Comeback Shooter and Old School Tuning vs the Ladder

[INTJ]

I shot 1K BR in Tucson from 2005-2007. I did okay my last year there with a 300 WSM Light Gun. I shot five screamer light gun groups (4" or less), set two LG club group agg records (4.91" and 4.71"), and got a bunch of 1st place finishes. I realize none of that even warrants a mention by today's standards but it was pretty good at the time in Tucson--using std Redding 7/8 x 14 dies for loading and measuring powder on an RCBS 10-10.

I developed all my loads by shooting at 100 yds through a chronograph. I would pick a powder and shoot five shot groups of powder charges in 1/2 grain increments, then shoot seating depths in .005" increments until I found the best group with the lowest ES. Then I would test again to ensure repeatability. I had heard about the Audette method, but I always figured that just got you in the ballpark.

When I retired from the USAF in 2007 and found full-time employment in Oregon, I couldn't find any 1K BR anywhere close so I sold my rifle. A couple years ago I started looking for a shooting competition, but it wasn't until this Feb I discovered NBRSA LR BR were being held at TWO ranges close by. I contacted Curt Mendenhall, who happened to have a Dasher built that hadn't been sorted out.

I jumped in and using my old methods--though now with Wilson straight line dies, 21st Century Hydo Press, AMP Annealer, and Auto Throw/Auto Trickler on a Sartorius Entris--found a load that shot reasonably well the NBRSA Nationals--my third match since coming back. My development the week before the Nationals was 5-shot groups at .2 grain increments to find the best group, then I tested seating depths in .005" increments until I found the best seating depth. Then I repeated the seating depth test and confirmed my results. BTW, I found this barrel has a nice sweet spot of seating depths, but slightly prefers to be right at the lands.

All that background drivel to get to my questions. Several high level shooters have advised me tuning is better accomplished with ladder testing, ideally at the distance you want to shoot. They say ladder tuning approach will yield a better result with less rounds expended.

I have done a bunch of research and thinking about this, so please see if I have this down:

1. Start with a likely but slightly low powder load and load up single rounds in .1 grain increments

2. Shoot them either all at the same target spot, keeping careful track of where each round hits, or shoot one shot at a bunch of bulls that are horizontal across the target. The goal here is to see variations in powder charges that group together.

3. Find one or two good looking nodes and test around them, this time with three-shot groups.

4. Repeat steps 2 and 3 with seating depth changes

5. All that will be done at 200 yds, so the last step should be to test the best of what I found at 600--since 600 yd testing isn't as available to me.

Am I close?


Blaine

 

[retired]

i think some one is pulling you leg.
we (600/1000 yd shooters) have been known to load to +/-.02 or some to .01, but i know no one that does load development in .01 steps.
i have seen .002 seating depth change make a big diff
so..
use a scale that can hold tolerance to .02 or better
get micrometer tops for your seaters, try smaller changes

most agree to test at shooting distance
not all can so do what you can.
it use to be preload,
but i know guys that shoot the day before,, testing loads.
load the best that night

 

[INTJ]

Sorry, meant .1 grain increments though my Entris will measure to the kernel. Original post edited...

 

[BCBRAD]

For a lot of years I have approached load development the traditional way as described above, with hard earned results both in time and dollars.

A few years ago I purchased the Quickload (QL) program thinking this maybe, at least an aid, to getting better results.

Do not think QL is a plug and play program! I did and results were not there.

With that, I decided to become a student (my vocational background is in Vibration Analysis).
I quickly realized that weights, measures, and velocity must be spot on for the program to work. The included defaults will get you close and are good for modeling loads.

With the weights and measure part out of the way, QL is complementary (does the math) to the OCW and OBT principles, so the user must be fully appraised to these concepts.

So, with an unknown rifle/cartridge combination the first step is to find the bolt face to rifle distance, volume of a fired case in grains of water, distance the bullet is seated from the rifling, COL, weight of bullet (generally weigh 10-20 take an average, they can be segregated also), determine the weighting factor, determine the actual burn rate of the powder at the pressure you will be experiencing, determine the start pressure of the bullet as it resists the rifling and all the normal case prep that goes with a good load.

Velocity and powder charge, the load you have will produce a barrel time in mS, you must insure that this barrel time compliments the barrel length, adjust powder charge to change velocity to get the correct barrel time ( this a node, a point where the muzzle is least disturbed when the bullet exits).

Tuning is done with powder charge, accurate to 0.02gn.

The powder chosen will have all of the deterrent chemicals consumed at max pressure, if it is consumed before the powder is considered 'fast' for the application alternatively after it is considered slow. Also, the pressure curve will will not have a sharp peak to max pressure but a relatively quick rise to max and then a nice fat rounded curve as it drops to lower pressure, a signature of an OCW load.

When all inputs are correct, an accurate model can be produced, I load 5 rounds for velocity testing( I use a LabRadar) and a FX120i scale. Velocities are recorded and then the predicted velocity/powder charge is is 'tuned' to match reality.

This load generally produces the best accuracy the platform is capable of.

 

[BoydAllen]

Funny thing, if you look at all of the accuracy records shot at 100 and 200 yards, many, including recent ones, were shot with thrown charges, with ammunition that is loaded at the range, between matches, so that they could make adjustments to their loads based on changes in ambient conditions. Of course I understand that extreme spread of velocity within a group becomes increasingly important as distance increases, but even for longer ranges, a lot of productive tuning is done at short range, where less stringent standards for charge weights are the rule.

 

[newbieshooter]

Sorry, meant .1 grain increments though my Entris will measure to the kernel. Original post edited...

For step 1 I usually use .2 increments.

 

[retired]

boyd, he is talking long range..not 100/200..and there are more and more chargemasters at 100/200 matches
the people who win consistently at long range, do not throw charges.
ammo for long range is a fine tuned part of the process.

Funny thing, if you look at all of the accuracy records shot at 100 and 200 yards, many, including recent ones, were shot with thrown charges, with ammunition that is loaded at the range, between matches, so that they could make adjustments to their loads based on changes in ambient conditions. Of course I understand that extreme spread of velocity within a group becomes increasingly important as distance increases, but even for longer ranges, a lot of productive tuning is done at short range, where less stringent standards for charge weights are the rule.

 

[retired]

quickload is a TOOL not a BIBLE.
they did not test with
your bbl
your lot of powder
your lot of primers
your lot of brass
nor your lot of bullets.

For a lot of years I have approached load development the traditional way as described above, with hard earned results both in time and dollars.

A few years ago I purchased the Quickload (QL) program thinking this maybe, at least an aid, to getting better results.

Do not think QL is a plug and play program! I did and results were not there.

With that, I decided to become a student (my vocational background is in Vibration Analysis).
I quickly realized that weights, measures, and velocity must be spot on for the program to work. The included defaults will get you close and are good for modeling loads.

With the weights and measure part out of the way, QL is complementary (does the math) to the OCW and OBT principles, so the user must be fully appraised to these concepts.

So, with an unknown rifle/cartridge combination the first step is to find the bolt face to rifle distance, volume of a fired case in grains of water, distance the bullet is seated from the rifling, COL, weight of bullet (generally weigh 10-20 take an average, they can be segregated also), determine the weighting factor, determine the actual burn rate of the powder at the pressure you will be experiencing, determine the start pressure of the bullet as it resists the rifling and all the normal case prep that goes with a good load.

Velocity and powder charge, the load you have will produce a barrel time in mS, you must insure that this barrel time compliments the barrel length, adjust powder charge to change velocity to get the correct barrel time ( this a node, a point where the muzzle is least disturbed when the bullet exits).

Tuning is done with powder charge, accurate to 0.02gn.

The powder chosen will have all of the deterrent chemicals consumed at max pressure, if it is consumed before the powder is considered 'fast' for the application alternatively after it is considered slow. Also, the pressure curve will will not have a sharp peak to max pressure but a relatively quick rise to max and then a nice fat rounded curve as it drops to lower pressure, a signature of an OCW load.

When all inputs are correct, an accurate model can be produced, I load 5 rounds for velocity testing( I use a LabRadar) and a FX120i scale. Velocities are recorded and then the predicted velocity/powder charge is is 'tuned' to match reality.

This load generally produces the best accuracy the platform is capable of.

 

[dkhunt14]

For step 1 I usually use .3 increments.

I believe this depends on the capacity of the case. A Dasher for example, .3 is alot of change. Matt

 

[newbieshooter]

I believe this depends on the capacity of the case. A Dasher for example, .3 is alot of change. Matt

i meant to type .2 (mistyped on phone). But Matt is correct - depends on capacity of the case.

 

[BoydAllen]

boyd, he is talking long range..not 100/200..and there are more and more chargemasters at 100/200 matches
the people who win consistently at long range, do not throw charges.
ammo for long range is a fine tuned part of the process.

Yes, I understand all of that. My point was not to discredit the described method for the stated application, but to point out that a different approach may be warranted for others. Also, I have seen a tendency for shooters to try to substitute computer work for range work, and many who do may not be as good at getting all of the variables in order as the OP. In the past I have seen more than one post from someone who was not getting the results that QL predicted. My take on this is that there are some variables that a computer program is unlikely to be able to adequately deal with. That being said, QL is an impressive tool.

 

[BCBRAD]

quickload is a TOOL not a BIBLE.
they did not test with
your bbl
your lot of powder
your lot of primers
your lot of brass
nor your lot of bullets.

You kind of missed my point , respectively.

Yes QL is a tool..... that does the math, like any program it is the inputs that make or break it and the operators understanding of it.

Any component change/weight/measure, the program must run again.

What I'm after is an accurate barrel time and an OCW which will make the load more forgiving to small variables in the load, weather conditions etc.

Again, you must have accurate velocities recorded, you must have charges measured to 0.02gn, weights and measures must be spot on.

I have 'back engineered' some stellar loads that were developed the traditional way, I now know why they where as good as they were.



All this assumes that your platform is mechanically sound

 

[retired]

no i did not miss your point.

but if you expect me to believe you loaded one lot of five rounds and they produced the best ammo for your rifle, all based on input from ql,

IT AINT GONNA HAPPEN.
bye no time for people that waste my time.

You kind of missed my point , respectively.

Yes QL is a tool..... that does the math, like any program it is the inputs that make or break it and the operators understanding of it.

Any component change/weight/measure, the program must run again.

What I'm after is an accurate barrel time and an OCW which will make the load more forgiving to small variables in the load, weather conditions etc.

Again, you must have accurate velocities recorded, you must have charges measured to 0.02gn, weights and measures must be spot on.

I have 'back engineered' some stellar loads that were developed the traditional way, I now know why they where as good as they were.



All this assumes that your platform is mechanically sound

 

[INTJ]

I received a very helpful PM from newbie shooter. That with some research here tells me I have been using a ladder to find nodes for years now. It looks like the new way will help make that a faster process.

Th old idea was not to shoot past 300 yds so the wind wouldn’t be a huge factor. The new way says focus on vertical, which helps counter the wind effects on groups.

I think I can speed up my load development by incorporating this new approach.

 

[seymour fish]

I received a very helpful PM from newbie shooter. That with some research here tells me I have been using a ladder to find nodes for years now. It looks like the new way will help make that a faster process.

Th old idea was not to shoot past 300 yds so the wind wouldn’t be a huge factor. The new way says focus on vertical, which helps counter the wind effects on groups.

I think I can speed up my load development by incorporating this new approach.

QL for base/safe load, relatively coarse ladders to screen powders, bit of seating depth, fine 3-shot ladder at distance covers most of it. Reverse engineer your best loads using exact measurements and MV so you know where your 32 lb/same lot powder lies on the spectrum. If you hit desired bbl time + 1%, well you got that going for you

 

[INTJ]

I do like Quickload. I fireformed my Dasher brass with 19.5 grains of Bullseye and 1/8 piece of toilet paper. The max weight on the TP was one grain, and QL told me that was a little over 50,000 PSI. I got fully formed shoulders the first firing.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

1k BR is a tuning match more than any thing else IMO. An amateur shooter on a well tuned rifle can be competitive. Your most important tool is between your ears. Tuning in a hap hazard manner leads to frustration. What ever method you pick, do it in a systematic fashion in conditions worthy of testing in. If it does not produce the results, try a different method. Getting good at tuning will take you farther than any other skill in LR BR if you ask me. If you have a local match ask a couple of the top shooters what they do.

 

[BCBRAD]

no i did not miss your point.

but if you expect me to believe you loaded one lot of five rounds and they produced the best ammo for your rifle, all based on input from ql,

IT AINT GONNA HAPPEN.
bye no time for people that waste my time.

The first five is to ascertain the powder burn (Ba) , adjust, then shoot the next five for a group.

Any component change will change things , so test must be done again.

If one cares to study the QL program you will discover the 'secrets' of internal ballistics.

I won't feed the trolls anymore, they seem to be closed minded.