600 Yard Ladder Results

[APGE]

Howdy Folks,

I think this is a no brainier and that this is exactly what a good ladder should look like, but thought I would open it up to the brainstrust here for comment and advice

The shot S1 was a sighter to check I was zeroed after a few foulers off target

Charge increments are 0.3gr, 308 win, RWS cases, 225 eld jammed and 4350. Distance 600 yards

Charge 5 was 44.0gr. I did not chronograph, but I anticipate it's somewhere shy of 2500fps. Fast enough with a 0.386 g7, whatever it is.

I'm thinking next step will be to shoot 200 yard groups at 43.8, 43.9, 44.0 (charge 5), 44.1 and 44.2gr, then play with the barrel tuner. Since I'm at a hard jam, I'm assuming playing with seating depth increments won't yield much?

Previous advice from this forum was avoid shooting groups at distance so as to avoid a "weather report", hence moving in closer for the next stage of development.

Any advice on where to from here? Am I on the right track with my next steps?

Thanks y'all for the help

 

[6mmcldasher]

Do a seat test with load 4,5 or 6 . work from you currant (jam) out to 30 - 40 off .

 

[Bc'z]

^^^^^^^^^5^^^^^^^^
Wiggle room

 

[Dusty Stevens]

Just for my own info what was your aiming point for every shot?

 

[JFrank]

Just for my own info what was your aiming point for every shot?

That's kinda what I was wondering

 

[APGE]

Just for my own info what was your aiming point for every shot?

Hi Dusty,

Centre of the bottom red dot for all shots except s1 which was aimed and the middle dot.

 

[Dusty Stevens]

Hi Dusty,

Centre of the bottom red dot for all shots except s1 which was aimed and the middle dot.

Ok i figured so.

 

[Northridge]

why move closer, your off on the correct foot, we don't shoot in tunnels we shoot out doors, don't be afraid to shoot at said distance for all ladders it important and very useful to do so.

Shawn Williams

 

[dmoran]

Previous advice from this forum was avoid shooting groups at distance so as to avoid a "weather report", hence moving in closer for the next stage of development.

That is poor advice IMO, that I totally disagree with.
Tune at the intended distance is my advice.

Conducting your ladder at 600yds, yielded true vertical dispersion for that distance instead of an assumption from a shorter distance. Why continue and gamble from a shorter distance with further tuning, since any tuning done at shorter distances will need confirmation tuning at the longer range regardless, so why?

My 2-Cents

 

[Zero333]

5 - 6

Usually when I do a ladder I do it 2 times to make sure results are true and repeatable.

 

[Zero333]

I also agree with Donovan.

as a side note...
Horizontal dispersion is also caused by barrel harmonics not unlike vertical. Giving some the wrong impression that wind is the only force to blame for the shots going to the left or right.

 

[Northridge]

That is advice that I totally disagree with. Tune at the intended distance is my advice.

Conducting your ladder at 600yds, yielded true vertical dispersion for that distance instead of an assumption from a shorter distance. Why continue and gamble from a shorter distance with further tuning, since any tuning done at shorter distances will need confirmation tuning at the longer range regardless, so why?

My 2-Cents

Donavan, I would prefer people tune in this fashion that compete against me makes my job easer Lol not really as I'm usually trying to best myself they just happen to be shooting next to me.

APGE's first ladder was informative but miss leading if viewed as a fine ladder, that data can be processed & recorded as a success but even finer ladders will divulge how broad of tune window you actually have. that one should finish up nicely with another session or two of data.

Shawn Williams

 

[APGE]

Thank you for all the replies, gentlemen, though I'm still a little confused!

Is the consensus that I should -
-shoot groups either side of load 5 at 600 yards
-Run the same ladder again to confirm results before proceeding to shooting groups
-Shoot another ladder in finer increments (say 0.1gr) centred around load 5

Thanks again, the advice here is always appreciated

 

[seymour fish]

Thank you for all the replies, gentlemen, though I'm still a little confused!

Is the consensus that I should -
-shoot groups either side of load 5 at 600 yards
-Run the same ladder again to confirm results before proceeding to shooting groups
-Shoot another ladder in finer increments (say 0.1gr) centred around load 5

Thanks again, the advice here is always appreciated

Excellent suggestion above: explore the width of the center of your node. 3-shots each, 1/10 grain increments, at max distance. Pay some attention to group shapes, and to wind sensitivity. “Find something”

 

[CharlieNC]

With one shot at this distance you can only conclude that 4-7 shoot in about the same vertical, indicating a node. I would pick the mid point between 4-7 and evaluate seating depth again at 600yd. Then you are finished if you are happy with the the results; otherwise, look at finer charge increments until the cows come home.

 

[lawman29]

-Shoot another ladder in finer increments (say 0.1gr) centred around load 5

This x 2. If you have a portable flag put in under the target. This is what I use.




Example of what happens to a ladder, when the wind picks up and you say screw it and do it anyways....Target at 500 meters. I put a little windage on the scope so I'm impacting off the orange dot in the white (holding on the orange dot). I'm then able to plot locations of impact as I shoot the ladder. First 3 shots the two 6 and 7 on left side. Wind comes up out of the west off of Bald Ridge and the rest is history.

 

[JFrank]

a flag at the target indeed tells you what's happening at the target ,personally I find that a flag at 50-100 has a bit more value.
Just me of course

 

[JFrank]

Thank you for all the replies, gentlemen, though I'm still a little confused!

Is the consensus that I should -
-shoot groups either side of load 5 at 600 yards
-Run the same ladder again to confirm results before proceeding to shooting groups
-Shoot another ladder in finer increments (say 0.1gr) centred around load 5

Thanks again, the advice here is always appreciated

Personally I prefer.2 gr increments
I would re shoot a narrowed down version 4-7 looking for the least vertical, load the middle then test seating.

 

[Ned Ludd]

Whether you're using a ladder test, or OCW (or some similar variant thereof), it is best to conduct the tests using methods that have been proven to work. For example, you can do a ladder test at a much closer distance than 600 yd. The advantage in doing so is to minimize shot dispersion due to wind, which may not solely be in the horizontal dimension. However, when you do this you're also shrinking the y-axis (vertical dispersion), which may make it more difficult to decipher the charge weight/node information from the target correctly. From your target, it appears as though the wind was not a huge factor. As has been noted, using a ladder test at the distance you intend to shoot also has the benefit of allowing you to directly interpret vertical dispersion as it relates to charge weight, without any distance-based assumptions. If you shoot in a place where the average wind conditions are typically very strong/challenging, the issue of added dispersion due to the wind can make interpretation of your targets more difficult at longer ranges.

Similarly, shooting 3- or 5-shot groups in OCW fashion at 100 to 200 yd will generally provide you with similar information, although you're looking for movement of of the center point of a group around your point of aim with respect to varying charge weight as opposed to vertical spacing of individual impacts as in a ladder test. The advantages of this approach is that wind dispersion will typically be less of a factor, as well as the fact that not everyone has ready access to ranges that extend beyond 300 yd or so.

The bottom line is that there is really no good reason to mix the two approaches. Each has its strengths and weaknesses, and each can provide similar information if carried out correctly. Unless the day you shot your target was the only mild wind day you'll experience in the near future, I'd strongly suggest repeating your ladder test exactly the same way you did it the first time, focusing on charge weights #3 to #8. In reality, #4 to #7 clearly look like your node, but you can't define the boundaries of the node if you don't also include charge weights that are outside it. One repeat with those charge weights is very likely all you'll need. At that point you can load to the center of the charge weight node and move on to seating depth testing by whichever approach you prefer. The main point is that your first ladder test appears to have worked very well. Why switch to a different approach merely to confirm what the ladder test has already suggested?

 

[Zero333]

If you " 0 " stand for 10, then I'm liking 9 - 10