Loaded 3 different loads, each with .5 gr more R22. 51, 51.5, 52 gr. 143 eldx, 6.5-06.
5 shot groups. Bumped up the point of impact 3” on the last grouping to get zeroed. I’ve never had such a group size discrepancy, so suddenly, in working up loads. Loads went from 3+“ at 200 yards to .70” at 200 with the 52 gr. load. Any of you seen something similar?

Eventually l snake my barrel and it comes back. If not go over the rifle.

When working up loads, I do it at 100 yards. That way wind doesn't have as much of an effect on the groups. Even at 200 yards, it has much more of an effect and can mislead your results. During load work up, yes I've seen charge weights effect the group size. Even a 1/2 grain charge can shrink or open groups by a lot. That is exactly why we work up loads.

Your worst group is 1 1/2 moa, your best group is .33 moa. So, Yes, I've seen it. But again at 100 yards. Because of the wind, I don't like to mess with working up loads at 200+ yards. It's up to you though, but you can get some pretty skewed results working where the wind is going to bite you in the butt.

Also, at further distance you are or may be dealing with a parallax issue and an enhanced shooter error issue (if there is one). Some guys may look at your groups and say there's no indication of wind, what is he talking about. Those guys have never shot with extreme headwind or tail wind or evaluated group dispersion either. You'll see headwind and tailwind compounds group size the further out your target is too.

Recently I was working with a new rifle and I got some really weird/wonky groups. Keeping in mind this is a worked up proven load. The first 5 shots at 100 to confirm went into 1 moa. The second group at 200 was a little over moa, the third group (at 300 yards) was .8 moa and the last group fired at 400 yards was only 1/2 moa. All groups (200-400 yards) roughly the same size when measured. How does that happen??? That's an anomaly that is hard to explain. Your groupings, not so much. The first one screams too light of a load (wants more powder), the second seems charge weight was too light plus wind may have effected the group, could have also been shooter input that threw a couple shots too. But there is really not nearly enough groups shot to evaluate any kind of a rational explanation.

Personally, I'd step it back to 100. Re test those loads and see what they tell you. If that 52gr charge load is driving tacks again, re test at 200. If it's consistent, go with it. That's a pretty damn nice group at 200 yards.

BSA, good feedback. Thank you.

In my experience, even with a tight group at a hundred wind is still an issue at 200. POA plays into it as well. I use a diamond target that improve POA and POI. Watched a pod cast from Hornady about thier ELDX wondering how it would fair beyond 300 yards.

I take it a step further and do initial development at 50 yds. Besides the wind issue, I'm working these loads up in the rifles that I hunt with and the optics are typically 2.5-8X36 max
Once I can shoot consistent 3 shot bug holes with a load, than I'll move it out to 100/200 and see how it does.

That doesn't seem to be a very efficient use of limited-supply components.

This is what happens when you have a "whippy" barrel and you find a vibration node. The bullet exits when the barrel movement is at a minimum. Like BSA said, you need to re-test to confirm previous results.

I've used a lot of Re22 in many calibers. Mostly, Re22 loads have shot best at or near max. The same as all slow burners I've tried.

Yep I have seen it. 25.06, 52.5 grains RL22 and 110 AB shot at 200 yards. I already knew powder charge so this was seating changes, but powder charge variation does the same.



And whether working at 100, 200 or 300 wind flags are your friend.

This is another worthy piece of Information that's worth considering.

Seen it many times with RL22. It's a magnum, slow burning powder, when it gets into it's range it typically comes alive. Great stuff.

RatherBHuntin,

Is 52 gr the max with that powder/bullet or where you at with that?

If there was still a margin of safety, it would have been interesting to see what a 52.5 grain load would have done.

Yep

You're seeing statistical noise. Like ghosts in fog bank.

You might search for the Hornady Podcast episode "Your groups are too small".

They ran a bunch of experiments with groups up to 500 rounds. Short summary.

- Group sizes generally don't get bigger after 50 shots but may not be entirely circular.

- Groups are usually circular by 100 rounds.

- The data suggests you need groups of 35 to predict which load is better (statistical significance).

- Groups of 20 are usually predictive but not always.

- Generally speaking, stick powders are usually more accurate than ball powders.

- Different barrels like different bullets and different powder.

- GROUP SIZE (dispersion) INCREASES WITH VELOCITY!! THEY COULD NOT FIND "VELOCITY NODES" OR "ACCURACY NODES" WITH GROUPS OF 35 OR MORE SHOTS.

-Bottom line, for hunting, pick a bullet type and stick powder with a good reputation for the cartridge. Select the slowest safe load that will deliver the bullet at your target distance at a speed sufficient for terminal performance (eg, 1800 fps for many traditional cup and core bullets). Shoot 20 (or more) shots in a manner that replicated your use. For hunting with a light barrel, 7 or 8 3-shot strings on thr same target allowing the barrel to cool, will give you 21-24 shot replicating a common hunting scenario. If the result is sufficiently good, don't keep looking for something better. If it's not, try a different powder or a different bullet.

Like many people here, I've stared at 3 shot groups like a medium reading tea leaves. In a former life, I taught stats and am convinced the Hornady approach is sound.

I no longer chase accuracy nodes and simply load for just enough velocity.

Well you're no fun

I’m likin Hornady casts

I buy into your post 100%. I would add one more piece of wood to this fire. A few years ago, I got interested in something a poster here suggested concerning true hunting rifles only. 1 cold barrel shot a day for a week or two...just to see what your rifle can do in a real world cold barrel shot found in hunting. It's a real eye opener, rifles that I considered, yawn ho-hum accuracy in prolonged bench sessions...in some cases turned out to be...old reliable.

That 3rd, or 5th, shot is so often the deciding factor in whether an animal is taken or lost.

I can understand the premise of once load development has finished, but I don’t understand the logic of it for load development to which the OP’s question was about.
So as to throw another piece of wood, if on day one you have a clean cold barrel then days 2-5 or 10 would also have to have a clean cold barrel for any said test to be valid. That sounds like barrel break in, shoot one, clean, wait 24 hours and start over. Will also add that I have never taken a clean barrel out on opening morning.

Another fruitless thread

Here are 2 examples.
I hunt with a Win94 carbine in 32WSP. Here is a target from 4 3-shot strings on a cold, but fouled barrel. Where I hunt, getting off 3 shots is about the limit.

The first 3 shot string printed at 7/8". Happy me? No, it's luck, sort of like flipping 3 heads in a row.

By time the 4th string (12 shots total), the group opened up 3 7/8", which is more indicative of the gun.

I shoot a .223 varmint gun in 200 yd matches with a 20 shot course of fire. The gun has produced numerous 3 shot groups at 5/16" at 100. Happy me? No, they're just statistical noise.

A 20 shot group at 200 yds shot at match pace produces a 2 1/8" group.

So, my deer gun and load will hold 4 MOA over 12 shots. My target gun and load will hold a bit over 1 MOA over 20 shots.

IMO, claims about a guns accuracy based on less than 20 shots don't tell us much of anything.

I no longer "work up" loads. I only test bullet and powder combinations at the lowest velocity needed for the job.

Worth watching IMO.

bottom line big game hunting.... isn't a wide area of hydrostaic shock from expanding bullets, enough ?

And long range comp. the winner doesn't win by much.

I do most of my shooting at 200 yards. I spent my whole life at 100 to check loads and group sizes and two years ago I said goodbye to 100 yards. My plan is to spend a good amount of time at 200 and then I will go to 300. I’m not anti 100 yard but if you try to exclusively shoot at 200 and beyond, you will be in for a shock. You may shoot a good 3,4, or 5 shot group at that distance, but try a 10 round group and see what it does when being just as careful with heat, form, wind and all of the other things we do to make small groups.

In a year from now, I plan a 100 yard secession with my rifles and see if I have improvement there from my time spent at longer ranges. I hope I kill it at 100. That’s the idea I have anyway.

That would be counter productive. My favorite, most dependable hunting rifle always threw the first shot from a clean bore, the second was a little better. I always shot three after cleaning the bore, before a hunting trip, and before checking zero.

I had a range just off the front deck for thirty years. It is still there, I just have to drive seven miles now to use it, and it was 132 yds. So I go to a formal range these days. But, back in the day, I did the one shot a day for a few days with a couple or three rifles..

Grab the rifle, take one shot into a target each cool, clear morning before the morning breeze starts. Sometimes you get very comforting news. Sometimes it is more like WTF.

Fouling is a definite

I was introduced to a rifle builder/gunsmith Alex Wheeler who explained about bumping shoulders. For awhile l was convinced that .002 was the way to go. Inconsistent groups. One trip after fouling, it was there, the magic group, but there after not. Then l followed the advice of Wheeler, stripped bolt, ejector, extractor and firing pin assembly. .004 bump with bolt drop on its own. Bullet centers the throat, no influence from case. Last three trips consistent 3 shot 1/2 inch groups at 100 yards. Sub MOA 200.

What, exactly, in the context of good/bad group size, is the relationship between a fouled bore and bumping shoulders?

Kiss,find pressure and rock on. Hint.

From there I'm gunning come-up's,to establish DOPE and never not close to the platform's Transonic Slip. After that,I'll cycle through the erector and bang schit as per whim. Such things are warm/fuzzy. Hint.

I've never shot 3x at a Critter,nor 5x,10x or 20x. Shot my 6PPC yesterday in nice conditions,at 650,500,400 and 200 1x,for the warm/fuzzy. A bit of wind,so I was dealing and sliding the horizontal etching. Hint.

Pardon wares that actually exist,as you CLUELESS Fhuqktards Pretend aloud. Hint............

Crickets, interesting.

Researching.

"recalculating" "recalculating"

Grease on the tracks.

Too funny

Um, seriously?

I'm just trying to get a solid handle on what you got going there, chief.

We might save this "fruitless" thread afterall.

What barrel did you make that discovery with, that you need to bump four thousandths to get a fouled barrel to shoot 1/2" at 100?

My premium hand lapped barrels from Kreiger, Hawk Hill, and a 5R from Bartlein unfortunately don't foul much at all. I might get 200 sometimes even 300 rounds on it before groups OPEN UP TO 1/2" at 100, and I feel compelled to strip copper.

But, I only partially FL size in a bushing die and am only bumping shoulders .001" from a fired case. Other precision rifle series competitors that I've compared notes with over the years have found the same thing regarding fouling, shoulder bump, group size, and needing to clean.

Wondering if I should bump shoulders more to get them to foul more often? Because fouling, as you say, is a "definite"?

Or, somedamnthing.

This is worth considering


And this is even more worth considering

Oopsy.....didn't delete that post quick enough did ya.

oopsy you missed your life description...... sure the wife and sons would agree unless they're just like you.


overwhelming
have different priorities
cause too much drama
have trouble listening
just rude, most of the time
come across as fake
overshare too soon
dominate conversations
far too pushy
don’t respect people’s boundaries
You always want to be right

Dude, just elaborate on your statement.


Tell us the relationship between fouled bores and bumping shoulders to gain more accuracy.

Don't make us guess at what's in your head.

So, PMs incoming?

Classic Maser move!


My hat is off to the perp, if this is an imitator. Doing a fine job there!

Well sh it man it's obvious you already think you know what's in my head, but you so enjoy putting on a show here, isn't it.

As long as you know what's in your head that's all that matters and as far as I'm concerned, I could care less what's in your head, that's for sure.

3 shot groups don't tell us anything.

What was the aggregate group size taken over you last 6 to 8 3-shot strings (for a total around 20)?

Better yet, what is the mean distance of your impacts from the calculated group center?

They don't tell me anything that you want me to know, instead tell me that even at extended ranges, 200 300 and 400, they will still flatten deer for me and have. Give it up fellas. At 300 yds, where I aim is where that bullet went in, and that's all that matters to me AND I don't give a sh it about your statistical, cerebral, over analyzing analysis either. Anything else ?

Yes, explain your statement.

Pretty Please

I'm ROLLIN', on the floor, LAUGHING my ass off!!!

🤣

👍👍👍

Yeah, I got sidetracked from load development, guilty yer honor.
Actually, you added the word "clean". I'm likely dead wrong, but I pretty much ignore bore cleaning now since component supply has gotten so bad, round count annually is way down, so all my hunting rifles are fouled all the time to varying degrees. Like you, I hunt fouled rifles. Until I see actual copper 'shredding' with a lighted magnifier, I just let it go. I'm not a precision shooter anyway, when I measure a group it's generally with the mini scale on a pocket multi tool, lol. 1/8" increments is goodenuff.

well at least you didn't clear your throat before you admitted the guilt.

As long as it shoots accurately and see the lands stand proud l leave it alone too. Patch out the carbon but that’s it.

nobody else is asking for a further explanation but the boy in a mans body who is nothing but a vindictive SOB. Make sense ? Hope that helps.

Even you know you stepped in it this time.

2800 plus views on this thread I'd say a few or two are just sitting back and patiently waiting to be endowed with your infinite wisdom.

Or laughing like hell at you deflecting and avoiding, and deflecting and avoiding, and deflecting and avoiding again.

Just a note, this was a legitimate thread that deserved some discussion, until you shi t all over it.

I don’t know what l was thinking, l’m so sorry !🥱

I listened to the podcast a couple of times then went out and tried this with my Model 70 Classic 30-06. The barrel has been lapped and it has been bedded into a Bansner stock. Scope was a Nightforce SHV 3-10 set to 10x, and I made two each 20-shot groups at 100 yards using Norma 150-grain Whitetail ammo. I used a sandbag front rest and no rear rest.

I was somewhat sloppy with my hold, so the extreme spread for the first three shots in the first group was about 1.5 MOA. Two more did not expand the ES but landed within the spread of the first three. The second five-shot string didn’t increase ES, but clustered together near the first shot. The third and fourth strings gradually opened up the group, with the final ES being 2.209 MOA. Mean radius for this group was 0.655 MOA.

I was more careful with hold on the second group. The first three shots were nearly touching. Two more opened the ES to about 0.75 MOA. The second five-shot string opened the ES to about 1 MOA. That’s 10 in 1 MOA, which was the gold standard for Townsend Whelen back when he said that only accurate rifles are interesting. The third string opened up ES to about 1.5 MOA. All five shots in the fourth string hit to the left of the group and increased ES to 2.326 MOA. I take the rap for that: I had just fired 40 rounds of 30-06 through a sporter-weight rifle from the bench and I could tell that my hold was loosening up again. Mean radius for this group was 0.658 MOA.

Then I chronographed 10 rounds with my MagnetoSpeed chronograph. I had been using 2,749 fps as a working figure based on checking just three rounds. But 10 shots averaged 2,818 fps with an extreme spread of 58 and a standard deviation of 18, so that’s probably closer to the truth.

What did I learn?
• This rifle may be better than I thought, but I need to shoot more groups with at least 10 shots to really understand what I’m seeing.
• I need to improve my bench technique, and should look at using a rear bag for this kind of work.
• A different type of target might help make groups smaller.
• 40 rounds of 30-06 in one day is probably too much.
• If I’ve been thinking that this load did 2,749 fps from this rifle when it’s really closer to 2,818 fps, what else have I been getting wrong?


Okie John

Okie John, how different were the atmospherics from the 2749 velocity to the 2818 velocity. In the big picture that's not very much if there was a decent shift in temps, humidity, etc.

You found the fallacy of 3 shot groups for anything, you need at least 3 groups of 10 to get a true picture of ES/SD. If you take and throw out the high and low of the 10 shot group as random then a better picture will emerge.

Rear bag will definitely help stabilize the hold which in theory will bring down group size. Maybe.

Average velocity will definitely change somewhat day to day depending on overall conditions.

Different targets may help with target picture but with bad bench technique and no wind indicators it is doubtful.