HELP WITH SATERLEE VELOCITY TEST

25WSM said:
I've been using the Satterlee method with great success for quite some time. It greatly speeds up load development. It won't replace groups on paper but will get you real close real fast. One thing for sure is if your using a magnetospeed on your barrel don't pay any attention to your group size. Just use it for speed numbers only.
Shep
Click to expand...
Thanks Shep
 
53.1 to 53.7 is a good node. It's 4 shots wide which is typically what I see most often. So I it was me I would drop 53.1 and 53.3 and go right in the middle of 53.5 and 53.7. So I would load 53.6 and do a few seating test around this charge. Once you have the best seating seating depth I would load that depth with 53.5 and 53.7 also and see what is best. This process works for me very consistently. Let us know how it goes.
Shep
 
25WSM said:
53.1 to 53.7 is a good node. It's 4 shots wide which is typically what I see most often. So I it was me I would drop 53.1 and 53.3 and go right in the middle of 53.5 and 53.7. So I would load 53.6 and do a few seating test around this charge. Once you have the best seating seating depth I would load that depth with 53.5 and 53.7 also and see what is best. This process works for me very consistently. Let us know how it goes.
Shep
Click to expand...
That is an interesting observation. I missed that one
 
25WSM said:
53.1 to 53.7 is a good node. It's 4 shots wide which is typically what I see most often. So I it was me I would drop 53.1 and 53.3 and go right in the middle of 53.5 and 53.7. So I would load 53.6 and do a few seating test around this charge. Once you have the best seating seating depth I would load that depth with 53.5 and 53.7 also and see what is best. This process works for me very consistently. Let us know how it goes.
Shep
Click to expand...
Thanks 25WSM.
Appreciate that
 
My one college class in Statistics taught me to not believe any Stats that I didn't make up myself. :)

As a person at the very foot of this learning curve I find that I'm liking Shep's approach. Plain English method and not wrapped up in a bunch of techno-babble.
 
ntsqd said:
My one college class in Statistics taught me to not believe any Stats that I didn't make up myself. :)

As a person at the very foot of this learning curve I find that I'm liking Shep's approach. Plain English method and not wrapped up in a bunch of techno-babble.
Click to expand...
I totally agree with you.
Shep can lay out a good plan.
I have learned much over the last few months from Shep and Mikecr.
Thank you fellas!
 
No problem. The reason I drop the bottom half of the node is that the top half has the best sd and es numbers by far. Normally the load right before the next jump (scatter load) is the one with the best numbers. I try to find a load just under this spot so it has some temp insensitivity. 100% of the time my best loads are in the top half of the node. Once I figured that out I don't even try the bottom half anymore. I think anyone who has played with this method long enough will agree. Lots of guys just want to go right for the middle of the node but it's definitely not the best spot. 75% up in the node seems to be a sweet spot. I found the exact same thing with long distance ladder loads that if 4 bullets hit the same place the 3rd highest of the charge weight was the one that shot best. So now I always start at 75% in the node and then find the seating depth. Then go up and down on charge from there. If your seating depth didn't move much you probably won't find a better powder charge weight on either side. I use this method to tune every custom I build and countless customers rifles. Its just simple and works. For 1000 yard there is no substitute for confirming your loads at distance but I start the same way every time.
Shep
 
25WSM said:
No problem. The reason I drop the bottom half of the node is that the top half has the best sd and es numbers by far. Normally the load right before the next jump (scatter load) is the one with the best numbers. I try to find a load just under this spot so it has some temp insensitivity. 100% of the time my best loads are in the top half of the node. Once I figured that out I don't even try the bottom half anymore. I think anyone who has played with this method long enough will agree. Lots of guys just want to go right for the middle of the node but it's definitely not the best spot. 75% up in the node seems to be a sweet spot. I found the exact same thing with long distance ladder loads that if 4 bullets hit the same place the 3rd highest of the charge weight was the one that shot best. So now I always start at 75% in the node and then find the seating depth. Then go up and down on charge from there. If your seating depth didn't move much you probably won't find a better powder charge weight on either side. I use this method to tune every custom I build and countless customers rifles. Its just simple and works. For 1000 yard there is no substitute for confirming your loads at distance but I start the same way every time.
Shep
Click to expand...
The 75% up in the node comes from experience, which I acknowledge 25WSM.
Well, like they say...You learn something new everyday!
 
Everybody that keeps notes on your loading go back and see which part of the node was best. Satterlee will tell you exactly the same thing. He won't tell you to drop the bottom half of the node but he will say the top half has the most consistent numbers. Sort of the same thing really. Basically if the top of the node has the best numbers why use the bottom at all. I used to start in the middle of the node and work both ways and it always was the loads going up that shot better. You do that enough times you stop starting in the middle.
Shep
 
It's only a problem if it doesn't work for you. And it may not work for everybody. There definitely are more time consuming and components depleting ways to do it. Maybe I'm just simple and simple works best for me. So far it hasn't let me down yet. I've used it on smokeless muzzleloaders and lever actions and ARs as well as my target rifles and hunting rifles. I've saved a ton of money on time and components. But it's not the only way and everyone has to do what works for them. But if you do use the satterlee method try the 75% rule and see if it doesn't get you right there real quick. 20 shots can get you a real good tune. Then a few groups for fine tuning and your done. Yes I know it's so easy it's boring. But time is money and components are money and I don't have enough of all three.
Shep
 
25WSM said:
It's only a problem if it doesn't work for you. And it may not work for everybody. There definitely are more time consuming and components depleting ways to do it. Maybe I'm just simple and simple works best for me. So far it hasn't let me down yet. I've used it on smokeless muzzleloaders and lever actions and ARs as well as my target rifles and hunting rifles. I've saved a ton of money on time and components. But it's not the only way and everyone has to do what works for them. But if you do use the satterlee method try the 75% rule and see if it doesn't get you right there real quick. 20 shots can get you a real good tune. Then a few groups for fine tuning and your done. Yes I know it's so easy it's boring. But time is money and components are money and I don't have enough of all three.
Shep
Click to expand...
25WSM I truly like the way you take your time to provide feedback and share you experiences as opposed to some who just try to shoot something down without any backup...
 

Similar threads

S
Help with velocity variance
2
Replies
17
Views
5K
Loner
L
haftime
velocity or grouping with a ladder test
2
Replies
14
Views
3K
aschler
A
Mc Fraser
Help with ladder test
2 3
Replies
37
Views
9K
nt7332
nt7332
B
Help with OCW test
2 3
Replies
33
Views
4K
WildRose
WildRose
brguide
Help with OCW test
2
Replies
16
Views
4K
dsculley
D

Recent Posts

Top