What is the Widest "NODE" you have ever found?

[NC/Br Shooter]

In the Br case, no matter which caliber, what is the Widest node you have ever came across reloading?
Reason I ask, I seem to have found a wide one, but I don't have a graph to show it. How it plots out . This is with slow powder.
The ones in the past seemed to be .3grains apart.
Those where with varget, or faster powders.
Just curious to your findings and inputs on this.
Thanks

 

[dmoran]

How are you judging the wideness?
(By comparison in velocities, by vertical dispersion, by group sizes, by increment placement, etc...)

 

[NC/Br Shooter]

How are you judging the wideness?
(By comparison in velocities, by vertical dispersion, by group sizes, by increment placement, etc...)

I'm asking you, so you be the judge.
It can be any of those categories you mentioned.
Any that you have found. What is the Widest, biggest.

 

[tom]

If it's too wide for you, just put the target out further. Eventually it will be 9 kernels of powder lol.

Tom

 

[dmoran]

@22bra4350
For myself, the vertical dispersion of each charge weight being tested is my primary focus. With the vertical dispersion placement of all the increments in conjunction to each other, being in part of the focus. When an increment doesn't stack up on top (or very near) of at least 2 other increments, I consider it "scattering".
Grouping capability of the best vertical dispersed increments being my 3rd focus. Velocity data after that.

Much like @tom alluded to above, testing / development at "distance" I find can greatly yield true dispersion better (even significantly more at times). Personally like to test / develop at no less then 400yds (the further the better).

Just my 2-Cents

 

[NC/Br Shooter]

@22bra4350
For myself, the vertical dispersion of each charge weight being tested is my primary focus. With the vertical dispersion placement of the increments to each other, being in part of that primary focus. When an increment doesn't stack up on top (or very near) of at least 2 other increments, I consider it "scattering".
Grouping of the low vertical dispersed increments being my 3rd focus, and velocity data after that.

Much like @tom alluded to above, testing / development at "distance" I find can greatly yield true dispersion better (even significantly more at times). Personally like to test / develop at no less then 400yds (the further the better).

Just my 2-Cents

This is why I asked this question.
This is useful information. I had a guess that if I shot at further distance's it would give me better or say, I can see the results better
Guess I just needed someone else to tell me this
Still thinking on the other part you said. But I think I get it.
Thanks toooo

 

[Lance21]

22 br. 95gr SMK. Rl 26. Shots are .2 grain apart, Satterlee test.

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

Nothing wrong with a wide window and we all want that. Since going to tuners, I pay less attention to tune width than before because I have a tool that allows me to correct it on the end of the bbl. Granted, in a perfect world, we'd never get out of tune, right? I'd rather fight all the other issues with a well tuned rifle, be it with powder, seating depth or a tuner. Nothing more or less than that. If I didn't use a tuner, I'd do my best to maintain tune by powder or seating depth. I've never seen a peak tune that never goes away. I tune hunting rifles to 1/2" in groups and call it good. Not with my comp rifles, though. I look for everything tune can give me. I need all the help I can get!

 

[NC/Br Shooter]

View attachment 1415541
22 br. 95gr SMK. Rl 26. Shots are .2 grain apart, Satterlee test.

Looks like I may need to try a slower powder then for the 90 g sierra.
Iv got the 80s goin really good with all the 4350 powders.
Im trying to get the 90s to group under a .3 .
Not achieved that yet.
I got a 8 twist bbl.
I'm going to look at this graph a lil bit more.
Thanks for posting

 

[dcali]

I don't know about widest, but my 6BR hits steps in an Audette ladder that are about 40fps (~0.3 grains) wide.

Don't go down the staterlee test path. It's not real - you'll wind up chasing your tail and getting results that are not repeatable. It's a total waste of ammunition.

What you can do instead is shoot an Audette ladder - make a chart plotting velocity vs vertical impact distance from some arbitrary point like the center of the target. Do this at long range. That is where you will find repeatable nodes. If you don't have a chronograph, you can do it as charge weight vs vertical, but the results aren't as clean.