Ladder Teasting with range brass

[dmoran]

jlow -

My "shoot 2 or 3... if you need the extra confidence" was solely advise to you in regards to your "misdirected" comment.
But it was part of your way to skew my reply.... lol

Almost everyone abbreviates around accuracy nodes, no matter what developing method used.
But even so, say we have a new barrel or rifle and want to test 3 components from 8 increments each.
- 72-rounds OCW
- 24-rounds Ladder
A substantial difference to many effecting aspects (ammo, barrel heat, wind, time, expense, cleaning, etc.).

OCW is not an efficient method in my experience, that is limited to 100yds to success.
Donovan

 

[jlow]

jlow -

My "shoot 2 or 3... if you need the extra confidence" was solely advise to you in regards to your "misdirected" comment.
But it was part of your way to skew my reply.... lol

Almost everyone abbreviates around accuracy nodes, no matter what developing method used.
But even so, say we have a new barrel or rifle and want to test 3 components from 8 increments each.
- 72-rounds OCW
- 24-rounds Ladder
A substantial difference to many effecting aspects (ammo, barrel heat, wind, time, expense, cleaning, etc.).

OCW is not an efficient method in my experience, that is limited to 100yds to success.
Donovan

Donovan – you surprise me… I got you pegged as a pretty experience reloader/shooter. Do you always test 3 components each time you get a new barrel/rifle? I figured you pretty much know the optimal stuff before you start, or are you just stacking the deck here a bit to win a discussion?

Regardless, I am one of those pay up front type of a guy and so ladder is not for me.

BTW, you’ve probably never used OCW but the method as per Dan Newberry is best shot at 200-300 yards but some do use 100 yards with success.

 

[dmoran]

Donovan – you surprise me… I got you pegged as a pretty experience reloader/shooter. Do you always test 3 components each time you get a new barrel/rifle? I figured you pretty much know the optimal stuff before you start, or are you just stacking the deck here a bit to win a discussion?

At least 3.... if best accuracy is what is being sought after.
If lesser accuracy levels is your cup of tea, not much development is needed or component testing. Just figured you would know better then putting all your apples in one basket....

BTW, you’ve probably never used OCW

I have possibly used the OCW method as many times as you have, and would put 50-times as a bare minimum that I have used it. Primarily with customer factory rifles with low power scopes (under 12x) and where only 1 set of components was selected to be used. But back some 10-years, I used OCW a few times for my own Comp rifles, bought repeatedly seen it's weakness, limitations, and inefficiency.
Totally stopped using it to my customer developments for at least 5 years now as well, when I came up with better solutions to seeing the targets at distance. Now I do 450yd Ladder's with those type rifles on a reactive target board.

as per Dan Newberry is best shot at 200-300 yards but some do use 100 yards with success.

Dan's OCW instructions are exclusively 100yds: http://optimalchargeweight.embarqspace.com/#/ocw-instructions/4529817134

Wind can and does easily destroy OCW tests at longer distances. To long of test sessions from to many rounds, is why. Which is another good example of its limitations to mid and long range precision accuracy.
Donovan

 

[DLH_]

I have done the OCW test for as long as I have been reloading. However despite great success, I feel like I need to learn another aspect of reloading!

 

[DLH_]

I would never of know!

 

[dmoran]

I have done the OCW test for as long as I have been reloading. However despite great success, I feel like I need to learn another aspect of reloading!

I hear ya..... Used it for several years myself (like I stated to jlow), but am confident I found better approaches from Ladder's, and spin-off's of Ladder for fine tuning (like Tom's example).

Good Luck....
Donovan

 

[jlow]

Yes, you are right about the OCW and 100 yards, that was my mistake. But the question really is how many people run 3 components for each barrel they get and also only need to run a ladder once to get reliable information? That is the real question.

You are probably at the extreme end of OCD for reloading and understandably so if you shoot 1k only, which is great for you. However, since we are on a public board and we are talking about reloading methods in general (since no specific conditions were originally announced nor restrictions), then I think it could be construed as misleading since it is not exactly a majority of the shooters do what you do or for that matter have the equipment you have, or is capable of doing what you can do.

So from that standpoint, saying doing ladders and you only need to do one I don’t think is not good advice.

This is why people find this board disappointing. Look at this whole paragraph you wrote.

I have possibly used the OCW method as many times as you have, and would put 50-times as a bare minimum that I have used it. Primarily with customer factory rifles with low power scopes (under 12x) and where only 1 set of components was selected to be used. But back some 10-years, I used OCW a few times for my own Comp rifles, bought repeatedly seen it's weakness, limitations, and inefficiency.
Totally stopped using it to my customer developments for at least 5 years now as well, when I came up with better solutions to seeing the targets at distance. Now I do 450yd Ladder's with those type rifles on a reactive target board.

Basically a lot of conclusions, your conclusions but not one bit of useful information as to why you concluded that one method is better than the other. It’s like you are saying, “we are the Gods of reloading/shooting, this is our conclusion, don’t ask why because we either can’t tell your or is willing to tell you, just follow us and you will be OK” – really?

When you learn to use logic and data to back up your conclusion, you will have the respect you deserve anything else is just idle bragging...

 

[dmoran]

jlow -

As to components, if no more then one powder is tested, that powder could actually be the worse powder selection for a given barrel. Which demands at least 2 powders to have a confident winner (same for bullets, and same for primers).
So unless one is willing to except lower accuracy levels, no less then 6 components need develop tested against each other, to have even low confident levels and deviations to accuracy.
You being at more the extreme end of desires to laboratory and mathematical type proven results, I'm surprised by your suggesting that 3 components being extreme, to any level of reloading.

The topic to DLH's thread is "Ladder Testing with range brass", and his questioning of using range brass for Ladder tests. Which I feel is creditable and good questioning, from a method that is widely used, very popular, and well proven.
Donovan

Edit: (for your edit)
"Basically a lot of conclusions, your conclusions but not one bit of useful information as to why you concluded that one method is better than the other. It’s like you are saying, “we are the Gods of reloading/shooting, this is our conclusion, don’t ask why because we either can’t tell your or is willing to tell you, just follow us and you will be OK” – really?

When you learn to use logic and data to back up your conclusion, you will have the respect you deserve anything else is just idle bragging..."

Same goes for you. Read it back to yourself in the 1st person.
And I gave reasons, in my very first reply (go back and read them).

 

[jlow]

If I was testing a rifle in a caliber I know absolutely nothing about, and there was no information in references or in the web (there you have to of course find the good from the bad) about the caliber, I would surely do as you mention which is to test multiple components, but that would be an extreme case that I have not run across before. The reality is there is always some information to help you get started out there and one does not have to start from ground zero.

Of course we always hear from this same exact board as to how it is not necessary to find the ultimate precision, and burn your barrel out finding it, and just go out and shoot because skills and the wind is the big equalizing factor. I guess I have heard that enough that I am usually happy to have a load in my rifle that can shoot in the 3s and not worry about getting it to potentially shoot in the 1s, and of course in part because I don’t shoot BR and yes, getting out there and tacking the equalizing factor to me is more important.

For what it’s worth, I am certainly a Type A (maybe even a AAA as some test at work have shown…) but I have long accepted that in life, there is an important balance in finding something that is good enough and concentration my effort on what is not even close to being good enough. That has been a winning formula for me and I am not going back to the bad old ways...

 

[DLH_]

Which load would you chose from data? Blue due to the verticle stringing?
Thanks Josh

 

[M14AMU]

Here's a ladder test....from 700 yards:

Shortytst by Rick Mulhern, on Flickr

With this:

Untitled by Rick Mulhern, on Flickr

Six rounds

 

[DLH_]

I have read that already and also a few different articles in books that I have. I understand what the ladder test provides you with, but I don't know how to choose the best load out of the gathered data.

 

[jlow]

Speaking of OCW and Dan Newberry, we met him and shot at the BangSteel range he works out of this weekend and was able to make multiple hit on this target out at 1 mile with an Accurate International PSR rifle chamber in .338L

 

[Alex Wheeler]

Hands down the ladder is the way to go IF you have access to longer ranges. 3 powders 3 rounds at each charge .2-.3 gn. apart for 12-15 shot ladders run round robin. From that you will learn what powder the barrel likes. Then a fine ladder in .1 gn. increments (3 rounds each) where the first lapper showed you to go. Your looking for a spot where the POI is the same or very close dexpite the powder charge increase AND it should show good vertical. If you dont see this, change a component. For these guys who know the dasher, they can go out one time with a few ladders and have a gun tunned 95% in 30 minutes.

 

[dmoran]

Speaking of OCW and Dan Newberry, we met him and shot at the BangSteel range he works out of this weekend and was able to make multiple hit on this target out at 1 mile with an Accurate International PSR rifle chamber in .338L

Cool......
Never met Dan in person, but have conversed by phone a few times over the years and online forums, email, etc. Shot 1-mile a few times and further. Even shot the little 6Dasher to 2000 yards last spring. Did a write up here on AccuarteShooter: 2000 Yards - 6Dasher (<<...link)
Donovan

 

[jlow]

Cool......
Never met Dan in person, but have conversed by phone a few times over the years and online forums, email, etc. Shot 1-mile a few times and further. Even shot the little 6Dasher to 2000 yards last spring. Did a write up here on AccuarteShooter: 2000 Yards - 6Dasher
Donovan

Awesome and sweet!

 

[mac86951]

I'm with some others. I'll use OCW to get a "rifle is working right" charge weight range and to be sure of my pressures, then add distance for fine tuning, or in some cases to learn that this combo wont work.

I am certainly one of those that gets a box of 100, or 1lb for load testing. If it performs, I'll reverify with the large batch.

-Mac