OK I've got another post going (my first load development) and it has me thinking of another thread. What's the goal of a "normal" load development with a new powder/bullet combo for your gun? i.e. what's good enough? if the action cycles reliably (X rds in various weather conditions), no failures to feed/cycle/fire/lock, etc why charge more powder ? Is the goal to duplicate what the factory ammo does launching a shell casing 8' away?

I talked to a guy yesterday that reloads for cowboy action competition and his criteria seem to weigh on the minimal powder and particular bullet type/weight to stay on sight picture faster. That made a lot of sense for a particular gun and topic.

What are some popular schools of thought? What do you guys use as your rule(s) of "good enough" when developing a load? (I've got 4 9mm's same make but different models) I haven't seen this topic yet in my reloading manuals.

This is good stuff folks thanks and keep it coming. I'll try to compile later.

It appears we have a couple categories emerging (from below):

1) Pistol / Rifle
2) Gun Function (e.g. lack of malfunctions, cycles, etc).
3) Gun Performance Results (on target at distance criteria)

Feel free to comment with this in mind.

quote:

What do you guys use as your rule(s) of "good enough"

I guess I'm fortunate that my rifles will make MOA or less, and that's the criteria I use for my hunting rifles. If they can't be made to shoot that or better, they aren't serious contenders for longish ranges (500ish yards) where energy begins to drop off and bullet placement is crucial. I have a M71 (348 Win) and a old Remington rolling block (7X57) that will shoot better than 2MOA, and I think that has more to do with my eyesight than the rifles.

1/2 MOA is not an unreasonable expectation for a varmint rig. A good sized yote provides a 10" target tops, and a varmint rifle that can't shoot MOA or better won't reliably connect past 350 yards, so that's my criteria. My .22-250 will pile 10 shots into a nickel sized group if I do my part.

Where handguns are concerned, I'm all over the map. With fixed sights, I load so as to regulate the point of aim to 25 yards. My hunting handguns are loaded to top velocities with either JHPs, or Keith type semi-wad cutter bullets. I want JHPs to expand, and I want the lead bullets to cut a hole clean thru the critter.

That's my 2 bits worth...

I pretty much go for .75-1MOA in a velocity range I like. Years ago when I had fewer rifles I would spend hours and $$$ trying to turn a .8 into a .75.

As a young man in Colorado I hunted with a sporterized Carcano Carbine with open sights. That's open sights with a really short barrel. I think I measured a 100 yd. group only ounce; about 3".Not really "on the nose" but seemed to work OK. Never remember hearing the term MOA at the time.
Used 140 to 160 grain .264" dia. bullets and did quite well in the mule deer department.
I guess it depends only on what you think you need or want to get your job done. That's MHO. roger

Not too many years ago, when the sporting mags would give actual evaluations of new products, if a rifle could keep it's shots inside of 2.5", it was deemed a deer/elk killing machine.
With modern manufacturing technology, 1-1.5" groups are pretty easy to achieve right out of the box with a bolt rifle.
And too, good enough would depend on the application. At 300 yards and under, a deer or elk make a pretty big target. I don't shoot at
BG much beyond 300 yards; I prefer to get closer.
So if more time was spent practicing field position shooting (and dry firing) and less time angsting over 1" versus 1.25" groups, I think we would find good enough is quite often good enough.

quote:

Originally posted by mrgouda:
OK I've got another post going (my first load development) and it has me thinking of another thread. What's the goal of a "normal" load development with a new powder/bullet combo for your gun? i.e. what's good enough? if the action cycles reliably (X rds in various weather conditions), no failures to feed/cycle/fire/lock, etc why charge more powder ? Is the goal to duplicate what the factory ammo does launching a shell casing 8' away?

I talked to a guy yesterday that reloads for cowboy action competition and his criteria seem to weigh on the minimal powder and particular bullet type/weight to stay on sight picture faster. That made a lot of sense for a particular gun and topic.

What are some popular schools of thought? What do you guys use as your rule(s) of "good enough" when developing a load? (I've got 4 9mm's same make but different models) I haven't seen this topic yet in my reloading manuals.

This stuff needs to be defined between handgun loading and rifles. They can be very different.

In the end only you can define what will meet your requirements for a specific loads.

For handgun I want something very cheap that goes bang everytime and is reasonably accurate for the type of shooting intended.

My rifle requirements are often very different since a scope permits much greater precision.

What is the "kill zone" size of your "target"?
What is the furthest distance that you will be shooting at that "target"?

As a rule of thumb, groups that are 1/2 the size of the kill zone at the furthest distance are acceptable (I'm trying to cover everything from PD's to elk with this thumb ) IOW if you're shooting deer (6" KZ) at 100yd max, than a 3 MOA group is good enough, but if you're shooting the same deer at 600yd, than a .5 MOA group is acceptable.

I try for 1" but most often quit at 1 1/2 to 2"

good nuff is defined by the gun.
if they are a semi-auto they have to function 100% period.
then accuracy is worked on a little from there.
ditto leverguns they are of no use if i have to use them as a single shot.
hunting rifles are the same way,they must function 100% of the time.
bet there ain't anything worse feeling than making a "good" shot on a deer only to watch it get up and start running away while you fiddle and faddle around with the bolt/lever/slide/magazine. [part of this could be gun prep too]
and even worse when the deer can shoot back.
#2 is accuracy, and is trumped by #1.

It all depends what you start with. Factory? Custom? Non DG up to mid magnum rifles?

For non DG custom rifles or modified/accurized factory rifles 1/2" with std cartridges and 1" for mid magnums is a good bench mark to strive for.

For factory rifles I think it's be reasonable to either cut the groups by half and/or get them to 1- 1/1/2"

1 MOA 5 shot groups for bolt guns & less than 3 MOA for the L1A1.
That's consistent groups, rather than the occasional one-off.
If I have the inclination, then doing things like getting 130 & 150gr bullets to shoot close to the same MPBR out of the 270 is interesting.

Depends on the gun.

Bullseye pistol; chambers, fires, cycles 100%, groups well (shots are on call, rested pistol holds 10 ring).

Rifle; meets or excedes factory ammo performance. For example my RRA NMA2 and M262 is under 1 moa.

This is good stuff folks. thanks and keep it coming. I'll try to compile later.

It appears we have a couple categories emerging:

1) Pistol / Rifle
2) Gun Function (e.g. lack of malfunctions, cycles, etc).
3) Gun Performance Results (on target at distance criteria)

Feel free to comment with this in mind. I'll post here and attach up top on the thread.

I have little use for a gun that won't shoot. That said, I like to get MOA out of my rifles. All of them. AR's, and bolts.

When I luck out and get a .75-.5" well, I'm pretty happy.

I will rarely settle for 1.5"