• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

tricks to achieve low es??

All give good advice based on their experiences........a little of mine:
2 examples spring to mind.
1. Mate has a 6mm Rem custom varmint rifle that ES's are in the low double digits (~15 IIRC) and it prints into 1 1/4" @ 500 yds.
2. My hunting 308 spitting 130 Hornadys @ 3000 with a compressed load of Varget has 6 fps ES. Sub 1/2" @ 100.

Both were crony'd with a cheap F1 Crony and 5 shot strings when the loads were developed.
Brass was nothing flash with only good standard prep applied.

Mates other long range rifle, a 7mm Practical shoots ~3" groups @ 1000 yds.

Are we just shit lucky......maybe. Attention to handloading details...........YES.
 
Also how do you account for chronograph incorrect readings. My beta chrony is only accurate up to 99.5% of the velocity. And if I'm shooting 3600 fps that could be as much as 18 fps. So what kinda chronograph do you guys us to get them low numbers?
I used to be skeptical of the accuracy of my inexpensive Alpha Master chrony. Then one day at the range I borrowed a second one, and put the two in series while shooting through them. With a few minor differences they gave virtually identical results. While I think that on an absolute basis 99.5% accuracy or 0.5% error is probably right, I suspect repeatability is better than that. SD is a measure of repeatability, not accuracy.
 
Last edited:
A better idea might be to ignore ES alltogether and focus on SD instead. Just because ES is easy to measure, doesn't mean that it is useful. Regards JCS
Do to the sample sizes needed to do SD justice, myself find SD to be largely inefficient.
Say one tries 3 seating depths in hopes of tightening up extreme spread. For creditable SD data, one would need to shoot 20 or more rounds to each increment. But by ES data, 5 or 6 rounds to each is efficient.

To me, vertical dispersion (at intended distance) is the "holy grail" and key aspect to assess and tune by. Which I feel trumps captured ES and/or SD data. But a combined assessment of the target vertical dispersion and the captured ES of the string, offers proof to each other in assessments, and from lower round counts needed.

Just my 2-Cents
Donovan
 
Last edited:
I used to be skeptical of the accuracy of my inexpensive Alpha Master chrony. Then one day at the range I borrowed a second one, and put the two in series while shooting through them. With a few minor differences they gave virtually identical results. While I think that on an absolute bases 99.5" accuracy or 0.5% error is probably right, I suspect repeatability is better than that. SD is a measure of repeatability, not accuracy.
We did this too with a pair of F1 Crony's...........same result.
 
I haven't run across this hobby of trying to get ES into single digits. Seems like a fun hobby. Personally, my hobby is to shoot tiny groups, but maybe I'm missing some of the fun. I do chronograph my test groups, and do pay attention to the relative change of ES, to help in bracketing an accuracy node. But whether the lowest ES group is .015 or .030 is not particularly interesting to me.

FWIW I was surprised read that the legendary Virgil King (of the Houston Warehouse) never employed a chronograph, only a dial caliper to measure group sizes. But then he also did not detect a problem if his powder charges varied plus/minus a few tenths of a grain. Just when you think you have it all figured out ...
-
 
FWIW I was surprised read that the legendary Virgil King (of the Houston Warehouse) never employed a chronograph, only a dial caliper to measure group sizes. But then he also did not detect a problem if his powder charges varied plus/minus a few tenths of a grain. Just when you think you have it all figured out ...
-
In my experience, ES for 100yd grouping has little meaning compared to its meaning for say 600yd
To bad Virgil and the warehouse results didn't include LR !.!.!
I've read the Houston Warehouse at least 5 times over the years, and while interesting and relevant for SR, doesn't tell me much for LR aspects. But maybe just me...
Donovan
 
I was the one asked what is the difference between the two hell I don't know that is why I am asking.



Standard deviation is a statistic that measures one important characteristic of a normal distribution, which is also known as a “bell-shaped curve.” The assumption that we're dealing with a normal distribution is important for calculation of sd, and velocity data do seem to follow a normal distribution. I've tested a number of sets of data from chronographs which did in fact approximate a normal curve (i.e., were not significantly different from normal), so I’m sure that the algorithm for calculation of sd that’s programmed into the chronograph makes that assumption. (Lest someone jump in to point it out, I’m aware that velocity is a vector quantity, so what we’re really talking about is speed, which is a scalar – but velocity seems to be the term in common use, so that’s what I’m using).

So, the chronograph uses the individual velocity readings to calculate the mean (average) velocity and then looks at the deviation from that mean of each of the individual data points to calculate the standard deviation using a formula that is not greatly complicated but which we don’t need to get into. A small standard deviation indicates that the data points are clustered more closely around the mean, while a larger sd indicates more spread, i.e., more variability. Because consistency in velocity for the individual shots of a particular load recipe is [presumably] conducive to greater accuracy (precision, really), a smaller sd is always (I think) better, but it’s also important to consider the size of the mean velocity in question – for example, an sd of 20 for a set of low-power pistol loads that have a mean velocity of 700 fps is actually indicative of greater relative variability than an sd of 30 for high-speed rifle loads that average 3500 fps. The statistic that takes that relationship into consideration is known as the “coefficient of variation” (abbreviated CV, and also known as Relative Standard Deviation, RSD), which is simply the standard deviation divided by the mean. In the first (pistol) case the CV is 20/700 = 0.029 (and usually given as a percentage, so 2.9%), while in the second (rifle) example, it’s 30/3500 = 0.009 (0.9%), so the rifle data are actually more consistent, relative to the larger size of the mean.
the sd can be used to determine the percentage of your shots that you can expect to fall within a certain velocity range. For any normal distribution, the mean +/- one standard deviation will include about two-thirds of the data points (68%, in fact), +/- two sd will include about 95%, and +/- 3 sd over 99%. Using the rifle example, with a mean of 3500 fps and an sd of 30, 68% of all shots taken with that load (all other factors also being equal) would be expected to range from 3470 to 3530 fps, 95% should fall between 3440 and 3560, and over 99% would be between 3410 and 3590. Another way to look at the same numbers would be (for example) to conclude that only 5% of the shots would either be slower than 3440 or faster than 3560 fps.

The question of how many shots in a data set are necessary for calculation of a “meaningful” sd can be approached by considering the Student’s t-distribution in comparison to the normal distribution. The t-distribution is, in effect, a normal distribution that is mathematically adjusted to account for a small sample size. The amount of the “adjustment” for a particular small sample size is a measure of the uncertainty relative to having lots of data. In a normal distribution, based on an infinite number of data, +/- 1.96 sd includes exactly 95% of the data points. If, for example, you had only 20 data points (e.g., a string of 20 shots) the t-distribution says you would have to increase the 1.96 to +/- 2.093 sd to be confident that 95% of the data are included – the range is greater because of the uncertainty arising from the small sample size. That amounts to a difference of (2.093 – 1.96)/1.96 = about 6.8%, which is probably close enough for the average person evaluating loads but probably not, as steveno points out, good enough for a manufacturer. By the time you get down to a 10-shot string, the difference grows to about 15%, and for the typical 5-shot string, the difference is a good bit larger – nearly 42%, which I think makes a pretty good argument that sd based on a 5-shot string is a suspect value that should be used only with caution, or not at all.
 

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.

Forum statistics

Threads
165,781
Messages
2,203,016
Members
79,110
Latest member
miles813
Back
Top