Vertical Dispersion - Weighing Primers

[Bc'z]

I have a video before I got better at it. But I'm not sure how to post it. It was 28 seconds from first trigger touch to tenth. I aspire to keep up with Bob shields who is pretty consistently low 20 seconds for ten shots. Again, in a 17# light gun.



Think quicker. while still keeping the cross hairs where they need to be

2.8 seconds per shot on average.
That's moving!!
If you find the video, I'd love to see it.

 

[Rocketvapor]

Pre-engraved.
If it's a caliber/twist I have.

 

[JEFFPPC]

2.8 seconds per shot on average.
That's moving!!
If you find the video, I'd love to see it.

I stood behind Bob Shields last year at several matches and he would be just under 25 sec. Wildest thing is he is so smooth he does not appear to rush. So shooters like Bob and Mike have made me realize in the 1000 yd 10 shot game its tough to pick, gotta get them out there quick with percision.

 

[Bc'z]

I stood behind Bob Shields last year at several matches and he would be just under 25 sec. Wildest thing is he is so smooth he does not appear to rush. So shooters like Bob and Mike have made me realize in the 1000 yd 10 shot game its tough to pick, gotta get them out there quick with percision.

I find speed and precision a thing of beauty, not just in shooting. To see this would be cool.
Not trying to stay off the subject of primer weights, but I've got a curious question
related to Mike's quest to tame vertical.

So were all well aware of the importance of reading the wind.
Competitors who run thier rounds as fast as Bob & Mike are you timing the wind?
Not just watching flags, but actually timing it waiting for the prevailing, or shooting into the consistent heavier winds? Head and tail winds related to vertical dispersion.
Could or would this have more of an effect on vertical than weighing primers?
Powders...
With my limited reloading experience of 20 years I've noticed some powders deliver what we call or consider a water line better than others, is N150 a powder with these attributes?

Yes, I do pay attention in class, and not just sit in the back making jokes.

 

[mikeeg02]

Unless something wildly changes mid string, once I start, I'm committed. I think the trickiest thing I have to do during the string (which usually requires paying a lot of attention up until they say commence fire) is trying to see how much the patch is moving, think mirage. If the target is consistently in place, it's better to he meticulous on crosshair placement. If the target is swirling, sometimes I just have to trust my stock and know the scope is lieing to you, because of the mirage optical illusion. I have had both scenarios (holding off and trusting the stock) work in my advantage, and I've also seen it go the other way and the shots go exactly where my adjustments put them. But I try not to make large enough adjustments to throw off the group. I kind of adopted the motto "shooting for group, with the hope's of a good score" lol.

@tom and I talked a little about this at gba nationals and we still arent sure what all those circle things are for on those pieces of paper we shoot at Should only need an aim point lol.

I cant afford viht powders so I'm not sure about that one. I like dirty ol rl15. Though hunters bullets seem to prefer h4895 for me.

 

[mikeeg02]

In my opinion thats the wrong way to look at it. I believe sorting primers is one of the steps in helping minimize the chances of self induced (load) fliers.

It wont likely fix a 6" load. And depending on where your load is, it could throw a shot left or right. Not just up and down. Again, in my humble opinion, its part of minimizing the risk of fliers on a well tuned load.

 

[expiper]

OP,,,if you are getting "vertical" ,,use more powder,,,you can weigh it to the .0001 grain but it wont shoot if it doesnt burn efficiently ,,,,,,the primer weight can also be influenced by the weight of the sealant as well as the "mud",,,,what matters is how much brisiance it gives,,,Roger

 

[MikeMcCasland]

This thread has taken some interesting turns.

I've already got them sorted, so I'm going to run them that way for the foreseeable future. It also doesn't take as long, nor is it as tedious as you might think. My next 1,000 yard match probably won't be shot at the best location to evaluate the results (really windy range), but I'll track it over time and report back.

I also think the N150/200-20X combo is what shoots best in this barrel (better than Varget, H4895, or N140). When I first got the rifle, I tried 200 Hybrids and 200.20Xs over a powder I thought the gun would like best (Varget). The gun liked the 20Xs better than the Hybrids. I then went and loaded up the 20Xs behind H4895, Varget, N140, and N150, all in charge ranges that should put me around 2615-2670, and the gun shot N150 the best (interestingly enough N150 was far and away the best powder on the chronograph). I knew I'd be somewhere around .009 - .020" off with the 20X, so did a depth test, and been running that every since.

As far as how much vertical I'm getting, it's really not terrible for my application; most every 9 (and maybe an 8 or two ) I've shot is my fault, and this exact load combo has brought me to MR-HM, and LR-M (which is where the majority of F-T/R competitors sit). What I can say is that I've seen some unbelievable waterlines when browsing shot-marker while I'm not scoring, and I'd like mine to look more like that. The folks shooting those are clearly doing something I'm not (probably reading the wind, and handling the gun better, but surely I can't be that bad ).

I had two new TR barrels spun up this week, and I've got another new Panda/Bart setup that still needs load dev work done once the stock is finished (ETA ~1 month). My current barrel will be north of 2,000 rounds sometime in the April/May timeframe, and I'll be pulling it then. Net/Net - That all translates to me having PLENTY of load dev work to do in the near future, and more opportunity to run tests on primer weight; I also anticipate having access to a 1k range in the near future (albeit it'll take some effort to get out there).

Strictly from an "on paper" & theoretical standpoint I did see more variation than I was expecting, and more than I'd accept in any other aspect of match ammo prep. As Tom alluded to, maybe this lot of primers just sucks, but I have to think that batching them in similar weights will result in some level of improvement.

Time will tell.

 

[dkhunt14]

Like this ?

or this?

or this

These guys are members, right?

The rail gun and the heavy gun like Buhay is shooting is not even in fhe same planet as a light gun. Rodney is only shooting 5 shots, where we shoot 10. Those things make a difference in time. Also a big difference between a 6 and shootimg a 300 WSM. Matt

 

[dkhunt14]

OP,,,if you are getting "vertical" ,,use more powder,,,you can weigh it to the .0001 grain but it wont shoot if it doesnt burn efficiently ,,,,,,the primer weight can also be influenced by the weight of the sealant as well as the "mud",,,,what matters is how much brisiance it gives,,,Roger

The sealant weighs almost nothing. Even if you get the Federals that are plastered. Matt

 

[dkhunt14]

I have tried to stay out of primer discussions because of past PM's. It doesn't take hundreds of shots to test and see a difference. If you take a good shooting gun and color 5 bullets one color and five another color, then load five light ones with 5 heavy ones in them. Shoot them in good conditions, and sometimes it just says dam. Matt

 

[Ledd Slinger]

Well son-of-a-.....

Guess I need to sort primers now.

 

[Evan]

Well son-of-a-.....

Guess I need to sort primers now.

I need a better scale first...

 

[Rocketvapor]

0.1 grain will find the outliers.

 

[Crow]

There's no arguing with success if sorting primers really tightens your groups up. but it's unfortunate that it requires an $500 scale to prove the theory.

And if it does seem to have benefits, then your faced with other questions: Were the primers you settled on during initial load development really the best choice for your barrel/load combo, or did you just happen upon a very consistent lot of the primer you ended up choosing? And wouldn't it be necessary to sort several different types of primers prior to load development if arriving at the absolute tightest load was the goal, and you wanted to be sure about your choice of primers?

The quest for accuracy really is a bottomless pit, isn't it?

 

[Ledd Slinger]

I bet the GemPro 250 would sort primers just fine.
My GemPro has always been very accurate.

I sold my AND FX-120i because is was just an oversized scale that didnt offer any advantage over what my GemPro 250 had already been doing for me.

 

[davidjoe]

There's no arguing with success if sorting primers really tightens your groups up. but it's unfortunate that it requires an $500 scale to prove the theory.

And if it does seem to have benefits, then your faced with other questions: Were the primers you settled on during initial load development really the best choice for your barrel/load combo, or did you just happen upon a very consistent lot of the primer you ended up choosing? And wouldn't it be necessary to sort several different types of primers prior to load development if arriving at the absolute tightest load was the goal, and you wanted to be sure about your choice of primers?

The quest for accuracy really is a bottomless pit, isn't it?

Add to that “bottomless pit” that if a barrel is particularly vulnerable to harmonic vibrations, (undamped, short or thin walled tenon, long, flexy stock/action) then just the throat erosion from each match could make the tuned load a truly moving target.

 

[Evan]

I bet the GemPro 250 would sort primers just fine.
My GemPro has always been very accurate.

I sold my AND FX-120i because is was just an oversized scale that didnt offer any advantage over what my GemPro 250 had already been doing for me.

I've been looking at picking up a FX-120i, but keep telling myself it won't make a difference on the target. In the last year I have with much greater consistency dropped below 0.5 inches at 300 yards and am starting to think that I may see some advantage to going down the rabbit hole on some of these more OCD tasks: weight sort primers, load charges to 0.02 instead of 0.1, sort bullets, sort brass by volume.

How quick is your GemPro 250? I'm thinking that I'd continue to throw charges on my Chargemaster Lite and transfer it onto another scale, which it seems like the GemPro could handle well. Would it handle really small weights, like a primer being transferred on and off, reliably?

 

[Rocketvapor]

How fine do you plan on sorting primers?
I get 3.65 grains for an average weight of CCI450's.
CCI250's are about 5 grains.
You probably don't have to use a powder trickler to weight primers
From the OP's results and my abbreviated test of 100 CCI450's,
outliers were at least couple percent from the mean.
Accepting +/-1% would exclude anything you could call light or heavy.
It doesn't take a $400 scale to sort primers to +/- 1%.

Even +/- 0.1 grain would catch the really light or heavy Small or Large Rifle Primers.
If you don't think your scale will weight all the way down to 3 or 4 grains, add a tare weight.

If you want to further sort them into 5 or 6 weight groups then Yes, a better scale is needed

 

[Ledd Slinger]

I've been looking at picking up a FX-120i, but keep telling myself it won't make a difference on the target. In the last year I have with much greater consistency dropped below 0.5 inches at 300 yards and am starting to think that I may see some advantage to going down the rabbit hole on some of these more OCD tasks: weight sort primers, load charges to 0.02 instead of 0.1, sort bullets, sort brass by volume.

How quick is your GemPro 250? I'm thinking that I'd continue to throw charges on my Chargemaster Lite and transfer it onto another scale, which it seems like the GemPro could handle well. Would it handle really small weights, like a primer being transferred on and off, reliably?

The GemPro does have a slower delayed response time than the FX-120i when trickling individual kernels into the pan. So I guess that's one disadvantage.

I do my load development with a scale that measures in .02gr. But after ladder testing, I throw my powder on a Chargemaster because I always try to find a charge weight with a good wide accuracy/POI node. The Chargemaster has always been plenty accurate enough to keep weights within the middle of my node window.

But I think "ignition" is a whole different beast than powder charge weights. And there have been times where I wondered why a bullet flew off target a time or two, but never became a consistent flyer. I can usually call errant shots quite well due to poor shooting form on my part and the type of flyers in question always felt like perfect shots. Definitely could have been out of spec primer changing the ignition rate of the powder charge enough that it threw it out of my node.

I recall last year when I bought a bunch of 6mm Creedmoor brass from a member here. 200 of the cases wer primed with standard Fed 205. I tried using them for initial load development. The primers must have been sitting in a humid environment for a long time because everyone of them had a split second hang fire. I had already loaded 40 rounds to test so I just made sure I held steady during the hang fires and finished the range session with them. Nothing shot great. Reloaded the cases with the same standard Fed 205s from my own inventory and went back to the range with the same loads. Night and day difference on the groups.