3 shot group vs ladder tests

[Varminterror]

Litz and Neville also stated a 1moa rifle did not exist

Can you cite these references, specifically? I don't follow all of their content, so I may have missed it, but I expect you're intentionally misinterpreting and misrepeating what they've both independently stated about distribution of group sizes opposed to the ONE small group many folks try to pass off as what the rifle can do "all day long, if I do my part, when the wind cooperates."

 

[Varminterror]

Likewise the ELR guys have shot thousands of ladders

The Bryans are demonstrably and defensibly some of the most successful and most highly decorated ELR shooters in the game, and they don't shoot POI or velocity ladders - if we want to play the appeal to authority fallacy game.

 

[Tommie]

I tried ladder testing a few times. Seeing the sine wave thing was cool but it didn't translate into a pet load. Went back to 3-shot groups

 

[JFrank]

"I didn't wash my jock all season and we won state, so we won state because I didn't wash my jock."

Spare me the visual , so now that you’ve tossed in the towel on velocity flat spots and came over to the dark side of the target, what’s next , Sorting primers ?

 

[Steve Donlon]

If you can illustrate how drawing an angled line on top of a plot someone is using to find flat spots is different than the way they drew the flat lines, maybe the cynicism might be interesting.

Sometimes we know the outcome before we draw the chart. I can explain it better if you wish. From my experience the most accurate node is the middle and upper middle node. Yes the upper low node can be most accurate but at long distances the wind will have more influence. And the higher node can be more accurate but for me, it's not worth it in the summer with some calibers, but with other calibers, I will get closer to pressure signs. So I need to only test a small sample to see what works for me. From experience, most of us know what is going to work at the velocity we need, so we don't need to do much. So for your question, I think your line is longer than needed, And way more complicated than need be for most of us. Why do all those tests to all those loads if they will not work for you?

 

[CharlieNC]

Can you cite these references, specifically? I don't follow all of their content, so I may have missed it, but I expect you're intentionally misinterpreting and misrepeating what they've both independently stated about distribution of group sizes opposed to the ONE small group many folks try to pass off as what the rifle can do "all day long, if I do my part, when the wind cooperates."

Im not smearing the lines, and one complete video negated load development as beneficial. I stopped watching them after such absurdity, so feel free to screen them to double check my conclusion.

 

[Varminterror]

Spare me the visual , so now that you’ve tossed in the towel on velocity flat spots and came over to the dark side of the target,

I did start shooting Audette Ladders in 1999, and really only paused doing so for a few years between '18 and '21-'22 out of convenience where I lived 1 mile from an indoor range and velocity curves were easier than driving 40min to a 1k range. I wouldn't necessarily say, however, that I'm fully on board with conventional 1-3 shot POI ladders either - for the same reasons I described above - I'm not convinced at all that we're successfully doing deductive experimentation. I'm happy to make inductive experimentation - shooting targets at distance and picking loads that do what I ask, which DOES include velocity consistency.

what’s next , Sorting primers ?

You and I have chatted previously on this, and I'm still just as frustrated by it today as I was when the data was shared to make me pick that scab again - I specifically did NOT sort primers for a long time, but data shared on this forum a few years ago illustrated a defensible offset in POI on target between high and low primer weights, so I tested for myself, and sure enough, I produced results on target which showed high weight vs. low weight primers struck different POI... So yeah, I'm back to weight sorting primers for my ELR ammo, but I'm satisfied that there's repeatable evidence to prove out that it does make a difference. Not for PRS ammo - the difference just doesn't make a difference in scores - targets are bigger, the game measures a different skill.

 

[Clancy]

It sounds and looks like these charts graphs are trying to predict the weather. Sometimes it's good and "sometimes you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing."

louder for the people in the back!!!!

 

[dryhumor]

I think over time everyone gravitates towards methods that work for them, from components selection to testing and results interpretation.

 

[ELR LVR]

People want to make it more complicated than it needs to be,
You know, I defend it with proofing the day before the match as well as using that particular charge rate to test seating along the way.
When I get 1000 yard test groups in the one’s and hold my own against some of the best tuners in the country I feel satisfied I’m on the right track.

For a self proclaimed "dumb country boy"
Whatever you're doing, I am impressed with your 1000 yard results.
You know what it takes to achieve the desired results.
I think that's where the Line is drawn
Some of us do enough to simply achieve the results we personally set for ourself
Then call it good.
While others, wear out a barrel with continued endless testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of us can complicate it as much as a NASA Engineer if we want to
While other's take the path that I like to call, an "Algebraic Approach"
by taking the most complicated drawn out equation and......................
.............................."Reduce it down to its simplest terms"
If I can take the Simple shortcut, I will lol

 

[Bronsin]

You could just do a ladder with 3 shot groups and cover all the bases. Seems to work for me.

 

[jelenko]

How many times does a "flat spot" have to occur in the same spot for it to be relevant?

Yeah - I completely understand.

The thing that drives some of us is the dispersion in velocities when we shoot a multi shot group.

How about the next time you find a flat spot in velocities, you just shot another 8 shots at the flat spot? I'm thinking that would allow to you ask 'What would happen to the 'flat spot' if some of the other shots were used instead?'.

 

[JFrank]

For a self proclaimed "dumb country boy"
Whatever you're doing, I am impressed with your 1000 yard results.
You know what it takes to achieve the desired results.
I think that's where the Line is drawn
Some of us do enough to simply achieve the results we personally set for ourself
Then call it good.
While others, wear out a barrel with continued endless testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of us can complicate it as much as a NASA Engineer if we want to
While other's take the path that I like to call, an "Algebraic Approach"
by taking the most complicated drawn out equation and......................
.............................."Reduce it down to its simplest terms"

Thanks, my range mates are some of the best tuners in the country, sooner or later even a dumb ass like me learns a few things.
Jim

 

[ELR LVR]

Just so's I understand here when you guys are talking "Flat Spot"
do you mean?
1. Velocity tapered off and flattened out even as the charge weight increased
or
2. POI stayed the same vertically on target as charge weight increased
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because I have seen, (Once with one particular type of powder)
Velocity actually tapered off and starting going down after reaching max
So max (Optimum) charge would show a flat spot in velocity with that one powder as it started to then taper off

 

[ELR LVR]

Thanks, my range mates are some of the best tuners in the country, sooner or later even a dumb ass like me learns a few things.
Jim

Imitation is the shortest path to wisdom
I finally learned too, it's much easier to copy guys who know what they're doing than to try and reinvent the wheel

 

[JFrank]

POI stayed the same vertically on target as charge weight increased

This one

 

[kfreeze]

Good Afternoon,
I grew up developing loads using the 3 shot group method.
Lately I have been noticing a lot of guys using the ladder method.
I have a chronograph and thought I would give it a go.
So what you are looking for is a place where the velocity does not change with charge weight, correct? So how much do you increment your powder charge for each step on the ladder typically? So from that I could assume that POA does not matter all that much?
Thanks

Its way faster and easier to do a ladder actually shooting at a target with a chrono running the shots. First shots out of a 280ai with rl23 and 180 berger hybrid started .020 off. Real easy and fast to see if a rifle likes a combo naturally. 200 yds ladder. Group is on a hot day with really bad mirage with 5 loaded at the top node. If I don't see 1/2 to 3/4 moa right away that way I change the powder, bullet or both. And I wait 10 min between shots on the ladder and barrel heat has never been an issue for me.

 

[ELR LVR]

Its way faster and easier to do a ladder actually shooting at a target with a chrono running the shots. First shots out of a 280ai with rl23 and 180 berger hybrid started .020 off. Real easy and fast to see if a rifle likes a combo naturally. 200 yds ladder. Group is on a hot day with really bad mirage with 5 loaded at the top node. If I don't see 1/2 to 3/4 moa right away that way I change the powder, bullet or both. And I wait 10 min between shots on the ladder and barrel heat has never been an issue for me.

52.5 looks like a good middle of the ground point

 

[Varminterror]

You could just do a ladder with 3 shot groups and cover all the bases. Seems to work for me.

That’s been the basis of the entire thread, and again, illustrates the false hope so many of have placed in old methods. 3 is better than 1, but still not enough to earn the faith so many of us put in it.

Human brains are wired to seek patterns, so we find patterns even when none exist.

 

[Bronsin]

That’s been the basis of the entire thread, and again, illustrates the false hope so many of have placed in old methods. 3 is better than 1, but still not enough to earn the faith so many of us put in it.

Human brains are wired to seek patterns, so we find patterns even when none exist.

I can find the entire range of the loads I'm going to use for an entire weekend in far less time than it takes to read through this thread.