Ladder or OCW style load development

Discussion in 'Reloading' started by Matt_G, Jul 25, 2006.

  1. Matt_G

    Matt_G Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    73
    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Looking for some input on these types of load development.
    If you have used either or both of these styles, which one do you prefer and why?
     
  2. Gustavo

    Gustavo Writers Guild

    Messages:
    131
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007

  3. royinidaho

    royinidaho Writers Guild

    Messages:
    8,853
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    If you have used either or both of these styles, which one do you prefer and why?

    I use both and have settled on a combination of the two to get close.
     
  4. jb1000br

    jb1000br Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,307
    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    A waste of time? Care to elaborate?

    I do both or hybrid i guess...

    for LR rifles:
    at 500yd, or 1000
    1-2 shots/charge for 9-10 charges from max down to wherever that lands you.

    shoot low->high x2 at chosen distance.

    find nodes

    confirm nodes with 3, 5-shot groups at the chosen areas shot round robin at 500-1000

    JB
     
  5. davewilson

    davewilson Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,634
    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    JB, do you mess around at 1 or 200 yards at all or just start things out at 500?

    you shoot 8 or 10, 2 shot groups and hopefully find a node then try to fine tune with 5 shot groups?

    kind of an "optimum ladder charge"
     
  6. Gustavo

    Gustavo Writers Guild

    Messages:
    131
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    [ QUOTE ]
    A waste of time? Care to elaborate?

    I do both or hybrid i guess...

    for LR rifles:
    at 500yd, or 1000
    1-2 shots/charge for 9-10 charges from max down to wherever that lands you.

    shoot low->high x2 at chosen distance.

    find nodes

    confirm nodes with 3, 5-shot groups at the chosen areas shot round robin at 500-1000

    JB

    [/ QUOTE ]

    In the past, I and some others (in the AR forum) sustained a long discusssion on the merits of this method.

    Especially from a a scientific point of view, and concluded that there is nothing "magical" here that could remotely back any sort of statistical correlation.

    In short, the method could be defined, at its best, as a good and ordered manner of elaborating a load.

    Nothing else.

    Let me add, that if this method is the "holy grail" of reloading, millions around the world would adopted its virtues.

    Again, there is nothing "special" about it, just a way of thinking, just a way of ordering a procedure.
     
  7. royinidaho

    royinidaho Writers Guild

    Messages:
    8,853
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    jb,

    That's exactly what I do BUT at much shorter distances than you. Why u ask? Cause me and my rigs don't shoot nearly as good as you and yours /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif Yet!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif And they aren't nearly as pleasing to the eye /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif Again, Yet!
     
  8. edge

    edge Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,088
    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    [ QUOTE ]
    SNIP

    Especially from a a scientific point of view, and concluded that there is nothing "magical" here that could remotely back any sort of statistical correlation.

    SNIP

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I don't think that anyone mentioned "magical", but finding the harmonic nodes of a particular round would seem to be Scientific to me!

    1) Are you stating that this is not Scientific?

    2) Do you have a "More scientific" way of finding the best loading for your rifle?

    Thanks.

    edge.
     
  9. royinidaho

    royinidaho Writers Guild

    Messages:
    8,853
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Well, then......What's a 'better' approach?
     
  10. Gustavo

    Gustavo Writers Guild

    Messages:
    131
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    [ QUOTE ]
    [ QUOTE ]
    SNIP

    Especially from a a scientific point of view, and concluded that there is nothing "magical" here that could remotely back any sort of statistical correlation.

    SNIP

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I don't think that anyone mentioned "magical", but finding the harmonic nodes of a particular round would seem to be Scientific to me!

    1) Are you stating that this is not Scientific?

    2) Do you have a "More scientific" way of finding the best loading for your rifle?

    Thanks.

    edge.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Please I'm not here to start a fight, just gave my opinion.

    But, to see the effect on the method on harmonics, I guess you need to take a more serious approach...and of course, geto some sophisticated instrumentation and LOTS of experimentation, and of course, all of that is beyound the scope of recreational reloading, at least to me

    Unfortunately, nobody came up with a statistically correct method, than what, we simple reloaders, coudl grab without getting ourselves into the realms of college labs.
     
  11. Matt_G

    Matt_G Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    73
    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Thanks for the replies guys.
    Been out of reloading for a few years because of work and these methods were new to me. I'm going to give a "hybrid" a shot on Friday and I will post the results.
    Keep the replies coming. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
     
  12. Freebore

    Freebore Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    611
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2002
    Matt,
    I use the OCW method to develop a load.
    Why - I do choose to shoot a specific bullet at a required velocity. Obviously a chrono is required for this process/method. To obtain the accuracy along with this method can be time consuming. I do usually end up changing powders during this process, so you do need the powders in that 'burn rate' area to achieve this goal. Notes and targets are retained during this process for reference. As the song goes 'you can't always get what you want' you may have to refer back to a 'slower' charge that does work. A given rifle will only do what it is capable of doing, if that makes sense. Example, My 257 Lightweight 26" barrel is actually slower than my 24" 257 Lazermark.! my2c
     
  13. edge

    edge Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,088
    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    [ QUOTE ]
    SNIP

    Unfortunately, nobody came up with a statistically correct method,

    SNIP

    [/ QUOTE ]

    /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
     
  14. jb1000br

    jb1000br Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,307
    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Gustavo, so how do you develop a load?


    [ QUOTE ]
    JB, do you mess around at 1 or 200 yards at all or just start things out at 500?

    you shoot 8 or 10, 2 shot groups and hopefully find a node then try to fine tune with 5 shot groups?

    kind of an "optimum ladder charge"

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Dave

    I started at 100 initially for a 105 scenar load...and it worked, but is harder to decipher IMO than a 500-1000yd ladder.

    Since I have started shooting ladders at 500 and 1000 (1000Yard ladders limited to full blown BR rigs BTW...) It is easier to see where you need to be by where the shots hit.

    Eventually, i will post pictures and my findings that prove this works pretty well, but not ready yet.

    At 500 and 1000 there is NO switching up with the progression on shots...everything is more predictable in the verticle plane...

    I actually have a 500yd load for my 6BR that is .5gn under my 1000yd load.

    Why?

    5 at 500/5 at 1K
    30.6gn - 1.52"/5.8"
    31.2gn - 2.0"/4.0"

    the 500yd ladder testing the above charges showed a flat spot from 30.3-30.9...ONLY 1 BULLET OF VERTICAL WITH 4 SHOTS!

    then 31.1/3/5 landed counterintuatively (slower hit higher, faster hit lower)

    This showed me what may have been the perfect tune for 1K...and it has proven itself pretty well so far...


    Will be using the 500yd load at Lewistown Groundhog Match for the first time this weekend...

    JB