If the ladder test is to find a node to help with variances then that variance is very, very small if it depends on one kernel.
Is your aiming accuracy @1000 comparable to one kernel?
- Thread starter Marksman63
- Start date
If the ladder test is to find a node to help with variances then that variance is very, very small if it depends on one kernel.
What most shooters miss is how to control a scale. The pan should be carefully weighed and wrote on the inside, the scale must be properly warmed and calibrated. Nothing is perfect, it’s what separates facts from fiction in the observant reloaders.
Last edited:
Even with a good node, the one kernel can take you .005 or more and that is enough to lose in our game. Look at Jets example of .010 difference between first and second on a six target aggregate. That's .00166 per target average or .060 on one target. Matt
jackson1
Silver $$ Contributor
A topic near to my heart. Been a life long handloader and accuracy nut. Last year I fell in with the wrong crowd. Long range benchrest shooters. Had Alex build me a rifle for the up coming season. I am trying to follow Alex's advice to the letter and bought an fx120 scale. Earlier this month I loaded my first 50 rounds for fire forming. Was considering an electronic trickler. The first 50 were a real pain to get to one kernel. Yesterday loaded up 150 more. It went much better, almost enjoyable. As per Alex's instructions I used a tweezers. My point is, if a old man guy like me can do it. So can you. Takes me around a hour to charge and seat 50. Maybe I am a sick twisted, anally retentive old fool that loves handloading, but weighing to one kernel ain't that tough.
David, most want the first relay when the conditions are down. I do know Tom works hard the same as anyone else that is on top of the game. I saw the complete relay DQ. at Whitehorse, it is the luck of the draw sometimes, Shoot offs Take the luck out of it, but now it seems they want luck back in it. Heck you can get your gold and never win a match...... jim
Get the trickler...... lol.. I will never be without one..... I'm 74 and it sure takes work out of it..... jim
As someone who has competed at high levels in sevreral shooting sports, but new to the long range rifle game, f class, for two years, I have seen this conversation multiple times and always laugh.
Show me anyone, in any sport who does not think doing everything they can to gain an advantage over the compition and I will show you someone who is on the sidelines at the end of the day and not the podium. in my experience, those that preach the easy way are lazy and do not want to put the time or effort into doing it right and they put those down or make fun of us who do becaude they dont want others, especially new shooters, thinking they are lazy.
Is the amount of aaccuracy needed in BR needed in fclass? I would say yes, at least as close as possible with the equipment.
Why? As several have said already, you remove all the variables you can so that you limit the effect of the human varaible. case in point. windreading. often times, this thread included, people say that wind reading has more effect than 1 kernel. well lets say that the 1 kernel point effects your opens up your group by .3 at 1000 yards. you miss a wind change or make a wond call and miss the 10 line by .2. does it make a diffrrence then? You just droped a point because you did not want to do what was necessary to win. I would say that 1 kernel is more important for those with lesser shooting ability. For some one shoting around the 10 ring, closing up your group by .2 will help you not hurt you.
The best shooters in any sport will always have the best equipment for the job. it May not and does not have to be the most expensive but it is the best to accomplish their objective. I was fortunate to have shot with and against Wayne Mayes on many occasions. He is a multiple time world champion in Skeet shooting, A low tech sportcompared to what we do here. he was sposored by everyone. He shot for free. All his ammo was paid for but he never shot factory ammo in a compition. he reloaded all his compition shells on a mec jr, one at a time. why? because he coukd make ammo that threw better patterns than factory ammo.
Same premise aplies her.
Show me anyone, in any sport who does not think doing everything they can to gain an advantage over the compition and I will show you someone who is on the sidelines at the end of the day and not the podium. in my experience, those that preach the easy way are lazy and do not want to put the time or effort into doing it right and they put those down or make fun of us who do becaude they dont want others, especially new shooters, thinking they are lazy.
Is the amount of aaccuracy needed in BR needed in fclass? I would say yes, at least as close as possible with the equipment.
Why? As several have said already, you remove all the variables you can so that you limit the effect of the human varaible. case in point. windreading. often times, this thread included, people say that wind reading has more effect than 1 kernel. well lets say that the 1 kernel point effects your opens up your group by .3 at 1000 yards. you miss a wind change or make a wond call and miss the 10 line by .2. does it make a diffrrence then? You just droped a point because you did not want to do what was necessary to win. I would say that 1 kernel is more important for those with lesser shooting ability. For some one shoting around the 10 ring, closing up your group by .2 will help you not hurt you.
The best shooters in any sport will always have the best equipment for the job. it May not and does not have to be the most expensive but it is the best to accomplish their objective. I was fortunate to have shot with and against Wayne Mayes on many occasions. He is a multiple time world champion in Skeet shooting, A low tech sportcompared to what we do here. he was sposored by everyone. He shot for free. All his ammo was paid for but he never shot factory ammo in a compition. he reloaded all his compition shells on a mec jr, one at a time. why? because he coukd make ammo that threw better patterns than factory ammo.
Same premise aplies her.
Hi Danny, I must confess that when charging with H4350 I do cheat! I lower my standards and load to a range within 0.02gn. Meaning example load spec is 51.6 gn of H4350. I load to a range of either 51.60 is ok and 51.62 is ok. Above or below, I will swap a big one for a little one or visa versa. Man the kernels of 4350 can be hugeI completely agree with you on loading to the kernel, seriously. However, over the course of time, I've found that individual kernels of H4350, my favorite powder, do NOT weigh the same. So...when I got a pan scale weight that was just over, or less, than the intended weight; I'd sort thru the kernels in the pan or the tray with tweezers...and in-turn select a kernel out of the pan or tray to add/remove in order to get a spot-on powder weight. Noticing this kernel weight-variable, I commenced weight-sorting my 8-pounder H4350 kernels into separate weight lots. I've found that weight-sorting up front is quite tedious and time consuming, but it's really speeded things up on the charging end.
Dan
To follow up, normally I am done with the more precision method using the tweezers, before the "Chargemaster" has dumped the next load, usually set a tenth low. Dump from the "Chargemaster" pan to the .02gn scale pan, then return it. Very little time lost. Steve
Last edited:
I'm in trouble as my engineering studies are far away, but I remember that such "single kernel" issue could be related to the theory of errors and theory of measures.
In practice, IMHO, if a single kernel error is i.e. 0.05% of the total powder weight, it becomes significant only if all the systematic errors (case's volume, case's weight, bullet's weight, etc.) have comparable error percentage, i.e. 0.0X%.
Moreover it needs to be considered that the different and casual kernels' dispositions inside the case could vary the powder's burning rate with comparable error...
This apart from casual errors introduced by external factors that influence the final result (POI) with higher percent rate...
In practice, IMHO, if a single kernel error is i.e. 0.05% of the total powder weight, it becomes significant only if all the systematic errors (case's volume, case's weight, bullet's weight, etc.) have comparable error percentage, i.e. 0.0X%.
Moreover it needs to be considered that the different and casual kernels' dispositions inside the case could vary the powder's burning rate with comparable error...
This apart from casual errors introduced by external factors that influence the final result (POI) with higher percent rate...
just another error in your thinking.
it is not the WEIGHT of the powder,
it is the ENERGY of that powder.
it is not the WEIGHT of the powder,
it is the ENERGY of that powder.
??? Please clarify
Yes I would like to here the answer to that also Lord I might learn something.
. How can one attribute that to one kernel. It may be pure chance.
Has anyone shot groups with one kernel under or with one kernel over the desired load and compared the results?
Ned Ludd
Silver $$ Contributor
Thanks, Captain Obvious. Unfortunately, reloaders must make the assumption that charge energy is directly proportional to charge weight. If you don't, there is no use whatsoever in attempting to throw charges based on weight. If you have a better method than an analytical balance for throwing precise charges, I'd love to hear it...it might actually add something useful to the discussion.
So ive been thinking about thinking about this conversation and I think many, including myself may have it wrong. You have the side that rhinks one kernel does not make a a big enough difference because the change is smaller than a persons ability to shoot so therefore it does matter. then you have the group like me that looks at a analytically and say that if you take that change and put combine it with the human factor then the decrease in group size, no matter how small could make a difference.
But then we have the smart ass engineer reply (im not goung back and reading, sorry) and he suggested, if I am correct, that on kernel does effect the performance of the case equally, meaning that each kernel cause a change in burn case volume, case pressure and burn rate and this effect is magnifed as you increase the target distance.
If that is the case, and it does make sense to me, then that would len credence to the 1 kernel theory. I think that the camp I am in had the right idea because people see better resluts measuring to a kernel. we see the people winning doing it so it must work. we knew the results indicated that it works but did not understand exactly why.
Someone asked if anyone had tested the theory. in dont know if if you could test it, other than on a couputer sim program because even if you had the gun in a vise, and had multiple people do the reload to insure exact duplication of each load, there are no 1k ranges in existance that I know of that would completely eliminate mother nature as an influencing factor.
I looked to see ryan Litz had ever chimed in on this and could not find anything to support the argument in a technical way. I think it would take him, or someone with his knowledge of balistics, to look at this and figure out the exact answer of not only how much one kernel effects a ullets impact at 1k but why.
But then we have the smart ass engineer reply (im not goung back and reading, sorry) and he suggested, if I am correct, that on kernel does effect the performance of the case equally, meaning that each kernel cause a change in burn case volume, case pressure and burn rate and this effect is magnifed as you increase the target distance.
If that is the case, and it does make sense to me, then that would len credence to the 1 kernel theory. I think that the camp I am in had the right idea because people see better resluts measuring to a kernel. we see the people winning doing it so it must work. we knew the results indicated that it works but did not understand exactly why.
Someone asked if anyone had tested the theory. in dont know if if you could test it, other than on a couputer sim program because even if you had the gun in a vise, and had multiple people do the reload to insure exact duplication of each load, there are no 1k ranges in existance that I know of that would completely eliminate mother nature as an influencing factor.
I looked to see ryan Litz had ever chimed in on this and could not find anything to support the argument in a technical way. I think it would take him, or someone with his knowledge of balistics, to look at this and figure out the exact answer of not only how much one kernel effects a ullets impact at 1k but why.
ClassCat
Unlimited
Regnar
You can put a gun in a vise. It's called a RAIL GUN. If you supply the barrel and action, you can borrow mine along with a March 50 LR. I have 2 rails,a Kenslar and a Powell , Google YOUNG RAIL GUNS
The barrel diameter on the Kenslar must be a 1.450 and the Powell will accept anything above .750
You can put a gun in a vise. It's called a RAIL GUN. If you supply the barrel and action, you can borrow mine along with a March 50 LR. I have 2 rails,a Kenslar and a Powell , Google YOUNG RAIL GUNS
The barrel diameter on the Kenslar must be a 1.450 and the Powell will accept anything above .750
Last edited:
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.