Thread: Testing a conventional approach to load development

I just found this thread. Its very interesting and a great practical example of the Hornady #50 and #52 podcasts I watched last week. Thanks @gimp for taking the time to do the test and share it.
I have a new rifle that I plan to load for using this method. Let's just say I settle on a load after 50 rounds. I understand that barrels speed up over the first 100-200 shots. Traditionally this would require retuning the load to get back to the "velocity node". In reality though, the velocity increase should be no real concern accuracy wise and I seem to recall the Hornady guys saying there is no correlation between velocity and accuracy. So it'll just be a matter of keeping an eye on velocity over time to make sure I'm making appropriate allowance in my ballistic calculator for long range work. Have I got the right take on that?
Cheers

I recently got a new rifle. I picked a load at book max of 2209. At 200 rounds it is 50fps faster than 0 rounds. The precision is no different.

Originally Posted by gimp

I recently got a new rifle. I picked a load at book max of 2209. At 200 rounds it is 50fps faster than 0 rounds. The precision is no different.

When I say I "picked a load", I mean -

I set the seating die so that the bullet is some distance off the lands and the COL is around the book max COL - not sure how far off the lands maybe 30 thou
I loaded 30 rounds, 10ea with 2209, 2208, and an old slow batch of 2209
I shot 3 10 round groups
All were fine for precision but the 2208 and the old slow batch of 2209 were a bit slower than my requirements

I then proceeded to select a max load of 2209 as my load at that random OAL, and use it.

Over the first 200 rounds it seems to have sped up around 50fps, precision hasn't changed.

As no-one else has repeated my "test of the test" - we can't say categorically that you should expect the same with every rifle, cartridge, bullet, powder combination - but I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary yet.

Cool, thanks. Coincidentally I will be using 2209 aswell.
Cheers.

Thought I’d come back and re-read. Definitely changed the way I do things

I managed to get to the range last night. Put 70 rounds of "load development" through the 223. Used a hybrid approach effectively a quick test of seating depth to see if I noticed any difference and to use the last bit of some old 4895 I don't trust. Then a quick exclusion test with various powders to exclude any options from further consideration (5 shots cant confirm a good group but inverse probability can highly suggest its not worth continueing with . I'm going to start a thread following this rifle as I have a few hundred bits of brass and intend to test a bunch of things for myself. I will try record it all to post on here. A summary was I shot 3+inch 5 shot groups as well as 4 consecutive submoa 5 shot groups with 4 different powders and charges that overlaid fall in 1.1moa for 20 shots. I think it's going to highlight the fastest reloading solution is to change components

Please post up the data! Very interested to see

Originally Posted by gimp

Please post up the data! Very interested to see

That's the plan. One thing I see straight of the bat is it doesn't like the 75s like the Tikka did.

A wee thought on this. The results are still a bit subject to "other factors". My 223 full length die has been on the same "setting" for years. My last two 223s didn't really perform as well as I expected. Then the latest one gave me a series of light primer strikes, no bang. Hmmm, it's a very well built rifle, everything should be good, what's causing that? I checked firing pin protusion, all good. Headspace is the next suspect, so a trip to the gunsmith, hmmm that's within tolerance as well, the"no-go" wouldn't drop.

A real big Hmmmm. So after some more thought I got a comparator and measured the should length of some fired, factory and reloaded rounds. The measurements are relative but most factory ammo hovered round 2.507" Fired cases from the last two 223s a very consistent 2.514. My sized cases, 2.505 to 2.507 ( including the light pin strike ones). So I dug through some old cases until I found some that were measuring 2.511+, neck sized them and presto, accuracy improved, and the light strikes vanished.

Funnily enough both current 223s have exactly the same chamber length, and both improved accuracy.

My dies must have been like it, potentially causing issues, for at least 5 years since I got a co-ax press.

Originally Posted by Tentman

A wee thought on this. The results are still a bit subject to "other factors". My 223 full length die has been on the same "setting" for years. My last two 223s didn't really perform as well as I expected. Then the latest one gave me a series of light primer strikes, no bang. Hmmm, it's a very well built rifle, everything should be good, what's causing that? I checked firing pin protusion, all good. Headspace is the next suspect, so a trip to the gunsmith, hmmm that's within tolerance as well, the"no-go" wouldn't drop.

A real big Hmmmm. So after some more thought I got a comparator and measured the should length of some fired, factory and reloaded rounds. The measurements are relative but most factory ammo hovered round 2.507" Fired cases from the last two 223s a very consistent 2.514. My sized cases, 2.505 to 2.507 ( including the light pin strike ones). So I dug through some old cases until I found some that were measuring 2.511+, neck sized them and presto, accuracy improved, and the light strikes vanished.

Funnily enough both current 223s have exactly the same chamber length, and both improved accuracy.

My dies must have been like it, potentially causing issues, for at least 5 years since I got a co-ax press.

Sure, a reloading process/quality error like that could mean that you'd struggle to "find a good load" at all. However tuings like that are a constant across all loads trialed and don't at all detract from the investigation of whether or not conventional load development methods work. It's a separate issue like whether or not your rifle is junk. I think right back at the beginning I recommend avoiding these issues by having a very high quality rifle system and using the best components.

Quite surprised theres not much focus on seating depth here. Remember watching a podcast with eric cortina and jack nerry (i think his name was) one f class the other benchrest for team lapua. Talking about seating depth has a direct relation on group size, testing in 3thou increments. A example of this is when people buy factory ammo to test what there rifle likes that is the seating depth of the different ammo that determines the better groups.
I think his way of load development makes sense, first stage over chony, no target to distract you, find lowest es
Once powder charge found on to seating depth testing

Originally Posted by Hunterdave

Quite surprised theres not much focus on seating depth here. Remember watching a podcast with eric cortina and jack nerry (i think his name was) one f class the other benchrest for team lapua. Talking about seating depth has a direct relation on group size, testing in 3thou increments. A example of this is when people buy factory ammo to test what there rifle likes that is the seating depth of the different ammo that determines the better groups.
I think his way of load development makes sense, first stage over chony, no target to distract you, find lowest es
Once powder charge found on to seating depth testing

Cortina's are so last year. They don't even make them any more.

You are assuming that factory ammo brands all use the same powder.
I test powders before I fiddle with length (if ever). Mag length and a couple or three powders at near book max. Usually one of them works. Chrono when it's all over and adjust the charge for target velocity. Then go hunting.

Originally Posted by Tahr

Cortina's are so last year. They don't even make them any more.

I stopped watching him ages ago.

Originally Posted by Tahr

Cortina's are so last year. They don't even make them any more.

You are assuming that factory ammo brands all use the same powder.
I test powders before I fiddle with length (if ever). Mag length and a couple or three powders at near book max. Usually one of them works. Chrono when it's all over and adjust the charge for target velocity. Then go hunting.

No just that any load can be made better at the right seating depth

Originally Posted by Hunterdave

No just that any load can be made better at the right seating depth

Show us your groups . . . Awaiting results with interest!