Berger VLD load testing: 100 yds or 200 yds to stabilize

[jhibbard24]

I've heard that VLDs won't quite stabilize by the time that it reaches 100 yds. therefore it is better to shoot them at 200 yds. for load development testing. i've had bergers punch some nice, tight ragged 5 shot holes at a 100 yds before. Whats your opinion. (Barrel twist is 1-10)

Working on some .300 WSM loads and the 190 VLD hunting bullet using both Superformance powder and RE-17 (trying to get around 3000 fps). The re-17 is looking more consistent and promising but still not quite as tight of groups that i'd like to see.

[ICANHITHIMMAN]

My stand point is loads should always be tested at a minimum of 200 yards with anything more being better. Regardless of the bullet used!

[jhibbard24]

I agree that 200 yds is great for testing but i also believe that there are larger margins for errors at that distance ie. heartbeats, wind, etc. Just trying to figure out if the bullet myth of it not shooting as good at 100 vs. 200 is true...

[TikkaShooters]

I recently experienced this when loading some Berger vlds and Matrix vlds.

My groups at 100 were worse than my groups at 200. In my mind that solidifies the fact that a bullet may need to "fall asleep"

The guns were my 1:8 223 that I'm working on for ftr. The other was my 270 wsm. Both displayed the same results.

I use rl17 in my wsm and get excellent accuracy with low sd/es numbers at all temperatures.

[ICANHITHIMMAN]

I here what you saying about human error, thats why one group is not good enough, you need to shoot multiple groups on diffrent days and in diffrent conditions. This is the only way to validate that you rifle and you are shooting to you potential.

[TikkaShooters]

Originally Posted by ICANHITHIMMAN

I here what you saying about human error, thats why one group is not good enough, you need to shoot multiple groups on diffrent days and in diffrent conditions. This is the only way to validate that you rifle and you are shooting to you potential.

Great point! When I was doing load development for the same 223 referenced above, I had a load that shot 5 rounds into .11 inches. I was floored! and promptly spent the next month trying to shoot that group with that combo again.

I had to take a step back and realize that I had other loads shooting much more consistently in the .2's and the load I was chasing averaged in the .3's with the random group in the .1's.

Ultimately, the load that shoots consistently in a variety of conditions is the winner.

Human error does play a role which is why your handloads need to be as perfect and consistent as possible so when you do shoot a bad group, you can look at yourself for improvement.

My .02

[dodgefreak8]

Please excuse this amateur question but how would any kind of unstable flight between 0 and 100 yards not cause accuracy issues at further distances?? I don't understand how any degree of bullet wobble is predictable. I would think that would throw accuracy off at all ranges