Ladder test results

Terrytin

Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2016
Messages
7
Location
Montana
DA4B03DF-49EE-4756-AF51-69C9888EF916.jpeg
I am new to long range shooting and reloading. I am currently trying to find the best load using a ladder test method. I have read numerous forums as to how to go about it but need all the experts to chime in and tell me if I'm on the right track.
I shoot a Rem 700 long range 300 WM with a 24" 1x10" Proof barrel, H1000, Nosler Accubond LR 190 grain bullets. I tried a ladder test at 400 yds (max our range has) but the mirage was bad enough I couldn't see the holes, and there was enough shooting going on besides me, I just couldn't go down after every shot, so I just got done with a 300 yard test. Here is a picture of the test. I started at 75.4 with .2 grain increments up to 77.2 I know everyone says to look for the vertical shots placements as well as the speed closeness as they should be together. What does everyone think?
 
I would use load #4 and do another ladder for seating depth.
Start first load .010" off the lands and increase distance from lands to .020, .030, .040 and so on.
Look for a good horizontal grouping of 3 shots that are in sequence of seating depth. Example: .020, .030, .040
 
Does it make a difference what you fine tune first? I did do a ladder test earlier for seating depth before the charging test. Found out that between .30 & .40 the grouping was quite a bit tighter. I did a test from touching the lands to .50. That was using a load of 75.5 grains.
 
Sorry, I had the methods confused ( ladder vs. OCW) and that you were At 300 yards!

And yes, mirage and people shooting next to you doesn't help either!
 
Last edited:
in a ladder you need enough time in gravity to show what you are trying to weed out ,

with 1 so high and 7 so low , just says not enough distance and that poi changes due to power charges , are too random and overlap , not useful IMO

differences between 4 & 6 , 1-1/2 moa poi shift! , horizontal , probably mirage

id add more distance with this small of increment powder change , more shots of each charge

if you put a 1 moa circle around every shot, it is just too confusing .. i need to make a pic that shows why i feel a diamond shape target is easier to see when its not dead center , for me anyway

i would also suspect that the 3" target circle with the mirage added some error ,

the useful data that you did get is the velocities <thumbs up>

modified DA4B03DF-49EE-4756-AF51-69C9888EF916.jpg
 
Last edited:
#5 76.2 gets my vote too. It's right in the middle of 4,5 and6 with the best vertical.
I would stretch it out farther if you can, and work on seating depth. Sometimes changing primers can really tighten up a group too.
 
SNIP OF EXCEL DATA

Does it make a difference what you fine tune first? I did do a ladder test earlier for seating depth before the charging test.
how were your groups with seating test , ladder is pretty much for velocity

you are definitely getting lower sd's at the higher charge weights , but its not corresponding to the POI you are getting , shooter error , wind , mirage ? only you would know

i am going to make a post regarding the target shape and how its easier to see the differences when using a diamond target vs a circle
https://www.longrangehunting.com/threads/target-shape-choice.225998/


SNIP OF LRH DATA.GIF
 
Last edited:
View attachment 148135 I am new to long range shooting and reloading. I am currently trying to find the best load using a ladder test method. I have read numerous forums as to how to go about it but need all the experts to chime in and tell me if I'm on the right track.
I shoot a Rem 700 long range 300 WM with a 24" 1x10" Proof barrel, H1000, Nosler Accubond LR 190 grain bullets. I tried a ladder test at 400 yds (max our range has) but the mirage was bad enough I couldn't see the holes, and there was enough shooting going on besides me, I just couldn't go down after every shot, so I just got done with a 300 yard test. Here is a picture of the test. I started at 75.4 with .2 grain increments up to 77.2 I know everyone says to look for the vertical shots placements as well as the speed closeness as they should be together. What does everyone think?

Going to agree with others that around 4-5 looks promising. Charge 3 appears to be right there as well. If you have a chronograph available to you, I'd recommend trying the Satterlee load development method. It's essentially the same concept as you're trying to see on a target but using the data from a chronograph. I've had really good luck with this. If you don't I'd probably start around charge 3 loading up to around charge 6, and shoot some 3-5 shot groups. Maybe try an OCW test in doing so? Anyway you shake it, unless there are some major aberrations in your first test I'd bet 72.1 grains will be awful close. Keep us posted.
 
Going to agree with others that around 4-5 looks promising. Charge 3 appears to be right there as well. If you have a chronograph available to you, I'd recommend trying the Satterlee load development method. It's essentially the same concept as you're trying to see on a target but using the data from a chronograph. I've had really good luck with this. If you don't I'd probably start around charge 3 loading up to around charge 6, and shoot some 3-5 shot groups. Maybe try an OCW test in doing so? Anyway you shake it, unless there are some major aberrations in your first test I'd bet 72.1 grains will be awful close. Keep us posted.
76.1
 
Thanks everyone for your input here. I really enjoy most of the time everyone's input, and difference of options. The comment about diamond targets vs circles does make sense, but IMO at 300 yards and longer your reticle is the complete width of that circle or diamond or almost, so trying to hold directly on the high point seems to of little difference. A couple comments of trying 71.0 grains or there about is not even in my ladder test, maybe a typo there. I just reloaded 3ea of 76.0 through 76.6 in .2 gr. increments. I will see where they land. Thanks again.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top