It's been my understanding that the so called 'accuracy load' is nothing more than the one that consistently had the closest velocity variation and the smallest standard deviation.

It has been my experience that loads with the closest velocity are rarely the most accurate. It doesn't sound logical but that's the way it is..

The fact remains; every rifle IS uniquely different and shoots the way it shoots. One cannot predict with any certainty how any given rifle will handle any given load until the rifle is actually shot at the range, regardless of what a loading manual happens to say..
Until the rifle is thoroughly rung out at the range, you just don't know.

As far as I'm concerned, they're only applicable to the test rifle in the test lab. The real world is not the test rifle or lab.
Not that I haven't tried the accuarcy loads, I have many times. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't. It's kinda like the old "your mileage may vary according to the driver and/or driving conditions".

It's not a bad place to start. My 7-30 waters contender is super happy with sierra's recomended load. My 308 bar is very happy with noslers 150 load. My 308 blr is very happy with the same load. Who can argue with EVERYONES 30-06 165 GRAIN LOAD which is 57-58 of I4350? Who can argue with 300 win mag and the re22 load of 75 grains for 180 grainers.
My 45-70 loves both sierra's full power load and it's trapdoor accuracy load. My 300 wby loves noslers accuracy load for 180's.

IS IT GUARANTEED....NOPE

iS IT A GREAT PLACE TO START....FOR ME IT IS!!

I often wonderered how they came about determining an "accuracy load" Since most of the load manuals use universal receivers and probably the same 24" for every chambering of a given caliber. The 24" barrel is what bothers me. Why does every single one have to use a 24" barrel? There are many chamberings that a 24" barrel isn't offered by ANY manufacturer, yet they still use one.

I am with Kraky. I find that acc loads are a great place to start. Pay attention to their OAL info too. Kudude

Accuracy loads in your rifle are not of concern to me. We might find that performance loads are good to go for most guns.....accuracy is not IMO

When someone posts asking for accuracy loads I really think they are missing the boat.....We all must find them by testing.

Never paid much attention to them, usually don't have that powder/bullet/primer/case on my bench. But for what it's worth, lots of people shoot 55 grains of 4350 and 165 grain bullets in the 30-06, enough of them that there must be something to the idea of a good load will shoot well in many rifles.

Here's a question for ya, How do the ammo makers get their ammo to shoot well across a broad section of rifles? Many of us may not think a lot of a 2" load, but when it does 2" in almost any rifle it is shot in, that is better than good performance.

The most importaint info given with the "accuracy" loads is the velocity.
It's just a ballpark as your hunting rifle probably has a different twist than the test barrel.

Primarily, I'm looking for bullet/powder combinations.

I'm pretty convinced that some powders will do better in some calibers.

Then I look at test rifle barrel length, as it seems to me that a slower burning powder might do better in a longer barrel.

I'm also interested in the pressure/velocity relationship. Am I right in thinking that a lower pressure/higher velocity relationship might be preferred?

In theory, I'm a fan of the Audette method that you advocate.

But the 200 yard range at our club is hard to access. When I can get access, I intend to give it a try.

In the meantime, I've been trying different powder weights on the 100 yard range.

Overall, I believe that most of the outfits that publish the manuals, especially the bullet manufacturers, have a vested interest in publishing accurate information, as that will get the best out of their bullets.

The accuracy loads, then, are probably a good place to start.

flaco

quote:

Originally posted by flaco:
...Am I right in thinking that a lower pressure/higher velocity relationship might be preferred?..

Hey Flaco, That is what I'm normally looking for when I'm getting started with a new cartridge.

I usually flip open the Hodgdon Manual and see what has the highest Velocity at the Lowest Pressure. If there is another Powder that is within 50-100fps, but at a significantly lower Pressure, then I might start with it, or Test both Powders.

Also look in a couple of other Manuals to see what they list as the Powder producing the Highest velocity and take their recommendations into consideration too.

As I do the Testing, I'm more concerned about watching for Pressure Indicators than the velocity on a chronograph. Reason being that they can be very mis-leading.

Here is a Link to Chronographs & Pressure which was written by a guy who frequents this Board. His Testing and Research says it much better than I can.

Don't the manuals have the disclaimer that the accuracy load was the results in THEIR rifle and your findings may be different? I look at them as an aid in a starting powder selection if I have that particular type on hand.

.

I use the manuals for starting point. I will look and compare different manuals and usually start with their suggested load and as I work my way up and don't find the accuracy, FPS, Ft.Pounds, etc, I will continue with the next load