Ladder tests ???

[jr600yd]

Ok guys a little help here. Ladder tests. What’s the consensus on what one to do first? I know it’s probably been discussed ad-finitum but at 71 sometimes the brain synapses don’t fire as fast as they use to. I wonder if I should do a powder ladder test first or a bullet seating one? Does it make a difference? Kind of like which came first the chicken or the egg. I’ve been doing a powder ladder test first then bullet seating but I wonder if I got it backwards.

Thanks for the help

 

[Jet]

Powder first is my method but I've seen folks post on here that they do a seating depth 1st. Once I know the powder charge I'll do a seating depth test. Once those two are known I'll do another ladder with the chosen seating depth to confirm.

 

[jr600yd]

Thanks Jet. That’s what I thought also.

 

[Raythemanroe]

Whatya shootin?

I would start around .010 in, research my chosen powder/bullet choices for a ballpark area to start my initial ladder test @ the given yardage I intended to shoot.

Ray

 

[Clancy]

Start with a luke warm charge, run a seating depth test, then follow Erik Cortina’s method for finding a node. You can be down to bugholes in 60 rounds with fantastic SD.

All in all, seating depth test with anything but varmint bullets comes first.

 

[dsculley]

I agree with Clancy. I used to test powder first, but now am convinced that it is best to test seating depth first. I use the Berger method then test for powder.

 

[Terry O]

I'm a convert to seating test first. I use a 10% reduced charge of expected full load (I think this is key) and use the intended bullet. Test at 200 yards, three shot groups over flags from +10 to -20 in .005 increments, skipping touch. One group will stand out head and shoulders over the rest. Since using this my ladders have been more straight forward and repeatable.

 

[JFrank]

I agree with Clancy. I used to test powder first, but now am convinced that it is best to test seating depth first. I use the Berger method then test for powder.

Are you working with Berger vld Bullets

 

[jr600yd]

Thanks guys. Actually I have two rifles to work up loads for both are for F Class. First is a Remington 260 with a 30” Brux 1/8 barrel the other is a Borden 284 win with a Brux 1/9. For the 260 I plan to shoot Berger 140 VLD’s or Sierra 142’s over H-4350 or 4831sc. For the 284 I'm planning on 180 Hybrids and H-4831sc.
The plan is to shoot the 260 in midrange matches and the 284in longrange matches.
Thanks again Jim

 

[JFrank]

I understand seating first with VLD however the Sierras with Tangent ogive I would be interested in your results.
I'm a powder first guy but open minded "
Jim
Addendum- great choice of calibers BTW

 

[jr600yd]

I got to test the 260 today. Using Peterson brass (good stuff!) Federal 210M primers and H-4350 pushing Berger 140 VLD’s jamed. Groups weren’t that good, wind, but did find two nodes. First was 41.3 - 41.6 grs at 2870 - 2895 FPS. Second was 42.8 - 43.7 at 2920-3000

Seems loads in this range are pretty common for the 260 and 140 gr bullets.

Seating depth test is next.

 

[FURMAN]

I do powder first. I have found with several different rifles that a particular bullet may have a different seating depth preference depending on powder. I do my ladders at the lands watching for pressure signs. Once I find the powder node I do seating depth testing.

 

[CharlieNC]

Unless I am starting in the dark with zero knowledge about charge, I run a matrix with combinations of charge weight and seating depth at a single time. If you look at Tony Boyer's book he shows an example using a matrix of all combinations of something like 5 charges loaded x 5 seating depths = 25 loads to pinpoint the best combination. Or view it as 5 charge ladders loaded at 5 ladders of seating depth. I use an abbreviated version which involves 9 loads to assess that same situation. Less work and time involved in the long run to look at the combinations in the beginning instead of jumping back and forth from charge to depth, then back to charge and back to depth again based on what was found before. Check out Tony's book for details as this kind of method will get the best results vs one-at-a-time looks at charge and depth.

 

[jr600yd]

Thanks Charlie I’ll check it out.

 

[Rick Ratzlaff]

I'd appreciate some feedback on my ladder test. I thought I had a real winner yesterday. See photo.
6.5 Creedmore in a Bergera with a deep throat, and a Vortex Razor, using bench and sandbags. Shooting Hornady 147 ELD and H4350 powder. Loaded each round up .3 gns. Shot at 300 yards

So to day we took out 3 rounds at each of these powder charges. I'm not impressed. Maybe 2 groups in under 1 MOA.

Got me confused and disappointed.

 

[jr600yd]

Are any of these cold bore shots? I usually put 5 in the dirt just to foul the bore before any testing.

 

[FURMAN]

You can NOT get repeatable results from a "ladder" at 300 yards. Ladders should be shot at 500 plus. The farther the better. If you do not have farther to shoot use the OCW method. Ladders are looking for vertical dispersion. At 300 yards you aren't far enough to see the difference in vertical from velocity and random accuracy dispersion. You are just wasting time and money.

 

[JFrank]

You can NOT get repeatable results from a "ladder" at 300 yards. Ladders should be shot at 500 plus. The farther the better. If you do not have farther to shoot use the OCW method. Ladders are looking for vertical dispersion. At 300 yards you aren't far enough to see the difference in vertical from velocity and random accuracy dispersion. You are just wasting time and money.

Did you read that in a book?
I'm not sure how to respond to a statement like that..
Nothing could be further from the truth.
SPJ

 

[FURMAN]

I could not care less if you want to waste your time and money doing it. I can show you countless short range targets exactly like the OPs with absolutely no value. You want to do a ladder? Back up. If you don't have the distance do and OCW. I am out. Good luck to the OP.

 

[Rick Ratzlaff]

Are any of these cold bore shots? I usually put 5 in the dirt just to foul the bore before any testing.

No that was the end of a 26 round string.

My feeling was that I'll do it as far back as i am absolutely able to know through the scope that I am rock solid. And can see that in the scope.