My 10 rd load development

Discussion in 'Reloading' started by bob4, Jul 16, 2018.

  1. bob4

    bob4 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    394
    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2012
    After reading both Brozs comparison of the 210 VLD to the 215 Hybrid and 6.5 guys 10 rd load development I had to try.
    I loaded 12 rds in .02 GN increments starting at 72.2 and going to 74.4 of H-1000. 2 rounds being over book max. And just took it .040 off the lands. Working my way up here's what I got.

    72.2= 2721
    72.4= 2755
    72.6= 2736
    72.8 =2757
    73.0 =2764
    73.2=2766
    73.4= 2787
    73.6=2782
    73.8= 2770
    74.0= 2802
    74.2=2794
    74.4= 2816

    Unless someone sees something I'm missing I'm gonna load a few @ 73.0 as between 72.8 and 73.2 has an ES of 9. The 2 over max never showed any sign of pressure. Not sure if I should continue up till I see those signs or not. I must say the Berger 215 hybrid show accuracy tendencies. 10 rds landed as you see in the picture. Between the a different bullet and the magneto speed my POI started 7 inches high and took 2 rounds to adjust the scope to put it were we see now. I was pretty impressed with thebullet seeing's this was just over a 2 GN difference.

    [​IMG] Close to home all I have available is 100yds.
     
    Mike 338 likes this.
  2. Mike 338

    Mike 338 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,443
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    I'd say your right on. The handy thing about this type of test is that you can pull off the road and shoot them into a dirt bank 15 feet away and never even look down the scope. Finding a load can take 10 minutes.
     
    magedon44 likes this.
  3. Mikecr

    Mikecr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,560
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    This is not load development, and yeah you might as well be shooting into a dirt bank at 15ft, for all it's worth..
     
  4. Mike 338

    Mike 338 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,443
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Have you tried it?
     
  5. yobuck

    yobuck Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,126
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2008
    Well I wouldn't go so far as to agree on 10 minits. lol
    But no doubt it does eliminate a lot of shooting in order to get to a max load. I think just one round each 1/2 to even a full grain apart (shot over a chronograph) until pressure signs occur, is the way to go. Then backwards with 3 shot groups while playing with seating depth.
     
    Mike 338 likes this.
  6. Canhunter35

    Canhunter35 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,436
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2017
    How does your desired load shoot? I would consider a seating depth ladder test to tighten up your group. Perform it at 400yards minimum
     
  7. Mike 338

    Mike 338 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,443
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Your right. Picking out a load from the data still needs to be tested so that's a trip to the range. I frequently do this type of test along with a max load test. I'll load up about 15 shots in .2 grain increments in the general area I expect my nodes to be. Then I'll continue to increase powder charges in about 1% charges just to find max load. If I find max load goes way beyond the anticipated performance band, I'll go home and load up some more in small increments and test them too. I seldom need to because I don't have much interest in flirting close to max. Like all load development, you don't always get the results you want but using a method that may reveal a nice little sweet spot along with a reasonable likelihood of accuracy potential while getting some data you'll need anyway in 15 or 20 shots isn't such a bad way of approaching things.
     
  8. yobuck

    yobuck Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,126
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2008
    Exactly, anything under that is actually a waste.
    OK to shoot less distance initially, in order to find the velocity and where the pressure starts as thats all that matters at that point. Just far enough so the chronagraph works, no need even for a target.
     
    Canadian Bushman likes this.
  9. Mike 338

    Mike 338 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,443
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    This!
     
  10. Mikecr

    Mikecr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,560
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    You can test for best seating, which will open & close grouping more than anything else, with only the slightest affect to MV, and this will take way more than 10 shots. You can't look at a chronograph and see this.
    The brass has to be fire formed to stable capacity and consistent chamber fit before any meaningful powder load development can begin. This takes as many shots as number of cases times ~3. A ladder test for powder nodes takes ~30 shots. Grouping confirmations, another ~30 shots. If results are not good enough there may be powder or primer or bullet changes plus retesting.

    If you ever intend to find a best load for a gun, something providing 1/2moa or better, you can forget about this 10 shot hogwash.
    That beginning picture of a 100yd shotgun pattern,, that would kill a deer -at 100yds. But then, so would a shotgun...
     
    MNbogboy likes this.
  11. Mike 338

    Mike 338 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,443
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Sometimes yes, sometimes no. I have a couple rifles that shoot great from what I found in a 10 shot test. Low ES and 1/2 moa. Of course picking a seating depth that a particular style tends to like makes a lot of sense. VLD's very close or touching/jammed, Berger Hybrids do great with 70 thousandths jump, same for Barnes, ELD's, Match King's and Scenar's I start at 20 thousands jump. Match primers don't hurt.

    Certainly nothing is carved in stone but it's an interesting and often rewarding approach that an accurate chronograph like a Magnetospeed lends itself to. IMO, using previous styles of chrony's that read off reflected light don't cut it. Did I mention it was fast? I can pull off the road, have my gun and chrony set up on the tailgate in a couple minutes and bang out 10 or 15 shots in as many minutes (less if it's cold outside). I've done it numerous times in near dark and needed a flashlight to write down my data. Handy if you don't have a day to spend at the range. I then go home, load some and go the the range. If it likes them, I'll refine the load although it's usually not necessary.

    Note that the OP's shots on paper were not any one load but rather a load work-up from low to high. I was sorta impressed how close all his shots were given that none of them were the same load. The idea is to find a node, load some up and go back out and then test for accuracy. I usually don't even use a target when doing that test unless I'm trying to get a new scope somewhere around zero.
     
  12. SidecarFlip

    SidecarFlip Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,241
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2011
    I've been load laddering using Walt Berger's regimen for decades and laddering at 100 yards. never been an issue with me and I build loads for more than myself. Only time I stretch it out is after I find the node, set the velocity to where I want it and only then do I stretch it out. Been doing it that way for a long, long time. Lots of mounts on my walls and other shooters walls will attest to the fact it works,
     
    MNbogboy likes this.
  13. Mikecr

    Mikecr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,560
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    Wait a minute now, this was supposed to be 10 shots..

    My contention here is that you can't find sustainable accuracy in 10 shots.
    A fleeting flat spot in velocity means nothing until more testing proves otherwise. More testing means more shots, and so the '10 shot load development' is no more than fake news.
     
    MNbogboy likes this.
  14. bob4

    bob4 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    394
    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2012
    It's certainly not named correctly. But I didn't name it. Nope, 10 shots isn't gonna do it, you're absolutely right. Anyone should have understood that after watching the video. Hell, I started with 12 and certainly have more to go. It was something new to try. New to me anyway.