load testing are there newer more efficient methods now?

[jimmymac]

Apologies to the OP.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

i call what you are doing group shooting.

If ripping 15-20 shots round robin and the same poa is group shooting, then I will go with that.

 

[dolek]

Must you be a persistent pain in the ass? It's pretty much a given that any place you show up on this forum, there is negativity and controversy as you pick the fly shit out of the pepper. I hope you are not nearly as miserable as your internet persona indicates.

Could not have said it better.

 

[Bart B.]

I loaded up 5 rounds of 6 Dasher, this was to test 105gn Berger Hybrids, with all the parameters, as closely as I can do it, inputted to QL tells me that 34.8gn of H4350 will produce 2903 ft/s, be on a node 1.0905 mS and have the progressive burn stop at max pressure, hallmark of an OCW load.

I don't think a different rifle and component lots will produce the same barrel times QL calculates. Quickload says we shouldn't expect calculated fps results to match that customers get. A 50 to 100 fps difference is normal. So are barrel times not going to match.

 

[BCBRAD]

Bart, when starting to study the QL program I was of similar thinking.

1st step was to get accurate velocities, Lab Radar does that .

2nd step is to get accurate weights & measures.

(((I don't think a different rifle and component lots will produce the same barrel times QL calculates.)))

The idea is to match the barrel time with the components you are using OR get the components used to match a barrel time that is considered a node, a point where the muzzle is least disturbed.

I have two 6 Dashers , they do not take the same load to get an OBT, cases are different Norma vs Lapua, bullets are different , twist rates are 7.7 vs 8, powder burn rates are 'slightly' different even with the same lot# as they burn at different pressures. The bullet accelerates at different velocity.

Many competitors have great success using Varget in their Dashers, this powder when charged to a node/barrel time does not produce an OCW load with my components, the load while hitting the barrel time is finicky to any variables....weather included. H4350 gives and OCW and OBT load, in my rifles at ~60kpsi, ~ 103% case fill.

I and a few friends rely on the program to analyze and model loads, it is an alternative to the OP's question.

Again the program does the math, the study is on internal ballistics.

 

[Bart B.]

The idea is to match the barrel time with the components you are using OR get the components used to match a barrel time that is considered a node, a point where the muzzle is least disturbed.

Yes that's the theory. But the speed of sound in barrels steel OCW is based on is different than what most mechanical engineering references state for barrel steel.

I've seen no change in accuracy across a few ten-thousandths inch change in muzzle bore diameter, nor with a thousandth. A few ten-thousandths is the spread stated in OCW theory.

 

[Webster]

Freakin troll ruins it every time ! Do you EVER leave the computer ?

Now we have two of them.

 

[dolek]

Now we have two of them.

Make that 3 ! And one does not even contribute .

 

[rockwind1]

well, i for one appreciate all the input, thanks for posting everyone. i am making slow but sure progress, although today seemed frustrating after i did a ladder test today which is pure chaos,,,will be making some changes in powder and brass (thanks josh) and see what happens. this was with my gap extreme hunter, bartlein24" 3b 6.5 saum on gaps's short action 700 clone with manners carbon hunter style stock. killed about 6 animals with it using copper creek ammo but making my own load for it has not been an easy road so far.

my OTHER gap rifle with a proof barrel is shooting pretty good with hornady brass and 150 smk's and rl 26. but that was also the one where i suddenly lost half my brass due to primer pockets.

hopefully i can start another controversial thread soon!

i think i will call it "shoulder bumping ladder test,,help needed"

 

[Homerange]

well, i for one appreciate all the input, thanks for posting everyone. ............

my OTHER gap rifle with a proof barrel is shooting pretty good with hornady brass and 150 smk's and rl 26. but that was also the one where i suddenly lost half my brass due to primer pockets.

hopefully i can start another controversial thread soon!

i think i will call it "shoulder bumping ladder test,,help needed"

Which indicates your loads are too hot !

 

[rockwind1]

Which indicates your loads are too hot !

i don't believe so,,but i will certainly keep it in mind,,,i've posted this a couple times,,,the hornady brass made for the gap 4s 6.5 saum is famous for being good for only 1 or 2 firings before the pocket goes, even when used judiciously. in my case,,,i was doing load developement, so almost all my stuff was working my way up to pressure signs, and the pockets still went.

 

[Homerange]

i don't believe so,,but i will certainly keep it in mind,,,i've posted this a couple times,,,the hornady brass made for the gap 4s 6.5 saum is famous for being good for only 1 or 2 firings before the pocket goes, even when used judiciously. in my case,,,i was doing load developement, so almost all my stuff was working my way up to pressure signs, and the pockets still went.

Different brass is what I'd use as the Hornady is known for being a bit soft.
I use it but don't push the boundaries or have magnums.

Hot calibers have their own unique sets of problems.

 

[RRgun]

I too have performed an OCW test, my first one mind you. 7mm REM mag, 26 inch Krieger, newly installed Holland brake.
I had plenty of issues going on with every aspect of reloading that caused me to question everything I used or did during reloading.
Starting from scratch, I ran the OCW test with RE22 powder, 175 Accubonds, Nosler brass Fed 215 primers just as Nosler's load data suggested. I did a lot of brass prep. I shot over the Labradar and set aside my chrony.
I started with the minimum load to the max load (62.5 gr) in .5 grain increments which gave 10 rounds. The sill (or flat spot) occurred at rounds 4, 5 and 6, right in the middle of the set, and again in round 9 and 10 . The difference in speed in the 2 flats was 57 fps. 2806 avg.and 2863 avg.
On the second test I loaded 3 rounds each around the lower speed flat in .2 grain increments starting at 60 gr. to 61 gr. yielding (6) 3 shot groups running about 2800 fps.
To my surprise a 60.4 grain group shot an ES of 4 fps and and .5" group counting a flyer low (could have been me). The rest of the groups' ES ranging from 20-25 fps and larger group sizes.
I plan on continuing this test with the same recipe, to shoot at least 10 rounds taking my time at the bench for my best effort and make good shot calls. That should convince me if I have a good starting point. I do enjoy the research and experiments.
I am a hunter, not a competitive shooter.
But, I learned annealing, chamber casting, neck turning and neck tension in this journey and all had small but positive impacts. OCW just kind of reassured me that I was making the right choices. These are by far my best handloads in my rather short experience.