When starting off to find a load I use the normal method of loading three with the start load and then three each of increasing powder weights. The seating depth stays the same until I fiddle with the most accurate of the original loads.
A friend loads three cartidges each at various seating depths with a relatively low load and then fiddles with the most accurate seating depth.
Is his system better and quicker to find the ideal load? I.e, is seating depth a bigger determinate than powder charge?

quote:

Originally posted by Karoo:
When starting off to find a load I use the normal method of loading three with the start load and then three each of increasing powder weights. The seating depth stays the same until I fiddle with the most accurate of the original loads.
A friend loads three cartidges each at various seating depths with a relatively low load and then fiddles with the most accurate seating depth.
Is his system better and quicker to find the ideal load? I.e, is seating depth a bigger determinate than powder charge?

I would say no, adding another variable makes it more complicated. Finding a powder & charge that gives good accuracy w/ your bullet first & tweek w/ OAL after.

The OAL variable is very much a finesse adjustment. First pick the bullet you want to use, the best powder, charge weight and then play with the OAL. Work with one variable at a time.

Adjusting OAL will spike pressure if seating into the lands ,so remember to BACK OFF the charge and work up !.

Here is some excellent information regarding accuracy loading .

http://www.hevanet.com/temple/MatchPrep.html

If anyone has questions I rely on Woods and consider him TOP NOTCH !.

Hey Doc, kind words indeed!

We just recently had some discussion about this here and previously here.

IMO, if you run across a specific seating depth that gives the best accuracy at a specific charge weight, that seating depth may not turn out to be the best seating depth if you change the charge at all. In fact it may turn out to be the worst. But all rifles are different and you may have better results.

Quite frankly I think seating depth preciseness as a mandatory component of accuracy is over rated.

quote:

Is his system better and quicker to find the ideal load? I.e, is seating depth a bigger determinate than powder charge?

Ask him. I do it your way.

Another variable to consider besides bullets distance off the lands and powder charge and Accuracy is the Y.O.T. coefficient

Thanks for the info.

quote:

Quite frankly I think seating depth preciseness as a mandatory component of accuracy is over rated.

Very true. Custom dies, quality bullets, great barrels will make many different powder charges, seating depths shoot well.

Woods has it right.

It doesn't really matter which you do first. All of these variables are dependent on each other for accuracy. If you find the powder charge that give the best accuracy, and then start screwing with seating depth, you will quite likely no longer have the "best" powder charge. If you then tweak the powder charge again after adjusting seating depth, then you may have change the properties/velocity that allowed your seating depth to be so accurate. In this way you will continue to be chasing your tail when "tweaking" a load.

For hunting rifles, I simply pick one or two premium quality hunting bullets I want to use and then load 5 or 6 rounds each a few thousandths off the lands starting at the minimum load and going up in even increments until the max charge is loaded in the 5th or 6th charge. These 5 or 6 rounds are then shot over a chronograph and then using MS Excel, a linear equation is used to map the relationship between powder charge and velocity. If the R correlation coefficient is high, then you are good to go. I then simply choose the velocity I want and calculate the needed powder charge to achieve said velocity for MY rifle. After this is done, then I will make only very small tweaks to seating depth to adjust accuracy while watching velocity/pressure.

I think most shooters waste a lot of time and powder by doing "load development" without knowing how to determine if one group is actually statistically more accurate than another. A lot of shooters even use 3 shot groups for load development which is a kind of mental masturbation.

The bottom line is you should pick a method of load development which fits your needs/philosophy. For me, when shooting very expensive Barnes TTSX bullets, I don't want to shoot hundreds of expensive bullets finding a load. Oh, and did I forget to mention that if you've shot hundred of rounds, you are eroding your throat and changing your effective seating depth so the "best load" may not be so good after a few hundred rounds. Everything is dependent on other variables.

Wes

quote:

Originally posted by Karoo:
...I use ...three with the start load and then three each of increasing powder weights. ...
A friend loads three cartidges each at various seating depths with a relatively low load and then fiddles with the most accurate seating depth.
Is his system better and quicker to find the ideal load? ...

First off, you and your friend should use which ever Method each of you likes the best. As for me, I prefer to use the never improved upon Creighton Audette Load Development Method. You will find this Method provides the quickest way to locate the Harmonic Nodes rather than firing 3-shots at each level. The only real problem with firing 3-shots at each level is the environmental conditions continue to change which can affect how the grouping is going. The more shots, the more time it takes, and that results in more changes - primarily the wind.

quote:

I.e, is seating depth a bigger determinate than powder charge?

I think of it as Fine Tuning the Final Load. The easiest and most accurate way I've found to adjust the Seating Depth is by converting OCL to ODL. That allows precise Seating without the need to totally waste $$$money$$$ on Thingys.

But, you should do what gives you the most confidence in your Final Load, regardless of what Method you use.

Best of luck to you and your buddy.

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:

quote:

Originally posted by Karoo:
...I use ...three with the start load and then three each of increasing powder weights. ...
A friend loads three cartidges each at various seating depths with a relatively low load and then fiddles with the most accurate seating depth.
Is his system better and quicker to find the ideal load? ...

First off, you and your friend should use which ever Method each of you likes the best. As for me, I prefer to use the never improved upon Creighton Audette Load Development Method. You will find this Method provides the quickest way to locate the Harmonic Nodes rather than firing 3-shots at each level. The only real problem with firing 3-shots at each level is the environmental conditions continue to change which can affect how the grouping is going. The more shots, the more time it takes, and that results in more changes - primarily the wind.

quote:

I.e, is seating depth a bigger determinate than powder charge?

I think of it as Fine Tuning the Final Load. The easiest and most accurate way I've found to adjust the Seating Depth is by converting OCL to ODL. That allows precise Seating without the need to totally waste $$$money$$$ on Thingys.

But, you should do what gives you the most confidence in your Final Load, regardless of what Method you use.

Best of luck to you and your buddy.

Pitiful and dangerous crap!!

quote:

Originally posted by TEANCUM:
Pitiful and dangerous ...

Ahhhh yes, "my hero" has added his insightful and guru knowledge to the thread.

Do regal us all with what is "pitiful and dangerous" in the post and what you know to be better. Of course, if you remain silent, that will speak loudly for your expertise.
-----

I'd strongly encourage everyone to "NOT" hold your breath while awaiting brilliant and instructive reloading wisdom from "my hero" teenScum.

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
[QUOTE] Of course, if you remain silent, that will speak loudly for your expertise.
-----

.

Hey there Hotsh$t how're they hanging??? Wait a second.......... Someone accused you of not have any. How impolite.

Keeping silent is your forte. Waiting to hear from you on your Elk hunting, wait another second...................You don't elk hunt or harvest any elk, do you??? Just pontificate. My my my what a shame. Pitiful and dangerous.

Respectfully,

quote:

Originally posted by WESR:

For hunting rifles, I simply pick one or two premium quality hunting bullets I want to use and then load 5 or 6 rounds each a few thousandths off the lands starting at the minimum load and going up in even increments until the max charge is loaded in the 5th or 6th charge. These 5 or 6 rounds are then shot over a chronograph and then using MS Excel, a linear equation is used to map the relationship between powder charge and velocity. If the R correlation coefficient is high, then you are good to go. I then simply choose the velocity I want and calculate the needed powder charge to achieve said velocity for MY rifle. After this is done, then I will make only very small tweaks to seating depth to adjust accuracy while watching velocity/pressure.

Wes

Wes,

Can you please explain this to me?

What is the R coefficient?

woods has also stated that he shoots over the chrono, picks a velocity he wants, loads it and tweaks seating depth to accuracy. I have no understanding how this works.

What if the velocity you want isn't the velocity your gun wants for accuracy?

Just because you want a certain velocity doesn't mean it will be in an accurate harmonic node for your rifle's barrel. That's what the Audette method finds. It finds what your barrel likes for accuracy in terms of charge/velocity.

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:

quote:

Originally posted by WESR:

For hunting rifles, I simply pick one or two premium quality hunting bullets I want to use and then load 5 or 6 rounds each a few thousandths off the lands starting at the minimum load and going up in even increments until the max charge is loaded in the 5th or 6th charge. These 5 or 6 rounds are then shot over a chronograph and then using MS Excel, a linear equation is used to map the relationship between powder charge and velocity. If the R correlation coefficient is high, then you are good to go. I then simply choose the velocity I want and calculate the needed powder charge to achieve said velocity for MY rifle. After this is done, then I will make only very small tweaks to seating depth to adjust accuracy while watching velocity/pressure.

Wes

Wes,

Can you please explain this to me?

What is the R coefficient?

woods has also stated that he shoots over the chrono, picks a velocity he wants, loads it and tweaks seating depth to accuracy. I have no understanding how this works.

What if the velocity you want isn't the velocity your gun wants for accuracy?

Just because you want a certain velocity doesn't mean it will be in an accurate harmonic node for your rifle's barrel. That's what the Audette method finds. It finds what your barrel likes for accuracy in terms of charge/velocity.

An R^2 is a regression curves which denotes how well data fit together. The better the fit the higher the R^2. They range from 0 to 1.0 with 1 being an absolute perfect fi.

Regresssion curves can take on different shapes but the most commonly seen are a straight line (simple linear regression), exponential or quadratic curves. You can get into more complicated equations also like sigmoidal curves, etc.

Basically, the data denotes what the regression curve might look like and the R^2 tells you how well the data fit together.

That'll be $0.02 for the statistics lesson today!!!

quote:

An R^2 is a regression curves which denotes how well data fit together. The better the fit the higher the R^2. They range from 0 to 1.0 with 1 being an absolute perfect fi.

Regresssion curves can take on different shapes but the most commonly seen are a straight line (simple linear regression), exponential or quadratic curves. You can get into more complicated equations also like sigmoidal curves, etc.

Basically, the data denotes what the regression curve might look like and the R^2 tells you how well the data fit together.

That'll be $0.02 for the statistics lesson today!!!

Great, I guess....


Now tell me how this relates to picking an accurate load from simply looking at chronograph data, please

quote:

Originally posted by WESR:
I think most shooters waste a lot of time and powder by doing "load development" without knowing how to determine if one group is actually statistically more accurate than another. A lot of shooters even use 3 shot groups for load development which is a kind of mental masturbation.

wes

I'd also like to know how groups are determined to be statistically more accurate than another?

Low deviation in velocity?

I just shot an Audette's ladder at 300 yards with my 7mm RUM. I had 3 consecutive shots chrono at 3226 fps at 102.2gr, 3235 at 102.4 gr.,and 3234 fps at 102.8 gr. respectively. Does this signal an accurate range of charges?

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:
I'd also like to know how groups are determined to be statistically more accurate than another?

Since we're getting technical now, you don't want an accurate rifle, you want a precise rifle. You can have an accurate rifle that isn't precise and a precise rifle that isn't accurate. If you find precision, you can adjust the accuracy by adjusting your scope!

See this simple little link.

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:
Now tell me how this relates to picking an accurate load from simply looking at chronograph data, please

Personally, I don't think an R^2 of chronograph data is going to tell you anything about a "PRECISE" load. It will tell you that if you increase/decrease your powder level X amount you can expect your velocity to increase/decrease by Y amount within a certain confidence interval.

Let's try this again.
What we are trying to do in handloading is develop a "precise" load.

graybird and WESR, how does your statistics lesson help me to do that?

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:

quote:

Originally posted by WESR:

For hunting rifles, I simply pick one or two premium quality hunting bullets I want to use and then load 5 or 6 rounds each a few thousandths off the lands starting at the minimum load and going up in even increments until the max charge is loaded in the 5th or 6th charge. These 5 or 6 rounds are then shot over a chronograph and then using MS Excel, a linear equation is used to map the relationship between powder charge and velocity. If the R correlation coefficient is high, then you are good to go. I then simply choose the velocity I want and calculate the needed powder charge to achieve said velocity for MY rifle. After this is done, then I will make only very small tweaks to seating depth to adjust accuracy while watching velocity/pressure.

Wes

Wes,

Can you please explain this to me?

What is the R coefficient?

woods has also stated that he shoots over the chrono, picks a velocity he wants, loads it and tweaks seating depth to accuracy. I have no understanding how this works.

What if the velocity you want isn't the velocity your gun wants for accuracy?

Just because you want a certain velocity doesn't mean it will be in an accurate harmonic node for your rifle's barrel. That's what the Audette method finds. It finds what your barrel likes for accuracy in terms of charge/velocity.

R,

Read the last paragraph in my previous post. I don't think it adds anything.

I was mearly answering your question ... What is the R coefficient?

I misread his post. I meant "R correlation"

What relationship is he looking for between charge and velocity that makes you good to go?

What is an R correlation?

When working up a load for a specific rifle or type of hunting I start off using the max lenght of my magazine. This gives me a functioning round form the start. Then I work up the powder to either the velocity I want or can get within reason, looking for the best groups. If for instance I am working with a .243 and a 95gr bullet, I know I should be able to get around 3000fps give or take some change. IF I only get 2950 but hit a group which touches the bullets I am not worried about the extra fps, I missed out on. However if I hit 3000fps and still don't see accuracy within a close enough range I change powders and go again.

Worrying about how many rounds are put down range is worthless to me. I like to shoot anyway. Once the load is found I very rarely shoot over three or four boxes a year through that particular rifle anyway. But I know the next time out I have a good load for what I am looking to shoot. I have enough other stuff to keep me busy loading and shooting through out the year.

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:

woods has also stated that he shoots over the chrono, picks a velocity he wants, loads it and tweaks seating depth to accuracy. I have no understanding how this works.

What if the velocity you want isn't the velocity your gun wants for accuracy?

Just because you want a certain velocity doesn't mean it will be in an accurate harmonic node for your rifle's barrel. That's what the Audette method finds. It finds what your barrel likes for accuracy in terms of charge/velocity.

What Mike just said

quote:

Then I work up the powder to either the velocity I want or can get within reason, looking for the best groups. If for instance I am working with a .243 and a 95gr bullet, I know I should be able to get around 3000fps give or take some change. IF I only get 2950 but hit a group which touches the bullets I am not worried about the extra fps, I missed out on. However if I hit 3000fps and still don't see accuracy within a close enough range I change powders and go again.

I recognize what velocity is acceptable when working the load up. For instance if I am loading for my 280AI with 160 gr bullets and hit an accurate load with the velocity at 2850 fps or 2930 fps, I ain't gonna stop there. If I hit another accurate load at 3025 fps then I am at a velocity that I want. If it happens at 3000 fps then that is OK also.

I guess it is a range of velocity but I am not going to shoot a 300 win mag at 30-06 velocities or 6.5 rem mag at 260 rem velocities. I often keep going until I know I am approaching max and then look for the best groups closest to the loads approaching max. And like Mike, if I don't have good accuracy at the upper end with a velocity I want, then I will change something like the bullet or powder.

You wouldn't want to shoot a load in your 7 RUM that was comparable to what others are shooting in their 7 mags would you? Be better off to just buy a 7 mag. IOW you choose a caliber for a certain amount of performance and should seek a load to deliver it.

Good.

But what you look for first is accuracy at the velocity you expect from the cartridge.

I can't see saying "I want 3200 fps with a 160 in thr RUM so I'll load to that velocity then worry about tuning with seating depth"

You need to find the accuracy and velocity simultaneously with Audette's daughter. Your rifle will tell you where it will be accurate and at what velocity (s)

woods,

By the way, with all this talk of velocity and I guess looking for where velocity on an Audette's ladder climbs and levels out, I just now had success with the Accubond in the RUM.......See my above post for data given.

I went to 102.5 grains and the 1/2 grain made all the difference!


3/4 inch 4-shot group. I'm happy and can sleep now.

Congratulations rc, sleep well

Then get up next week and go shoot it again and see if you get the same result. Then shoot all those at that load that you have eventually (may take a year or so), load up some more at the exact same and see if it does the same thing again. Then wait one week after that and shoot the same load and see if it is still as accurate.

IMO, only time will tell about a load after multiple separate shootings. Especially loads with very little difference from one that doesn't do as well.

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to be a wet blanket and the load you found is the best possibility at this time for the best load in your rifle.

And I'm not saying I wouldn't give Audette's daughter a whirl (if times were hard), just don't think she is quite the knockout you think she is.

woods,

I can't disagree with anything you've said.

It seems to be that way these days since I have more experience!

Back to the topic .....

What purpose are you developing the load for? Hunting deer etc., varmint or target?

For field loads, I stick to a seating depth that clears the lands by 0.030" and for Barnes TSX it is 0.050". This ensures smooth feeding and reliability of the ammo in field conditions when you might grab and load etc. In the field, you do not want you ammo to be an exact fit in the magazine or chamber as it could jam in the rifle or the bullet could be pulled out & dump the magazine & action with powder etc.

I have followed John Barsness' suggestions (as above) and have not had a problem.

Other priorities are as follows - step by step.

First, make sure all cases are fresh and uniform as recommended. Then select the bullet you ant to hunt with. Then try powders / charges for precision / accuracy and velocity. If you do not get good groups, then change case brand.

As already mentioned by another member - do not change more than one variable at a time.

In the last 10 years I have achieved 1" groups for hunting rifles within 5 loads. Then I fine tune with a few more loads before settling on THE load.

rcamuglia,
Sorry for the tardy response. I have been "off the net" for the past several days. The r coefficient (actually r squared)is basically used in this case to determine how well the points on a linear regression are to a trend line. As I said, velocity and powder charge are linearly correlated. Please see the below links for detailed explanations:
Linear regression
Correlation coefficient

Your observations about velocity are valid. I use seating depth to make fine adjustments to velocity/accuracy. If a rifle won't give acceptable results using this method, than it is not accurate enough to be useful to me to begin with. This method works for me and saves a lot of money using very expensive bullets. PM me if you have any further questions.

Wes

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:

quote:

Originally posted by WESR:

For hunting rifles, I simply pick one or two premium quality hunting bullets I want to use and then load 5 or 6 rounds each a few thousandths off the lands starting at the minimum load and going up in even increments until the max charge is loaded in the 5th or 6th charge. These 5 or 6 rounds are then shot over a chronograph and then using MS Excel, a linear equation is used to map the relationship between powder charge and velocity. If the R correlation coefficient is high, then you are good to go. I then simply choose the velocity I want and calculate the needed powder charge to achieve said velocity for MY rifle. After this is done, then I will make only very small tweaks to seating depth to adjust accuracy while watching velocity/pressure.

Wes

Wes,

Can you please explain this to me?

What is the R coefficient?

woods has also stated that he shoots over the chrono, picks a velocity he wants, loads it and tweaks seating depth to accuracy. I have no understanding how this works.

What if the velocity you want isn't the velocity your gun wants for accuracy?

Just because you want a certain velocity doesn't mean it will be in an accurate harmonic node for your rifle's barrel. That's what the Audette method finds. It finds what your barrel likes for accuracy in terms of charge/velocity.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by WESR:
rcamuglia,
Sorry for the tardy response. I have been "off the net" for the past several days. The r coefficient (actually r squared)is basically used in this case to determine how well the points on a linear regression are to a trend line. As I said, velocity and powder charge are linearly correlated. Please see the below links for detailed explanations:
Linear regression
Correlation coefficient

Your observations about velocity are valid. I use seating depth to make fine adjustments to velocity/accuracy. If a rifle won't give acceptable results using this method, than it is not accurate enough to be useful to me to begin with. This method works for me and saves a lot of money using very expensive bullets. PM me if you have any further questions.

Wes

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rcamuglia:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by WESR:




Thanks for getting back to me Wes.

I've been to the links and they're a tad obtuse for me. What I need to know is how you use the velocity data from your chronograph with statistics to pick the optimal accurate load for your rifle.


I use the Audette method to try to determine the accuracy nodes. Sometimes the results are as plain as day; the nodes are obvious and simple to identify by clusters of consecutively fired shots. At least 3 is what I have found to be right. If your barrel is quality, you'll have more shots cluster. I've had 5 cluster at 500 yards in 2.5". When this happens, I don't pay any attention to velocity except to note if it was acceptable for the bullet weight/caliber because I've found accuracy.

Sometimes the results are tough to read and take a little more trial and error with loadings from the identified node and charge weight range. This is the instance with my 7mm RUM.

Let me tell you what happened.

I had 5 consecutive shots (at increasing charge weights of .3 grains. Remember this is an Audette's ladder).

Shots 1, 2, 4, 5 impacted on the same horizontal plane. Shot 3 was way high. When reading the tea leaves, I took a chance that this was an accuracy node and loaded the charge weight in #3 (center of the range) went to 100 yards and shot a group. It sucked.

I tried another possible node (last two shots of the ladder impacted within an inch at 300) but it didn't work either.

This is the point at which I began to look back at the velocities I recorded while shooting the ladder. Yes, it was generally a linear regression. Not perfect though as I have noted always when working up. The velocity increases with additions of powder but sometimes it levels off before it jumps back up. The graph would kinda look like a staircase from the side view. I noted that the velocity for shots 1,2,3 showed steady increases. Shots 4 and 5 showed a leveling of velocity; basically identical. I took a chance and loaded between these two charge weights and shot a group at 100 yards that measured .7" in a lot of wind.



Was the leveling velocity "telling" me something?

I guess I'm a real dumbass! I've been reloading for 40+ years and I don't even understand the bullshit that some of the posters are "displaying" to show how smart they are.

There is already enough knowledge available to determine what your velocity window is gonna be before you load the first cartridge. Then you select a beginning point and make gross adjustments to the powder charge until you have reached max or the percentage of max that you want to motor you rifle at. You take the best groups from this series and make fine adjustments around them until you find a group that satisfies your needs or goals. The ladder test does work but isn't always necessary. Then, if you've got a lot of time on your hands, you can jim around with the bullet jump. But, more than likely, you're not gonna gain much that way.
Ain't rocket science and it really isn't that complicated unless you make it so. If you let a computer tell you what is most accurate, you probably print out a trajectory chart and tape it to your stock.

I load just like you wasbeeman.

I've found that the long range Audette ladder finds the accuracy nodes generally quicker than shooting 5 shot groups of cases loaded at "x" grain increments though.

I've heard talk of accuracy as it relates to what velocity is doing as you work up and I was hoping Wes could enlighten me.