You shoot the wrong test at 100 and then claim that short range load development doesn't work... not smart. You should have loaded at lease 3 shots at each charge and shot an OCW test if you only have access to a 100 yard range. Ladder test should be shot at a minimum of 300, but I have found that if your gun is really accurate or using a magnum, ladders should be done at 500 or more. My 7 mag put 69-72 grains of H-1000 into a 1.2" at 400 yards on a ladder test and I couldn't tell what was happening, I moved back to 700 and did the test again and it looked totally different. Research OCW and do that test at 100 or 200 and you will get some useful data.
Why Short Range Load Testing Doesn't Work
- Thread starter Lapua40X
- Start date
I can not remember the last time I did any load development at 100 yards. However, here are some thoughts and a very real test I did.. I don't use a rifle for F-Open competition unless and until I get groups on a regular basis at 300 yards that measure "generally speaking" 3/4" to 1-1/4" for 5 shots. It also has to have extreme spreads not to exceed 15f.p.s. and I usually try and get, under 12f.p.s. With these parameters I have had GREAT success out to 1000 yards, except for one very unusual time. My 6.5 x 284 with 140 Hybrids set IN the lands 10K and OUT / OFF the lands by 20K both shot virtually the same at 300 yards, both for group size as well as e.s. spread. I took both seating depths to a 600 yard shoot in Beaumont and found virtually no significant difference in score or "X" count at 600 yards. So since there were no definitive answers there, I took it to Bayou Rifles at 1000 yards. NOW this is what happened: The 20K off lands gave me enough vertical that getting 10's was difficult>>12 o'clock / 6 o'clock was all too common>>>>the 10K INTO the lands produced very nice scores! Now had I shot my load development groups at 100, as opposed to the 300 they were shot at, would either distance have told the REAL story? It was not until I took it to 1000 yards that I found the "problem" of excessive vertical! So should I abandon my "standard" load development range of 300 yards because of one aberration? I doubt it. If you can find "your rifles load" at 100, 200 or 300 or whatever and it works for you>>why attempt to "fix" what is not broken for you!
Erik Cortina
Team Lapua Brux Borden Captain
ShootDots said:
Interesting Ben. You said you got very nice scores with bullets jammed .010", what kind of scores did you get as compared to the .020" off?
savagedasher said:
This may be a topic for a thread of it's own but just what is the best paper for clean holes?
The regular pulp paper for conventional targets seems to make have fuzzy holes most of the time. Regular printer/copy paper is flimsy and two adjacent hits usually tear out a chunk. I have used heavy, smooth, poster material with good luck but it's a bit pricey.
With a cardboard backer? Or no backer?
What is the best target paper to get nice clean holes?
Alex Wheeler
Site $$ Sponsor
dmoran said:
My experience mirrors this also.
Lapua40X said:
I have a membership at Chabot and have shot at Livermore. Chabot has a maximum range of 200 yards, open only on Friday mornings. Livermore has a maximum range of 100 yards. United Sportsmen range in Concord goes out 200, but think you have to belong to a club and use of the 200 yard range may be restricted like Chabot. Not sure on that. But, nothing else in the bay area that gets out beyond 200 yards. Outside of that, it is a two hour drive for me to the Sacramento range, which I have been to a few times. They have a 100 yard range monitored by a RSO and a 200/300 yard range that has no RSO (at least when I was there). The longer distance ranges, out to 1000, require you belong to a club, and have two people...one to shoot, one to operate the raising and lowering of targets behind a berm.
Phil
Hey Eric, on the previous Friday of the Sunday we shot the 1000 yard match, I went with a couple of friends of mine to Bayou to get "sighted-in" and fouled up the barrel.. I shot 25 of the 10K in the lands.. I got sighted in and fouled the barrel with 5 shots... I then shot 20, as if I was actually shooting in a match for score. I shot a "198-9x" if memory served me correctly. Then at the match on Sunday, I shot the first and third matches with the 20K off.. I was down in the mid-180's with 3-4 X count... The 2nd match was shot with the 10K into the lands and I promptly shot, I believe, 192- 7X>>>>which at 1000 yards is GREAT for me! I wish I had shot the 20K off in the practice session and the 2nd match>>>I would have had a reversal of scores! Erik, I just had a thought. Do you keep the scores when they send them to you via E-Mail? You could look it up and it is about 2-4 matches back.. I don't keep them or I would give you the date...
I like the bench rest targets they mark good and you can tell if the bullet is asleep when it goes through the paper.it is no different then tuning a arrow Look at all yardage
Good Shooting Larry
Good Shooting Larry
someone needs to start a thread **with pictures** about this like other member stated. How to read the holes on the paper and what they tell you.
Raythemanroe
Bullet Whisperer
Cardboard works great!
RMulhern said:
The paper used for IBS group/score targets work well posted on a celitex backer. You can tell by the holes if the bullet is completely stabilized, tipped or if the load is about to blow shots out of the group (too hot of a load). I've seen bullet holes from a .30BR that appeared almost 1 1/2 caliber wide...
BoydAllen
Gold $$ Contributor
Short range benchrest shooters are able to gather significant information from short range targets. They do it all the time, but they know better than to put that many shots on one aiming point. Yes, if you do it incorrectly, it becomes less than useful, and generally when we speak of one hole, it is not a slot. On the other hand, given the wide range of charge weights, the rifle looks like a winner, and beyond overusing one target, the shooter ain't bad either. What we have here is the result of a perfectly good session to correlate velocity with charge weight, but if the shots had been shot at a series of aiming points along a common horizontal line. or in pairs the same way, a lot more information could have been gotten from those same shots. Don't you think?
Alex Wheeler
Site $$ Sponsor
It is my experience that you wont know until you test at the intended distance. I have developed loads that shot very well at 100 or 200, and also shot well at 600, but gave bad vertical at 1k. Once I tweaked powder or seating depth slightly all was well. I have also found good loads at 200 that did work all the way out to 1k. I don't claim to have the facts, just what I have seen happen to a lot of shooters. If you don't have access to 1k then you just do the best you can at 100 and use the chrony. But its no guarantee.
Lapua40X
California Hunter Education Instructor
BoydAllen said:
Yes, Boyd, I do think. Thanks for raising that point and for the civility of your response. I believe the 100 yard bench rest shooter firing three shot groups at different targets often get a lot of good information at short ranges. And when you're limiting your "one hole" goals to 100 yards I'd say that's perfectly workable. I guess I should'a included something like, "IMO one hole at 100 yards don't mean squat at longer ranges". That .625 "slot" on my target would more than likely open up to a couple of inches, perhaps more, at 300 yards and put some of those round sideways through a 600 yard target. I think zfastmalibu's post illuminates that point. One of these days I may try lining up two targets on a matching horizontal plane at 100 and 300 yards and see if I can build a better graphic illustration. My intent here was simply to raise the issue of how false impressions can lead to frustrations in building a load for longer ranges so that those who hadn't considered this possibility might benefit from the info; especially the new shooter. I seem to have stepped on a few tender toes here. Glad that yours don't seem to be among those. Sometimes an innocent attempt to help ends up starting a war.
Calling Donovan. He has done just this, shooting a target at one distance that had targets lined behind it at other distances, observing what the load did at each distance
Maybe he can post this again to show. I can't find where I had seen this before. I will look for it again
I think the point of that data
he had posted was to show just what this thread is talking about
Maybe he can post this again to show. I can't find where I had seen this before. I will look for it again
I think the point of that data
he had posted was to show just what this thread is talking about
So, to the OP, [br]
If a load is developed, at 100 yards, that shows charge tolerance, ES in the 10-13 fps range, and groups ~¼ MOA; why will that load not shoot well at 1000 yards? This assumes, of course, that twist requirements for the projectile have been met, etc. [br]
I do all my load development at 100 yards over an accurate chronograph. I've also competed reasonably well at 1000 yards with the same loads. Some of the F-Class matches where I've competed included the best in the U.S. and my scores were at least competitive. When they were not adequate to win, it was not the load at fault. [br]
Given my experience, I say that your post significantly misrepresented reality. If you were to have said, "I cannot develop loads at short range," or, "I think that developing long range loads at short range is ineffective," you would have been on solid ground. As it is, you do not compete at long range and, apparently, do not have much experience shooting at long range. It would have been much better to have presented your case as a function of your experience instead of making an absolute, unsupportable statement.
If a load is developed, at 100 yards, that shows charge tolerance, ES in the 10-13 fps range, and groups ~¼ MOA; why will that load not shoot well at 1000 yards? This assumes, of course, that twist requirements for the projectile have been met, etc. [br]
I do all my load development at 100 yards over an accurate chronograph. I've also competed reasonably well at 1000 yards with the same loads. Some of the F-Class matches where I've competed included the best in the U.S. and my scores were at least competitive. When they were not adequate to win, it was not the load at fault. [br]
Given my experience, I say that your post significantly misrepresented reality. If you were to have said, "I cannot develop loads at short range," or, "I think that developing long range loads at short range is ineffective," you would have been on solid ground. As it is, you do not compete at long range and, apparently, do not have much experience shooting at long range. It would have been much better to have presented your case as a function of your experience instead of making an absolute, unsupportable statement.
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.