Jack Neary interview

[Gary C]

I watched the Cortina Jack Neary interviews and while I'm a cautious
reloader when working up a load I'm going to look at things differently
when I get the N135 powder that I just ordered.
According to Neary, a lot of accuracy is left on the table because loaders are
reluctant to approch the high node.
I will find out how much N135 I can stuff into Lapua brass over a 68GR Avenger before
I see pressure signs and or the SD goes away. According to Neary, the groups should tell me before Pressure
when to back up a tenth or two.
He covered a lot of important stuff and I found it informative.
Good stuff!
G

 

[Bill Norris]

I watched the Cortina Jack Neary interviews and while I'm a cautious
reloader when working up a load I'm going to look at things differently
when I get the N135 powder that I just ordered.
According to Neary, a lot of accuracy is left on the table because loaders are
reluctant to approch the high node.
I will find out how much N135 I can stuff into Lapua brass over a 68GR Avenger before
I see pressure signs and or the SD goes away. According to Neary, the groups should tell me before Pressure
when to back up a tenth or two.
He covered a lot of important stuff and I found it informative.
Good stuff!
G

In my experience with N-135 in 6BR it seemed to show pressure quickly as opposed to N-133 in the 6PPC. Best to move with small increments in my opinion. Jack also states that in calmer winds he did have to back off of the load a little.

 

[Dimner]

I watched the Cortina Jack Neary interviews and while I'm a cautious
reloader when working up a load I'm going to look at things differently
when I get the N135 powder that I just ordered.
According to Neary, a lot of accuracy is left on the table because loaders are
reluctant to approch the high node.
I will find out how much N135 I can stuff into Lapua brass over a 68GR Avenger before
I see pressure signs and or the SD goes away. According to Neary, the groups should tell me before Pressure
when to back up a tenth or two.
He covered a lot of important stuff and I found it informative.
Good stuff!
G

That Jack Neary interview was so good that I actually took notes as if I was back in college. Notes on both Neary interviews. I wish Eric could get him back for a 3rd!

 

[Link]

Link please. ;}

 

[Bill Norris]

 

[old_heli_logger]

Laughing out loud at the Cortina head explosion

 

[Webster]

I enjoy the video's. They show that these guys are light years beyond our ability. I would like to hear how many barrels they buy a year and how much $ they spend a year on their sport. No matter what our level we can always learn from these guys. I cannot shoot small enough to interpret targets like they do.

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

Beginning at about the 36 minute mark, Jack talks about reading group shapes and bullet holes relating those things to powder chargem specifically. Great info there. I'd love for him to expound on that subject a bit more. I tune by group shapes by far more than anything but I do struggle with reading bullet holes and what to do based on what I see from them.

Jack is a wealth of knowledge. I'd love to see a chart of group shapes and bullet holes relating to both powder charge and to tuner settings, in his vast experience, especially with powder. I think we could all learn a lot about tuning our rifles with that kind of data.

 

[Bill Norris]

Beginning at about the 36 minute mark, Jack talks about reading group shapes and bullet holes relating those things to powder chargem specifically. Great info there. I'd love for him to expound on that subject a bit more. I tune by group shapes by far more than anything but I do struggle with reading bullet holes and what to do based on what I see from them.

Jack is a wealth of knowledge. I'd love to see a chart of group shapes and bullet holes relating to both powder charge and to tuner settings, in his vast experience, especially with powder. I think we could all learn a lot about tuning our rifles with that kind of data.

In some of Jack's training classes/videos he goes thru a chart of bullet holes, shapes, and sizes in more detail. There are about 12 total videos on U-tube of Jack teaching. Very informative and interesting to watch.

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

In some of Jack's training classes/videos he goes thru a chart of bullet holes, shapes, and sizes in more detail. There are about 12 total videos on U-tube of Jack teaching. Very informative and interesting to watch.

Thanks Bill. I'm sure I'd learn a lot at one of his in person classes if I could make it to one. Unless I've missed it though, I haven't found a video that delves into this specific area as much as the bottom one linked in this thread. Without going to much trouble, do you have a link by chance? This is a subject that I love to learn more about. I like much of where I am with the group shapes and tuners but more in depth regarding the shapes with both powder and tuners would be great! I have been able to largely quantify tuner adjustments relative to powder charge specifically with n133 and a ppc. In a nutshell, I find 1 mark on my tuner is very close to .3gr of n133. That has to be noted too, as a general rule of thumb. Some of the reasons, he hit on a bit in the video, like, being on the edge of tune already, for example. But, as he alludes to in this video, there's even more to it and a ton more to it when you consider all the endless combinations if I tried to do the same for many various powders and how they act in many various cases and bullet combos. Just not remotely feasible, at least not with what little I know. Just a million too many variables. But if we compile data individually but join it collectively, I think that would be huge. It would still be, no small task and takes very good equipment and shooting ability. Some cartridge combinations make it difficult enough for various reasons but simply put, some just don't shoot well enough to be up to the task of getting reliable data from them. Something as simple as recoil, for example, would make it difficult at best. Something like a ppc, br or similar but with different combinations would be huge by itself. A lot can be extrapolated if the data is solid and would give a good handle on various powder characteristics under different projectiles in say a 6BRA or straight BR would cover a lot of ground. Tuning by group shape is paramount to success imho.

I've always struggled with reading the actual bullet holes and what they are telling me..what causes them to change, what I'm looking for and how to correct for it.

 

[bozo699]

In some of Jack's training classes/videos he goes thru a chart of bullet holes, shapes, and sizes in more detail. There are about 12 total videos on U-tube of Jack teaching. Very informative and interesting to watch.

I have them saved on YouTube for quick references.
Wayne

 

[Bill Norris]

Thanks Bill. I'm sure I'd learn a lot at one of his in person classes if I could make it to one. Unless I've missed it though, I haven't found a video that delves into this specific area as much as the bottom one linked in this thread. Without going to much trouble, do you have a link by chance? This is a subject that I love to learn more about. I like much of where I am with the group shapes and tuners but more in depth regarding the shapes with both powder and tuners would be great! I have been able to largely quantify tuner adjustments relative to powder charge specifically with n133 and a ppc. In a nutshell, I find 1 mark on my tuner is very close to .3gr of n133. That has to be noted too, as a general rule of thumb. Some of the reasons, he hit on a bit in the video, like, being on the edge of tune already, for example. But, as he alludes to in this video, there's even more to it and a ton more to it when you consider all the endless combinations if I tried to do the same for many various powders and how they act in many various cases and bullet combos. Just not remotely feasible, at least not with what little I know. Just a million too many variables. But if we compile data individually but join it collectively, I think that would be huge. It would still be, no small task and takes very good equipment and shooting ability. Some cartridge combinations make it difficult enough for various reasons but simply put, some just don't shoot well enough to be up to the task of getting reliable data from them. Something as simple as recoil, for example, would make it difficult at best. Something like a ppc, br or similar but with different combinations would be huge by itself. A lot can be extrapolated if the data is solid and would give a good handle on various powder characteristics under different projectiles in say a 6BRA or straight BR would cover a lot of ground. Tuning by group shape is paramount to success imho.

I've always struggled with reading the actual bullet holes and what they are telling me..what causes them to change, what I'm looking for and how to correct for it.

This is the one where he actually goes into group shapes and sizes @ 200 yd. tuning.

 

[bozo699]

This is the one where he actually goes into group shapes and sizes @ 200 yd. tuning.

I shot so many years without ear protection so I’m deaf in my left ear. The videos are very interesting and informative but my only complaint is the audio quality is very poor!.. I have to back up many many times and sometimes just guess what was said
Wayne

 

[Bill Norris]

I shot so many years without ear protection so I’m deaf in my left ear. The videos are very interesting and informative but my only complaint is the audio quality is very poor!.. I have to back up many many times and sometimes just guess what was said
Wayne

Yea, I find it much better to wear a headset to hear it really good.

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

This is the one where he actually goes into group shapes and sizes @ 200 yd. tuning.

Good stuff right there Bill and yes, that's one I had not seen, some how or another. Thank you for finding it and posting for me.

 

[Murray Brook]

Wayne, some of those vids have closed caption/subtitles. Might help you

 

[Link]

When Jack mentions 30.5 clicks of 133, does he mean grains? He did say both.

ty Don.

 

[bozo699]

When Jack mentions 30.5 clicks of 133, does he mean grains? He did say both.

ty

When Jack mentions 30.5 clicks of 133, does he mean grains? He did say both.

ty Don.

Don,

He means Clicks
Wayne

Edit:
I better double check that. Usually he refers to clicks

 

[bozo699]

Wayne, some of those vids have closed caption/subtitles. Might help you

Thanks Murray I’ll check that out,
Bill, thank you I’ll see if I can hook headphones up to my set, if so I’ll buy a set with long cord or maybe cordless
Wayne

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

When Jack mentions 30.5 clicks of 133, does he mean grains? He did say both.

ty Don.

Yes, he did say both and it would depend on the measure. I assumed grains but it could've been either if that particular measure, runs that close, clicks to grains with a particular powder. I think he mentioned which measure but not sure.