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
Bullet Jump
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="CBS" data-source="post: 2142295" data-attributes="member: 11718"><p>I'm starting to think that methodology CAN be backwards. I'm leaning toward the idea that es is a better indicator of long range accuracy and consistency than 100 yd group size. </p><p></p><p>This is a relatively new concept for me as I've had problems working up loads with the ideas you guys are talking about. E.g., I have a 7mm that i worked up a great load that consistently shoots groups in the 3s @100 yds. But because of velocity es my groups at 750 around moa +.</p><p></p><p>I found some you tube videos by a guy named Erik Cortina. He's an f- class shooter that details his methodology for working up loads. In his load development process he shoots different powder charge weights at a logical seating depth and doesn't care what size groups they shoot. His focus is strictly on low es. Low es results long distance consistency. </p><p></p><p>After finding his es node he then shoots for groups by seating depth. </p><p></p><p>I've tried this a couple times and while I don't think I've got my processes down my 100 yd groups aren't as good as I've shot in the past but my 5-700 yd groups are better. </p><p></p><p>From what I've experienced low es is more important than 100 group size for longer ranges.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="CBS, post: 2142295, member: 11718"] I'm starting to think that methodology CAN be backwards. I'm leaning toward the idea that es is a better indicator of long range accuracy and consistency than 100 yd group size. This is a relatively new concept for me as I've had problems working up loads with the ideas you guys are talking about. E.g., I have a 7mm that i worked up a great load that consistently shoots groups in the 3s @100 yds. But because of velocity es my groups at 750 around moa +. I found some you tube videos by a guy named Erik Cortina. He's an f- class shooter that details his methodology for working up loads. In his load development process he shoots different powder charge weights at a logical seating depth and doesn't care what size groups they shoot. His focus is strictly on low es. Low es results long distance consistency. After finding his es node he then shoots for groups by seating depth. I've tried this a couple times and while I don't think I've got my processes down my 100 yd groups aren't as good as I've shot in the past but my 5-700 yd groups are better. From what I've experienced low es is more important than 100 group size for longer ranges. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Bullet Jump
Top