Help with load dev

[Bitteroot]

Actual is not. The issue with the Ladder test is the single shot, with normal dispersions and variances you get poor results. You may have a good load, but because of normal dispersion you may throw that load out from the beginning. There is a lot of research on it and over time the Ladder test is has become obsolete. Ford and Chevy are still relevent.

You've over looked the part where I mentioned ( modified to the use of two or three rounds per increment). I could post examples of our long range tuning efforts for competition although I don't believe they would change any minds or help the OP.

 

[KsKevin]

You've over looked the part where I mentioned ( modified to the use of two or three rounds per increment). I could post examples of our long range tuning efforts for competition although I don't believe they would change any minds or help the OP.

I do the same…600yd ladder with 2-3 rounds per chg weight. It works

 

[nksmfamjp]

I will shoot much larger confirmation groups when I think we got it. Should I be shooting larger groups, earlier in the process?

Going with 5 rounds in this stage honing in.

I'd do fewer steps and 10 rd groups….few people want to shoot a 300 PRC at 2700 foe, so that knocks out half the charge weights. I shoot 3bx 10 shot groups instead of 5 x 5 shots. I have no use for 3 shot groups. I used to, but good was never repeatable for accuracy or sd.

Side note to this.... The gun was/is still in break in mode. I've only got around 120-130 rounds down the barrel so far. I started with factory stuff just to shoot it, and have 30 rounds of reloads on it. At what point do you see your velocities level out in the new barrel? I don't want that to skew my load testing.

It's past break in. Frankly, I develop through break in.

 

[the bullet man]

load for accuracy not speed.

 

[skipglo]

IMHO....6 is worth playing with.... ...top to bottom you only have 122 fps...which is negligible...so 6 shows great promise... Best group by far... would I change something on that load....well...at this point no until you see the results at 500 yards....then you can play with seating depth to possibly lower ES and SD .....IF necessary....just me
I have a question though on Number two load... have you trimmed your brass....stiff bolt LOADING is a sizing problem or that load was seated differently from the rest and you were into the Lands....my advice going forward is only change ONE thing at a time....new brass from another manufacturer will shoot different, new projectiles - different, new seating depth - different, new powder...different.so if going to new brass as you said.....I would stop here and save your consumables......just me

 

[dstancu]

I also load for accuracy, and higher speed is great, as long as it does not diminish my load's accuracy.

The standard process I'm using is this:
- Check the recommended max load from powder manufacturer (Hodgdon, Vihtavuori)
- Choose a seating depth similar with factory ammo in the same cartridge/bullet, maybe a tad longer (this will be modified later)
- Subtract about 2% of the max recommended load, that would be my base starting load for testing (e.g. 76.0 gr)
- Load 2 cartridges for each load, starting with my base, adding 0.2gr, e.g. 76.0, 76.2, 76.4. 76.6, etc, the last load going slightly over max recommended; I shoot these to find the first pressure signs, in worst conditions (the warmest expected real use temperatures). I stop immediately after first pressure signs! I pull the bullets from the hotter loads left
- decide what would be a speed adequate and safe for my needs; let's say the load for adequate speed is around 75.2gr. Load 5 groups of 3 cartridges adjacent to that, in increments of 0.2gr (e.g. 74.8, 75.0, 75.2, 75.4, 75.6). Shoot them for groups. If the SD is under 10, the tighter ones would be good enough (I found that small SD is greatly influenced by accurate powder measurement, more than other ignition and internal ballistic factors)
- The best load goes now to seating depth testing. I load groups of 3 cartridges with CBTO steps of 0.003" (3 thousands). I found very important for consistency of seating to vigorously handle the press (no pussyfooting!)
- If I find at least two adjacent lengths to be printing groups small enough for my liking, I choose the longest one.

This worked for me for about 20 cartridges (powder/bullet combinations).
It only happened to me once to have serious problems finding a good load's seating depth. I then used Berger's advice (it has similar procedures for hybrid bullets, and for VLD bullets). It worked as intended, and saved my sanity!

 

[Ubetcha]

IMHO....6 is worth playing with.... ...top to bottom you only have 122 fps...which is negligible...so 6 shows great promise... Best group by far... would I change something on that load....well...at this point no until you see the results at 500 yards....then you can play with seating depth to possibly lower ES and SD .....IF necessary....just me
I have a question though on Number two load... have you trimmed your brass....stiff bolt LOADING is a sizing problem or that load was seated differently from the rest and you were into the Lands....my advice going forward is only change ONE thing at a time....new brass from another manufacturer will shoot different, new projectiles - different, new seating depth - different, new powder...different.so if going to new brass as you said.....I would stop here and save your consumables......just me

All brass was trimmed prior to loading during case prep. We had an issue with trimmed and prepped brass fitting and loaded rounds not. Another forum member helped us thru that and found seating was the issue.

I started a new thread about the seating depth variations we were getting and I believe our seating stem is incorrect and we were not measuring EVERY loaded round, just spot checking them. Changing our process now to every round getting measured, using the right stem, and quality brass.

When we re-do this entire process with new brass, we are also going to only change ONE thing at a time and have only one guy running the press and measuring with the caliper. Removing as many variables as possible.

 

[Bitteroot]

All brass was trimmed prior to loading during case prep. We had an issue with trimmed and prepped brass fitting and loaded rounds not. Another forum member helped us thru that and found seating was the issue.

I started a new thread about the seating depth variations we were getting and I believe our seating stem is incorrect and we were not measuring EVERY loaded round, just spot checking them. Changing our process now to every round getting measured, using the right stem, and quality brass.

When we re-do this entire process with new brass, we are also going to only change ONE thing at a time and have only one guy running the press and measuring with the caliper. Removing as many variables as possible.

If you measure each round with a caliper and Hornday type comparator, you'll still likely see variations simply because of a few reasons,
Firstly the nose geometry on non custom bullets isn't exact and secondly the cases are not sized exactly the same in length despite your efforts and lastly the handheld tool resolution can be manipulated.
You could just use jump tolerate bullets ( hybrid ) and let trust the seater to do the job.

If you're shooting long range competition then that's a different level of load work.
Trust me when I say the sorting non custom bullets is maddening , but can be done.. so if you're dead set of that than send me a PM

 

[FEENIX]

I started a new thread about the seating depth variations we were getting and I believe our seating stem is incorrect and we were not measuring EVERY loaded round, just spot checking them. Changing our process now to every round getting measured, using the right stem, and quality brass.

When we re-do this entire process with new brass, we are also going to only change ONE thing at a time and have only one guy running the press and measuring with the caliper. Removing as many variables as possible.

It's hard for me, but I intentionally avoided your other thread. It is difficult enough to troubleshoot reloading issues with a new reloader in person, let alone online, with issues coming from all directions. I understand your frustration (heck, I get frustrated just reading about it), but take your time and enjoy the learning process. BTW, your kid is correct, reloading is supposed to be fun.

 

[Bitteroot]

It's hard for me, but I intentionally avoided your other thread. It is difficult enough to troubleshoot reloading issues with a new reloader in person, let alone online, with issues coming from all directions. I understand your frustration (heck, I get frustrated just reading about it), but take your time and enjoy the learning process. BTW, your kid is correct, reloading is supposed to be fun.

Good point, I think I've overlapped the two myself and apologies to the OP for the extra chatter.
B

 

[Ubetcha]

All good guys. We need to get our process in order to isolate issues. We were trying to make everything perfect on our very FIRST load dev and obviously made a TON of mistakes. You all are getting us sorted out real quick. Several members have reached out and offered help, met some guys at the range that know what they're doing with reloading, and contacted some others to get this on track.

Truly appreciate ya'll taking it slow with me/us. We're taking the advice and putting it to action.

 

[Ubetcha]

BTW, your kid is correct, reloading is supposed to be fun.

Yes sir!