LOL, this will never change until we all use one universal way of developing a load. A good share of people end up at the same place, yet take different paths.Cracks me up how y'all are fussing about this... Grown **** men (and women?) huh?
Funny you should mention that.What would this thread look like if we added in positive compensation? Wow
I am with you and Milo. I do learn ways to improve my methods.First - I should have added a little funny face or something, the bickering humors me.
I agree Milo, and I do gain something each time I visit. Either direct knowledge or something that made me think through whatever it is I am working on. That and the humor are worth it!
Oh I completely understand. I don't want to reinvent the wheel. I'm just trying to figure out the relationship between charge, seating depth, speed nodes, accuracy nodes, etc. They're all interrelated and the arguments on what works/doesn't work get tough to sift through at times. I just haven't done any seating depth testing yet. I've always just aimed for 0.010 - 0.015 off the lands and found which charge was most accurate. After playing around with my magnetospeed, I've become interested in figuring out how to find the optimal charge for velocity nodes but that doesn't always correlate to accuracy without playing with seating depth. I have tested and retested charges so many times I've used a lot of components chasing my tail. So I need to figure out the most efficient way to get a good load so I can get off the bench!Ryan changing the seating depth does change the perfect charge weight slightly. If you only move your seating depth a small amount to find the accuracy the powder charge usually stays the same. I normally only need to correct my initial powder charge by a couple tenths to get it back to perfect.
I don't know how to find other threads where I discussed in detail my methods. But I have done so many times. For a hunting rifle I keep it much simpler. It's pretty easy to get 1/2 moa and that's all I need for hunting
For my match rifles I first do the same steps as I do for my hunting rifles but then I do ladder test at long range. There is no substitute for shooting at the distance you compete at. For 1000 yard compatition I'm looking for self compensation in my loads which you get at the top of the barrel timing. This is a whole other subject that is controversial too. I know it works for me. I'm a results driven reloader and do tons of testing on many methods of loading and tuning. I try to do all my loading in a controlled manner and change one thing at a time and look at the results of the change. It either gets better or worse or no change. I keep it simple. I keep doing things that give me good results and don't do things that have not. Can't get much simpler than that. I fully recommend people do their own test to determine what works best for you. I remember one match where the current world record holder was watching me load rounds. I ask him if I am doing it right and he said no. I took those rounds out and won the match. My way works for me and his for him. I like my way because it gets me real close to perfect in very few rounds. My friend has a 28 Nosler and wanted a good load fast do he didn't burn up his barrel. 20 shots later it was sub 1/2 moa. That's fast and simple. Do your research on what your shooting. Don't reinvent the wheel. If everyone is saying Barnes shoot best jumped more than 50 thou don't start at 10 thou off. If everyone is getting best accuacy and speed with a certain powder then use it first. 6ppc n133. 6br varget 6.5 Creed h4350 are just examples. There are combinations that just work for most people. Use them and tweak it for your rifle. The wheel is a good design. You can try a square or pentagon or octagon but I can tell you you will probably go back to the wheel when all is said and done. Internal ballistics is rocket science. Reloading is not.
I have actually watched this one early on in my learning process on Saterlee.