Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Precision reloading guide

It seems the more I learn the less I know. Been reloading all my life thinking it was better than factory loads. At this point I'm overwhelmed with charge weight, powder, bullet, seating depth, case length, and other variables. Is there a resource that outlines the best steps to tweak first and gives a complete process? I've only used rcbs stuff. Think I've read here that the expander ball can cause issues with neck deformity when resizing and priming. At this point I don't know where to start or stop. I'd appreciate wisdom for reference materials. Thanks.

Find an old Sharpes manual.Old info,but still valuable

Precision is all about uniformity and alignment. First of all is the uniformity of your primers, powder charges, and bullets (in terms of weight, bearing surface, and diameter). If your cases are straight, and your bullets are seated straight, and your chamber is straight, and the leade is straight, and your barrel is uniformly bored and rifled, you should do well. The amount of variation in all of the above is what makes all of it a test-and-see endeavor.

An interesting example of precision when it comes to outputs of the system are the 6.5 CM and the 6.5 PRC. The reamer spec for both of these only allows for a throat only half a thousandth of an inch over nominal bullet diameter, and the leade on both is cut to a target rifle standard of 1.5 degrees. These two things probably have the most to do with precision in shooting, once everything else is relatively consistent, as they cause the bullet to enter the barrel pretty straight, thus allowing it to travel down the barrel pretty straight.

Rickshaw,

If you have been reloading for years, you know everything that's necessary. Any reloading manual has what you need inside, although I doubt you will learn anything new.

You are suffering from information overload. I suggest that you return to the roots. Much of what you read on this and other forums is unnecessary. If you were happy with your results, don't change a thing. Don't overthink things.

Don't worry about expander balls, specialty dies or some "magic technique". You said, QUOTE been reloading all my life thinking it was better than factory loads.UNQUOTE. You already nailed it. Don't overthink anything. Don't listen to the others. Don't spend money on things that won't help. You were happy once, before all the "experts" in these forums started dispensing their wisdom. No need to re-invent the wheel.

That said, it won't stop the know-it-alls from trying to fix something that isn't broken. Enjoy. Be happy. Reloading is not supposed to consume you or be difficult.

^^^^

What Steve said, if your handloads are doing what you want them to do.

Unless you're involved in some sort of target shooting, or long-range hunting, that requires the finest accuracy possible, then most of the precision stuff is irrelevant.

Unless, of course, you're one of the many "average" handloaders who like playing around with the precision stuff. In my experience, many average handloaders are, because handloading and shooting holes in paper can be done year-round--unlike hunting in many places these days.

About half of what people do in the name of extra precision is wasted effort.

Yep--especially weighing every powder charge.

I went through a fanatical "uniformity in everything" stage a couple decades ago. But eventually it taught me that I was overdoing it. I still try to be quite precise but not to such high standards as I once did.... For my uses it's unneeded. Perhaps if I had a benchrest gun or was competing on a national level I'd get back to those standards.

Thanks Gents! I'll try to chill and keep on keeping on. I think I got the wisdom for which I asked. I appreciate it.

Agree with most, but there's value in learning first-hand. Have a bunch of tools and dies that add nothing I can detect. But also found a few things that do add value, are now indispensable.

Also, goals differ. Benchrest guys go to alot of trouble but....... Asked some race team members "how much does it cost to do this stuff". Response: "speed costs money.....how fast do you want to go?"

I'm one of the guys who weighs every charge for rifle reloads. I "assumed" that most reloaders do the same. I use an RCBS Chargemaster which makes this a fairly quick and easy process.

What do you suggest, just dumping from the powder dispenser? Doesn't that leave the door open for charge weight inconsistencies?

Not criticizing, just curious.

Go check out the stickies in the reloading section by Tresmon.

Pretty good info.

Yes, it does leave room for inconsistencies. The thing is, in a well developed load they don't amount to much for a whole lot of practical purposes.

I agree with this. I liken it to many other things related to information overload. Until internet forums arrived, I did not even know that the Model 70 30-06 of my youth was "too heavy" to be carrying around the mountains. I guess when I was 12 I was a tougher S.O.B. than most adults today. I am guilty of seeking additional information on reloading; but, I know that the basics in my reloading manuals are sufficient.

Charlie-NY....

Random variation adds in a special way. One consequence of this is that you can fruitlessly fiddle forever with the minor sources of variation. Most powder dumps are consistent enough to qualify as minor sources. If you want to reduce variation, it is necessary to find and fix the major sources first.

Random variations in charge weight are actually built in to your powder scale. The charge master has an accuracy level of + or - .1 grains. So any charge could be at either maximum value or dead nuts on. This would mean that a max .2 variation between one charge to the next is possible and even likely.
Most powder throws with a properly setup baffle will be able to consistently drop a charge in this range except with some stick powders. I gave up weighing each charge long ago after figuring out as others have that a variation of .2-.3 is nothing in the grand scheme of things.

For straight ammo consider the tools.

In the case of a fired piece of brass, I anneal, use a Redding body die to bump shoulder, clean neck with 000 steel wool, leave the carbon inside the neck but swipe with a nylon bore brush, run it into a Lee Collet Die, for competition rifles use a Forester seating die (0.0000-0.0005") and for hunting rifles a Lee seating die (good for 0.0010" runout), a Lee factory crimp may be used if the rifle is heavy recoiling or having difficulty getting a super low ES. Preliminary to this the cases are neck skimmed and trimmed to length. As the cases 'stretch' they are trimmed and the neck thickness checked as well as they will thicken at the shoulder-neck junction, the collet die puts the donut on the outside.

Insure the base to ogive dimension is consistent, the powder charge is exact from case to case.

Chose a powder that will give an OCW load and tune to barrel time OBT.

The above techniques will make any rifle ,that does not have mechanical issues, shine.

The 2 rifles I use for hunting , a Steyr Pro Hunter 7mm-08 (6.25" 1000 yard 3 shot group), Sako Finnlight 30-06 ( 7.5" 3 shot group at 1000 yards) both have 6X scopes. These were used in a club event in hunter class, nothing special as these are true hunting rifles , as opposed to one that is built to the rules.

Good tools and techniques in handloading will make most any rifle shine.

Just as an anecdote, several years back an amateur contributor to Precision Shooting magazine did a short article, I won't bore you with his testing and methodology, but the upshot was he tested something like 3 different powders, measured with a Harrell measure, weighed with a quality scale and a Lee Dipper Kit. Conclusion, with a nationally competitive heavy benchrest rifle of verified accuracy, no statistically significant difference between equipment and powder tested. The howls of outrage from the owners of the 300 buck Harrell measures were heard across the US.
I don't think the poor guy ever got another article published. I guess my point is, powder throw inconsistencies are probably one of the least of anybodies worries for extreme accuracy.

Here is a link to a prior post, where I work through the math, if that sort of thing interests you.

link

I found the book "Handloading fo Competition" Zediker press, to have a lot of useful information. But unless you are loading for competition most of it should be forgotten for hunting loads. Like someone else mentioned Phil Sharpes "Complete Guide to Handloading" is very interesting reading regardless of how useful it is now.

John Barsness books have lots of useful information and are good at de-bunking many myths and time wasters.

Would be interesting to see the weighing-vs.-throwing analyses done with one of the modern lab scales that are available, like a Sartorius or A&D. In other words, if there is no statistical difference between a good powder measure and a Chargemaster, is there any statistical difference between a good powder measure and an A&D FX120i or similar?

Maybe this has already been done, dunno. I've always weighed each charge, probably for no other reason than it makes me feel better...

If someone were to say that it makes no difference if you use your left hand or your right hand to place a case in a shell holder, someone would instantly pop up to state that it might not make much of a difference to the average shooter (not them), but if a person is truly interested in fine accuracy, it does.

I haven't done exactly that, but I have run the stats on my Lee Perfect Powder Measure ($27) and my Hornady balance scale. For the balance scale, the smallest change or difference it has a 50% chance of detecting (Probable Error) is better than .04 grain. With ball powder, the measure is only slightly less capable.

If you run through the math at the link I posted earlier, in most cartridges a standard deviation in throw weight of .2 grains produces an effect so small that you would have to shoot many, many cartridges to even detect it.

There are things to work on that matter more.

Boy, that’s a darned fact.

Charge accuracy has very little if anything to do with why BR shooters use the measures they do. If you understood how effective they are for range loading and/or keeping a BR rifle in tune you'd understand why shooters use them. Have fun with your spoons and I'll gladly continue using my Harrells measure.

I use a Lee measure. Or scoops.

5sdad,

Once read an article by an expert who claimed that dumping powder into the funnel so it swirled clockwise resulted in lower standard deviation in muzzle velocity than if the powder swirled counter-clockwise. Or maybe it was the other way around. Can't remember, perhaps because I did not test his claim....

That must have been difficult for people in the other hemisphere. Perhaps the old IMR cans had spouts located on the other side of the can when made for export.

have shot 100-200 yard bench rest,FTR class,1000yd. and other stuff, but i hunt with my handloads in the fall and many years ago i wasn`t happy because i couldn`t shoot small 1/4 inch groups with this one rifle i was going to hunt with. well my old hunting partner Jonny Bell said this to me that fall : you are not hunting mice your hunting deer so a 1 inch even a 1 1/2 inch group is good enough for regular deer hunting. so just enjoy yourself with your handloads ,i will say this the Berger handloading book is a excellent read about Walt Berger and Mule Deer`S Gun Gack volumes 1 & 2 are another great reads and he does have volume 3 coming out soon too. i will talk about this one 100-200 yard bench shoot i went too everyone was using all their hand hammer resizing tools and the Harrel powder measure except this telephone construction worker who came to the bench rest shoot that weekend with the company telephone truck and his telephone uniform on. he did have a nice rifle but all`s he had was a set of regular 2-die Redding reloading dies,a press he c-clamped down and a Redding powder measure and his 2 aluminum cleaning rods and some hoppe`s solvent. he kicked everyone`s butt that weekend with the best groups 100 and 200 yards,best averages. i was new to all this and shot in the middle of the pack but this telephone lineman sure gave those guys a eye opener with his average reloading equipment.

RMI 5984 is darn good powder down there

Whatever, Selby....

Precisionly....

Nothing wrong with either one. While it's been quite a long time since I've used dippers, I've been a fan of Lee's for difficult stick powders. It's just that clicks are so easy to use for range loading I can't see ever going back

Rickshaw,

Having chased precision reloading spec’s in the different disciplines, keep in mind I actually trained as a gunsmith as well.. that’s a lot of time and on hand work.

As MD and Steve said - if you are happy where you are on accuracy results... then if you have time to try a few new tricks when reloading do so, if not... no sweat.

The reality is that if you go into any specific discipline of shooting you’ll find different things people do to increase their score, which could me custom chambers (non SAAMI), or different platforms all of which create different results based on what you change factor wise. I.E. a bench rest shooter will point you to neck turning, but a high power shooter won’t... PRS, and F-class tend to look more at kick and performance (PRS), where F-Class might look at dodging the wind... which means bullets.

So in the end it depends where you are - my only advice here would be to identify the range at which you typically shoot game, and then find a sport that aligns to that and investigate what they do accuracy wise. BUT only if you are a accuracy nut !! 95% of shooting inside of 300 yards doesn’t require anything more than what you have in general off the shelf reloading manuals.
IMO, Once you cross that 300 yard line then it’s best explore a shooting disciple I.E. - PD shooters follow bench rest guys path, practice shooters follow PRS, Highpower & F-class, ...

For the most part, what I did 25 years ago with varying bullet weight, then powder, then seating depth to find the best performing load for any specific rifle Still holds very, very true...
I now know the science behind them, plus MD’s articles help point out .. oops you bent the stem in the forming dies and now are screwing up your necks... type stuff really help a guy ID things that they may unknowingly being doing wrong...

With regards to throwing case charges vs. weighing each load;

About 15 years ago I came to a conclusion (however false this conclusion might have been) that some of the so-called extremely accurate factory ammunition that many of the rifle-smiths of the day were using to prove they had “accurized” your rifle, were actually weighed on the assembly line and not thrown from a powder measure. Considering the very real issue of varying case weights coming down the assembly line, the heavier (thicker) have less volume inside, thus producing more pressure compared to a lighter case with more powder.

I decided to do an experiment with military brass that I had formed from Mil-Spec 30-06 brass. The brass was from different lots and varied considerably in weight but were all fire-formed in the same chamber and trimmed. I will have to dig through my notes to find what chambering I conducted the test in since I have formed 8X57, 7X57 and 308 all from the same Mil-Spec brass.
But what I essentially did was take 20 cases and weighed them all and marked the weights on the side of each case. I then took the three lightest cases and worked up what I considered a safe working load with that particular powder & bullet combo. So let’s say the safe load was 50 grains of powder X in a case that weighed 180 grains. I then filled the three lightest case along with the 50 grains of powder X charge inside and recorded the total weight of case and powder. The result would be a case weighing 230 grains. I then took the remaining heavier cases and filled each case with the same powder to equal the same total weight of the lighter cases, i.e. 230 grains.
In other words I had 20 cases all weighing exactly 230 grains with powder inside. Now remember the cases themselves varied as much as 3-1/2 grains or more, so the end result was the heaviest cases had 3-1/2 grains or so less powder inside them. I then seated the bullets to the same depth and fired them at a 100 yard target over a chronograph.

This very “limited” experiment produced some surprising results. As I recall the velocities did vary more than most shooters would like but the loadings produced pretty decent accuracy, roughly about a 1-1/2” to 2’” groups at 100 yards.

weighing every charge for every cartridge could be more accurate for a benchrest shooter maybe ? but volume loading is to me accurate enough and makes reloading still fun and much faster. a good friend of mine builds some real precision rifles for people and shoots bench rest alot and still does very well ,he`s 71 years of age ,he volume loads always. i have seen and shot myself some very good groups volume loading , i see no reason to ever weigh powder for every cartridge,i did notice no deer complained .

During the life of the magazine, Precision Shooting, I was a subscriber. Among mostly benchrest shooters, that argument existed. Almost without exception the perennial winners always dumped powder by volume out of a measure, mainly for speed and ease of loading between rounds. I bought a Harrell's measure, which I still have. I shot many hundreds of rounds both ways and never really saw any real difference. I ultimately went to weighing each charge in preference, mainly to eliminate any question in my mind when one didn't go where it was supposed to.

Bob338,

Which is why before the Harrell's many benchrest shooters used the Lyman 55 with the Culver conversion: It was consistently adjustable to the same charge weight.

Luckily, I have one, a generous gift from Ken Oehler.

That's how I got started using BR measures. Some years ago a friend lent me a Neil Jones converted 55 and it didn't take long to almost entirely ditch my old measures.

Life was simpler before the internet. My loading bench wasn’t so crowded with fancy equipment. Lately, like a few people here ( Steve ) I have started to regress, and just load to have fun and shoot. My rifles still shoot about the same and I can find things on my bench.

None of my rifles are capable of the gilt edge accuracy that all this extra effort requires. All are factory wood stocked rifles. Some have triggers replaced or massaged, but that’s all. None are glass bedded or have after market barrels..although my Swift might soon.

I guess what I’m trying to say is as long as you are enjoying your hobby, your doing everything right, no matter how you do it.

You nailed it.

The Internet is a double edged sword. It can provide lots of useful information, and garbage, all in one. I would guess that the majority here do not need half the equipment they have on their benches. The ad men and the Internet told them they had to have them however.

The Internet is a powerful narcotic.

Maybe a more productive discussion would be which factors matter the most often. From my experience, and others seen to concur, powder charge weight is usually consitent enough unless someone is using a thrower or scale that is really out of whack.

Going back to Denton saying 50% of the things people do for accuracy don't matter, and that you have to identify the big sources of error first - what factors are in the big 50%?

Concentricity? Seating depth?

Assuming, of course, the rifle/scope platform is mechanically sound...

One of the first recommendations whenever a gun is behaving behaving wonky is to check the scope. It's easy to see there is a problem if your gun is printing 6+ inch groups. But if a gun shoots 2-3 inch groups, people seem to blame the load most often.

There was an interesting comparison by formidilosus (here or another forum, don't remember) where he shot his match gun with a test scope. Then he repeated the test with a known good scope and the groups were half the size of the original. The first groups weren't bad. Without a side by side comparison I think most people would have thought they needed to fiddle with loads. Opened my eyes a bit.

One thing you should find somewhere in all these different sources.

CONSISTENCY in your method, even movements impact precision.

On a Dillon 650, I run almost 20 rounds before I start seating just to get the powder measure performing because if the powder sits vs is moving it makes a difference how much it throws.
I also made sure I use a dryer sheet on the powder measure to kill the static elec.

but the most important thing by far is if the loader is aware of things like how you work the handle needs to be consistent... is ultimately how things come out different or not.

I still think that the most important variable is the shooter.

Yes, it always will be.

This is the Shooter's Triangle. The shooter is the foundation of it. He is also the most volatile element of the three. The best rifle and cartridge will not perform if the shooter is unpracticed. Great shooters can turn in creditable performances with so-so ammunition or untuned rifles, but the best rifle and ammunition cannot change a so-so shooter into a sharpshooter.

Like the fire triangle, take away any one of the sides and good shooting is impossible.

** some won't appreciate but......my wife polishes my expander balls. **







Well, slap my Grandma !

I've been a member here since 2010 and IF I've ever read things like these ABOVE... I don't remember.

I have ALMOST quit reading some types of 'threads'. I just don't have any interest in them.
I've been 'handloading' since 1974 and I NEVER missed a deer because of A HANDLOAD. Certainly I've missed some deer but NOT because of insufficient or incorrect handloading procedures.

You guys have almost restored my interest and confidence ! ! !
Thank You


Jerry

Overdoing the precision can rob you of sleep. Just make sure you’re not under-doing it.

Yeah, SOME knowledge of basic precision techniques can solve major mysteries--such as 3" groups from a rifle that normally shoots groups half that size.