Ladder test opinion

[rockwind1]

stuck at school function so figured I would post this and see if anyone thought the test looked Conclusive Is there a node in there somewhere? target 1 is from a
gap 6.5 saum extreme hunter, gap templar hunting short action, 24" bartlein 3b,
these loads were brand new hornady gap 4s brass with fed 210m primers. loaded with fx120i/auto trickler set up. redding match die set, redding t-7 press.

shot prone with atlas bipod, midway shooting mat, and rectangular rear squeeze bag

 

[rockwind1]

target 2 was from a gap custom rifle, bighorn tl3 action, 24" 8 twist proof carbon sendero, manners ET5A, these loads were brand new hornady gap 4s brass with fed 210m primers. loaded with fx120i/auto trickler set up. redding match die set, redding t-7 press.
shot prone with atlas bipod, midway shooting mat, and rectangular rear squeeze bag


And other rifle

 

[McHaggis]

FWIW I'm still learning too so I'd see what else you get but since you're stuck at a school function I thought I'd try and help pass the time... School function are sooooo much fun.

1st target... It isn't overly clear so I'd suggest re-shooting 6,7,8,9 & 10. Vertical isn't great but the numbers make it worth investigating here a bit more.
2nd target... I'd go with 9 and try loads from 59.5gr up to 60.1 in 1gr steps. There seems to be a node there.

Have fun!

 

[Regnar]

I'm not a ladder expert so don't take anything I say to mean I think I'm right. I'm going to answer so I can compare the to what others say.

1st target. I dont think there is any great information there. I say that be cause you don't have as NH successive charges grouping well. 2,4,6 have great verticle but 3&5 are out. 9 and 11 are good but not ten. what yardage? why is there so much horizontal?

Second target. I would test around 3&4 and 9&8

 

[rockwind1]

It was at 550. And the wind was 5 to 12ish.

 

[L W P]

You lost me after the First target load #4. Loads #5 and #6 don't match your powder charge chart against your target shot charge. If I looking at the numbers correctly?

 

[rockwind1]

You lost me after the First target load #4. Loads #5 and #6 don't match your powder charge chart against your target shot charge. If I looking at the numbers correctly?

Oops. Sorry about that. The loads in the list are correct. The #5 hole shud say 59 and 6 shud say 59.2

 

[L W P]

It was at 550. And the wind was 5 to 12ish.

Direction of wind ? Left to right half value?

 

[L W P]

Oops. Sorry about that. The loads in the list are correct. The #5 hole shud say 59 and 6 shud say 59.2

Ok no problem,Thanks

 

[L W P]

FWIW I'm still learning too so I'd see what else you get but since you're stuck at a school function I thought I'd try and help pass the time... School function are sooooo much fun.

1st target... It isn't overly clear so I'd suggest re-shooting 6,7,8,9 & 10. Vertical isn't great but the numbers make it worth investigating here a bit more.
2nd target... I'd go with 9 and try loads from 59.5gr up to 60.1 in 1gr steps. There seems to be a node there.

Have fun!

I would agree about loading from 59.5grs to 60.1grs in .1gr (1/10gr) increments. And seeing if the FPS stays fairly close. With in 10FPS for those seven cases fired. And load in the middle of that average.

 

[L W P]

But I'm not a High Marksman so wait for those guys to chime in before you reload.

 

[L W P]

On target #1 I'd like to see loads #6-#8 redone in .1gr increments for a velocity test and grouping.

 

[L W P]

Also which cartridge is this? A 280 or SAUM or what? And do you have anymore facts about both Rifles that these targets were produced by please? Just curious. And maybe the brass and primers too.

 

[rockwind1]

Also which cartridge is this? A 280 or SAUM or what? And do you have anymore facts about both Rifles that these targets were produced by please? Just curious. And maybe the brass and primers too.

hi, i guess i should have supplied more info but i was sneakily on my phone while guest speaker after guest speaker droned on and on and on,,,,,. i posted more info in opening posts. thanks for any input.

 

[L W P]

Ok thanks, the one thing that I myself might question is that on both of these rifles you are saying that these test were preformed with NEW brass. Does that mean that this was the first time that they were fired(virgin brass)? If so I'm not sure how accurate of a test can be preformed until your brass has been fired at least once. To conform more to your chamber and be more consistent in size after resizing. Others may comment on this theory better than me.

 

[500Stroker]

You are on the right path.
On target one I would refine your testing to 59.6 to 60.1 in .10 grain powder jumps.
I assume these are hunting loads so try to keep the barrel cool for cold shot clean kill accuracy.
Use only fire formed brass.
For best results try to test in the same ambient air temp and altitude as you will be hunting in.

 

[dsculley]

On the Berger target, 4, 5 & 6 are nearly identical vertically. I would try #5 and test seating depth. On the ELD-X target, there is very little vertical dispersion for 8, 9 & 10. I would probably try 59.7 and test for seating depth. This is based on the assumption that I called all these shots as good in the

 

[JFrank]

@rockwind1

With the ELD's, I like 8,9,10 <> and also 3,4 as a maybe

With the Berger's, I'd revisit 8,9,10,11,12
I'm suspicious 10 may have been an errant shot. By velocity data, it says it was.
Vertically 4,5,6 look appealing as well.

PS-1: myself only plot the shot numbers next to the appropriate holes. Less confusing IMO.
PS-2: pay horizontal dispersion no mind. Assess by vertical dispersion only, is my advise for ladder testing.

Mr. Moran
I have questions for you can we have a short conversation?
Jim

 

[rockwind1]

As @L W P pointed out, since your ladders were with new brass, I wouldn't be surprised that your results may obscure some, on continuation cycles. Myself, will never load develop with new brass, because I want new brass to all be fire-formed with one consistent pressured load, so that they all get ironed and stretched dimensionally the same. In fact, myself from one same lot of brass, I fire-form x-amount to be used as match brass and x-amount for test brass. I never use my match brass for testing, so that it remains dimensionally consistent.
My 2-Cents,

what do you do if your brass seems to be resistant to fireforming, like out of 130 1x fired brass, 95% of it had the same head to shoulder length as it had new, 6 or 7 were a little longer, like the shoulders had formed more to the chamber. i know some folks have said it takes 3,4, 5 firings to get it fully formed,,,, it just seems so intensive to have to fire form that much, i mean, my barrel life is probably 1000-1400 rds, by the time i get my brass fireformed, it's time for a new barrel.

 

[dsculley]

Take one piece of brass. Load and fire it 3 times. Compare this to your new brass. How much brass will expand depends on how your chamber is cut. You could be lucky and have minimal expansion.