AusVarmint

Evening guys, I have forced myself out to get some fine turning done though i am half question a poor result last week to the lack of sleep i have had of late... I though i had my head around this all but a recent link i was given made me think is there more to the obvious

My observations are:
-44.3 looks good (though last week it shot like shit = the reason why think test come up
-44.6 has me F*+k'd as it opened out drastically and if i had more round there i would have peppered it to see if anything collated a little more
- groups are tightening in again but, now do i play with seat depth or continue on another grain (if i can fit it)

Whats wrong with the first three ? Must have got fucken cold there awefull quick -13C already

I'd be happy with any of the above, assuming I was using box ammunition.

Camel wrote:Whats wrong with the first three ? Must have got fucken cold there awefull quick -13C already

Haha I should have put Coal xxx

You know me Mark will spend me whole life try to make my factory rifle shoot like a custom built one.

The article a read say that the best looking group isn't nessessarily the most stable so possibly one stood out as needed seating adjustment to improve accuracy

With ladder tests and other load development I was told always look at vertical spread, to do this effectively you need a good rest with a stop on it. If I am telling you to suck eggs apologies in advance

43.7 to 44gr looks best to me ... I'd be interested to see where 43.4gr would have placed. Everything beyond that is coming down the target. Maybe try a tweak by changing primer and see if it does the same or better. I agree with where you stopped being a maximum, did you see pressure signs at all?

Dr G,
This isn't quite a ladder test, although its dancing a similar tune. Your looking for where the groups are placed vertically rather than individual shots within the group. Where there's a run of groups that sit at the same vertical, further tweaking takes place with COL to reduce group size. If a group at say 43.4 had of been fired and been equal vertical to the next two, then the mid-point (43.7gr) would be where the tweaking would occur.
Cheers...
Con
PS: Yes up early ... x2 with tonsillitis.

dan_351 wrote:
You know me Mark will spend me whole life try to make my factory rifle shoot like a custom built one.

The article a read say that the best looking group isn't nessessarily the most stable so possibly one stood out as needed seating adjustment to improve accuracy

Mate, I think sometimes you just have to go with what you get on paper, rather than too much time and effort trying all the things that we read in articles and such, there are way too many variables, and differing opinions, in this game to rely too much on what you read. Sure use outside information as a guide, but I find that if you place more trust in what you have actually got from your equipment, you will spend a lot less time chasing your tail. I have done heaps of stuff that I've read will "make your factory rifle "THE" rifle", only to find that I have wasted a lot of time and effort, and sometimes great expense, for very little, if any improvements.

Nothing tells the truth like holes in paper for testing. I would be pretty damned happy with a factory rifle that shot that well.

My thoughts agree with Con.

Also from looking at and reading others targets often appears to be a scatter node after a decent one then it might tighten up again.

Don't know id those charges are already max but you might find there is a node around that 43.7 mark and one up above or near that top charge.

My 6.5x55AI shows a node basically at min and one close to max well compressed powder capacity. Now I need to shoot a few more groups at each and do some more fiddling.

I look at that and see nothing wrong with the gun but a whole lot wrong of the bullets. My 308 and SSTs do the same thing with nothing being repeatable. The SST is not an accuracy bullet. It's a hunting bullet designed for minute of pig. Replace the bullet with a BT and my 308 cuts ragged holes under half MOA.

Con wrote:43.7 to 44gr looks best to me ... I'd be interested to see where 43.4gr would have placed. Everything beyond that is coming down the target. Maybe try a tweak by changing primer and see if it does the same or better. I agree with where you stopped being a maximum, did you see pressure signs at all?

Dr G,
This isn't quite a ladder test, although its dancing a similar tune. Your looking for where the groups are placed vertically rather than individual shots within the group. Where there's a run of groups that sit at the same vertical, further tweaking takes place with COL to reduce group size. If a group at say 43.4 had of been fired and been equal vertical to the next two, then the mid-point (43.7gr) would be where the tweaking would occur.
Cheers...
Con
PS: Yes up early ... x2 with tonsillitis.

House of Death is playing up AGAIN!

If i happen to be out there at -13'c again i can give 43.3 a bash and just over the last dot too. No signs of pressure at all, there was alost no room in the case though. (as far as quickload data for this had come back i can't get enough powder into the case (within reason) to max pressure. From memory i am only just off the lands (but i have forgotten how to read my MIrcoseater.... But it sure looks cool

Next time i am at the LGS i might grab 1 or 2 packs of anther primer so i can twerk a little

Camel wrote: Mate, I think sometimes you just have to go with what you get on paper, rather than too much time and effort trying all the things that we read in articles and such, there are way too many variables, and differing opinions, in this game to rely too much on what you read. Sure use outside information as a guide, but I find that if you place more trust in what you have actually got from your equipment, you will spend a lot less time chasing your tail. I have done heaps of stuff that I've read will "make your factory rifle "THE" rifle", only to find that I have wasted a lot of time and effort, and sometimes great expense, for very little, if any improvements.

Nothing tells the truth like holes in paper for testing. I would be pretty damned happy with a factory rifle that shot that well.

I am def chuffed with a factory rifle shooting to 0.5" i guess whilst stuffing around i am learning a little more and more. Besides i still can't get out to hunt anything yet All in good practice for when i build my super duper .20

Tony Z wrote:I look at that and see nothing wrong with the gun but a whole lot wrong of the bullets. My 308 and SSTs do the same thing with nothing being repeatable. The SST is not an accuracy bullet. It's a hunting bullet designed for minute of pig. Replace the bullet with a BT and my 308 cuts ragged holes under half MOA.

Hmmmm, i kicked myself when told by a LR shooter he moved to Bergers from SST as he got a few fliers at 500m and beyond. I am ATTEMPTING to get my hands on a few hundred 140gn Bergers and got given a part box of 130gn (though i don't think they will swap straight out with these loads as far as testing the lands on my Rifle the 129 SST and 140gn Bergers matched... COuld i assume that if i found the sweet seating depth wasting my last SST i can start there with the Bergers?

Thanks you all for your advise to date

Has that rifle been bedded?
Cheers...
Con

Con wrote:Has that rifle been bedded?
Cheers...
Con

Not bedded but is in a Bell and Carlson stock with a full alloy block right the way up past the recoil lug which is part of the block if any of this makes sense

I'm not so sure the alloy blocks don't benefit from a skim bed with epoxy. Have another play before changing projectiles.
Cheers...
Con

0.5 inch groups with sst's seems about norm for them my old swede shoots them at about that.

I'm new to this reloading bizo but would say 5 shot groups at longer range give clearer results?