Narrowing down a node: .1 or .2 gr increments?
- Thread starter Winny94
- Start date
This ^ plus I look at ES and use it as the tie breaker when several nodes are identified. I know some people are in love with SD but I find ES is better for me. Do the seating depth test and monitor velocity. Velocity for that node is the key and once it’s identified you load to keep that velocity.
Fast14riot
Gold $$ Contributor
I always start out with ~1% increments to identify possible nodes, then explore the nodes in .1gr increments.
The issue with ES is that it does not mean anything statistically, SD on the other hand can be used to be predictions. One must be aware of sample size with SD to trust/make reliable predictions
I know that’s the argument but trust me when I say I personally use ES way more than SD (as do a lot of the other HMs I shoot with) and have no issues cleaning targets. My SD over 20rds is usually single digits and ES averages high teens/low twenties. To be fair I rarely use either and focus more on velocity once I have the load dialed but then I watch ES for anomalies in my loading process which I find more effective than watching SD. I shoot for an ES of 20 or less and if I’m maintaining that ES and my velocity is in its node then I’m good. Doesn’t make your way or my way wrong. There’s more than one way to shoot clean strings and that’s what makes this sport so fun.
Very true, if your SD is single digits over 20 rounds life is good and it does not really matter what method you use . I’m just a bit occupationaly damaged by using SD to predict vertical at a 1000 ( single digits is a good goal). For 600, the target tells the story. Reminds me, need to check the velocity of my great shooting 600 yard loads for 1000 yard use this season. Sling shooter so I have a bit more room
1shot
Gold $$ Contributor
It has been my experience that SD doesn't give me enough accurate information because of the small sampling. 3-5 shot groups just aren't enough to tell you what is going on. However, when I look at ES an have a low and high charge that is in the teens or low 20's but the middle charge is single digits that is meaningful data to me. The other thing I look at is the shape of the group. I had a load in my Shehane that was in the single digits and shot way better that fair, but the group even though it was under .3 moa was stacked one on top of the other. Moving up in charge weight a couple tenths made the group round.
I hope this helps,
Lloyd
I hope this helps,
Lloyd
And I would have investigated in .001 increments closer to jam by the looks of target his 3.470 is smaller than 3.467.
3.467 is starting to show a tiny bit of vertical on open a lil bit.
This is why I would load 3.471, 3.472 & 3.473.
Would his natural group tighten up before using the tuner ?
It is a good article and tutorial on ladder load work though.
.001 increments are closer than the component variations. If it’s that sensitive the load will not be a stable performer.
I get your point, but referring to artical he is .007 off jam. What lies in those 7 thou?
My last seating test I was amazed at how much .003 changes groups, I started at touch and was able to see groups shrink n grow.
To each his own method of success. Personally I stay far enough away from the lands for the variotion to be a small fraction of the total. I’m also not looking for BR type precision. Want loads for prone sling shooting that shoot well and are stable under varying conditions.
I can see nothing wrong with investigating further. The only way to know if they would help you or not is to try however as Tomswede points out .001 is closer than component variations.
I fully understand that .001 is closer than component variations.
But those that sort as I'm sure the author does are sorting to a minimum of .001.
My curiosity lies in the first .007 as to what his groups would be like.
Looking at his rifle setup and expieriance his tuner will tighten things up.
I’m curious how to sort to get a seating depth variation of less than .0005 ( to be able to be sure to be within .001). Is the bullet seater touching at the same location as where the lands touch the bullet and the sorting tool also touch at the same location?
As far as the comparitor is concerned it's only a data point.
If they are sorted into lots of set data points then they are of like kind in measurement.
As far as bullet seater its point of contact may be different than comparitor but when using the two tools together it's how we come up with our jam/ touch measurements in seating rounds.
Example all bullets measured to .001 seated to let's say 3.470 should only have a variation of +or- .0005 cbto correct?
So now why wouldn't your seating depth be within the same +or- .0005?
Now I've also read guys sorting bullets to
.0005 bbto
I'm trying to learn like everyone else, and this is what I've gathered.
If they are sorted into lots of set data points then they are of like kind in measurement.
As far as bullet seater its point of contact may be different than comparitor but when using the two tools together it's how we come up with our jam/ touch measurements in seating rounds.
Example all bullets measured to .001 seated to let's say 3.470 should only have a variation of +or- .0005 cbto correct?
So now why wouldn't your seating depth be within the same +or- .0005?
Now I've also read guys sorting bullets to
.0005 bbto
I'm trying to learn like everyone else, and this is what I've gathered.
1shot
Gold $$ Contributor
We all need to remember that different disciplines require more or less stringent accuracy requirements. @tomswede and I are both sling shooters and have more real estate to work with than a BR shooter, shooting for group.
If a given load is dramatically affected by a couple thou. of seating depth, or a .1 variation of powder, ( ie 44.5 shoots great, 44.6 terrible) that accuracy window is far to small for me.
I try to shoot bullets that don't require soarting. However if the barrel likes a bullet that needs sorted I have threshold of +- .001.
I also like to find a load that allows me to jump the bullets. There is nothing more aggravating that to have a ceasefire called while you have one in the chamber. You go to extract the round and get powder everywhere it isn't supposed to go.
I hope this helps,
Lloyd
If a given load is dramatically affected by a couple thou. of seating depth, or a .1 variation of powder, ( ie 44.5 shoots great, 44.6 terrible) that accuracy window is far to small for me.
I try to shoot bullets that don't require soarting. However if the barrel likes a bullet that needs sorted I have threshold of +- .001.
I also like to find a load that allows me to jump the bullets. There is nothing more aggravating that to have a ceasefire called while you have one in the chamber. You go to extract the round and get powder everywhere it isn't supposed to go.
I hope this helps,
Lloyd
Agree 100%. We had a 3x600 today, have not seen you down here for a while.
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.