Does this make sense to you? Can you handload off of these Ogive numbers?

[VaniB]

Ok help me out here. Here is a handload for the 6.5 Creedmoor that I found on another websight posted by John Doe a couple of years back;

44.2 grains H4350
130 Berger Hunting VLD
CCI BR2
COAL 2.196" to the Ogive
Velocity 2,946


My Berger 130 VLD bullets measures 2.892" on my Hornady COAL Gage. To keep comparisons the same, lets assume that the standard .200 length SAAMI freebore is used in his chamber as it is in mine. And let's assume that Berger 130VLD bullet production run doesn't vary but a few thousanths in length from bullet to bullet. Had he posted " I have .038 jump" , that would have been useable to me..... and I would know to subtract .038" from 2.892" to arrive at a 2.857" COAL length. Or if he simply would have posted "I have a 2.857 OAL cartridge length with the 130 Berger VLD" that would be clear too. Am I missing something here....or did John Doe post COAL numbers which are next to useless for others to duplicate at the reloading bench?

 

[rmist]

Would it depend on what type tool he was using to measure. A different comparator??

 

[searcher]

I would consider the seating depth, just as the exact charge weight of powder, to be approximations for what "might" shoot well in your rifle. It is pretty rare indeed for two rifles to like everything the same. I'd experiment to find what your rifle likes - just as in incrementally working up your power charge.

 

[mikecr]

His number is useless to anyone else, and not just because he's describing local cartridge base to ogive(CBTO), but because it's useless to anyone else even if duplicated.
Your best seating depth can only be determined locally.

 

[memilanuk]

Would it depend on what type tool he was using to measure. A different comparator??

^ +1 this. Unless you know what comparator he is using, the reading is essentially useless. My Hornady LnL comparator inserts have a hole with straight sides and a radiused edge, and my Sinclair comparator inserts have a tapered hole to match the leade angle of most custom barrels. Even in the same comparator body, zeroed on the same set of calipers, they give very different readings.

That said, even if you know what kind of comparator the original loader was using, I wouldn't really trust that number unless I was able to put *my* comparator on one of *his* rounds and compare the readings.

 

[Ringostar]

That's a lot of powder to fit in a creedmore case. I haven't checked load data, but I just squeeze 44.5 gn of H4350 in my 260 Rem loads.

 

[Mark Walker in TX]

Would it depend on what type tool he was using to measure. A different comparator??

^ +1 this. Unless you know what comparator he is using, the reading is essentially useless. My Hornady LnL comparator inserts have a hole with straight sides and a radiused edge, and my Sinclair comparator inserts have a tapered hole to match the leade angle of most custom barrels. Even in the same comparator body, zeroed on the same set of calipers, they give very different readings.

That said, even if you know what kind of comparator the original loader was using, I wouldn't really trust that number unless I was able to put *my* comparator on one of *his* rounds and compare the readings.

This. For the above reason, it is always a useless #, so I don't know why it is even talked about. I have two Hornady comparator inserts in the same caliber and they differ substantially.

Using normal comparators only yields a relative #, relative to other measurements taken with the same comparator. They are not absolute #s.

 

[VaniB]

Ok thanks.....just wanted to verify that those numbers are useless and that the benchrest shooters on these boards didn't know some technical way to read them and reuse them that I wasn't yet aware of.

Being a handloader since the mid 1970's I am quite aware of the fact that just because a load works in one gun doesn't mean it will work in another. I have in fact found few loads that will seldom carry over very well from one gun to another without at least some tweeking.(....if they will even work in the next gun at all!) But, when developing new loads for a brand new custom target rifle, you have to start somewhere, and a consensus of good handloads can often have its origin with the websight search tools. One such load I found on the internet some years ago was so accurate in my 20Tac, (ie; 5 shot 1/4" MOA groups) that I never bothered to try another load. Yes, of course studying and comparing the numbers that you find on the internet against the bonafide loads in the reloading books is always a good prerequisite to maintaining all 5 fingers on your firing hand when you go exploring cyberspace.

 

[memilanuk]

I've been similarly frustrated in the past... trying to get useful load data from someone who would *only* provide cartridge base-to-ogive (cbto), or else tell me his chamber had X amount of freebore and he was jumping Y amount. Well thats just ducky if I had a custom chamber that I knew what the supposed freebore was, or had the exact same comparator and bullet handy - neither of which were the case in this scenario. At the time I just wanted the OAL so I could tell if 'my' chamber was even roughly in the same ball park... got to the point I wanted to reach thru the computer screen and grab 'im by the scruff of the neck and shake vigorously!

 

[VaniB]

I've been similarly frustrated in the past... trying to get useful load data from someone who would *only* provide cartridge base-to-ogive (cbto), or else tell me his chamber had X amount of freebore and he was jumping Y amount. .......

As long as the guy's post mentions the bullet jump that he is using, regardless of his chamber, that can be useful information that I can work with. For example a .030" jump is .030" jump, no matter how much freebore he has. And even if my chamber may be different then his and have a different amount of freebore, as long as I'm using the same manufacturers bullet I can still set up the test bullet to have .030" jump, and see if I can get the same kind of accuracy that he is reporting. However, case base to ogive readings are next to useless information.

My experience with studying the 6.5 Creedmoor posts on different websight forums has lead me to establish a consensus that the Berger 130 and 140 hunting/target VLD bullets do well with bullets that are jumped about .050" and no less then .030" Therefore, a .050" jump is a good starting place for me, and I can try new COAL loads both longer and shorter from that starting point if .050" doesn't provide premium accuracy.

 

[mikecr]

Well keep in mind there was 'consensus' for many years that Bergers needed to be jammed..
That is, until someone decided to actually test it! (Maybe it was Berger)
You should actually test whatever you have for best, no matter what others are doing.

It makes no difference what anyone else is doing.

 

[BoydAllen]

For years I shot a 6PPC chamber that had a .060 freebore. Recently I had a barrel chambered with a reamer that is very much the same, except it has a .035 freebore. The difference would seem to be minimal but I have found the difference it makes when tuning loads is out of proportion to the difference in measurement.

I think that the real problem is that most shooters do not have a good way to work up loads in a time and component economical manner, given a safe starting load, and some idea of what sort of seating depth a given design of bullet has done well with in the past. I know more fellows that don't have wind flags, and don't work up their loads at the range that seem to wander around till they accidentally stumble on something that works, and then are surprised that the load that they worked up at one temperature, does not perform as well at a significantly different temperature. They are fine fellows, but I wish that they could see their way clear to adopt practices that would get them where they want to go in a more organized manner. As it is, they reach a certain level and start going around in circles, trying harder instead of trying different.

 

[22BRGUY]

For years I shot a 6PPC chamber that had a .060 freebore. Recently I had a barrel chambered with a reamer that is very much the same, except it has a .035 freebore. The difference would seem to be minimal but I have found the difference it makes when tuning loads is out of proportion to the difference in measurement.

I think that the real problem is that most shooters do not have a good way to work up loads in a time and component economical manner, given a safe starting load, and some idea of what sort of seating depth a given design of bullet has done well with in the past. I know more fellows that don't have wind flags, and don't work up their loads at the range that seem to wander around till they accidentally stumble on something that works, and then are surprised that the load that they worked up at one temperature, does not perform as well at a significantly different temperature. They are fine fellows, but I wish that they could see their way clear to adopt practices that would get them where they want to go in a more organized manner. As it is, they reach a certain level and start going around in circles, trying harder instead of trying different.

Very well said IMO.....and I know because I wasted many years doing just that. Small variable can make big differences also.

 

[VaniB]

Well keep in mind there was 'consensus' for many years that Bergers needed to be jammed..
That is, until someone decided to actually test it! (Maybe it was Berger)
You should actually test whatever you have for best, no matter what others are doing.

It makes no difference what anyone else is doing.

You're absolutely right. But at the same time, you are not hearing me state the fact that one has to start somewhere. No? If 3 guys say they are getting 1/4" groups jamming 130 Bergers into the lands, and 7 guys say they get 1/4" groups with a .050" jump using the same SAAMI chamber and load, then guess which one I start with. Is this logical to you? I never said that the "consensus" is a best bet and that it will work. I merely said that it's often a good place to start....because we all have to start somewhere. Considering the limited availability of bullets and powder, and the fact that it takes me a fair amount of time to handload and fire off 5 precision rounds, I like to have a plan where to start. Make sense to you?

BOYD,
Agreed that many folks aren't organized. While I myself have learned a lot of things about handloading through the years for which a more organized system for testing and developing rounds has evolved naturally, I must concede that my dozen range visits a year to fire off a 150-300 rounds does not compare with those gentlemen who engage in competition and fire off thousands of rounds. Normally, once I can arrive at my 1/4" 5 shot group with a new custom rifle, and I can start to fire it accurately at will, my mission is completed, the gun is put away in the safe, and it's time to start a new rifle. While you are still competing and continue to shoot thousands more rounds, you will obviously gain a whole lot more experience then I ever will.

 

[BoydAllen]

I think that you overestimate my situation. I have competed, but for some time I have spent almost all of my shooting time time looking for accuracy with equipment that would take me to any short range benchrest match, but I do not currently compete. Lately, I am back to learning more about things that I may have thought were more or less settled. Being self coached, as many of us are, I had settled into a range of performance that was mid pack, back when I used to compete, and began to feel as if there was not much point until I had a better handle on what it would take to win. Understand that these are not club matches, and they are regularly attended by world record holders and hall of fame members, so mid pack is not all that bad, it is just not that exciting for me. The good news is that I continue to improve, and learn, and perhaps in the near future, I will be back to some matches.

What I wrote was not so much directed at you, but was meant as a more general statement of the situation, and is more of a reaction to the pattern that I see on the internet where shooters are asking for "the load", apparently expecting it to be a done deal for their rifle when they duplicate it. My problem is that quarter inch is where I try to work down from. (and yes of course the ability to do that is highly depending on the weather)I should add that recently I have been seeing that such things as bags, setup, and how I address the rifle and pull the trigger become increasingly critical as one tries to have more groups in the ones. What I previously might have thought were load issues, have turned out to be more from other things, and so the quest goes on, which is what I like about this hobby. It never ends. There is always room for improvement, and where that will come from is often a surprise.