass bedding, barrel freefloat, to the proper degree. This one required some bedding under the chamber, which some do, and some don't. That is a mechanical thing, where you have to experiment to find out. So, I started with a load that I use in my girlfriends new to her Winchester classic compact and just used it in the Sako.. Easy enough. The rifle shot a very consistent 1.25 moa for 5 shots at 100 yards, and almost 1/2 moa for 3 shots at 400 yards. Now with some bedding and a little work, it shoots that same load into sub moa for 5 shots at 100 yards, and it still prints close to 1/2 moa for 3 shots at 400 yards. The thought crossed my mind many many times with this rifle, that this is GOOD enough!!!! Its' not a benchrest rifle, it's a classic hunting rifle and I'm basically treating it as such.
One reason I like my Tikka rifles, they are very little fuss for the amount of reward you get on target. Easy to develop loads for, they are lightweight and balance well when packing them around in the woods. Win win in my book. All the other rifles out there are projects in the box, waiting to be wrung out.
Someone mentions runout. Oh boy, lets not get started with runout!!! That needs to be minimal if you want good shooting ammo. Even my hunting ammo has low (sub .003" TIR) runout. When setting up my dies, I always set them to produce minimal runout. That is a must. That may be "obsessive", because we all know it's not totally required to kill a deer or elk. But if you extend those ranges you shoot, you better come prepared!! You owe that to the critter you are hunting.
One of my favorite elk hunting rifles for example. It has a custom barrel on it, and it shoots very well:
Is that level of precision really needed for an elk hunting rifle? Maybe not, but it never hurts..:
Do you think we worry about a tenth of a grain in charge weight a little too much?
For many purposes I would say yes. Here's a pic of a five round, 300 yard group I shot with one of my 308s using thrown charges of IMR 4064. Shot it with a 4x scope too.
And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that, either.................& it doesn't sound like you were obsessing over it at all.
This thread has gotten totally distorted, driven by FA's comments & into oblivion & off the edge of reality, regarding handloading.
The OP showed a nice illustration of the effect of 1.5 gr variation in a nominal 41 grain load..........................but I'd be willing to be a LOT of money that mathman's loads didn't have that much variation..................& neither do anyone else's that are worthy of being called a HL'er.
And all w/o obsessing....................over SD & ES.
If you accept that, to a significant degree, SD/ES are driven by powder charge variation, most HL'er are not going to accept a combination of powder, equipment & technique that gives 1.5 gr powder variation within a lot of handloaded ammo.
And given today's types of powders available, the equipment available & much more than basic handloader know-how, there's no need to get that kind of variation in performance on target due to velocity variations (SD/ES) that would drive the kind of on-target variation with a reasonably good shooting hunting rifle.
But using coarse powders, with a schitty powder measure, combined with sloppy technique will surely give far more than "good" results in powder charge variability, & subsequently poor ES/SD, & probably less than desired performance on the target.
But in today's world, you don't have to obsess to fix most of that.
There are lots of relatively fined grained powders that flow well for virtually any application.
There are plenty of good powder feeders that are verry accurate & repeatable in their performance.
And there are even more sophisticated tools like an RCBS ChargeMaster.....................if you still want to use a stick powder & not trickle to load by hand.
Or in the worst case, if you insist on using coarse powders, you can always manually trickle to load weight. (That's getting close to obsessive & stupid, today)
And you can learn better & more consistent loading techniques.
And best of all, none of that is "obsessive"........................
But FA did get one thing right; you can't overcome whatever the inherent, baseline capability of the rifle might be..................but you can make it as good as it can be.
And that's not obsessive.
Obsessive & anal retentive is BR shooting. And BR handloading. For discussion.
YMMV
MM
Glad I could help out.
Did I say how entertaining this stuff is?
Excuse me for a little bit while I go sharpen a knife, because, well, it's dull.
I don't think too many people obsess. It's a matter of trying to understand who they are and what makes them happy.
Joe Average
Some people buy a die set and use it to load whatever bullets they buy. You read their posts from time to time.
"I'm happy with Core Lokts and use the same RCBS die set I bought in 1969."
They might have a 308 Winchester they've been shooting for years and use the same bullets all the time. Occasionally, they read about some new bullet and might buy a box to try, but that's the exception, not the rule. They appreciate tools that last and consider themselves practical. It's all good.
The Weekend Warrior
Others like to try some of the new stuff from the bullet/powder companies - if it fits their needs. They enjoy tinkering at the reloading bench on Saturdays because it's relaxing. Sometimes, they read magazines or go online looking for hunting or shooting articles. They are curious. From time to time, new components or rifles interest them because of the adventure and potential usefulness. They are the silent majority.
Member of the Camera Club
Then there are people who like to buy gadgets. They enjoy experimenting, but it doesn't consume them. They can be convinced to shoot past 100 or 200 yards. They are willing to try something new because, well, it looks cool! You might see them at gun shows, looking for used dies or accessories. Reloading is still a hobby, but it takes up more of their leisure time. They like talking with like minded people about how they can make their groups shrink. They usually are members of a few online outdoor forums.
The Obsessed
As you ascend the mountain, you see competitive shooters, LR hunters and beanfield varminters. They shoot at things that are far away and need accuracy. Whether it's prairie dogs, sheep, or x rings, to be able to dial in on what you're aiming at is very important. They are always looking for an edge and buy all the latest equipment. Listening to them can be like trying to understand someone who speaks a foreign language. They are always talking about spin drift, mirages and precession.
The Keyboard Ninjas
There is another group, but they are secretive. I left them for last. Certainly, they are not fun to have around. Some talk about owning LR equipment like March or NF scopes. They love to join in on conversations about the newest ELD bullet or top of the line cartridge. They can even be found poopooing the equipment choices of others. Some do not hunt. Most are full of negativity.
This last group has issues. Perhaps they cannot afford the high end stuff. They may not understand why some people like to shoot long range, or hunt deer, or punch holes in paper. But they can afford a computer and love to stir the pot. They obsess over teasing the other groups. For them, it's the thrill of upsetting others. Sadly, they cannot appreciate any of the groups.
---
All these groups all have one thing in common. They don't understand any of the others.
Runout, sub0.2gr charge weights, ES, ED are all indicators.
It’s not like our rifles and loads are multimillion industries with hundreds of employees that have to rely on indicators to work out how good they’re doing.
Just shoot the load at paper and see.
Of course if there is then a problem you can look but most time it’s more basic
Runout, sub0.2gr charge weights, ES, ED are all indicators.
It’s not like our rifles and loads are multimillion industries with hundreds of employees that have to rely on indicators to work out how good they’re doing.
Just shoot the load at paper and see.
Of course if there is then a problem you can look but most time it’s more basic
What are E.S and S.D indicators of? Good group bad group? Vertical? Horizontal?
For the average shooter, over average distances won't matter much at all. But over the longer distances say 500yds and beyond the highs and lows start to be come apparent. Here's a pretty decent article that get's into the effect:
I ran the numbers with Strelok Pro using my 6mm SLR data (think 6mmC +P) Berger 105 Hybrid (fictional load, my load has an SD of 7) and a 10MPH cross wind, same conditions. I used the high and low MVs for the fictional load.
So at 600 you're looking at 2.3" delta in drop and .5" less wind between the highs and lows in your ES.
At 1000 you're looking at 8.8" delta in drop and 1.4" in wind delta.
I don't think anybody has ever said that stats trump accuracy, just that for the longer distances it's better to have both good accuracy and stats.
That is completely false ive seen many 1,000 shot ladders that will prove it, go over to accurateshooter and look at ladders 1,000 BR shooters post it will prove it also. Target tells everything period, numbers don't. I've shot more 1.5-2" triangle shape good groups at 700 with low teen to mid 20's with than I ever have single digit. I shot a 3 shot group once with my 30-28 all 3 shots were 3101fps and the group was 3" tall and 3/4 wide.
I watched a really good 1,000 BR shooter one day shooting 5 shot 890 yard 2.5 -4 " groups that were same shape as the size that were all high teens to mid 20's E.S
That is completely false ive seen many 1,000 shot ladders that will prove it, go over to accurateshooter and look at ladders 1,000 BR shooters post it will prove it also. Target tells everything period, numbers don't. I've shot more 1.5-2" triangle shape good groups at 700 with low teen to mid 20's with than I ever have single digit. I shot a 3 shot group once with my 30-28 all 3 shots were 3101fps and the group was 3" tall and 3/4 wide.
Got it, actual accuracy trumps stats.
The author of the article is listed, why don't you drop him a line and let him know. While you're at it, contact the folks at Berger and give them a piece of your mind:
Quote
A Berger 6mm 109 grain Long Range Hybrid Target bullet shot with a 2980 fps muzzle velocity has a predicted drop of 878.57 inches at 1500 yards, while the same bullet with a 3020 fps muzzle velocity has a predicted drop of 849.12 inches at 1500 yards. That is almost a 30 inch difference!
Quote
It is easy to see why so many shooters aim for single digit SDs when hand loading. The same relationship between average and SD applies for any range of numbers that are normally distributed, which many of the variables in shooting are, so it’s worth learning the above information.
Typically, variation in the BC of bullets from shot-to-shot are normally distributed, so you can estimate the spread of BC’s in any group you can measure the SD of. Shots with BC’s very far from the average will be less likely than shots with BC’s closer to the average. The Extreme Spread (ES) is the range from the highest to lowest, and will drive the actual dispersion at long range. To see what this equates to when it comes to hit percentage on target, read our next article, BC Variation and Hit Percentage at Long Range.
It does a pretty good job of comparing ES and SD with hit probability. I'm positive the author of that one would love to hear about your experience as well.
You can believe all the articles you want i believe what I see with my own eyes and targets,there's plenty of guys who will disagree with Berger. Read Tony Boyer book not one word about E.S and S.D, does Eric Cortina ring a bell Hornandy claiming his tuners dont work ring a bell. People need to test things for themselves or watch other really good precision shooters do testing. I guess all these guys who win national championships and records are wrong and should listen to Berger and magazine articles and change the way they do things.
Go over to accurateshooter and tell all the guys they got it wrong because there S.D or numbers says so, ill come watch just let me know when you do
I'm beginning to believe that reading comprehension isn't your strong suit.. am I correct?
As I said (IF you could comprehend) stats don't trump accuracy.
So, are you saying that good chrono stats are an indicator of poor accuracy? Or are you saying that achieving good chrono stats hinders accuracy?
Targets are definitely not your strong suit, ill be waiting on accurateshooter shooter to bring your arguments over there and tell those guys there all wrong Stick is right on one thing you can tell who shoots and who just reads about it.
That is completely false ive seen many 1,000 shot ladders that will prove it, go over to accurateshooter and look at ladders 1,000 BR shooters post it will prove it also. Target tells everything period, numbers don't. I've shot more 1.5-2" triangle shape good groups at 700 with low teen to mid 20's with than I ever have single digit. I shot a 3 shot group once with my 30-28 all 3 shots were 3101fps and the group was 3" tall and 3/4 wide.
No, it’s not false. The “target” is a result of the physical systems, which can be described and modelled using math and numbers. The key to matching the theory with reality is to understand the physics and correctly model the system with numbers. It would be crazy to suggest that, if it were possible, bullets exiting the muzzle in exactly the same position and with exactly the same speed wouldn’t impact at exactly the same point (assuming identical atmospheric conditions).
I think you are misinterpreting the point being made. Speed is one variable that affects POI, but that doesn’t mean that it’s necessarily the dominant variable, or that it can’t be somewhat offset by other variables. Muzzle position at the time of bullet release is another variable, and when people talk about “finding a node,” this is what they are referring to. Correctly timing bullet release at a certain point in the muzzle’s path of motion can largely offset any existing speed variation from shot to shot, but there is no doubt that minimizing speed variation helps and results in more consistent POI.
You mentioned Cortina. He is a proponent of the load development method in which you first tweak variables to minimize speed variation, and then tweak seating depth to time bullet exit correctly at an anti-node in the muzzle’s oscillatory motion.
That is completely false ive seen many 1,000 shot ladders that will prove it, go over to accurateshooter and look at ladders 1,000 BR shooters post it will prove it also. Target tells everything period, numbers don't. I've shot more 1.5-2" triangle shape good groups at 700 with low teen to mid 20's with than I ever have single digit. I shot a 3 shot group once with my 30-28 all 3 shots were 3101fps and the group was 3" tall and 3/4 wide.
No, it’s not false. The “target” is a result of the physical systems, which can be described and modelled using math and numbers. The key to matching the theory with reality is to understand the physics and correctly model the system with numbers. It would be crazy to suggest that, if it were possible, bullets exiting the muzzle in exactly the same position and with exactly the same speed wouldn’t impact at exactly the same point (assuming identical atmospheric conditions).
I think you are misinterpreting the point being made. Speed is one variable that affects POI, but that doesn’t mean that it’s necessarily the dominant variable, or that it can’t be somewhat offset by other variables. Muzzle position at the time of bullet release is another variable, and when people talk about “finding a node,” this is what they are referring to. Correctly timing bullet release at a certain point in the muzzle’s path of motion can largely offset any existing speed variation from shot to shot, but there is no doubt that minimizing speed variation helps and results in more consistent POI.
You mentioned Cortina. He is a proponent of the load development method in which you first tweak variables to minimize speed variation, and then tweak seating depth to time bullet exit correctly at an anti-node in the muzzle’s oscillatory motion.
Ask Eric Cortina. Alex Wheeler, Jack Neary, Tony Boyer, John Whidden etc. if there gonna believe there target or computer, E.S- S.D #'s. Read up on positive compensation even Eric i believe in his Podcast with Alex Wheeler didn't believe in it untill recently. What does Eric always say at the end of every podcast BELIEVE THE TARGET!!!
Who says at about the 6 minute mark don't worry about groups till you get your ES and SD down?
"When I'm doing powder charges, I don't even shoot at paper, I'm trying to get my loads as consistent as possible, and that's over a chronograph."
That guy?
Down to what? Reasonable is the answer not single digit is the end all be all. Jesus man dont put words in my mouth, listen to a bunch of his podcasts of different people he interviews not 1 sentence. Did he put a number on it? NO.
Not 1 person I have mentioned and I know there's more who have ever said you have to have a single digit E.S. to be competive or shoot small, if they have post it here. Have you ever been to a 1,000 yard match? Shot with some successful 1,000 shooter? or just read about it
Since some are to lazy to do there own research ill give you some examples on to look at on accurateshooter. Look at the 6BRA load data thread at post #786 page 40 and page 37 post #37. Look at the main page at the Aluminum Nuevo in a low profile LRB on paige 11 post #12 and come back and post your arguments at the results. One other shooter I forgot to mention is Glenn Kulzer who set 8 IBS 1,000 yard records in 2021. I guess all these I mentioned don't know [bleep]
If that isn't enough for you Google positive compensation shooting and read the thread on accurate shooter. The late Stan Taylor talks of a 3.7" group he shot at 1,000 yard match that had an E.S. of 29. Theres lots of examples out there that reasonable double digit E.S will shoot small at 1,000.
I don't think single digit SD's, over a long term basis with a large sample size, with hunting guns, bullets, brass & powder, is a realistic expectation.
Somebody, anybody, put up some 100 shot strings & prove me wrong.
It doesn't take many rounds downrange,to illustrate the perils of increased ES/SD on Long Range vertical dispersion. That whether Rimfire or Centerfire. Hint.
Not 1 person I have mentioned and I know there's more who have ever said you have to have a single digit E.S. to be competive or shoot small, if they have post it here. Have you ever been to a 1,000 yard match? Shot with some successful 1,000 shooter? or just read about it
Originally Posted by sherm_61
If that isn't enough for you Google positive compensation shooting and read the thread on accurate shooter. The late Stan Taylor talks of a 3.7" group he shot at 1,000 yard match that had an E.S. of 29. Theres lots of examples out there that reasonable double digit E.S will shoot small at 1,000.
Where is anyone here saying you need single-digit ES? Single-digit SD, maybe, but SD is very different from ES. In a Gaussian distribution, SD is approximately 1/6th of ES.
Not 1 person I have mentioned and I know there's more who have ever said you have to have a single digit E.S. to be competive or shoot small, if they have post it here. Have you ever been to a 1,000 yard match? Shot with some successful 1,000 shooter? or just read about it
Originally Posted by sherm_61
If that isn't enough for you Google positive compensation shooting and read the thread on accurate shooter. The late Stan Taylor talks of a 3.7" group he shot at 1,000 yard match that had an E.S. of 29. Theres lots of examples out there that reasonable double digit E.S will shoot small at 1,000.
Where is anyone here saying you need single-digit ES? Single-digit SD, maybe, but SD is very different from ES. In a Gaussian distribution, SD is approximately 1/6th of ES.
And does E.S and S.D go hand in hand? The higher the E.S the higher the S.D? Or visa versa? Go back a little and read post were E.S and S.D were " indicators, of What? This thread started out about " obsession" correct? How many obsess over single digit E.S. runout, annealing? Etc I know record holders that I mentioned that dont do or worry about any of that me included which I'm just a hick LR hunting gun looney that shoots no competition just alot. Only annealing I do is on my small 17 and 20 cal stuff because they get the crap shot out of them and I want the brass to last as long as possible because I have to make it not because of accuracy my LR hunting stuff never sees annealing and I've got a dozen reloads on alot of it. I really don't care wether you believe what I say or do I know for a fact it works and theres plenty of proof out there that it does and targets, records and matches ya just gotta look and be willing to admit it.
Every single Competitive shooter i know preps there brass 90% and reloads same way they do there 1,000 yard BR guns it does translate over whether you believe it or not. Like I've said if you never shoot mostly past 100-300 the results don't show up very little. It will to some degree at 300 but very little at 100 some things more than others. Why do you think 99% use Lapua, ADG brass, Berger or custom bullets? there is a reason. Listen to some of these guys talk about how 5 years ago what they shot in the top 5 will be in the bottom 5 today, there's always room for improvement you just gotta be willing and open your mind up what you were doing 5 years ago isn't as good as you were doing. Arguing about the use of components is an excuse like I posted above questions and seeking help is free.
When I shot F-Class ten or twelve years ago, the scores I was winning with are mid-pack or lower today. It has certainly changed a lot.
I'll just throw out another couple for old sherm 61 to stew on:
Quote
This article shares all the details of how a two-time Precision Rifle Series (PRS) champion loads his match ammo – from what equipment he uses to the individual steps and order of his process. First, let me introduce Austin Orgain: Austin was the PRS Overall Season Champion in both 2020 and 2021, and has the highest total accumulated PRS points over the past 7 years. He was also the 2017 National Rifle League (NRL) Season Champion and won the 2020 AG Cup. If you had to name one guy that has consistently dominated precision rifle shooting over the past 5-7 years – that would be Austin Orgain.
Quote
6mm Dasher Load Data Bullet: Hornady 6mm 110 gr. A-Tip Powder: 31.7 gr. Hodgdon Varget Brass: Alpha 6 Dasher SRP (Small Rifle Primer) Primer: Federal 205 Small Rifle Primers (yes, the 205 – not the 205M) Muzzle Velocity from 26-inch Barrel: 2,870 fps Variation in Muzzle Velocity: SD = 3-4 fps, ES = 15 fps (that is over a string of 7-8 shots and represents extreme consistency shot-to-shot.
Quote
25×47 Load Data Bullet: Hornady 25-caliber 134 gr. ELD-M Powder: 38.1 gr of Hodgdon H4350 Brass: Lapua 6.5×47 brass necked down to 25-caliber Primer: MostlyFederal 205 Small Rifle Primers (yes, the 205 – not the 205M), but he also occasionally uses CCI 450 Small Rifle Magnum Primers for cases like the Creedmoor and x47 Lapua. Muzzle Velocity from 26-inch Barrel: 2,740 fps (View Austin’s complete rifle details) Variation in Muzzle Velocity: SD = 5-6 fps, ES = 25 fps over 7-8 shot string
Quote
25 GT Load Data Bullet: Hornady 25-caliber 134 gr. ELD-M Powder: 37.0 gr Hodgdon H4350 Brass: Alpha 6 GT SRP brass necked up to 25-caliber Primer: Federal 205 Small Rifle Primers (yes, the 205 – not the 205M) Muzzle Velocity from 26-inch Barrel: 2,700-2,715 fps (View Austin’s complete rifle details) Variation in Muzzle Velocity: SD = 5-6 fps, ES = 25 fps over 7-8 shot string
This is Part 3 of the spotlight on Austin Buschman, the reigning Precision Rifle Series Season Champion & IPRF World Champion. He’s currently tied for 1st in the 2023 PRS season rankings (
Quote
Ammo Performance I asked Austin about the performance of this ammo in his match rifle in terms of group size and shot-to-shot muzzle velocity variation. Those are things that many of us precision shooters can obsess over, but Austin seemed to avoid getting tangled up in – which was very interesting.
Typical 5-Shot Group Size: 0.3-0.4 MOA. When I asked what his typical 5-shot group size was with this rifle, here was his response: “Are you talking about a 5-shot group size at 100 yards? I very rarely shoot five-shot groups and measure them. It’s hard to say what an average is because about the only time I go measure one is if I think it was an exceptional group and I want to take a picture of it. I would guess my average is very close to 0.1 mils.” Very interesting! 0.1 mil is equivalent to 0.34 MOA or 0.36” at 100 yards.
Average 10-Shot Muzzle Velocity Standard Deviation (SD): 7 fps. Most handloaders have a goal for their SD to be “in the single digits,” meaning less than 10 fps. Some want that to be even lower, or at least brag when they get 5 fps or even 3 fps (although most of those SDs I see posted on Instagram are typically over 3 or 5 shots, which is a meaningless sample size). Austin says, “A 7 fps SD is plenty good for precision rifle matches.”
Chronographs: Maintaining consistent velocities is an important part of long range shooting. If velocity varies too much, your groups will grow taller as range increases. So keeping an eye on velocity is something worth doing. One thing to note is that not all chronographs are created equal. The cheaper optical models can be more trouble than they’re worth, and many aren’t capable of measuring as accurately as we required. The Magnetospeed attaches to your rifle’s barrel and is very accurate and convenient. However, attaching a weight to the end of the barrel can influence how it shoots, so they’re not advisable during load development. The Labradar is also very accurate, and perhaps even more convenient as you don’t need to set it up down range or attach it to your rifle.
I do most of my load testing at 100 yards. I look at group size and ES. If I can produce consistent sub-half-minute groups with an ES under 20 fps, I have plenty of confidence in my loads for long-range work.
Record-Setting .284 Win F-Classer Ballard's .284 "Purple Haze" Shoots 200-13X at 1000 Yards Other Guns of the Week > Has Charles Ballard created the Ultimate F-Class Rifle? With this impressive rig, Ballard recently shot a new National F-Class 1000-yard record, a spectacular 200-13X on the new, smaller 1K F-Class Target. In a very short span, Ballard and his rifle have racked up an impressive string of performances. Ballard won the NRA Long-Range Regional, setting the new National Record in the process. He also won the North Carolina F-Class Championship with the gun, and finished second to National Champion Bob Bock in the NSSC Long-Range Club Championship. Ballard even broke a local club record at 600 yards (also 200-13X) with his tack-drivin' .284. Ballard's "Purple Haze" rifle features superb components, including a BAT MB action, Nightforce 12-42 BR Scope, and a wickedly accurate 32" Broughton barrel.
Quote
Load Development and Accuracy Testing My philosophy on load development differs from many shooters. I don’t primarily shoot for groups. The only goal I have is to obtain the lowest ES and SD I possibly can. Holding elevation in F-Class is crucial. Uniform velocity gives me more consistent vertical point of impact. As we commenced load development, Jerry Tierney’s .284 Win load data posted on this website gave us a good starting point. We loaded 53.0 grains of Hodgdon H4831sc and shot one round, cleaned, shot three rounds, cleaned, then shot 10 rounds and cleaned. From this point we worked up in half-grain increments until pressure signs developed at 2950 fps. Then we backed the powder charge down until the bolt lift was smooth and the primers were nice and round.
Success: 2910 FPS with Ten-Shot ES of 7 and SD of 3 At this point I began working with different primers, neck tension and seating depth. After trying Federal 210m primers, CCI BR-2 primers, light tension, heavy tension, jamming, jumping, we settled on 56.0+ grains of H4831sc with CCI BR-2 primers. We ran about .002 neck tension with the 180s seated just touching the lands. This load gave us 2910 fps velocity with an Extreme Spread (ES) of 7 fps and a Standard Deviation (SD) of 3 fps over ten (10) shots.
When you hear PRS guys say their ES is super small, say under 15-20, they are telling you one day, one group of five more often than not. When you hear an F-Class shooter tell you their ES is 20, they probably shot 20-rounds in one sitting. A lot of difference in the behaviors of the two groups. Its a matter of statistics, the more rounds you shooter, the larger it will be. Five rounds, or even ten rounds is not enough of a test to determine statistically significant numbers for ES/SD. One needs a sample of at least 30. Pulling up my Garmin, my last range session with my F-Class rifle, my SD/ES for ten shots was 6.3/21.9, 5.8/18.2, and 5.2/18.6 on three separate strings. If I combine them, I ended up with an ES of of 21.9 for 30 rounds. If I take the first five rounds of the first 10 round string, I would have had an ES of 5 and change.
Ole chucky since all you seem to wanna do is try to prove what I'm saying is wrong when everything you highlighted is exactly what i have been saying that low teens to mid 20's E.S will shot as small or smaller than single digit. maybe you should pick up some rifles and shoot some instead of reading about it because you can obviously tell were your at in the game. Have you told the guys on accurateshooter all your spewing here?
Since you like quoting things put a link to positive compensation, you obviously went to accurate shooter but decide to pick and choose. Post the whole thread about positive compensation it will explain why 20's E.S will shot as small as single digit E.S Like drop point said things change what used to be top 5 not long ago is bottom 5. WHY? because loading practices change but you wanna believe 9 year old articles. Nothing against PRS but its a 1 moa game not the precision required in f- class or BR, I know some PRS shooters who shoot factory horny ammo
Ole chucky since all you seem to wanna do is try to prove what I'm saying is wrong when everything you highlighted is exactly what i have been saying that low teens to mid 20's E.S will shot as small or smaller than single digit. maybe you should pick up some rifles and shoot some instead of reading about it because you can obviously tell were your at in the game. Have you told the guys on accurateshooter all your spewing here?
shermy,
Again with the lack of comprehension??
You're the jackazz that started BS about single digit ES.. right? Because basically you don't know the difference between ES and SD.
I double dog dare you to find a post anywhere where I stated ANYTHING about single digit ES.
Now as to actually picking up a rifle.. you're a funny guy, must be due to a seasonal lack of kids on your lawn to shake your fist at.
Here's a pic of my "I love me wall", it's all from rifle matches:
here's my back yard, my home range goes from 50 to 760 yds:
Now again, slowly.. post a quote where I stated something that tracked with single digit ES, or we're done here. have whomever is helping you work the computer help you. My time with be better spent following a short bus around and finding a passenger to debate with.
BTW, go on over to accurate shooter and wait for me, I'll be right over sometime between now and ... never.
Your hilarious, you'll never go over there because you know I'm right but that's o.k. I've seemed to rubbed you wrong about the PRS comment no pun intended your the one who started the attack so be it.
At the end of the day I like to decide what matters for me based on my own results.
1000 yards prone/sling/irons groups
.284 Win, 184 Bergers SD 5.4 FPS Vertical 6.56"
.308 Win 155 Bergers SD 13.1FPS Vertical 16.37"
This group has double the shots of the first, but you can clearly see the elevation differences corresponding different velocities shown on the right.
The "positive compensation" effect mentioned in other posts above is not to be discounted, but I'm not certain it can be relied upon over different conditions.
Postscript: For those not familiar with acoustical targets (Etargets) the velocities shown are read at the target face. I find they tend to have a greater spread than at the muzzle due to varying individual bullet BCs, winds during their 1000 yard trip etc. , but I digress... or is that obsess??
At the end of the day I like to decide what matters for me based on my own results.
1000 yards prone/sling/irons groups
.284 Win, 184 Bergers SD 5.4 FPS Vertical 6.56"
.308 Win 155 Bergers SD 13.1FPS Vertical 16.37"
This group has double the shots of the first, but you can clearly see the elevation differences corresponding different velocities shown on the right.
The "positive compensation" effect mentioned in other posts above is not to be discounted, but I'm not certain it can be relied upon over different conditions.
Mike i agree 100% if I wanna change something I tezt it myself, I consider myself lucky I can lean on a very successful 1,000 BR shooter if have a gun that isn't were I want it all I have to do is text him a pic of my targets and he gives me suggestions after we text or talk about it. I've also shot with him for a couple years alot when he does his testing which is usually Jan and Feb in Montana winters which aren't very pleasant we always set are targets up and everything ready and are shooting as soon as we can see. He would shoot at 890 and me at 700. One mourning I watched him test 3 different firing control systems different bolts with different weight springs and pin dia. in his BAT action Light Gun, pretty eye opening at the rests. How many do that? or even measure pinfall, protrusion or change springs? My guess is not many. I know some dont even own an annealer, couldnt tell you there runout because they don't measure it, use mandrels to open up necks because they don't want to disturb the carbon inside the neck its there lube albeit you have to turn necks for that or clean case only the outside they wipe it down with alcohol to get all the case lube off. Grip on bullet is another big one and only using inline dies to " feel" the seating force you can never do that with the " Competition " seater. I'm not to the point yet were I use a force pack but if I feel any difference in seating a bullet the round comes apart and I start over. Everything I just mentioned was basically taught me by some really good 1,000 BR shooters because I asked questions and saw the results for myself on target not because some article, computer or number said otherwise. People can believe this stuff or not it really doesn't matter to me but some just wanna attack you because some 9,10 20 year old article says different.
If you run a 6mm 105 Berger over there ballistics calculator at 2900 then at 2920 to 1,000 yards it should have 5" vertical but I've seen that shoot only 2" vertical. My 6.5x300wsm waterlines at 2.5 wide x.5 vert at 665 with an E.S at 22fps, I do need to get it to stand up a little.
I do not doubt that. I have had a loads for past barrels (RIP) that seemed pretty immune to velocity spreads and I attributed that to the upward movement of the muzzle interacting with the exit time of the bullet. It is only recently that I have heard of the term "positive compensation". I am glad that I shoot sling (competition) and don't really need to be concerned about a lot of this. As a Professional Engineer I can appreciate it though.
[ Where is anyone here saying you need single-digit ES? Single-digit SD, maybe, but SD is very different from ES. In a Gaussian distribution, SD is approximately 1/6th of ES.
Actually, the estimate of SD is ES/4. And that will be "rough".
Then to get a realistic estimate of the real world variance, you should use at least +/- 3 SD, or to be even more certain, +/- 6 SD.
I do not doubt that. I have had a loads for past barrels (RIP) that seemed pretty immune to velocity spreads and I attributed that to the upward movement of the muzzle interacting with the exit time of the bullet. It is only recently that I have heard of the term "positive compensation". I am glad that I shoot sling (competition) and don't really need to be concerned about a lot of this. As a Professional Engineer I can appreciate it though.
[ Where is anyone here saying you need single-digit ES? Single-digit SD, maybe, but SD is very different from ES. In a Gaussian distribution, SD is approximately 1/6th of ES.
Actually, the estimate of SD is ES/4. And that will be "rough".
Then to get a realistic estimate of the real world variance, you should use at least +/- 3 SD, or to be even more certain, +/- 6 SD.
MM
That entirely depends on your confidence requirement. Assuming a meaningful sample size, ES is well-described by a range of 6*SD (+/- 3 from the mean) that captures approximately 99.7% of the population. Using 4*SD captures 95% of the population, which is still a fairly good estimate of ES.
Some really well known famous gun guy somewhere back in the day said only accurate rifles are interesting ...
I think we sometimes forget that "back in the day" an accurate rifle was 1.5moa and many "well known famous gun guys" were satisfied with 2moa
That particular famous gun guy was only THE Townsend Whelen......who needed/needs no introduction.
Care to venture a guess what a rifleman like him would do with our modern means and methods if he were alive and shooting/handloading/wildcatting today?
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/rVWzH26.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/hW8pgoa.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/gallery/80/full/183895.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/VCQFstm.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/57bZuOL.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/R8IuJ2N.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/5CUuWQF.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/lAQNcQj.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/vWW1y77.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/hiPOCDRl.jpg)
![[Linked Image from imagizer.imageshack.com]](https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq70/923/VlgBjv.jpg)
![[Linked Image from imagizer.imageshack.com]](https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq70/924/KlvkwU.jpg)
![[Linked Image from imagizer.imageshack.com]](https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq70/924/JyQh2P.jpg)
![[Linked Image from imagizer.imageshack.com]](https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq70/923/DCkrX7.jpg)
![[Linked Image from imagizer.imageshack.com]](https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq70/922/SJ48HC.jpg)
![[Linked Image from imagizer.imageshack.com]](https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq70/923/vwPn7U.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/V1i6M6ll.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/dIcPZwAl.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/NoP1smMl.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/EaSDU6pl.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/gallery/80/full/228249.png)
![[Linked Image]](https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/gallery/80/medium/248849.jpg)
