Develop a load based on velocity window vs OCW nodes

[Darryle]

Cliff notes version:

I have listened to a couple of different podcasts where it was mentioned that if you have velocity in the 2700fps to 2950fps window that it will generally be a very accurate load, it will be more consistent, it will extend barrel life, brass life, be easier overall to tune and work over a wider range of temperatures. The host/guests also more or less dismissed the OCW/Ladder tests because they waste components, shorten barrel life and waste time. Their advice was pick a couple powders based on the velocity you need for the chosen bullet to perform as designed at the maximum distance you need it, choose the rifle barrel length and twist to put you in that window and it would be easy to tune. One example was RL 26 vs N565/N570, one of the powders would give you the consistency and accuracy/performance you wanted.

It was also mentioned that everyone should own the QL program, because the data is constantly being refined and will get you in that window quicker.

It was also noted that not every cartridge fell into those parameters, because there were over bore cartridges that were at their best when leaned on hard.

Looking at several boutique ammunition manufacturers, there are a number of very consistently accurate cartridges that you can not fit inside that window, on both ends of the bullet diameter spectrum. Examples, 22 Creedmoor, 6mm Creedmoor and 280 Ackley

Curious as to your thoughts?

Can you choose a cartridge for a given bullet design and performance based on the velocity window and it work consistently with minimal effort?

 

[Bob Wright]

I lean that way with OCW being a rather expensive approach to finding a load. Instead, I do a 10 shot ladder and look for nodes in the range of velocity that I want a particular bullet to run at. I don't need quickload as I am not developing new rifles and chamberings often enough to justify. I believe my chronograph and targets give me a lot of information if you study and experiment with all components over time. It's just a simpler way for me to get where I want to go.

 

[59FLH]

I use QL at home and work, it saves wasted time on combos that are not going to get me where I want to be.

 

[Darryle]

If using the velocity window alone, it really limits some smaller cartridges on big game at longer ranges. They fall below that minimum velocity for expansion and minimum energy needed at relatively short distances.

It becomes easier for me to understand why so many say that, for arguments sake: 223/6.5 Creedmoor, they are marginally effective beyond xxx yards.

 

[Bob Wright]

If using the velocity window alone, it really limits some smaller cartridges on big game at longer ranges. They fall below that minimum velocity for expansion and minimum energy needed at relatively short distances.

It becomes easier for me to understand why so many say that, for arguments sake: 223/6.5 Creedmoor, they are marginally effective beyond xxx yards.

Yes, all chamberings fit into brackets and for me, bullet performance is the primary factor for distance. Will it blow up on bone at X distance or will it reliably expand at long range?
It's a mental exercise that requires a bit of research to say this bullet will do everything I need between a given bracket.

 

[orkan]

Without getting into the specifics... Nope. Not on board with the new "velocity window" development practices being presented.

Every student I've mentored has reached better results with the "old" technique of OCW-type testing... than any of the "quick/cheap/new" ways.

... and the confidence in their shooting as a result of having properly done target-result-driven testing, shows with every shot.

My belief, as succinctly as I can put it:
Velocity is a result, and that's all. You don't tune around velocity. You tune based on results on target.

The constant desire of the instant gratification crowd to not spend proper time completely understanding things, might work if your targets are big enough. Yet the real problem here is that often times the presenters don't have any real expertise in what they are presenting, then the person receiving the presentation doesn't really understand the material well enough... then they go test the way they think they were told, and it doesn't work out... so everyone is left confused and frustrated.

Watch this video, twice, then ask yourselves just how many variables in all of this you don't even know about, much less have figured out how to counter.



-----------
Follow on Instagram
Subscribe on YouTube
Amazon Affiliate

 

[Elk Hunter 338]

 

[Koda_]

Curious as to your thoughts?

Can you choose a cartridge for a given bullet design and performance based on the velocity window and it work consistently with minimal effort?

yes.

Im not the most experienced handloader but when I started learning I wasted a lot of time and components with the OCW test. Halfway into that I learned about pressure ladder testing and it was so easy, work up to desired velocity or pressure and back off a grain, look for 2 or more shots that are close POI and pick one or the middle. Load 10 at that charge weight and zero and done in 2 range sessions. The trade off is you have to shoot well that day or your might not find an accuracy node. In one caliber Ive had to do a second pressure ladder cause I simply started too low. In another Ive started over to fine tune smaller grain increments to find the node.