Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment > Reloading

Reloading Techniques For Reloading


Reply

Way in or way out ?

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #22  
Old 02-08-2006, 06:20 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 564
Re: Way in or way out ?

"Lot more subtleties to this game than you have mastered and learned yet, but keep on trying." You're right, that is a game as far as I'm concerned, much like golf. Shooting from benches with heavy rests and bags and wind flags and such is a competitive and interesting sport, but a game, nonetheless.

Seating to magazine length is useful in the hunting field. If you cannot get a cartridge to perform well at mag length, you've got a single shot rifle (which, of course, most BR rigs are). This isn't practical for long range hunting, where a quick follow up shot may be needed.

"Get you a 308 and try it." You did it again... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] You read part of something I said about a light, practical field rifle in .308 win. I mentioned that I don't have a sporter barreled field rifle in .308 win, which I don't have. (I do have a .270 win which sort of makes getting a .308 in a light field rifle sort of superfluous). You understood this to mean that I don't own any .308's. Not true. I have two .308 tactical rifles, and I shoot them quite often...

Dan
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02-08-2006, 06:39 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: west of Little Rock ,Ark.
Posts: 1,271
Re: Way in or way out ?

Roy,

Did you really ? !!! Shoot the fly that is . That is way better to me than winning the match [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] I reckon you've seen " Tin cup " the movie but if you haven't get it , you'll love it . [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

In 1972 I was fresh out of the Navy and I bought a Sako actioned Browning .243 pencil
bbl in aa safari grade rifle . I was just learning to reload and I was using , what else ? , RCBS dies and a rockchucker press .
To this day I have a couple of targets ( some dand where that my new wife witnessed and signed ) that I shot at 100 yds that went .251 and .323 . This out of a PENCIL bbl with nothing done to it other than my inept tweaking of the trigger.

Remarkably , 34 years later the same powder ( well almost , I used IMR 4350 back then and H4350 now) is providing a very accurate load within a smidgen of the load wt. I used back then. Actually , I have to make note here that the IMR 4350 will produce the same results with minor tweaks of the load .

One may like to shoot paper , another fur, one may use bipods , another sandbag rests , I submit that if you like to shoot you are a member of a fraternity that should'nt stand divided against itself. Elitism is a dead end !

So , whew !!! gotta go now , time for more zanax ( what the hair is this stuff anyway Roy? [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img], they keep insisting I need it )

Jim B.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02-09-2006, 12:45 AM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,515
Re: Way in or way out ?

Hey green. I've been following this post reading every word ( I have also read most of the info on the OCW site you link to but not every word ) and I'm not about to get into the discussion that you and Bounty Hunter are having. I will admit that I am not quite sold on the OCW way to develop a load but that is not why I am writing.

I am growing more curious as to your experience at long range hunting. I am not very experienced compared to some here but I have a good understanding of the science and skills that are involved with this activity so this is not going to turn into a wizzin' match. You might be vastly more experienced than I am.

The reason I am asking for some background is this. You seem to have come in here with an idea that makes some sence. That degree of sence depends on alot of factors but it at least sounds reasonable enough to investigate. You did however come in rather abruptly and that got the attention of a few of us I'm sure. As I read your posts here and there I notice things that make me wonder if you learned a technique that makes tons of sence to you but because your actual field experience is limited you are having a hard time selling it to others. For example from your posts above:

"Most guys who peruse these pages aren't BR types. Accuracy goals and necessary equipment for long range practical shooting aren't compatible or comparable with the benchrest equipment and discipline."

See to me this is all wrong. The people that dwell here are exactly BR types. They are hunting BR types that will use every competition trick they can to quickly kill game at as long a distance as they feel comfortable with. And a blanket statement about the gear not being comparable or compatable with BR shooting seems to contradict the photos of heavy bbl flat stocked guns that our longest range hunters and some of the sports most experienced personalities are using.

Or this quote:

"Seating to magazine length is useful in the hunting field. If you cannot get a cartridge to perform well at mag length, you've got a single shot rifle (which, of course, most BR rigs are). This isn't practical for long range hunting, where a quick follow up shot may be needed."

As I have learned, in the sport of long range hunting a quick follow up shot is an "if" to be avoided. In fact one of the benefits of hunting at these distances leaves the game unaware of the source of the noise and bewilderment of what to do with the sudden pain that is now felt. The spotter then ranges the animal if it moved and the shooter adjusts and follows up with another shot if necessary. There is often nothing quick about it. What is often prefered is the extreme accuracy to put the first (and second) bullet where it needs to be. Not the ability to jack a round into the chamber in 1 second instead of 3.

It is thoughts like these that are raised by statements like yours. This is why I am curious how much actual long range hunting you have done and at what sort of ranges? A person with a new idea is usually received more warmly when the people listening and reading and thinking have some background. It is a common tactic for those who want to succeed to pay attention to those who have succeeded, not just those that have an idea on how to succeed.

I'm hoping you will give us a chance to learn a little bit about you and where you are coming from. Heck, what sent you looking for the OCW in the first place?
__________________
GRAVITY. It's not just a good idea. It's the LAW!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-09-2006, 06:12 AM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 564
Re: Way in or way out ?

4ked Horn, there are a lot of questions there, but they are good ones.

I have not been out west where 1000 yard shots on elk are common. I live in the Eastern US, and the largest critter I've shot at a distance past 600 yards has been a white tail deer at 735 yards. Most of my long range hunting has been on varmints.

You mention not wanting to get into a whizzing contest (or something like that)... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] That puts me in mind of the ~1000 yard elk thread here a while back, where a whizzing contest ensued shortly after the initial post. Some members raised concerns about whether the kill was humane or not. It turned into a full blown insult trading argument. And I think a couple of over-zealous members got shown the door...

I did not join in the commentary on that thread, but read it with interest and actually understood both sides of the debate. This forum is about long range hunting, and that elk thread was certainly about long range hunting--no debate there. But I will say that the guys who legitimately and politely questioned the manner in which that elk was taken had some good points. (I didn't say they were right--just that their points were good ones!)

Bringing up that thread is not an attempt to re-open that awful can of worms again. But that thread is a cogent and very memorable reminder of the fact that folks aren't always going to agree on the how's and the whether's of taking game at extreme range.

Now I'm going somewhere with this (I think) [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] so hang with me.

Again, that relatively recent thread helps us to understand that there are strong differences of opinion in matters of range limit and technique. IIRC the rifle used on the afformentioned elk--I believe--was a factory barreled rifle. But I would say that the factory rifle was not the limiting factor there. Conditions and familiarity with the terrain were probably what kept that hunt from being ideal, and follow up shots were needed.

If you'll be fair with me, you will notice that I have not offered any advice to members here as to bullet types, chamberings, etc., that they should use on large game beyond 600 yards. I've kept to the Handloading and Optics forums, where I believe I can offer meaningful participation. I'll never speak to the things I have no personal experience with. But if you want to talk about 700+ yard shots on groundhogs and other varmints, I'll be there. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

"Hah! We've got him!" [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] Someone (not you, necessarily) says: "He doesn't have much long range experience on big game so his points regarding handloading, rifle types, etc., are to be taken with a grain of salt."

If my points cannot stand on their own merit, then they shouldn't be believed. I think that I've offered some useful information on load development, and I also think that I've asked some important questions which--for those who ascribe to benchrest philosophies--should be easy to answer. But rather than getting answers, I generally get derision and the dog-eared mantra "Bring that_______to the next 1000 yard BR comp and we'll see how you do." (The implication there being that when I lose the BR match the why's and wherefore's of distance to lands seating will suddendly be revealed). [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

When I said "Most guys who peruse these pages aren't BR types. Accuracy goals and necessary equipment for long range practical shooting aren't compatible or comparable with the benchrest equipment and discipline." I based that on the truth. Most members here aren't using benchrest rigs to take game at long range. An MOA group at 600 yards will lose big time in a BR comp (unless conditions are awful) but will handily take even a smallish deer at that range.

I don't believe you mean that the exact rifles used in 1000 yard BR comps are what should be prescribed for elk at 1000 yards--so I'm not putting words in your mouth. Most of these rifles are 6mm and 6.5 mm max, which would certainly take a back seat to the 30 and 33 caliber magnums for the purpose.

For my part, I don't want a single shot rifle in the field. Whether I be hunting varmints, deer, or whatever--I like the ability to chamber another cartridge immediately after the shot, so that I can get back on scope and survey the situation. I have honestly had to use follow up shots on groundhogs! Seriously, I have. I hit one twice at 540 yards last summer and he still wasn't dead when I got to him! 105 AMAX, .243 win, by the way. I would not plan to need a second shot, but I would (again, just me) like to have it immediately available should it be needed.

It is a simple matter to build a magazine fed rifle with sub MOA capability. The military sniper rilfes are such (even the 338's and the big 50 BMG's).

You also asked what led me to develop the OCW method. Since this post has already gotten a bit verbose, I'll do you and others a favor and save that explantion for later. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

But one more thing: You said "As I read your posts here and there I notice things that make me wonder if you learned a technique that makes tons of sence to you but because your actual field experience is limited you are having a hard time selling it to others." I don't understand what technique you're referring to in this sentence. Are you referring to OCW load development? Or opinions I've offered about particular scopes, rifles, etc.? I'm not sure I understand that question... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Thanks for taking the time to write.

Dan
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-09-2006, 11:33 AM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,515
Re: Way in or way out ?

[ QUOTE ]
If you'll be fair with me, you will notice that I have not offered any advice to members here as to bullet types, chamberings, etc., that they should use on large game beyond 600 yards. I've kept to the Handloading and Optics forums, where I believe I can offer meaningful participation. I'll never speak to the things I have no personal experience with. But if you want to talk about 700+ yard shots on groundhogs and other varmints, I'll be there.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough.

[ QUOTE ]
I based that on the truth. Most members here aren't using benchrest rigs to take game at long range. An MOA group at 600 yards will lose big time in a BR comp (unless conditions are awful) but will handily take even a smallish deer at that range.

I don't believe you mean that the exact rifles used in 1000 yard BR comps are what should be prescribed for elk at 1000 yards--so I'm not putting words in your mouth. Most of these rifles are 6mm and 6.5 mm max, which would certainly take a back seat to the 30 and 33 caliber magnums for the purpose.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most members are not using BR guns in the field but they are loading with BR techniques, they are having actions blueprinted and bedded and bbls crowned in BR style and are using BR / field hybrids with Nesika actions and Bat actions. It all has a very BR tone about it.

And then there are guys who are using exactly BR gear. For a while here there were so many posts about 6.5x284s that I thought the .308 had been discontinued. BR guns are spendy but there are more than just a few here that do use them in the field with bench and mechanical rests and the whole 9 yards. There are also those who shoot at the extreme ranges that employ BR guns but simply in the large calibers. The guns weigh in over 25 pounds and many going into the 50s. Good Groupers .338 is actually the second 50+ pound gun I have ever seen personally. the first was a 60 pound .308 Baer being shot at a BR match in Chalis Id. (He won the match in his class BTW). So yes I am saying exactly that BR is interwoven inextricably through the fibers of long range hunting.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand what technique you're referring to in this sentence. Are you referring to OCW load development?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep. Maybe I should have said procedure. You are obviously a believer in the OCW idea but something just isn't clicking in to place here (in my perception) and that is why I posted. I was thinking that if even a few people knew of your experience they would know where you were coming from. It might temper the discussion. I have been visiting with guys here for some time and I am familiar with some of their accomplishments. I am going to, for the first time, try a ladder test at their reccomendation. Now you are running head to head with guys that have been ladder testing for years with great results and you want them to give your OCW a try. Why should they? Honestly it sounds interesting but is not far removed from the "shoot groups with different powder charges" method. They will listen more if you can show them how it is an improvement. If I can shoot a ladder to zoom in on a start to a fantastic load for my gun (which is all I care about) why would I shoot more bullets to get a load that is good in several rifles? I would be more inclined to listen if the person with this new procedure showed me pictures of a 600 yard deer he shot in the snow at 5000 feet altitude AND a picture of a 1000 yard coyote taken in a sage desert in rattlesnake weather using the same load.

It happens every day. There are folks with good ideas that get shut down at the door because no one knows who they are. There is no background. Yes your ideas should stand on their own merrits, but they won't. That is the same as saying "I'm tellin' ya, the engineers said it would work." If you had something to show that was different and better I think your conversations here would be easier.

But this is all just my point of view and really nothing more than a suggestion. If it helps then good. If you don't see it as helpful that is fine as well. Now work is calling so I gotta go. Have a good day. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
__________________
GRAVITY. It's not just a good idea. It's the LAW!
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 02-09-2006, 12:13 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wilmington NC
Posts: 4,230
Re: Way in or way out ?

Dan

Your misinformation on LR BR and LR hunting is astounding. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

1. Many of the LR hunters are using rigs that could and are often used in Competition. Look at the Point Blank videos by Bobby Hart etc. Those are his comp guns.

2. Most of the LR BR guns are not 6.5s as you alledge. About 50% or more of the LR BR rigs are still 30 caliber shooting 190-240 gr bullets (in some areas much more than 50%) and a few 338s and yes the rest are 6.5-284s, and other 6,5s, 7mms and we are seeing the 6mm come in. This last year I shot my LR hunting gun, 338 Lapua Ack Imp w/300 gr SMKs, in the HG class without a muzzle brake. As it is relatively lightweight for a HG and the recoil very heavy (guys said that they had never seen the front two legs of the stool come off the ground before when someone shot), [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] I was not too fast on the repeat shots but shot two 9" 10 shot groups with a gun not tuned to shoot w/o the brake just to see what it was doing and took 2nd in both relays and it has shot a five shot in 18" at one mile.

3. As for the usefullness of a BR type LR rig vs a mag gun on a second shot. couple points need to be considered. A: A good first shot is what is prescribed for LR hunting and not quick second with a quick bolt handling for a running second shot so you supposed so your advantage of a mag gun is not factual. B: Guys with BR rigs can and do run 5 shots in under 20 seconds and 10 in 43-50 seconds, so speed of a second is not an issue as you believe.

3. As for the "incompatability of LR shooting and BR reloading techniques, wrong again. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] The exact same reloading techniques for comp will consistently give you sub moa groups in LR hunting/tactical comp guns. Most of the top tactical shooters are using BR reloading techniques only in no-neck turn chambers that are min SAAMI with match leades, same bullet sorting and brass prep techniques (You know all the things you say is not needed). They are using Neiseka actions with Borden bumps, Surgeons or others that are about .002-.004 looser in the bolt raceway but just as tight elsewhere. The trigger is 1.5 lbs vs 1.5-2 oz. Same barrels, same lug prep, firing pin/spring work, etc.

4. I know you were alluding to me with not answering simple questions as to why. Like I said, it does not matter if I cannot personally answer because that does not make it false. But I know what works and I routinely push the envelope to try new things, bullets, reloading techs to see if it works. On the flip side of that coin, you cannot personally answer the tecnical questions from your own technical research or personal knowledge either and that is substantiated by your gross misconceptions on BR and LR hunting for example. Can you answer technical questions on the G1-G7 curves on bullets or the SGy vs SGx axis based on your own technical research, yes or no? They how can you say with authority the things you do? You relied on someone elses info and simply quoted and ref us to it. So get off that horse because you cannot ride it either.

Now if you want to shoot flys, suggest you load em up and get on BR central and contact the Aussies that hang there. They have a 500m fly shoot contest all the time and they will invite you over. If you can hang with those boys and get your FLY SHOOT cap, OCW might work. Do not even think to ask if I have one, you would make me go dig it out.

If OCW is so dang good, then go to the guys who can prove it hands down as I have said repeatedly. Go to the 308 palma and Fclass F/TR guys like I suggested. When they start preaching it, I will listen and say you are on to something.

Anyway, I still say this is fun and great discussions. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

BH
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 02-09-2006, 01:16 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 564
Re: Way in or way out ?

4ked,

You said: "I am going to, for the first time, try a ladder test at their reccomendation. Now you are running head to head with guys that have been ladder testing for years with great results and you want them to give your OCW a try. Why should they? Honestly it sounds interesting but is not far removed from the "shoot groups with different powder charges" method."

If you'll carefully study what the OCW method is designed to accomplish, it is simply this: Three ladder tests, fired in round-robin fashion. And that's it. It has a significant statistical advantage over the results of a single ladder test, which I explain more in depth here--> http://home.earthlink.net/~dannewber...pment/id1.html

I appreciate your advice and your patience in bearing with me here. I don't believe you're trying to be combative, and that you honestly don't yet see what OCW is all about. I'll do whatever I can to help.

Regarding photos of long kills with loads developed by the OCW method... I would respectfully have to say that if I were a shooter who had not heard of OCW load development before, I wouldn't be convinced by photos of long range kills. And I say this because, well, even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then. I might however be convinced if I were to see some long range groups. I say "might" because you never know when some stosh is going to shoot a group at 200 yards and tell everyone it's an 800 yard group. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] But anyway, that's as much as I can offer, that is, photos of groups fired with OCW load recipes at different long ranges.











I've got many others, but I don't want to use up too much bandwidth here... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

If you'll do a google search on OCW load development, you will find that the method has become pretty widely known. Not all of the hits you'll see are from sites I have anything to do with. I've even seen my load development method being discussed on foreign sites, Swedish and Russian in particular. (Yeah, maybe they're giving me down the road, I don't know... I can't understand anything but my name and the acronym OCW). [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

You don't have to enter into OCW load development with the idea that you'll have a load that shoots well in other rifles. Use it simply as a way to conduct a thourough ladder test which factors out the errors caused by heating and/or fouling barrels, etc.

The long range groups shown above were fired with pretty much un-tweaked OCW load recipes which were first identified at 100 yards.

To both 4ked and Bounty Hunter: I had no idea so many folks were using bench guns to hunt long range. I stand corrected there. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] I think so long as the rifle is light enough to carry into the field without a hand-truck, you're still hunting... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Dan
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC