what i have found, is my groups always seem to get larger from there...I love the idea of shooting one shot to test for a group size.
Then start testing your loads - powder charge on target. Thats were it count.I want most accuracy.
What is your plan to identify when you have the most accurate load?I want most accuracy.
Yea those are always the tightest.I love the idea of shooting one shot to test for a group size.

From what I've seen any testing with a moderately valid sample size basically results in a nearly linear relation between velocity and powder charge.But this concept of flat spots keeps coming up and as an engineer that worked as both a test engineer and combustion engineer during my 43 year career I want someone to explain to me how an increase in energy input doesn't show up as an increase in velocity and then increases again? As part of the explanation it should include an explanation of what changed from one load to another.
Erik isn't my favorite shooting references but he often does provide some good guidance. One thing I believe that gets lost in load development discussions is the rifle itself. My opinion, and its based more on discussions with shooters of different disciplines, is that you can't expect a 6lb hunting rifle and a heavy Bench Rest rifle to behave the same in terms of sensitivity to load variations.From what I've seen any testing with a moderately valid sample size basically results in a nearly linear relation between velocity and powder charge.
Hornady has been putting out a ton of info on valid testing and people hate it.
Cortina who used to preach about load dev has also admitted he just shoots the same load.
So I'm not sure I'd trust myself to remember what happened last week much less over a year agoNoob reloader here - based on this limited powder charge test where would you set your powder node at and why? Do I use the 94.5 node or the 97.5 node? STDEV is based on the charge before and the charge after.
View attachment 1760820
In the photo (shot #13) the black stuff around the primer is actually neolube that was sitting in the bottom of my loading block - that's not carbon.
There ya' go. Concise ...Just because the formula's and the software spit out a value doesn't mean that the result is meaningful.
Do you mean to ask, why doesn't the velocity go up linearly and predictablyI'm going to PO some people here but that isn't my intent. But this concept of flat spots keeps coming up and as an engineer that worked as both a test engineer and combustion engineer during my 43 year career I want someone to explain to me how an increase in energy input doesn't show up as an increase in velocity and then increases again?
Why would you ignore group size. Many records were set with a big ES. Especially out to 300 yards. With a Low ES and a big group do you throw your data out and start all over? Are you even capable of shooting small groups? What's a velocity node. A flat spot in a plot is just too small of a data set to mean anything.I'm no expert but to parrot what I heard on Cortina's podcast he and Lou Murdica say the powder charge test is only to test for a velocity node. I don't care about groups on paper at this stage - I'm just trying to pick a powder charge where the velocity seems stable. I don't think you understand the test I did here - I'm intentionally doing different powder charges to look for a velocity node and also see where my pressure limit is.

We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.