How do BR shooters get away with it?

[1953greg]

At a big match almost everyone has a good rifle. I believe the difference is gun handling at the bench and consistently reading down range conditions better than 90% of the shooters at the line.

100% fer sure!!!!!

i have read this thread 3 times and
THE WEALTH OF KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE AT ACCURATESHOOTER CONTINUES ASTONISH ME!!!!!!

kudos and thanks guys

 

[BoydAllen]

Short range bench shooters: please do not read this...

I learned a long time ago that the days of innovation were essentially dead in 100 & 200 yard benchrest. They tend to gravitate to whatever equipment happened to win the last big shoot. It's a herd mentality like I've seen in no other sport.

Just because the short rangers are all doing it, don't assume "it" is the best approach. Most of those guys are simply playing Follow the Leader.

I have to say that if you are shooting relatively small cases at one and two hundred yards then the best at that range are benchrest shooters. Every so often I read or hear a remark about lack of innovation, usually I think because someone wants to read about something new. Nothing prevents anyone from coming up with new equipment as long as it fits within the rules, and there is a lot of room within them particularly if you include unlimited class. What I have also observed is that those that are complaining are usually not themselves innovating within that sport. Perhaps it is because it is expensive to do so. Recently there has been some interest in a new short range caliber, the Grinch. It takes a different twist barrel, different weight bullets, different dies, different cases, a different reamer and perhaps a different powder. If you total that all up, you are looking at well over a thousand dollars, with no guarantee that it will be better than the 6PPC overall. Add to that the fact that most shooters know that it is not their equipment or the caliber that they are shooting that is holding them back, and perhaps you can understand why they do not feel the need to have much of a R&D budget, given the performance of current equipment. If anyone thinks that short range is something to be dismissed because equipment is so near to the top of the development curve, he should come out and give lessons at a registered match, with his innovations in hand. Personally, I wish anyone who does this the very best of luck, but I will not hold my breath. One last bit of informaton: The equipment that is taken to matches is what the shooters know to be the best that they have, but that does not mean that they have not experimented. Not all experiments involve things that are easy to see, neither is there any guarantee of their success. When all is said and done, they bring the best that they have because they come to win, not to satisfy someone's curiosity about how something different would do.

 

[Webster]

I have to say that if you are shooting relatively small cases at one and two hundred yards then the best at that range are benchrest shooters. Every so often I read or hear a remark about lack of innovation, usually I think because someone wants to read about something new. Nothing prevents anyone from coming up with new equipment as long as it fits within the rules, and there is a lot of room within them particularly if you include unlimited class. What I have also observed is that those that are complaining are usually not themselves innovating within that sport. Perhaps it is because it is expensive to do so. Recently there has been some interest in a new short range caliber, the Grinch. It takes a different twist barrel, different weight bullets, different dies, different cases, a different reamer and perhaps a different powder. If you total that all up, you are looking at well over a thousand dollars, with no guarantee that it will be better than the 6PPC overall. Add to that the fact that most shooters know that it is not their equipment or the caliber that they are shooting that is holding them back, and perhaps you can understand why they do not feel the need to have much of a R&D budget, given the performance of current equipment. If anyone thinks that short range is something to be dismissed because equipment is so near to the top of the development curve, he should come out and give lessons at a registered match, with his innovations in hand. Personally, I wish anyone who does this the very best of luck, but I will not hold my breath. One last bit of informaton: The equipment that is taken to matches is what the shooters know to be the best that they have, but that does not mean that they have not experimented. Not all experiments involve things that are easy to see, neither is there any guarantee of their success. When all is said and done, they bring the best that they have because they come to win, not to satisfy someone's curiosity about how something different would do.

The complainers of lack of innovation are on the outside looking in. They never shot in competition. Some well known short range BR shooter said that a lot of guys want to get into SR comp. They buy a lot of expensive equipment. After a couple years they find out they cannot come close to competing and quit. Personal skills rule. Buying tennis shoes doesn't mean you can compete in the NBA.

 

[CubCouper]

I don't post often, but figured I could chime in here since I do actively shoot SR BR, do a lot of my own smithing, experiment a bit, and mostly remember what I didn't know before I got into the 11 years ago.

First, I was drawn into BR for reasons like the OP had in post #1. I was an avid reloader and hunter and I heard the BR guys could find the perfect lot in 30 shots. I had a hundred combinations to run through a 7Mag for a hunting trip and knew there had to be a better way. Reality 1: BR shooters do it 30 rounds when they have already chosen the powder, bullet, primer, rests, etc. The variables are typically just tiny charge weight and seating depth adjustments within an already well known range. Reality 2: Even though the PPC techniques did not apply to my 7Mag, over the years I learned a LOT about choosing a powder and charge that was likely to produce better groups because some principles like consistent ignition, completeness of burn, reading pressure signs, etc apply to nearly reloading scenario. And today, I quite expect to shoot very reasonable groups in 30 rounds or less from completely unknown rifles by carefully prepping brass and selecting likely loads from some Quickload choices.

On Resizing
I believe the biggest cause of short-lived brass is over-working during resizing. Practically every manufacturer of reloading equipment has instructions like, "set the die 1/8 to 1/4 turn further" [verbatim, RCBS]. The reason is that they all write instructions to make ammo suitable for any SAAMI chamber. Unless you are running several rifles of the same caliber and want to exchange ammo between them, you can do a lot better. In SR BR we target a .0015 push back on the shoulder. .005 push back will shorten case life from 100's of firings to less than 10. Twenty thou can lead to complete case failure in 2-3 firings. A standard 14tpi dies moves .071" per revolution. So that 1/4 turn adjustment is .018". To set any die length correctly, you need a simple sleeve (I call it a critter) that will slide over the neck and rest on the shoulder. Measure, then resize, then measure again. Adjust. Repeat until the your dial caliper moves but just barely.

The second part of the equation is the cartridge body support. The secret to long life and easy bolt lift through dozens, if not hundreds, of firings is a die that correctly supports the case while resizing. For the PPC (and BR) cases Harrel's makes semi-custom dies in a variety of 'sizes': 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, etc. This generally refers to the amount that die is undersized from the 'standard' chamber. To pick the correct die, I lock the jaws of my calipers as precisely as I can at the very top of the body of the case. Resize. The jaws should not slide down the case more than a 1/4", 1/8" is perfect for me. If it slides too far I pick a slightly larger die (smaller # in Harrels case). Basically, if the die is too big around, pushing the shoulder back will eventually create a mushroom-like ring at the shoulder-body junction. The brass will get sticky, clicky, and hard to extract. If the die is too small, the body will work-harden, crunch down, and get sticky, clicky, and hard to extract. When you order a custom die by sending in three fired cases, this is what the maker is doing... hopefully finding a die that is just right. Trouble is that as a case stretches, moves, work hardens, etc. over many firings, you will occasionally find that a different size die is needed for the correct sizing. I carry a full set of Harrels dies and I verify my die/brass matchup at least once every weekend I compete.

Using these techniques, I have had 30 pieces of brass last through 2500-3000 firings with no annealing, the entire life of a barrel and then some. I tend to run my PPCs in the lighter nodes and I usually give up on the brass when the primer pockets get too loose.

On Competitions:
Above posters are correct... almost any gun at a sanctioned event could win, but the same competitors usually end up at the top. Less mistakes is the reason, not better equipment. Mistakes in wind reading, mistakes in gun handling, and mistakes in adjusting for conditions largely determine where everyone will place. Years ago I was told that small groups are fun, but small mistakes bring home the wood.

I do go to some matches to test components. Try out a new barrel or a new bullet or a new bag. I know that almost anything can be made to look good in a practice session, but I believe that top-notch performance can only really be known if it tested where it counts. A barrel that shoots the occasional 0's is no good if you can can't also trust it to slide gradually away from perfect instead of falling off a cliff. Look at match reports throughout the season and you will see top competitors in the middle or even the bottom of the pack. It is called experimenting.

TL;DR
I thought I knew everything about reloading 11 years ago. SR BR competition taught me how little I actually knew and how much more there was/is to learn. In just the ten years I've competed, I've seen the average winning aggregates shrink from around .24-.25, to now consistently in the .19-.20 range. Doesn't sound like much but every tenth is exponentially harder. Scores that would have won 10 years ago don't even get you on the first page. Overall equipment still costs ~about~ the same, but better barrels, better rests, better stocks, better bullets have tightened the spread and expectations throughout the shooting industry. Most importantly, I believe, are sanctioning organizations that maintain a sport that offers no reward except for your own personal sense of accomplishment. Everyone competes head-to-head, any shooter can win, there is no $$$ incentive to hide equipment or components or technique.

Rod Brown

 

[Drakehammer]

I think I need to resize my chamber.

 

[Hengehold]

I don't post often, but figured I could chime in here since I do actively shoot SR BR, do a lot of my own smithing, experiment a bit, and mostly remember what I didn't know before I got into the 11 years ago.

First, I was drawn into BR for reasons like the OP had in post #1. I was an avid reloader and hunter and I heard the BR guys could find the perfect lot in 30 shots. I had a hundred combinations to run through a 7Mag for a hunting trip and knew there had to be a better way. Reality 1: BR shooters do it 30 rounds when they have already chosen the powder, bullet, primer, rests, etc. The variables are typically just tiny charge weight and seating depth adjustments within an already well known range. Reality 2: Even though the PPC techniques did not apply to my 7Mag, over the years I learned a LOT about choosing a powder and charge that was likely to produce better groups because some principles like consistent ignition, completeness of burn, reading pressure signs, etc apply to nearly reloading scenario. And today, I quite expect to shoot very reasonable groups in 30 rounds or less from completely unknown rifles by carefully prepping brass and selecting likely loads from some Quickload choices.

On Resizing
I believe the biggest cause of short-lived brass is over-working during resizing. Practically every manufacturer of reloading equipment has instructions like, "set the die 1/8 to 1/4 turn further" [verbatim, RCBS]. The reason is that they all write instructions to make ammo suitable for any SAAMI chamber. Unless you are running several rifles of the same caliber and want to exchange ammo between them, you can do a lot better. In SR BR we target a .0015 push back on the shoulder. .005 push back will shorten case life from 100's of firings to less than 10. Twenty thou can lead to complete case failure in 2-3 firings. A standard 14tpi dies moves .071" per revolution. So that 1/4 turn adjustment is .018". To set any die length correctly, you need a simple sleeve (I call it a critter) that will slide over the neck and rest on the shoulder. Measure, then resize, then measure again. Adjust. Repeat until the your dial caliper moves but just barely.

The second part of the equation is the cartridge body support. The secret to long life and easy bolt lift through dozens, if not hundreds, of firings is a die that correctly supports the case while resizing. For the PPC (and BR) cases Harrel's makes semi-custom dies in a variety of 'sizes': 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, etc. This generally refers to the amount that die is undersized from the 'standard' chamber. To pick the correct die, I lock the jaws of my calipers as precisely as I can at the very top of the body of the case. Resize. The jaws should not slide down the case more than a 1/4", 1/8" is perfect for me. If it slides too far I pick a slightly larger die (smaller # in Harrels case). Basically, if the die is too big around, pushing the shoulder back will eventually create a mushroom-like ring at the shoulder-body junction. The brass will get sticky, clicky, and hard to extract. If the die is too small, the body will work-harden, crunch down, and get sticky, clicky, and hard to extract. When you order a custom die by sending in three fired cases, this is what the maker is doing... hopefully finding a die that is just right. Trouble is that as a case stretches, moves, work hardens, etc. over many firings, you will occasionally find that a different size die is needed for the correct sizing. I carry a full set of Harrels dies and I verify my die/brass matchup at least once every weekend I compete.

Using these techniques, I have had 30 pieces of brass last through 2500-3000 firings with no annealing, the entire life of a barrel and then some. I tend to run my PPCs in the lighter nodes and I usually give up on the brass when the primer pockets get too loose.

On Competitions:
Above posters are correct... almost any gun at a sanctioned event could win, but the same competitors usually end up at the top. Less mistakes is the reason, not better equipment. Mistakes in wind reading, mistakes in gun handling, and mistakes in adjusting for conditions largely determine where everyone will place. Years ago I was told that small groups are fun, but small mistakes bring home the wood.

I do go to some matches to test components. Try out a new barrel or a new bullet or a new bag. I know that almost anything can be made to look good in a practice session, but I believe that top-notch performance can only really be known if it tested where it counts. A barrel that shoots the occasional 0's is no good if you can can't also trust it to slide gradually away from perfect instead of falling off a cliff. Look at match reports throughout the season and you will see top competitors in the middle or even the bottom of the pack. It is called experimenting.

TL;DR
I thought I knew everything about reloading 11 years ago. SR BR competition taught me how little I actually knew and how much more there was/is to learn. In just the ten years I've competed, I've seen the average winning aggregates shrink from around .24-.25, to now consistently in the .19-.20 range. Doesn't sound like much but every tenth is exponentially harder. Scores that would have won 10 years ago don't even get you on the first page. Overall equipment still costs ~about~ the same, but better barrels, better rests, better stocks, better bullets have tightened the spread and expectations throughout the shooting industry. Most importantly, I believe, are sanctioning organizations that maintain a sport that offers no reward except for your own personal sense of accomplishment. Everyone competes head-to-head, any shooter can win, there is no $$$ incentive to hide equipment or components or technique.

Rod Brown

Rod,
Very nice write-up. Thank you.
-Trevor