Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
280ai load development (continues)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="bomberodevil" data-source="post: 2602416" data-attributes="member: 23175"><p>One thing I've found is splitting the difference between two decent accuracy charges doesn't always mean a better accuracy charge. In your example above, you had decent accuracy loads at 58.0 and at 59.0, so you went with 58.5, in the middle. I've found that before changing other variables like seating depth, I need to confirm that the 58.5 charge is equal to or better than the 58.0 and the 59.0 loads. The 58.0 and the 59.0 loads may be two separate accuracy nodes, and the 58.5 charge may not actually be better.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="bomberodevil, post: 2602416, member: 23175"] One thing I’ve found is splitting the difference between two decent accuracy charges doesn’t always mean a better accuracy charge. In your example above, you had decent accuracy loads at 58.0 and at 59.0, so you went with 58.5, in the middle. I’ve found that before changing other variables like seating depth, I need to confirm that the 58.5 charge is equal to or better than the 58.0 and the 59.0 loads. The 58.0 and the 59.0 loads may be two separate accuracy nodes, and the 58.5 charge may not actually be better. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
280ai load development (continues)
Top