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
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Very strange ladder tests
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="7mmTikkaShooter" data-source="post: 1739691" data-attributes="member: 92915"><p>Oofta! These are some muddy waters kind of results. Frustrating I'm sure. Several things come to mind here: </p><p>1) chronograph error. Could the Magneto Speed have been or wiggled a little loose or just setup too close or far from the bore? </p><p>2) Bearing surface variations. Did you sort bullets for this? </p><p>3) Seating depth. In my experiences with Nosler ABLR's they're known to be pretty soft and like a bit more jump. Loaded too close and you may see inconsistencies. I've been told that the Partition construction is similar to the ABLR so is it possible that 0.030" jump is too close? </p><p>4) Primers. Could a switch here show more consistent ignition?</p><p>5) Powder. It's possible that this combination of brass, bullet, powder, primer, and gun just don't work as expected. Though all are high quality components, they just might not be the best recipe. Switching to a faster or slower powder might make ignition more consistent.</p><p>6) Neck tension. This can be critical in consistent velocity. Lapua brass is known for its consistency but have or can you check it?</p><p></p><p>Looks to me like it's worth testing again. I'd start by sorting bullets by bearing surface, then checking the neck tension and possibly turn them if you thought it was a factor, then check seating depth at the ogive. When it's time to shoot I'd be triple sure the magneto speed is setup perfectly. I would also load 3 per charge and use the average velocity as that's the basic minimum for scientific data. If your results are erratic again after that test it would seem time to swap primer and/or powder components. I wish I could give you a more expedient or economical answer but this data is just too erratic to glean any info from in my opinion. Check your component consistencies and give it another go. Good luck and keep us all posted. Here's hoping we can all learn something.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="7mmTikkaShooter, post: 1739691, member: 92915"] Oofta! These are some muddy waters kind of results. Frustrating I’m sure. Several things come to mind here: 1) chronograph error. Could the Magneto Speed have been or wiggled a little loose or just setup too close or far from the bore? 2) Bearing surface variations. Did you sort bullets for this? 3) Seating depth. In my experiences with Nosler ABLR’s they’re known to be pretty soft and like a bit more jump. Loaded too close and you may see inconsistencies. I’ve been told that the Partition construction is similar to the ABLR so is it possible that 0.030” jump is too close? 4) Primers. Could a switch here show more consistent ignition? 5) Powder. It’s possible that this combination of brass, bullet, powder, primer, and gun just don’t work as expected. Though all are high quality components, they just might not be the best recipe. Switching to a faster or slower powder might make ignition more consistent. 6) Neck tension. This can be critical in consistent velocity. Lapua brass is known for its consistency but have or can you check it? Looks to me like it’s worth testing again. I’d start by sorting bullets by bearing surface, then checking the neck tension and possibly turn them if you thought it was a factor, then check seating depth at the ogive. When it’s time to shoot I’d be triple sure the magneto speed is setup perfectly. I would also load 3 per charge and use the average velocity as that’s the basic minimum for scientific data. If your results are erratic again after that test it would seem time to swap primer and/or powder components. I wish I could give you a more expedient or economical answer but this data is just too erratic to glean any info from in my opinion. Check your component consistencies and give it another go. Good luck and keep us all posted. Here’s hoping we can all learn something. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Very strange ladder tests
Top