As a Matter of Fact, You Should Start Reloading

[ADMIN]

ADMIN submitted a new Article:

As a Matter of Fact, You Should Start Reloading

As a Matter of Fact, You Should Start Reloading
By Jose Gardner

So, you're on the fence about reloading and not sure you want to take the plunge. Maybe you're not sure you have the time? Maybe you're not sure you want to make the initial investment? Maybe you're not sure you'll save enough ammo to justify it? All are valid concerns that I had as well. Only a year ago in fact, I still had my RCBS Rock Chucker Supreme kit sitting unopened in my gun...

Read more about this article here...

 

[jmgardner]

ADMIN submitted a new Article:

As a Matter of Fact, You Should Start Reloading



Read more about this article here...

 

[Frenchie1]

ADMIN submitted a new Article:

As a Matter of Fact, You Should Start Reloading



Read more about this article here...

What a terrific article and I can relate to so many of the "bullet" points in it. While I do not consider myself neither an expert reloader or an expert long range shooter, reloading your own ammo is a rewarding feeling and I beam with pride when my shots land true at any distance and when they don't, I know that I muffed the shot or made a mistake of some kind while loading. Great Breakdown Jose! Well done.

 

[jmgardner]

What a terrific article and I can relate to so many of the "bullet" points in it. While I do not consider myself neither an expert reloader or an expert long range shooter, reloading your own ammo is a rewarding feeling and I beam with pride when my shots land true at any distance and when they don't, I know that I muffed the shot or made a mistake of some kind while loading. Great Breakdown Jose! Well done.

Thanks Frenchie, It is quite an enjoyable pastime that pays lots of dividends!

 

[ChrisInKY]

It is quite an enjoyable pastime that pays lots of dividends!

Finding the recipe that dials you in @ 100, is one of the first steps to effective long range shooting. It doesn't require the most expensive equipment, but there are real costs to doing it right. I agree with you that the initial output is a cost one should set aside ... and one's focus should be on attaining precision.

It's been my experience that you get one shot at a coyote. If you're taking the shot beyond 600 yards, are you 'planning' to do it with your fingers crossed?

Nice article, Jose!! Cheers!!

 

[dsculley]

Very nicely written article. I do have one issue though.

The author states he is a scientist in his day job. As such, he should understand statistics. When he is describing ES and SD, he gets a bit off base. A caveat before I proceed: We do not run enough rounds over a chronograph to get statistically significant data. To do so would burn up too much barrel life. We do get a good approximation of the true SD. The relationship between SD and true ES for this load is: ES = 6 * SD. The ES that we get from our chronograph data is OBSERVED ES. When he stated that his .308 load had SD of 8 & ES of 32 may be what he observed but is a bit misleading. His OBSERVED ES may be 32 but the true ES for the population is 48 if the SD is correct. The 6.5 data has the same type error.

When we shoot a sample, it would be surprising if we see the actual outer limits of our load. That why SD is so important. Once I settle on a load, I will usually chronograph this load for several range trips and combine the data. In this manner, I can get better statistical data.

Perhaps I am splitting hairs, but I see people on these forums that say they have an SD of X and an ES of YY, yet they have fliers they can't explain. Those fliers are due to the true ES for the load being much larger than they believe!

FWIW

 

[jmgardner]

Hey Dennis, Thanks for the feedback. you make all valid points, but it really just emphasizes the point I was *trying* to make. More sample size is better than lower sample size. you are right, in order to hit true statistical significance, we likely would burn a barrel out. But we likely agree doubling sample size (from 3 to 5 for groups, or 5-10 for speed data) is going to give a more reliable number while still being practical. and you are probably right that my SD and ES may be not quite right, but that was calculated by my magneto rather than excel or a statistical program. I would guess that most shooters are simply reporting the same.

you also make a great point that true ES would explain unexplicable fliers. but from a practical standpoint, if I run ten rounds each of five different charges over a magneto, the one with the lowest reported ES/SD is likely the most consistent charge, regardless of if the reported numbers are 100% accurate. the food for thought is much appreciated! cheers!

 

[ChrisInKY]

More sample size is better than lower sample size.

I think 'it depends'. You have to consider the environmental variables on the days you load too. Were you loading under high pressure or low pressure conditions? Was humidity high or low? Was your brass above or below room temperature when you started your load?
What you're saying sounds 'smart', but isn't 'practical'. What I'm saying makes me sound like an @ss, but I'm just trying to expand perspective.

Cheers,
Chris