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
What’s up with Hornady’s reloading podcast?
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="willfrye027" data-source="post: 3080710" data-attributes="member: 114992"><p>"Generally this is the load falling apart"</p><p></p><p>Or…this is an example of small sample size misleading you.</p><p></p><p>And then when you're "in the node" but a shot falls out…do you call that a flier? Flinch? </p><p></p><p>I have done things both ways..personally the headaches, guessing, and wasted time at the loading bench and 100 yard line have been minimized by going away from the notion of nodes.</p><p></p><p>For some guys it may be enjoyable to tinker and play with small variations looking for a slightly tighter group. But the reality is it takes a very large sample size to prove small differences in group size..and at that point your lands have moved, fouling increased, range conditions/mirage have changed…for me that's time wasted that could have been spent improving my wind call and positional shooting.</p><p></p><p>The hornady guys admit that some small changes/improvements can be made with tinkering, with SOME cartridges and bullets. If that sounds fun, have at it. But there is a more painless way that achieves similar results in less time/components, freeing the shooter up to actually practice at whatever their chosen discipline is.</p><p></p><p>I would argue that the vast majority of shooters would see improvement in their scores, ability, or whatever meaningful metric you can place on it by ditching the conventional idea of a tune and spending time actually practicing with even a "mediocre" load in whatever their chosen discipline is.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="willfrye027, post: 3080710, member: 114992"] “Generally this is the load falling apart” Or…this is an example of small sample size misleading you. And then when you’re “in the node” but a shot falls out…do you call that a flier? Flinch? I have done things both ways..personally the headaches, guessing, and wasted time at the loading bench and 100 yard line have been minimized by going away from the notion of nodes. For some guys it may be enjoyable to tinker and play with small variations looking for a slightly tighter group. But the reality is it takes a very large sample size to prove small differences in group size..and at that point your lands have moved, fouling increased, range conditions/mirage have changed…for me that’s time wasted that could have been spent improving my wind call and positional shooting. The hornady guys admit that some small changes/improvements can be made with tinkering, with SOME cartridges and bullets. If that sounds fun, have at it. But there is a more painless way that achieves similar results in less time/components, freeing the shooter up to actually practice at whatever their chosen discipline is. I would argue that the vast majority of shooters would see improvement in their scores, ability, or whatever meaningful metric you can place on it by ditching the conventional idea of a tune and spending time actually practicing with even a “mediocre” load in whatever their chosen discipline is. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
What’s up with Hornady’s reloading podcast?
Top