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
QL v3.6 just arrived and its conflicting info
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="Fitch" data-source="post: 395420" data-attributes="member: 19372"><p>I see the trend in the data but don't think it is statistically significant. In fact I can tell you for sure that differences that small determined from averaging two rounds are statistically meaningless. The data stream shows it rather clearly with the 3016, 3026, 3001.5 sequence. Shoot 8 or 10 at each seating depth, or better about 30 (which is close to the minimum for a good normal curve), and get the results where the uncertainty in the data doesn't exceed the claimed change and I'll go for it. The data shown is not compelling. </p><p> </p><p>My real concern is with pressure which isn't being measured. To convince me would require pressure measurements averaging a significant number of shots at different seating depths. </p><p> </p><p>What I do find compelling are the documented cases of firearms blowing up due to overpressure from bullets being pushed backinto the case. Those events have been documented and duplicated. </p><p> </p><p>We can agree to disagree about this.</p><p> </p><p>Fitch</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Fitch, post: 395420, member: 19372"] I see the trend in the data but don't think it is statistically significant. In fact I can tell you for sure that differences that small determined from averaging two rounds are statistically meaningless. The data stream shows it rather clearly with the 3016, 3026, 3001.5 sequence. Shoot 8 or 10 at each seating depth, or better about 30 (which is close to the minimum for a good normal curve), and get the results where the uncertainty in the data doesn't exceed the claimed change and I'll go for it. The data shown is not compelling. My real concern is with pressure which isn't being measured. To convince me would require pressure measurements averaging a significant number of shots at different seating depths. What I do find compelling are the documented cases of firearms blowing up due to overpressure from bullets being pushed backinto the case. Those events have been documented and duplicated. We can agree to disagree about this. Fitch [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
QL v3.6 just arrived and its conflicting info
Top