Gstaylorg – this is that Bartlein 30” that I was talking to you about. Freebore as it turns out is .170” (sorry initial confusion on my part). MV at 45.8 grains of Varget was 2,784 fps. MV was still linear up to 46.3 grains (2,815 fps) which is as far as I went.
What you said about “being on the ball” is my only hesitation of tying to shrink the group. I am using a NF Competition but frankly not sure of my ability to consistently shoot in the twos…
Just being honest....
RonAKA – appreciate your input but I am pretty much sold on OCW and an additional ladder is not in my horizon.
I see, thanks for the clarification. With that configuration, 2784 fps still seems a little fast to me for Varget. In a 30" barrel with a 185 that's about the velocity I'd expect for H4895, which in my hands usually gives about 25-30 fps greater velocity than Varget at the sweet spot. However, it doesn't sound like it's grossly overpressure. Are you using Palma brass? Regardless of the final velocity you obtain in your specific setup, the precision will ultimately tell you where it needs to be. I think you might be able to tune it finer than it currently is with a little more effort. The good news is that it sounds like what you already have is certainly useable, so you can decide how much more effort you might be willing to put into it.
FWIW - I shoot load development rounds exactly the same way I shoot in matches (prone, bipod, etc), rather than off a bench. It's simply feels more natural for me to shoot development rounds the same way I shoot in competition. When I first started doing load development, I could fairly routinely shoot half MOA groups, occasionally a little under, but that was about it. I believe the process of shooting many, many load development groups over time actually helped me to become better behind the rifle in terms of shooting smaller groups at 100 yd ( breathing, trigger control, etc.). So even load development can be put to good use as practice. It certainly won't hurt you to try and tune the load in a little better with seating depth, even if the groups ultimately remain about where they are currently. I would view it simply as more time behind the rifle, with at least the possibility for improving the load.
I'm not sure how you actually shoot your groups during load testing, but one suggestion I would make (if you're not already doing it) would be to offset your POA and POI. I usually try to put the POI about 1" to 1.5" below the POA. That way, I don't shoot out the aiming point during the process of shooting each group. I also mark a cross with a Sharpie on yellow adhesive-baked round labeling circles, which I place over the center red aiming dot of the targets I use. The bright yellow background provides better contrast with the black reticle and the cross provides a much finer aiming point. The image below is a recent seating depth test I did with the 90 VLDs (5-shot groups @ 100 yd), which shows how I set my targets up. There are certainly lots of different approaches, but I find that a fairly fine aiming point and offset POA/POI are helpful.
I'm also finding out the hard way after my recent move back to NE that the constant windy conditions here make load development much more challenging. If you're not using the small BR-type wind flags while you test, you should definitely think about getting a couple. The difference between consistent half MOA and 0.25 MOA really isn't all that much, but even the little things can add up to more dispersion, so I like to have as many of them covered when load testing as I possibly can. The more confidence I have in my ability to shoot tighter groups, the better I feel I will be able to correctly interpret the effects (if any) of changes in load parameters. In any event, it's certainly worth working on over the long run. Good luck and keep at it!
