That is because they never bother to take the blinders off and look at the data. There are three Nodes even Ray Charles could see. There is a fourth one that was pointed out to me, which I missed. They were probably confused by the targets. The data is the MV. This was Satterllee, not Audette.
HELP WITH SATERLEE VELOCITY TEST
- Thread starter NW Hunter
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Oddly enough, H1000 gave me very strange spikes and drops doing the S test. Reloder 23 and 26 however gave me exactly what was described by Satterlee. But maybe I just got lucky with my loads in my rifles. If that's the case, I'll take it. I just hope that luck holds for me in the future as well
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 283
Statistics!
Generally, I think most of the problems we see in rifle space is related to drawing conclusions from statistically insignificant data.
Considering Monte Carlo simulations, it's a worthy exercise to understand how silly it is to chase these small groups. Use a program like AB Wez to explore group size effects on hit probability at distance. If we as shooters put more time into learning wind rather than chasing bug holes, we might actually hit better!
Generally, I think most of the problems we see in rifle space is related to drawing conclusions from statistically insignificant data.
Considering Monte Carlo simulations, it's a worthy exercise to understand how silly it is to chase these small groups. Use a program like AB Wez to explore group size effects on hit probability at distance. If we as shooters put more time into learning wind rather than chasing bug holes, we might actually hit better!
User4302021
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2018
- Messages
- 0
To be interpretable, data requires statistical significance.
Statistical significance requires more than a single data point per set.
Therefore, not interpretable.
And the SUN STILL ROTATES AROUND THE EARTH!!!!
Have you all heard the one about the scientist and the engineer?
They put a scientist and an engineer in one corner of the room
in the opposite corner they put $1,000,000 and they told them that each step they can take could be half the distance to the money. When the get there, they can have the money.
The scientist took out his pad, started writing formulas, pulled out his scientific calculator and started punching in numbers. Finally, frustrated he threw his arms in the air and said "I'll never get there"
The Engineer, took one step (half the original distance). too a second step (Half the remaining distance), took a third and said "I am close enough, the money is mine!!" and grabbed the money.
You can spend a ton of powder and lead to arrive to perfect scientific solution, maybe..or you can take the empirical approach, any one, that has proven to work and do it good enough for your purpose quickly and economically.
Or you can just argue that you don't have statically enough samples and watch life pass you by!!! Choice is yours!!!
They put a scientist and an engineer in one corner of the room
in the opposite corner they put $1,000,000 and they told them that each step they can take could be half the distance to the money. When the get there, they can have the money.
The scientist took out his pad, started writing formulas, pulled out his scientific calculator and started punching in numbers. Finally, frustrated he threw his arms in the air and said "I'll never get there"
The Engineer, took one step (half the original distance). too a second step (Half the remaining distance), took a third and said "I am close enough, the money is mine!!" and grabbed the money.
You can spend a ton of powder and lead to arrive to perfect scientific solution, maybe..or you can take the empirical approach, any one, that has proven to work and do it good enough for your purpose quickly and economically.
Or you can just argue that you don't have statically enough samples and watch life pass you by!!! Choice is yours!!!
DUSTY NOGGIN
Well-Known Member
funny picture and i believe it shows an exaggerated visual of your point .. but, however if you actually did this 2400 shot test all of us would see all of the changes throughout a barrels life . no doubt in my mind . the randomness would have a shape different to your picture
dog i believe the first node is caused "neck tension release to jam/rifle swage timing" is stabalized by a pressure to overcome all that at the same time .. and generally there will be another at or near full capacity (depending on powder choice)
if a guy doesnt care much at case prep a saterlee test graph will show alot of false hope so the even the lessor false hope seems best .. this guy will likely not see repeatability
but, a guy that does flash debur . weight sort . bullet sort, neck turn & tension prep , and keeps record of everything .. this guy can see repeatability
exreme spreads include ALL data from all batches using same components . not just the one shot today . anybody that says they have a ES of 10 or less needs to shoot more and add new data to the old chart , in hopes it doesn't come close to opaloopas picture above
25WSM
Well-Known Member
His experience mirrors mine. It just works. Over multiple platforms and cartridges. I use it to get the smokeless muzzleloaders tuned up too. So even on a rifle that is so simple to load for it still shows the nodes. There are no variations in neck tension or brass capacities or seating depths.
If anyone has read my loading methods from other post you will see I don't use the satterlee method to determine the exact load. It is used to get the initial starting powder charge. Quickly. All the rest of my development is on paper with groups. But in my experience the powder charge I come up with in the velocity testing is usually within a couple 10th of my final load. This greatly speeds up tuning.
Shep
If anyone has read my loading methods from other post you will see I don't use the satterlee method to determine the exact load. It is used to get the initial starting powder charge. Quickly. All the rest of my development is on paper with groups. But in my experience the powder charge I come up with in the velocity testing is usually within a couple 10th of my final load. This greatly speeds up tuning.
Shep
DUSTY NOGGIN
Well-Known Member
i havent done much with muzzloader testing . seating depth is still present based off powder charge =timing to muzzle. and swage force is also added, kinda acts like tension.. depending on bullet type
i do also believe the saterlee method gives good data . not final data ..
sure is awesome when harmonics do line up though
i do also believe the saterlee method gives good data . not final data ..
sure is awesome when harmonics do line up though
25WSM
Well-Known Member
What would this thread look like if we added in positive compensation? Wow
Shep
Shep
