So, when working up a new load or testing new components, do you shoot 3, 5 or XX shots for each varying load?

I realize some are going to say I use the ladder method, but once you have found your nodes, when confirming your harmonic node, how many shots do you work up?

Question:
How many shots do you work up for a particular load when working on development?

If you use another number, please add a brief description.

Choices:
3 shots
5 shots
some other number

 

For developing loads, all I need is a 3 shot group. That will tell me if the load is good or bad.
If I happen to pull one of the shots, I shoot a 4th shot.
I really can't justify shooting 5 shots to prove out a load.
I know that 5 shot groups will always be larger than 3 shot groups by a factor of 1.33. So, if I want to know what a 5 shot group would be with data froma 3 shot group, I can multiply by 1.33 and get the answer.
I shoot well enough to know that my 3 shots are good ones. Shooting 2 more is a waste of good components for me.

Don

Five for a couple reasons

Gives a better example of the loads accuracy potential and gives more data points for more accurate chrony averages

5 is a easily divisible number for use with components sold by the 100, you do load workup is 3's and it's not long till you have dozens of bullet and primer boxes with 4, 2 or 7 ect pcs left

I voted other - I use 2 shot groups for 5 step ladders when conparing several powders. Then switch to 5 shot groups to tune accuracy of the selected powder.

I used to use 5-shot groups but switched to 3-shot as it used less resources, less time, and was adequate for the purpose.

I always shoot 5 shot groups so I will have a good idea of extreme spread as well as accuracy. On the final work up it is 10 rounds----that way when I buy the components for the life of the barrel I am not making a mistake.

It depends in part on what kind of gun you are building loads for.

First, I shoot three shot groups with initial loads. A good three shot group can go sour with a couple of more shots, so it is not conclusive, but a poor three-shotter won't improve with a couple more shots, so you can essentially rule out loads which do poorly in the initial three shot test.

If the load is promising, AND it is for a gun used for high volume shooting like a varminter, I shoot a five shot group to "prove" the load. This sometimes results in rejecting a load which initially looked good, but not all that often. It is important that a varminter load is accurate both before and after the barrel is hot.

If the load is for a HUNTING rifle, I am much more concerned about it shooting good THREE shot groups consistently multiple times than about it shooting a good five shot group once. Therefore, I shoot only three shot groups with hunting rifles, but like to do so to prove a load by shooting two or three such groups, preferably on two or three different days. For example, I have a .300 H&H with which I've never shot more than a three-shot group. But it has never printed a three shot group that is larger than .75", so I'm giddy about its aggregate. Whether the fourth or fifth shot from a rapidly warming barrel would create flyers is irrelavent -- with a hunting rifle it is the first, second, or rarely third shot that needs to be accurate. Subsequent shots are certain to be Hail Mary's or finishers which do not require gilt-edged accuracy.

What Stonecreek said.

LWD

since ALL 5 shot groups include 3 shot groups, then its 100% use 3 shots ..
(bad humor)

i USED to do 5 shot groups .. until i really reviewed my data .. i am not a bench shooter, so sometimes 5 shots don't matter to me.

when going to the range, and the bullets cost north of a buck or 2 each, 3 shot groups give you a reasonable baseline for vels and pressures .. since i tend to work from 90 to 100 grains of powder, or 75-85, in a single session, and record all of the shots, then publish the average, 5 shots didn't do anything meaningful for me, other than cost another 20-30 bucks a range session.

but that's ONLY vel and pressure testing ..

as for judging guns, 3 shots will tell me if the load had promise ...

I'll second what Stonecreek said and add that it also depends on how well I know the particular rifle. If I know that the rifle is consistently accurate with a variety of components, it takes much fewer shots to prove a load good or bad. If the rifle is a bit more finicky, I might be inclined to shoot several 5 or 10 shot strings before I feel that the load has proven itself to be good.

I still use "1-shot at each level" when beginning any Load Development using the old, never-fail, always reliable Creighton Audette Load Development Method. Once I know where the best Harmonic Node is located, I often verify it with 9-18 cumulative 1-shot verification groups on the same Target from a pristine clean lightly lubed and then wiped dry Bore.

I do the first single shots because it finds the best Harmonic Node the fastest possible way. Using more shots causes the Range Conditions(primarily "wind") to change more than when the single shots are used.

And the cumulative single verification shots tells me the most important things about my Load - if the Load is Accurate and Consistent from a pristine clean barrel.

Best of luck with which ever way you all may use.

Years ago I thought only 5 shot groups counted but now I only shoot three shot groups. My concern is that the group will be similar in size and shape on several trips to the range in various weather conditions. Example---I set up a load for a 25-06 ackley a few years ago with 100gr balistic tips. Over several weekends of shooting three shot groups, I noticed that the groups seemed to drift left, right or high from week to week. I switched to a 100gr Sierra Pro Hunter and the point of impact stayed the same from week to week and the group size varied only slightly depending on weather conditions.

4 shots

I like to be different

3 shots on my big game rifles more on my varmint guns.

I voted 3 because I assumed we are talking about hunting rifles. I do, however, shoot several groups to make sure that it's not just a fluke when I get a sub MOA group.

For my varmint/target rifles I use 5 shots because I shoot longer strings when I am doing hunts/shoots.

If you are trying to determine the precision of one group as compared to another, the more shots the better. In my opinion, 3 shot groups are completely useless for comparing accuracy between groups. I think 5 shots is a minimum for meaningful comparison, and even then, one is often hard pressed to say with certainty that one group is statistically larger/smaller than another.

Chance plays an huge role in the size of 3 shot groups.

Wes

I use three shot groups to save on components and I think it is enough to find out if the load is accurate. I also use a 4th shot If I know I screwed one up.

Once the load is developed, I try to shoot 5 shot groups because that tells me more, how accurate I am.

I think that 3-shot groups are o.k. for a hunting rifle, but 5-shot groups are an absolute must for a target or varmint rifle.

Woods, me and you, guy! Four shots will tell me everything I need to know, and it gives me one more load combination to check out of a "box" of 20 handloads...

I guess I'm with the vast majority here.

Regarding hunting rifles, the first 2 shots are the ones that need to count with the occasional third shot coming into play in the field. This is why I believe a 3 shot group for a hunting rifle is all that is needed.

Regarding varmint rifles, I believe the accuracy is needed once the barrel has been heated up, which is why for load development I choose 5 shots. When sighting in for a varmint rifle, I adjust the scope once the barrel has been warmed a bit.

Well I like 3 X 5 . # 3 groups of # 5 shots each and MULTITUDES OF PRACTICE at nearly ALL RANGES !!!.

Separates serious shooters from weekend wannabees !.

I didn't purchase the components to marvel at the packaging !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

Couldn't have said it better myself, Doc.

If you can't afford to shoot your rifle, why do you have it?? From the post, I assume that you shoot 3 rounds and if they are acceptable, you put old trusty rusty in the closet until hunting season whilst you spend your time in cyberspace talking that talk.

quote:

Originally posted by graybird:
So, when working up a new load or testing new components, do you shoot 3, 5 or XX shots for each varying load?

Getting back to the original question, as stated above.

Three shots.
IMO, 3 or 5 shots, it has little to do with being a serious shooter. Generally, a person who handloads and is out at the range testing loads, is likely to be a serious shooter.

Nor, IMO, does it have much to do with the price of componants, the color of the packaging, weekend wannabee, etc.

It's a matter of being practical. There's a difference in load development, compared to shooting for practice, or just for fun, which comes after the load is selected and the rifle and load is declared ready to go hunting.

Lately, the way I go about it is during the initial stages of load dev, it's three shot groups - sometimes only two shots tell me what I need to know about that load. I'm initially interested in knowing the load to not exceed - the top load. Then after it's narrowed down a bit, I test some more with the two loads nearest the top end - minus one or two grains. I generally follow up on a different day, just to confirm the apparant results. At this stage, naturally what I'm looking for is a good group, consistantly, but just as important, and perhaps more so, is to notice where the first shot hits in relation to the next two or three. (cold clean barrel vs warm barrel) If I'm lucky, and satisfied, then I may test a four or five shot group.

Before all that, IMO, the fourth and fifth shot is a waste of powder. If the first three shots show poor accuracy, I've yet to see the logic where shooting two more will improve the situation. IMO, the only value in the fourth and fifth shot is to confirm consistancy, (or inconsistancy) or to prove the great three shot group wasn't an accident, but that can be done with another three shot group.

Then, after finally deciding on THE load, I'll go back to the range, with a fresh batch of loaded ammo, and a clean barrel, and commence to really sight in the rifle exactly where I want it. Since most likely it's already close from the testing of loads, now it's one shot, click, one more shot, click, then finish up with a group of three to five. Then, I mark it down on my spreadsheet, that this rifle is sighted in with this load, and ready to go hunting. Now, it's time for practicing, fun, or a hunting trip, or load development for some other rifle.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
Couldn't have said it better myself, Doc.

If you can't afford to shoot your rifle, why do you have it?? From the post, I assume that you shoot 3 rounds and if they are acceptable, you put old trusty rusty in the closet until hunting season whilst you spend your time in cyberspace talking that talk.

Naw, I leave that crap for folks like you. But, you're more likely just a paper puncher any way.

I average around 2 trips to the range every week. Some weeks more some weeks less dependent upon work travel and weather.

Trust me, economics has nothing to do with load development. If you were to take a look at my bench you'd find Nosler, Barnes, Swift, NorthFork, Norma, Hornady, Sierra, Woodleigh and Lapua bullets sitting on the shelf along with some cheaper stuff like Midway's Dogtown and Midsouth's Varmint Nightmare bullets. And, I have no problem sending them down range when trying to find a load I like.

The question was asked more out of curiosity of what others do. The questions regarding economics was never raised by me.

Just for shits and giggles maybe one of you five shot guys could tell me what two more shots on each of these groups would objectively (not subjectively) tell me.

Each group was shot off the bench at Pearland Shooters club, 100 yds. Sako Varmint, 260 Rem, 130 gr. accubond, 43 gr. H414, different OAL's, 3 x 9 variable power scope at 9X. Groups were fired in order from shortest oal to longest oal. Barrel was fouled with three shots after cleaning and before the 5 groups pictured were fired. Rifle was allowed to cool for fifteen minutes or so between each group.
Best
GWB











I'm using the 2.900 oal loading. for my go to hunting load.

PS: Don't tell those critters I only used three shot groups for load development! (ha)

quote:

Originally posted by Geedubya:
Just for shits and giggles maybe one of you five shot guys could tell me what two more shots on each of these groups would objectively (not subjectively) tell me.

Geedubya,
I'll gladly take this on. Please don't view this as an attack, but is only an academic exercise.

Your last target picture is the best to illustrate this. It looks to be about a 1/4" group. Since you asked for "objective" analysis, use this as an example. If the 4th shot is a half inch left and the 5th shot is 3/4" to the right, then all of a sudden this single hole turns into 1.25" group. The same exercise could be applied to each group.


On your first picture, the left most shot looks to be about 0.75" away from the center of the other two. If a 4th shot is the same distance below these tight two, then all of a sudden this shot group is between 1.5-2".

If 3 shot groups make you happy, then that is all that really matters. For some purposes 3 shot groups are adequate. For other uses (such as comparing groups) they are completely inadequate and simply a waste of ammunition in my opinion.

The following is undeniable FACT: The fewer shots you fire, the greater impact chance will likely play in the size of your group. It is just simple statistics.

Taken collectively, this is a 15 shot group anyway (which shows an impressively accurate rifle). Collectively, it gives you a much more statistically certain assessment of the rifles accuracy. Any single one of these targets tells very little due to the influence of chance as evidence by the difference in group size between the 1st and 5th target.

If someone really wants to shoot nice groups, just shoot one or two rounds. That will really tighten things up. Of course on the "bad" targets, the second shot was likely just a flier anyway.

Nice coyote and nice accurate rifle BTW.

Wes

WESR,

No problem with any of what you say.

I try to approach most discussions as this with a sense of humor.
Also, in my old age my concentration isn't what it used to be, that taken with low magnification scopes, 4 cups of coffe and a cigar, my groups tend to get a little sloppy sometimes.
Plus, I'm a meat hunter rather than a paper puncher, so anything less than an inch typically works at 100 yds unless its dragonflies.

Here is the first group I shot with this rifle after mounting scope and shooting for zero. Three shots of course! (ha)
Best
GWB

quote:

Originally posted by WESR:
I'll gladly take this on.

The following is undeniable FACT: The fewer shots you fire, the greater impact chance will likely play in the size of your group. It is just simple statistics.

Taken collectively, this is a 15 shot group anyway (which shows an impressively accurate rifle). Collectively, it gives you a much more statistically certain assessment of the rifles accuracy. Any single one of these targets tells very little due to the influence of chance as evidence by the difference in group size between the 1st and 5th target.

Wes

OK, I'm kinda agreeing with you - just discussing.

So, I have a few rifles that are showing over time that they can be considered accurate. It just so happens that these rifles showed promise right off, with various loads.

I'll pick one rifle in mind as I write this. Lately, every time I've shot it at targets, it has done the same thing. Second and third shot within an inch or less from the first shot - cold clean barrel. If I took a composit of the last five sessons at the range with this rifle, the group would be an inch or less, for maybe 20 shots (well - ok 21 shots to be evenly divided by 3 ). Because of this fact, I have a rather high confidence level with that rifle.

I think we are saying the same thing. Am I missing something? In other words, is a composit group of 15 shots, three shot groups - five sessions, statistically as good as five shot groups - three sessions?

BTW GW, I think that's a great demonstration of seating depth testing, which is something I have not done. Mostly my tests have been seating to normal OAL and being done with it. A few times lately, I tested seating out with some long throated rifles (CIP), but found the normal OAL simply shot more accurately after all.

KB

KB,

Typically I find the same thing. Its very seldom that I load the OAL's long. This rifle seem to like that. On all my loads, I use a stoney point modified case and oal gauge. I find most commercial chambers are to long to load near the lands. I typically load .015" to .050 over SAAMI.
Best
GWB

PS: Once you get your load, its fun to either shoot one shot and wait about an hour before you shoot another, or come back on three consecutive days and shoot the same target from the same support at same distance, 1 shot from cold barrel to see point of impact.

I usually fire a couple of shots if they're on then I shoot a five shot group my best with a Leupold 3x9x40 scope with a cpc reticle & bedded Sako L61R in 30-06 using a 165gr nosler solid base bullets,imr 4831 was 7/16 inch at 100 yards from a bench dropped a northern calif columbian blacktail deer.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
If the load is for a HUNTING rifle, I am much more concerned about it shooting good THREE shot groups consistently multiple times than about it shooting a good five shot group once.

I was going to type a response to this effect until I decided to read other replies. So, I agree and this is what I do.

quote:

Originally posted by Doc224/375:
Well some of us Walk and Talk !!!. Paper Punching Yep ,Animal Punching Yep , Guilty !!!.

I also have taken over 15K pictures on #5 continents

Are we all Happy now

Cool. Yes I'm happy. Nice trophys.

I've been on 5 continents too, but mostly I was trying to avoid being hunted, rather than hunting. And I took a lot of pictures, but nowhere even close to 15K.

There's no way I can accumulate as much experience as some of you guys. I'm still working on it. So, between trips, I have fun at the range. All my working rifles are sighted in, so now I'll have to plan a trip.

KB

More than happy doc.

But just for shits and giggles I think I have somewhat north of 35k digital images on one continent. You definitely have me beat in the spending money to take game dept. Those however are some beautiful mounts. I bet you have some fond memories.
All the stuff I shoot is on low fenced ranches where I pay about $1500 per year trespass fee.
Here are a couple more groups and rifles at 100 and 200 yds. I cheated a little as these scope go up to 14 power.

Cooper Model 22, 6.5 x 284




3 @ 100

3 @ 200 My point of aim for this target was the top left hand corner of the intersection of orange. I was shooting the corners. This was one of my first load combinations for this rifle. Once I experiment a little more, it'll probably do better! (ha)

and one more......

Savage 10 FCP, 308 Win


3 @ 100 yds




a couple of 3's at 200 yds.



Best
GWB

Doc,

Nice set of critters. I could add some additional of my own. Matter of fact, I'm headed back over to Africa for my second trip in August. Gotta add to my nyala, blue wildebeest, impala and warthog mounts in my office.

When I mentioned paper puncher in my previous post, I was specifically talking to this knucklehead and his idiotic comments!

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
From the post, I assume that you shoot 3 rounds and if they are acceptable, you put old trusty rusty in the closet until hunting season whilst you spend your time in cyberspace talking that talk.

Here is a post I made a few months ago about my 2009 season. I let the air out of my fair share of critters each year also.

I guess ole trusty rusty does pretty good for a DIY hunter, doesn't he?

Geedubya,

I must agree with KB! Your pictures are certainly a prime example of how seating depth could affect the accuracy of a particular load.

Thanks for sharing the pictures of both targets and critters!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Kevin Rohrer:
I used to use 5-shot groups but switched to 3-shot as it used less resources, less time, and was adequate for the purpose.

Plus you shoot smaller groups that way!!

quote:

Originally posted by Demonical:
Plus you shoot smaller groups that way!!

I've always wondered about those 4th and 5th shots being so much more effective on actual game, in actual field conditions, but that is actually lacking in my realm of experience. Thus it's great to read of those with such expertise.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by graybird:
Geedubya,

I must agree with KB! Your pictures are certainly a prime example of how seating depth could affect the accuracy of a particular load.

Thanks for sharing the pictures of both targets and critters!!!

Give GW credit for the pictures, and seating depth testing.

KB

Gee, greybird, didn't mean to pinch your toes with my remarks. Or are you just naturally a rude, name-calling dickhead??
I do punch a lot of paper. I have my own range right outside my reloading shop. Mine goes to 250 yards not meters, however. It keeps my eye in when I'm not hunting. And I get a lot of practice for factory shooting matches.
Tell me, Have you lived in Colo long?? When did you move from Calif? Do you get aroused when you look at all your pretty bullet boxes?