Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Chatting and General Stuff
General Discussion
Load Tuning By Jerry Teo
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mikecr" data-source="post: 442847" data-attributes="member: 1521"><p>Your linked observation is right inline with what I see with my guns. </p><p>And what I find from that point is that powder tweaks to normalize MV are not needed -to spot optimum seating. You see, I'm not trying to hit on the best load at that point. I'm not fine tuning the overall load. Just finding best seating, before continuing on with powder testing.</p><p></p><p>There is more going on with seating than we can see.</p><p>Many pick distance w/resp to lands right up front, and go through the load development motions as though carved in stone by a divine messiah. Then they tweak seating just a tad for further 'fine' tunning/timing, Then guess what? Optimum seating SEEMS very very close to that they chose right up front, after pre-conditioned with further development... Hell, it might be, for them(never am I so lucky). And their gun might shoot well enough with that process. </p><p>But there was no particular reason that chosen seating would happen to actually be the 'best'. There is no formula, rule of thumb, known reason, or rational basis with which best seating could be predicted up front like that.</p><p>So they got what they got, and it's canned carvings that they try other bullets, just in case these results aren't good enough. Oh, and we'll do the same thing with primers as well.</p><p>Talk about tail chasing..</p><p></p><p>But this is what I've noticed; Once best seating is actually determined it does not change with other loading parameters. You can go from IMR to VV, from Feds to CCIs, big changing of the whole ballgame, and a quick +/- seating check will show that best is still best.</p><p>Yes, adjusting seating affects velocity. It affects the pressure curve on engravement and possibly through tension change(with an extreme). But you'll also notice that those same velocity changes ALONE do not cause the same things that seating does. Targets show they are seperate, and different actions. </p><p>A chronograph won't.. PressureTrace won't..</p><p>Your MV normalized +/-8thou seating change(which is HUGE) caused a far bigger change to grouping than 5fps alone would cause. This was NOT a 'fine tune'.</p><p></p><p>I also agree completely with load development being different for longer/lighter contour barrels, over shorter/heavier barrels. And I've found through communications with many barrelmakers that they have no idea how to make an accurate barrel in light contour. They make em all the same, and they are not at all interested in R&D for accurate hunting barrels. </p><p>Ruined by the BR market... </p><p>This is how we've arrived to a point of so many barrelmakers, with none any better than another. A market so divvied up, and so assimilated, that a better barrelmaker could not profit from it.</p><p>Anyway, it won't change. Just recognize that LR hunters need to pay less mind to the ancient carvings, and think for themselves.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mikecr, post: 442847, member: 1521"] Your linked observation is right inline with what I see with my guns. And what I find from that point is that powder tweaks to normalize MV are not needed -to spot optimum seating. You see, I'm not trying to hit on the best load at that point. I'm not fine tuning the overall load. Just finding best seating, before continuing on with powder testing. There is more going on with seating than we can see. Many pick distance w/resp to lands right up front, and go through the load development motions as though carved in stone by a divine messiah. Then they tweak seating just a tad for further 'fine' tunning/timing, Then guess what? Optimum seating SEEMS very very close to that they chose right up front, after pre-conditioned with further development... Hell, it might be, for them(never am I so lucky). And their gun might shoot well enough with that process. But there was no particular reason that chosen seating would happen to actually be the 'best'. There is no formula, rule of thumb, known reason, or rational basis with which best seating could be predicted up front like that. So they got what they got, and it's canned carvings that they try other bullets, just in case these results aren't good enough. Oh, and we'll do the same thing with primers as well. Talk about tail chasing.. But this is what I've noticed; Once best seating is actually determined it does not change with other loading parameters. You can go from IMR to VV, from Feds to CCIs, big changing of the whole ballgame, and a quick +/- seating check will show that best is still best. Yes, adjusting seating affects velocity. It affects the pressure curve on engravement and possibly through tension change(with an extreme). But you'll also notice that those same velocity changes ALONE do not cause the same things that seating does. Targets show they are seperate, and different actions. A chronograph won't.. PressureTrace won't.. Your MV normalized +/-8thou seating change(which is HUGE) caused a far bigger change to grouping than 5fps alone would cause. This was NOT a 'fine tune'. I also agree completely with load development being different for longer/lighter contour barrels, over shorter/heavier barrels. And I've found through communications with many barrelmakers that they have no idea how to make an accurate barrel in light contour. They make em all the same, and they are not at all interested in R&D for accurate hunting barrels. Ruined by the BR market... This is how we've arrived to a point of so many barrelmakers, with none any better than another. A market so divvied up, and so assimilated, that a better barrelmaker could not profit from it. Anyway, it won't change. Just recognize that LR hunters need to pay less mind to the ancient carvings, and think for themselves. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Chatting and General Stuff
General Discussion
Load Tuning By Jerry Teo
Top