Breaking the MOA barrier

[azar92]

It's seems in every thread I read, both here and elsewhere, people talk about shooting 0.25" groups, 0.5" groups, or, on a bad day, 0.75" groups. Maybe a lot of it is simple bravado. I am also aware that many that frequent these types of boards are benchrest shooters. I have seen photos of some of the targets and the sizes of the groups astound me. I only dream about shooting that good of groups. My best shooting with my reloads never seems to break 1 MOA at 100 yards. I am more than willing to admit that it could be the guy pulling the trigger. But maybe you could help me out?

If you can regularly and repeatably shoot groups less than 1 MOA please answer these questions for me:

1) Are you shooting with a stock rifle, straight from the factory with no modifications? If your rig is customized such as custom barrels, triggers, free-floats, beddings, etc, what have you had done?
2) What type of rest do you use? Range provided sandbags, your own nicer bags, bi-pod, Caldwell lead sled, or some higher-end rest?
3) How much work do you put into your handloads? Weigh every charge, every bullet, check for run-out on each round?
4) What is your bench technique like? When you let your barrel cool down, how cool is "cool"?
5) How often do you get to shoot and how much time do you spend at the range at a given time?

Now, a little bit about my gear and my goals...

Both guns I reload for are factory standard with no modifications or customizations:
1) CZ 550 American in 6.5x55 SE
2) Ruger M77 Mark II in 7mm Remington Magnum

I use a set of Caldwell "Deadshot" sand bag rests. I do my best to make my handloads as accurate as possible. I weigh every charge, and sometimes weigh each bullet. I have no tools to check for run-out, case neck thickness, etc. I try and let my barrel cool down usually about 3 minutes in between each shot. I only get to go shooting 1 to 2 times a month and spend around 2 hours at the range when I do get to go.

I have the Rock Chucker Supreme Master reloading kit, standard RCBS green box dies, a basic Lyman dial caliper, etc. No Redding, Forester, or Wilson dies. Nothing high-end, because it's too expensive. The reloads I make will be used for hunting, not benchrest shooting. I full-length resize and use typical hunting bullets (Interlocks, Core-Lokts, GameKings, etc).

Now, I know I don't need better than 1 MOA accuracy for bullets that will be used for hunting. I would like to get my rounds as accurate as possible and to get my bench technique as good as I can. I think it's mainly jealousy when I see so many good shooters around me getting amazing groups. Especially when I see people who have the exact same factory standard gear claiming to get 0.5" groups regularly. I don't mind being outshot by a benchrest shooter who has heavily modified ($$$) gear.

Am I expecting too much of standard reloading gear and factory stock guns? Is it more likely the shooter and the need for better technique? How much will basic mods to my guns help (free-float, glass bed, trigger work)?

Sorry for the long post...

[Alleykat]

Both my Remmy 700 varmints, VS and VLS, in .223 and .243 will shoot under 1 m.o.a. @ 100 yds. They're stock, except for the Timney triggers set at around 1#, and the VLS has been bedded and free-floated.

My Bushy Shorty has shot some 1/2", five-shot groups @ 100 yds, using Berger bullets, H335 powder. Barrel is free-floated, and JP trigger/ hammer installed.

[rwilson452]

Breaking the MOA barrier
It's seems in every thread I read, both here and elsewhere, people talk about shooting 0.25" groups, 0.5" groups, or, on a bad day, 0.75" groups. Maybe a lot of it is simple bravado. I am also aware that many that frequent these types of boards are benchrest shooters. I have seen photos of some of the targets and the sizes of the groups astound me. I only dream about shooting that good of groups. My best shooting with my reloads never seems to break 1 MOA at 100 yards. I am more than willing to admit that it could be the guy pulling the trigger. But maybe you could help me out?

If you can regularly and repeatably shoot groups less than 1 MOA please answer these questions for me:

1) Are you shooting with a stock rifle, straight from the factory with no modifications? If your rig is customized such as custom barrels, triggers, free-floats, beddings, etc, what have you had done?

Stock guns with the exception of trigger work to get it lighter. as all my rifles are for hunting I like around a 2.5 pound trigger.

2) What type of rest do you use? Range provided sandbags, your own nicer bags, bi-pod, Caldwell lead sled, or some higher-end rest?

Front rest is a Caldwell BR rest. Rear bag is a protecktor,

3) How much work do you put into your handloads? Weigh every charge, every bullet, check for run-out on each round?

Every charge is trickle charged. I use almost exclusively Sierra bullets. Lee dies. I don't weigh the bullets unless I suspect a problem ( I had a problem with some Hornaday once). Don't check for runout except for the first run with new dies etc.

4) What is your bench technique like? When you let your barrel cool down, how cool is "cool"?

Until it feels "room temp" I use 4 fouling shots. I can watch them walk onto zero. I shoot 20 rounds then clean and start over

5) How often do you get to shoot and how much time do you spend at the range at a given time?

As often as I want, weather permitting. usually 2-3 days a week when I'm doing load development. My home range is 5 min. away. Dues are $10 per year. I use their stand and my targets. This year I might start using my own target stand.

My Varmint rifles are varmint weight barrels, Like my Savage BVSS in .243.

[42769vette]

i use a stock tc prohunter 243 and got .6 inch group on my first attempt of reloading. since then i have lightened the trigger.

i use a caldwell lead slead

i measure everything. i even seperate my bullets from each pack by wieght.

i shot 2 fouling shots then a 3-5 shot group. wait a few minutes and shoot 3-5 so on and so forth

i shot every week or 2 for a couple hours each time. but when i was developing my loads i shot 3 times a week for a hour or 2.

hope this helps

[Unclenick]

Azar92,

Welcome to the world of guns as individuals.

There are lots of good stock guns out there. One thing I notice missing from your post are things accuracy shooters usually start with, and that is load work-up. What powders are you using? What bullets? What COL's? Have you experimented with altering seating depth to find a sweet spot? Have you experimented with altering powder charge? What bullets have you tried? Have a look at Dan Newberry's site for a systematic approach to getting your loads tuned to your guns.

Expensive tools can help. You do not need to spend money on sizing dies better than RCBS, but you might find that buying an even less expensive Lee collet die and doing some neck-size-only reloading will help?

As to bedding, Harold Vaughn wrote that he'd only ever seen one style of bedding consistently improve the group sizes made by sporter rifles, and that is what he calls O'Conner bedding (believing that a Jack O'Conner article is where he first saw it described). It is remarkably simple. Take the gun out of the stock and wax the barrel in the forestock area with Johnson's paste wax for a release agent. Put it back in and check that Your stock screws are tight. Set the gun on a workbench such that the butt stock is tied down and the front is supported by a bag under the magazine floor plate. The barrel and forestock should both overhang the bench. Use the front sling swivel to suspend a 10 to 20 pound weight. With the forestock pulled down by that weight, soak some thin cardboard squares about 3/8" square in a good grade slow setting epoxy and put them between the barrel and forstock near the front about 180° apart so that they bridge the gap between the forestock and barrel. Let the epoxy set up with the weight in place. Remove the weight and remove the action so you can get it to release the barrel. Let the shims cure in the stock for a week. Put it back together being sure to tighten the stock screws so you have that 10-20 lbs of upward force bearing on the barrel.

That method has the effect of shortening how much of the barrel whips freely, thereby reducing its vertical and lateral deflection during firing.

If you want to tune the gun still tighter for a particular load, you can fiddle with the setup at the range before adding the epoxy into the mix. Adjust the cardboard forward and backward along the barrel and forestock with the bag still under the floor plate during test firing. Repeat the process, moving the the wedges back an inch each time until you get a group reduction. Then try tuning it out and back a half inch. Then a quarter inch. Try to find the best sweet spot. Measure their location and epoxy them in that location when you get home, using the method I described above. Obviously, you can use any kind of bedding material you might prefer for the job.

[a7mmnut]

It has been my steadfast rule for more than 20 years now, that every bolt action rifle that I'm going to keep will do at least 1" or better with factory loads. If you're talking .22 to 6.5 cal., then I'm going to need at least 3/4". Most rifles I've ever owned will do this--you just have to spend enough money to find its individual likes. I always start by trying Hornady Custom or Federal Premium. Once I find its potential (and it's a "keeper"), I begin working up handloads for the bullet weight it seems to prefer. To keep a rifle from being so picky, you're probably going to need to do a tune up.

The first and probably most important lesson I learned about accuracy is optic quality. If you don't have solid mounts, rings that don't slip, and a scope with repeatable adjustments and great glass, then the rest is a headache for nothing. Picking a good setup doesn't mean only buying the best, it just means buying the best that you can afford, and that works for you. This is where TFL friends and research come in.

Many times, I haven't been able to do any better than the factory loads. That's fine with me, 'cause I love those Hornady and Federal rounds. If the rifle blows out most other brands within the same bullet weight range, then the tune up is in order, and it would probably have gotten it later anyway. At any rate, I load a dummy round with my bullet picks after I measure the chamber. Each new bullet or case gets a complete new load worked up for it. After that, I go to tuning the rig itself.

I start with a light weight trigger adjustment and do the free float and glass bedding while it's out of the stock. While these may not improve on any one load's particular accuracy potential, it has most certainly proven to me to be more beneficial to overall accuracy of the rifle itself. By this, I mean to say it limits the "pickiness". After the float and bed, most will shoot almost anything you feed them into a softball-sized circle at 100 with the same zero, so sighting in for many different bullet weights in the same gun should be much easier, as well. It also makes your gun more weather friendly and repeatable under most all conditions.

If I really want to super tune, then I start with squaring the action and bolt face, then move to polishing the chamber and recrowning. Most of the time, these aren't even necessary in a hunting rifle. There are a whole host of other techniques that are out there, but these are my picks for affordability and ease of completion.

IMO, your nice CZ most certainly should be under 1" with a good factory load. The Ruger will most likely do much better after tuning. Its compressed stock fit and 45º recoil lug will scare some people away. I did my (MkI) Ruger by relieving and bedding both surfaces of the lug at the same time. You can experiment to see if it will improve accuracy by adding a shim around each lug screw before taking out material. Make it thick enough to relieve stress at the forearm, and make sure to place one at the rear lug with the same thickness as well so the action will stay sqaure and level.

My 24" barrel did like the middle of the road 150-154 grainers, and would shoot three into 5/8" after tuning. The trigger needs to be done by a smith if you don't want to try it yourself. It will need a new spring and stoning and polishing of the trigger engagement surface. The MKII is really a lot easier to make accurate without switching components than my older model. When complete, I think you'll be quite proud of the diet your improved friends will prefer.


Good luck, and keep us posted;

-7-

[TheNatureBoy]

When I go to the range I can shoot up to 1000 yards and beyond actually, but at this point I limit myself to 100-300 yards. From shooting table I place in front of me a 100 yard target and to my left a 300 yard target. To shoot the 300 yard target I need only to go to the other end of the table.

I'm shooting a stock 7mm rem mag sendero with no mods what so ever. I use a Hyskore combination rig that you can clean and sight rifles with. If anyone has ever seen one, you can slide one end to the front and use it as a rest.

I'm not anal about loading but I am very, very serious about it. I don't use digital scales cause I don't trust them (yet). I use a spoon and carefully load each round the old fashioned way. I haven't gotten to the point that weigh cases or bullets yet. I will admit that I'm slowly getting nit picky about this reloading thing and will probably get to that point. I enjoy loading. Its good therapy. I take my time and enjoy it.

1 fouling shot. I let barrel cool after 3 shot group. Easy for me to do because I usually shoot my custom .280 Remington until the Sendero is cooled.

I go to the range 1nce a month. I practice in my yard with scoped pellet rifle every other day.

My Sendero is very accurate. Last week I shot moa to 1/2 and 3/4 inch groups consistently @ 100 yards using Nosler 150 grain ballistic tips. I also load 160 Sierra Game King and 168 Match King bullets.

[RodneyJ]

I had A Rem 700 in .270 that would do better than 1 moa with factory loads and only got better with hand loads. the only work I had done to it was to lighten the trigger. I belive one the biggest factors in getting small groups is to insure you have good optics. On the other hand I have a TC 30.06 I am working on load development for and after shooting 4 different factory loads and a hand full of hand loads I have had only one group come close to 1 moa. I guess some just come off the assembly line shooters and some have to be tweaked to get the most out of them. Good luck and have fun
RodneyJ

[a7mmnut]

These last posts also brought to my mind that a good hunting load seldom equals a good match load. Some people may bring you a 1/4" 3 shot group that was individually loaded into the chamber, but is waaaay overlength to feed in the magazine. Don't get too tore up over what other people say(or the Sierra Loading Manuals). Your standards may not equal ours, and you can still kill a deer with a 2 MOA rifle.


-7-

[amamnn]

Over the years I have found that the vast majority of people claiming to shoot tiny sub MOA groups with out of the box factory rifles fall into 3 categories.

1) people for whom the word regularly means once-- and it was a 3 shot group on a perfectly still day and they were lucky because they don't use wind flags and have no idea as to how to control neck tension.

2) same as above, but the group was incorrectly measured and/or shot at close range (under 50 yards)

3) bald faced liars

All three groups seem to have some reason or other to be somewhere else than on the range when you are, even if you invite then to come to your club as a guest shooting for free.

The rest of the sub-MOA folks who really do manage to shoot that well with a lightly modified factory rifle will surely admit that a large portion of their success is due to luck--in that they have managed to buy an out of the box rifle that will respond to their hard work and skill at developing the loads and their careful shooting technique.

IMHO you have to pay close attention to ALL phases of shooting in order to be able to consistently shoot the real screamers (groups you just had to holler about) but the age old accuracy rule still applies: 60% is the shooter 30% is the rifle/equipment and 10% is the ammo.

It took me years to really believe that deep down in my bones you might say, and when it finally penetrated I started shooting the kind of groups that eluded me before.
I know a lot of people who have never really absorbed that information. If you get every book you can, written by real shooters who are successful in the application(s) you want to follow, you'll get the information you seek. Meet the top shooters in your area and observe their technique. Ask questions. You'll find nearly all top shooters are not only willing to share, but eager to help a fellow along. There is no quick answer that will fit on a reply on a shooting forum, even if those replies are written by well meaning and in some cases on this particular forum, expert and experienced shooters.

[TheNatureBoy]

I feel as though someone took a shot @ me so in defense of myself. If not, please forgive me but.....

I have no reason to lie. None what so ever. I'm not the kind of person who trys to impress anyone. I don't see the need for it. I said I shot moa groups with my 7mm rem mag sendero @ 100 yards from a bench (measured from the muzzle) with no mods because I did. I've done the same with my custom .280 @ 100 yards. The rifle performs well because Remington Arms Inc. made/designed it to do so not because I am cut from the same cloth as Annie Oakly. If you want to say that I'm lucky because I "managed to buy an out of the box rifle that will respond to their hard work" I'll go along with that. God knows I spend a lot of time in my garage reading, loading, and practicing other aspects related to shooting, to include the many hours I've spent on the telephone asking related questions all in the quest to improve. "Skill at developing the loads", I'll go along with that to a degree. I've learned a lot and I'm still learning. A lot of trial and error. "Careful shooting technique" absolutely; even with inadequate equipment.

[a7mmnut]

I don't know about that, but I will tell you about on of the best shots I ever sat down beside of on the bench. He was in his 20's-a doctor's only son. He had been raised in a two story huge brick estate near our small home town. While we were mowing lawns to pay for just one good bike by the age of 12, he was riding a brand new Yamaha 465 and Honda CR500 he could barely hike his leg onto. When he turned 16, he drove a fully restored '68 RS Camaro convertible to high school. By the time he was 21, he had part ownership in a nice log cabin gun business with an outdoor range and both gunsmith and taxidermy services in the basement. He shot Hoyt bows before I knew what they were, and his plinking rifle was a Remington 40X. For hunting, he chose a Browning Superposed O/U, a Knight MK 85 .54 cal. stainless muzzleloader(in their 3rd year as MM) and Pre-'64 Winchester M70's. Some called him a brat, but I called him just lucky. That was, until the day he sighted in his dad's .375 H&H with a 300 gr. bear load beside me.

For those of you that haven't witnessed this feat nor tried one of these big bores off the bench for yourself, let me just say "devastating" may be an understatement. That day we witnessed this small framed young guy just sit there and be brutally pounded by that big Browning. He never flinched that we could tell('cause we were flinching?), but just sat there breathing deeply, counting, then holding his breath and closing his eyes. When he opened them, he fired. When he was done, he had a great 1 1/2" 3 shot group with the 270's, a nice 1 1/4" group with the 285's, and an even group of just over 1 3/4" with the 300 gr. pills that were all astonishing to me.

Since that day, I've never called him "lucky" again. Being several years his senior, I thought I had known how to shoot all my life. I learned an important lesson. Witnessing a 45 minute butt-kicking behind that big bore turn in better groups than most of the other guys' taught us all a lot about shooting that day. The most important was of discipline and self control, but the most obvious may have been that great shooting has absolutley nothing to do with age--nor luck. Thanks Sam.


-7-

[Swiss7.5]

1) Are you shooting with a stock rifle, straight from the factory with no modifications? If your rig is customized such as custom barrels, triggers, free-floats, beddings, etc, what have you had done?Savage model 12 in 22-250
2) What type of rest do you use? Range provided sandbags, your own nicer bags, bi-pod, Caldwell lead sled, or some higher-end rest? Range bags and lead sled
3) How much work do you put into your handloads? Weigh every charge, every bullet, check for run-out on each round?i'm ultra anal about them loads
4) What is your bench technique like? When you let your barrel cool down, how cool is "cool"?shoot a 5 shot string then let it cool
5) How often do you get to shoot and how much time do you spend at the range at a given time?every weekend

Mine is a stock gun and will Genuienly shoot sub moa

[wncchester]

Amen to AMAMNN! The reason many quarter or half minute shooters carry the cut-out targets in their wallets is that it's so rare! How do such tiny groups happen, especially with factory rifles and common bullets? The math laws of random probability!

You can demonstrate it to yourself. Throw a handfull of rocks, perhaps 10 or more, at a wall from up close. Look at the marks on the wall, take any 3 or 5 that are close together and call that a "group". But it's really not, the whole pattern on the wall is the group. you just picked the a few that occured within the random pattern of the whole group. The more hand's full of rocks you throw (or groups you fire) will make the probability of finding a random collection of a few very close together more probable. But, it's still just chance, not accuracy, per se.

Understand that decreasing group size is a square law function. It's the surface area covered by the group that counts, not the diameter, and that makes small groups more difficult, fast. It's four times harder to shoot a half inch group than a one inch group. A quarter inch group is sixteen times more difficult than a one incher, a one-eighth inch group is sixtyfour times more difficult! That's why BR shooters have to work so hard to make groups just a tiny bit smaller.

Few of those who claim repeatablity of small groups can actually do it on command, at least not when I'm around. The more groups they fire the more likely it is they will get a few random close holes but their REAL group is the total of all the shots they fire, not just a lucky few occuring in sequence, nor an average of a series of groups.

[azar92]

Wow, I come back after a few hours expecting a reply, maybe two, and instead I have a bunch of repsonses! Okay, to give a bit more information.

When working up a load I:
Use brass that is either new (Winchester brand) or commercial brass (Hornady, Federal, Winchester, Remington...) that has been fired in my gun that is in good condition.
I install my die in the press following RCBS's instructions.
I attempt to "square the dies in the press" by putting a second shell holder "upside down" on top of the one I'm using and putting light pressure against the die. I then secure the lock ring.
I full length resize as I have been given many opinions that it's usually best for hunting as it will chamber easier when the moment counts.
I hand prime using the RCBS hand priming tool (not the universal one, the one where you have to use the shell holder).
I choose a powder that is commonly regarded as being a good powder for the caliber I'm loading.
I choose a bullet that is regarded as being accurate and suitable to what I will be hunting.
I start at the book starting load and move incrementally up to the book max load.
I throw a charge using the RCBS Uniflow measure, weigh it on the RCBS 5-0-5 scale and trickle to the desired weight.
I install the seater die per instructions, square it, and adjust the plug to seat the bullet to the desired OAL.
My starting OAL is either:
1) 0.020" off the lands as measured by my Sinclair Intl. OAL length guage.
2) Recommended book OAL for that load.
I make 5 rounds per load

I have started taking both of my guns to the range at the same time. At the range:
I place one of the guns on the Caldwell "Dead Shot" front and rear rest.
I make sure the rifle is not canted and that the cross-hairs on the bull at 100 yards.
I gently wrap my hand around the stock and place my right finger on the trigger.
I attempt to keep as much of my body from contacting the gun as possible. There is only light contact with my shoulder.
I slowly squeeze the trigger and allow the gun to recoil freely.
I remove the gun, place it to the side, and grab my other gun.
I repeat this process allowing the first gun to cool while I fire the second.

Using this process I shoot 4 5-shot loads, 2 for each gun, round-robin at 4 targets 100 yards away. I then pack it up, go home, measure my groups and wonder if it's my shooting ability, my reloading skills, or my guns that are keeping me from reaching repeatable sub-MOA.

[Qtiphky]

I think it all comes down to the guy pulling the trigger. I just shot 14 different loads for testing in 223 rem and 5 of them were sub MOA. Out of 9 for my 204, I had four that were sub MOA. I will be doing follow up work on those loads to ensure repeatability and consistency with my loading technique, but I don't consider this random by any means as I do this with my deer rifles regularly. If you take an average distance from center of group, instead of spread, then the numbers go even higher. Ten out of the 14 for the 223 and 7 out of the 9 for the 204.

All of my rifles are stock with absolutely no upgrades. I shoot a Bushmaster in 223, a CZ in 204, a Remington 700 that is 28 years old in 270, a Tikka T3 in 308 and a Browning A Bolt in 300 WSM. I don't use sandbags as I won't be carrying them with me in the woods. I use a bi-pod on the 204, all the rest are just shot off a bench with me using whatever is around for support.

Both of my sons use my rifles as well and can shoot about 2 MOA at 100 yards with any of my guns. They are 13 and 16 years old.

I guess I have been lucky with the guns that I bought then because I am not a liar, I have no reason to be.

[a7mmnut]

Guys, c'mon. 1/2 minute is not all that rare in calibers like the .22 PPC, 6mm BR, .222 and .223 Rem., .22-250, .25-06, etc. In fact, it gets boring when trying to repeat that performance with so many different powders. If you will shoot a few samples of your new loads through a chronograph before going to the bench, you may save yourself a few trips. If your SD isn't within 10% in a small (.22 cals.) case, then there is little accuracy potential there. No matter how well your gun will perform, the load must be extremely repeatable, round for round. Then you as a shooter must match the gun and load with your repeatability.

One of the most accurate guns I've seen targeted lately was a Savage 116FP in .300 Win. Mag. It shot 3 in .875" @ 100, and the target was posted in a local gun shop where a whole series of these rifles were for sale. The 7mm Rem. Mag. mate shot just over 1". The .25-06 shot .75", and a .308 M70 Target shot 3 in .625". I don't doubt those Senderos are just as accurate at all. One of my friends has a M700 LSS .22-250 with a new 28" Douglas barrel that shoots 3 shots into a cloverleaf at 100. Another buddy heard that the 7mm Rem. wasn't very accurate (pure BS), so he got himself a Tikka in .300 Winchester. It will shoot 3 WW Power Points into 3/4" @ 100 all day. The real MOA test for these guns aren't at 100 yards, but at 200, 300, 400, and beyond. That's where the equipment part of the equation peters out and the shooter comes on strong.

You still can't do any of it without great optics--especially at extended ranges. Glasses, ear protection, a bipod when necessary, shooting bags or mechanical rests for the bench. If you are serious about sub-MOA, then you'll go the distance. That's the only way you will truly know what a handload is capable of. The gun can be tested with factory loads, as I earlier described. The rest is all you. Unless you're a human robot, I doubt very seriously if you'll never have a bad day at the range, so don't sweat it. Every day with a rifle in your hand is a really great day.

-7-

[Unclenick]

Azar92,

One flaw in your procedure is that you are full length resizing and trying to seat 0.020" off the lands. That seating technique really only works best for neck-sized-only cases. The reason is that even though you think you have the bullet seated that far off the lands, when the resized case's shoulder is moved forward in firing, that headspace distance is taken up, moving the bullet that much closer than when the case head is at the breech. Cases don't all resize exactly the same and bullet ogives aren't all exactly the same, so this can result in more round-to-round variance than you'd expect. When a bullet is up near the lands, that variance can cause peak pressure to swing five or ten percent and throw the barrel time around with it. A neck-sized-only case already fills the chamber so it does not have significant free headspace to move forward.

Additionally, if your goal is to FL size so they'll feed from a magazine, you usually defeat that by seating bullets way out. At that point they often will not fit in a standard magazine. When they happen to fit anyway, they can be less accurate because the case neck has so little grip on the bullet that the bullets get tipped in the neck when they are pushed up against the feed ramp by the bolt. You probably need to decide you will have loads that feed from the magazine and loads that don't and keep them separate.

Also, 0.020" off the lands is not a magic number. Many swear by 0.030" as magic. You see anything from 0.010" to 0.050" off the lands among people who've taken the time to tune their seating depth to a sweet spot in their gun. I would say 0.030" is probably more common than 0.020" these days. Still others find a bullet seated way back about one caliber into the neck works best. Some guns like having the extra grip on the bullet and like letting it have a little runup into the throat. My my point is just not to assume 0.020" off the lands is good for your particular equipment.

Additionally, we still don't know what specific components you are working with? Ball powders, being harder to light, can benefit from deburring flash holes or going to a magnum primer. Federal makes a match magnum primer (215M) if you want to take that route with a ball powder? If you are using a stick powder, they generally do fine without all that extra prep.

In your shoes I would move the bullet back to one-caliber into the neck for to get a baseline performance. Save getting close to the lands for when you have exhausted the possibilities back there and have the groups narrowed enough to really see the difference? That way you have rounds that will feed reliably from the magazine, too. Even that one caliber depth can be tuned. Do it with a mild load to find the minimum group size, then tune the powder charge afterward.

[FrankenMauser]

My .220 Swift is a factory Ruger M77 V/T, that hasn't even had the trigger adjusted. (factory adjustable)

Assuming I have chosen a bullet with good consistency, that doesn't foul the bore quickly...
It will print .5" or smaller groups, at 100 yards, all day long. However, it takes a bit of case preparation. My rifle sees maximum seating depths for the magazine well. I want 4 rounds in the rifle, at all times. So, I don't worry about how far off the lands I am (as long as the bullet isn't touching). I just seat to an OAL that allows magazine loading and feeding.

For my rifle, the accuracy is in case prep. Consistent neck thickness is almost more important than consistent powder charges.


The problem lies in the fact that I cannot shoot that well on most days. (I usually shoot off shot-filled bags, and a forward rest.)


My .270 Win, on the other hand, needs a bit of work. It is a factory M77 MkII. (Stainless / Laminate)
On a nice, warm, sunny day; it will print close to, or at MOA with decent ammo.
On a cold or humid day; it moves the point of impact, and opens the groups to 3-4 MOA.
I have tried quite a few variations with my handloads. So far, the only thing in common, between these crappy groups, is cold or humid weather.
The stock currently has a barrel pressure point on the fore-end. I think it may need to be reworked for a more precise fit. I suspect some minor expansion issues to be working against accuracy.
(Still using the unmodified factory trigger on this rifle. I'm sure some work, or a replacement would make a difference in accuracy. I doubt it would do a whole lot, though.)

[azar92]

Unclenick,

Thanks. I didn't realize that about full length resizing. It does make sense. I know that 0.020" is not some magic number that will give you the best results every time. It's simply seems to be the most commonly quoted number to use as a starting length for C.O.A.L. tuning. It wasn't an assumption that it would always be the best, but simply a place to start. You have to start somewhere right?

All of my loaded rounds that I have tested, even when seated 0.020" off the lands have met these two goals:
1) Fits the magazine length
2) Has at least 1 caliber of bullet length in the case.

So, I'm already doing those two things. If you'd like specifics, here's some I shot recently.

6.5x55
140g Hornady SP Interlock
40.9g IMR 4350
PMC cases, 4th firing, trimmed to 2.155" (trim-to length)
Winchester WLR primer
3.025" C.O.A.L.
5-shots, chrono'd at 2,536 fps (avg) with a 1.108" group at 100 yards

I shot the next two stages at 41.4g (Hornady book max) and one a 41.7g (0.3g over Hornady book max). No pressure signs. I haven't had a chance to measure these targets yet. They look like there are in the 1.1" to 1.5" range.

Other combinations I have tried are:
6.5x55
140g Speer HotCor
Reloder 22 (Speer #13 min to max)
Winchester cases, new, trimmed to 2.155"
CCI 200 primer
3.107" COAL
5 shot groups ranging from 3.0" at the worst to about 1.03" at the best (discounting one flyer, otherwise the group was 1.4")
Chronied between 2,579 (start load) and 2,762 (max load). No pressure signs.

160g Sierra Pro-Hunter
6.5x55
Reloder 22 (Sierra load)
PMC cases, once fired, trimmed to 2.155"
Federal 210 primer
3.025" COAL
7 shot groups ranging from 2.1" groups down to 1.1" groups. Sierra max load listed 40.5g of Reloder 22. Went all the way to 42.5g (2.0 grains over max!) with no pressure signs. This was the first load chrono'd after I got my chrony. With 2.0g over max I was still only moving at 2,352 fps.

I also have a 140g Remington Core-lokt load partially tested and a 140g Sierra GameKing load that I haven't had the chance to shoot yet. It takes me a long time to test a load from min to max. I make about 6 to 7 loads per bullet / powder / primer combo and I get two shoot 2 loads per range visit. That means at the best of times (2 range visits per month) it will take me about 1 1/2 months to test a new load.

The only loads I have tried for my 7mm Remington Magnum are:
154g Hornady Interbond
Reloder 22 (Hornady min through max)
Winchester case, new, trimmed to 2.490"
Federal 215 primer
3.290" COAL
5 shot groups from 3.0" to 1.5" ranging from 2,399 fps to 2,766 fps.

I am currently testing the same combination but with Reloder 19 powder and a length of 0.020" off the lands (3.370").

Hope that helps.

[Bart B.]

I find the posts in this thread quite interesting. There's many ways claimed to "break the MOA barrier" that are more myth than reality. For example:

* Putting a shim between barrel and fore end will reduce the amount of barrel whip or vibration thereby making groups smaller.

Yikes! The barrel's gonna vibrate the same way for each shot only if it's not touching anything. Varying amounts of pressure on the fore end from its resting on something or pulled out of its natural position by a sling or hand pressure will change the way the barrel vibrates because of the different amounts of pressure it puts on the barrel. I don't care how much it vibrates or whips anyway. The bullet's long gone before it goes through one major cycle.

One can see how much a barrel pressure shimmed in the fore end bends by putting an optical collimator in the muzzle, zeroing your scope on it, then looking through the scope from different shooting postions. You'll see the cross hairs move about the collimator reference with different pressure on the fore end.

Totally free float the barrel if you want it to vibrate/whip the same for each shot regardless of how the rifle's held. This is how the most accurate target rifles are built. Even those with long, skinny, very whippy and flexible barrels.

*Full length sizing and seating bullets 1/50th of an inch off the lands doesn't work.
*Neck sized cases don't get driven forward when fired.

Well, all rimless bottleneck cases get driven forward when fired. Factory new, full, neck, or partial neck fired ones too. Find out yourself by measuring an empty primed case's headspace, chamber it then fire it, then measure its headspace again. It'll be shorter. How much depends on shoulder area and angle along with firing pin strike force and primer cup hardness. It can easily be as much as almost 10/1000ths of an inch.

Sierra Bullets has been full length sizing all their fired rifle cases setting the shoulder back a couple thousandths to test their bullets for accuracy. They've done it since the early 1950's. And seating bullets a few thousandths off the lands, too. Their best bullets shoot into about 1/4 to 1/2 inch at 200 yards; half that at 100 yards. Smallest 15+ shot groups ever fired at long range have all been done with full length sized cases.

[firewrench044]

not sure about 7MM mag but 6.5X55 can be extreemly accurate

on the 6.5X55
IMR 4350 and Reloader 22 are probably too slow burning for the barrel length
( I use IMR 4350 in my Swede with a 29 inch barrel 1/7.5 twist , I think yours is 23 or 24 inch try something around the burning rate of Varget)

I think you have a 1/8.5 twist barrel so I would recomend 139 to 142 gr bullet, 160 may be too heavy

Do some reserch about accuracy, there is a lot of missinformation on forums
( free floating a barrel helps most rifles but not all, some rifles do shoot better with some type of preload close to the muzzle, example- British
Enfields are preloaded and they shoot terrible free floated because of barrel whip, the M1 carbine is another example of preload )

Your CZ550 is built on a modern Mauser receiver, Mausers work best free floated so check to be sure your stock is not preloading your barrel

before building any ammo, check what is working for others in that cartrage,
barrel length and twist rate and that will help in narrowing down the choices
in your load work up, keeping in mind what works for one may not work right for you and your rifle

[Bart B.]

Ones ability to handle heavy recoil before the bullet's left will seriously impact the accuracy attained. Folks getting the best accuracy are typically benchresters whose 13 pound rifles shooting 22 or 24 caliber bullets weighing 50 to 70 grains have only a few foot-pounds of free recoil. Resting atop supports coated with talcum powder and not touched by the shooter except to pinch their 2-ounce triggers off lets them be very repeatable from shot to shot. They slide back on their rests about an inch or so.

Replace one of these with a 9 pound sporting rifle with a 2-pound trigger pull shooting 28 to 30 caliber bullets weighing 140 to 200 grains with ten times as much free recoil, they would scoot completely off their rests if shot the same way. Ending up on the ground ain't a nice thing to happen. So they're held hard and tight by shooters who vary their grip from shot to shot and are not all that repeatable from shot to shot. This is why I'm convinced there are a zillion different "best accuracy" loads and techniques for each cartridge as claimed by everybody reloading for them.

Best example I've seen that supports this is what happened at a public range some years ago. A couple of us had a scoped .308 Win. 13-pound match rifle checking muzzle velocity for some handloads. We didn't care about accuracy for this event as it would shoot 1/4 MOA groups or better at 100 yards from a machine rest. Best I could do with it was about 1 MOA at 100 from a bench. We let several other folks shoot 5 rounds with it resting on sandbags. Their groups ranged from just under 3/4ths inch to just over 2 inches. Those shooting the smaller groups said it was very accurate. Others shooting the largest groups said it was not at all accurate and the load was no good. Muzzle velocity I got averaged 2540 fps. The other guy's velocity averaged about 2600. Same rifle and ammo. Both of us had about 25 fps spread in velocity. I didn't hold the rifle as tight/hard as he did.

[azar92]

I appreciate the continued responses.

firewrench044,

You are correct about my gun on a couple of counts. For those not familiar with the CZ 550 American in 6.5x55 here is what I know:

Barrel length: 600mm (23.6 inches)
Barrel twist: 1 in 220mm (1:8.66 inches)
Mauser action

Why does the barrel length matter with regards to the burning rate of the powder in the case of my swede? I know that some of the 6.5x55 loads are developed in older military surplus rifles with 29" barrels, but would 5.4" less barrel suddenly make Reloder 22 and IMR 4350 too slow? I can understand a powder suitable in a pistol with a 6" barrel vs. one in the same caliber with a 2" barrel. But a powder becoming "too slow" with a 23.6" barrel vs a 29" barrel?

I've been told that with my twist rate I may not be able to stabilize a high B.C. VLD bullet (such as a Berger). The only bullet larger than 140g that I've fired is those 160g Sierra Pro-Hunters which actually seems to be the best overall grouper in my gun. If the notes I have on me are correct, it's really only slightly longer than the 140g Hornady interlock. It's really the bullet length that matters on whether a barrel will stabilize it, not the weight. Typically a heavier bullet means a longer bullet, though not always.

I know that it's best to find out what has worked for others in the same caliber, but that doesn't often get you anywhere. If you ask 10 people with Swedes you'll get at least 8 different opinions/experiences. And the most common response is always "You have to see what works in your gun." Which I know is true as each rifle is unique. So... that's what I'm attempting to do, find what works in my specific gun(s).

[Unclenick]

Azar92,

Go to my file repository and download the barrel twist estimator Excel file. If you don't have Excel, it will run in Calc, which is the spreadsheet software in the free Open Office Suite.

Originally Posted by Bart B

. . . I don't care how much it vibrates or whips anyway. The bullet's long gone before it goes through one major cycle.

Not so. The speed of sound in barrel is about Mach 17. It's pressure waves run several cycles back and forth before the bullet exits. Harmonic vibration vertically or horizontally are commonly around a kilohertz (just tap a barrel and listen to it). Within a 1.5 ms barrel time a 1 kHz resonant barrel will have gone through a cycle and a half before bullet exit. This is what firing Audette Ladders for tuning loads are used for. The ladders look to get a load that exits in the right phase of that oscillation to avoid an exit where the muzzle position is changing rapidly.

Originally Posted by Bart B.

Totally free float the barrel if you want it to vibrate/whip the same for each shot regardless of how the rifle's held. This is how the most accurate target rifles are built. Even those with long, skinny, very whippy and flexible barrels.

It's lovely in principle and it would work perfectly if ammunition performed absolutely identically from round to round. Instead, we usually have to work up a tuned load to exit at a relative flat spot in the vibration so that the ammo variance stays within that neutral range. That's what the Audette Ladder is intended to do, though I like Dan Newberry's round robin approach better these days.

Reality is always less convenient than theory, of course, and the issue gets worse if you have to fire a variety of ammunition accurately rather than tuned loads. That's the reason for the O'Conner bedding. Pressure on the middle of a barrel, whether realized with shims or by some other method, is what in engineering we call pre-loading. The Army Marksmanship Unit armorers pioneered tensioning the barrel with a stock as part of bedding match rifles in the Garand and M14. They pull it down rather than push it up, as the shims do, but the effect is the same. The standard bedding fixtures for those rifles all bed the barrels angled up a bit off line with the as-issued assembly. When you put them back together and pull them in with the trigger group, they pull the receiver down against the barrel's entrapment by the front stock ferrule and thereby apply the tension. They use of a 15-25 lb range that exceeds the forces normally applied by slings, so the POI is fairly constant.

The effect of the pre-loading is significant. I don't know if you are familiar with Harold Vaughn's work? He is a decorated fighter pilot who went back to school after Korea and became distinguished scientist, now retired from being supervisor of the Aeroballistics Division of the Sandia National Laboratories. In that position he pioneered aeroballistics and flight mechanics for nuclear ordnance. He is also an avid hunter and shooter. His book, Rifle Accuracy Facts (2nd Ed., Precision Shooting Pub., 2000) is recommended reading. In it he describes fabricating instrumentation and measuring actual rifle performance while he tunes a .270 sporter to shoot under 1/4 moa. On the topic of action bedding, what he writes is a bit surprising. In part, he says:

"There has been a lot written about epoxy bedding and most of it consists of unsubstantiated claims. Contrary to all those grandiose claims, I can't see a big difference in sporter accuracy between a good inletting job and epoxy bedding. However, it may make a small difference in the case of a sloppy factory bedding {or inletting} job. . . epoxy bed the action if you feel like it. . . Epoxy bedding will protect the wood from deterioration from oil soaking and should cause the action to come closer to assuming the same position in the stock after each shot. But like I say, I can't really tell any difference.

"The only conventional bedding I have found that definitely improves accuracy is what I call the O’Conner method. I call it the O’Conner method because I think I first read about it in {Jack} O’Conner’s column some 50 years ago. Whether it was his idea or the idea of a gunsmith of his acquaintance, I can’t say. But it works well enough to improve the accuracy of most commercial rifles by about 20 to 30 percent.”

He goes on to describe what I did above. I omitted to include that the barrel has to float between the shims at near the tip of the stock and the receiver and that some stocks may need to be relieved of some wood to get that clearance. It is likely the best approach is to start by clearing the barrel channel of contact with the barrel before applying the weight and the shims.

Vaughn goes on to show instrumentation results measuring receiver moment (page 78 of the aforementioned volume) are that barrel vibration amplitude is cut about 50% by the O’Conner method. This obviously improves its ability to work with untuned ammunition.

Vaughn’s surprising initial statements about the ineffectiveness of bedding sporters corresponds pretty well with my own experience. Some guns shoot like a house on fire with no bedding or added work. Some shoot poorly, bedded conventionally or not. There are too many other variables. I tend to bed everything out of habit, but one exception is the Bell and Carlson Carbelite stocks whose instructions specifically recommend you try them without bedding first, because recoil is sharpened by the rigid bedding.

[quote-Bart B.] Sierra Bullets has been full length sizing all their fired rifle cases setting the shoulder back a couple thousandths to test their bullets for accuracy. They've done it since the early 1950's. And seating bullets a few thousandths off the lands, too. [/quote]

Yup, but apples and oranges to full length resizing without limiting it to 0.002” setback. It’s my fault for not being clearer. There are really two issues at play. One has to do with magazine feeding, which Sierra’s testing is not doing. If the long seated bullet does fit your particular magazine, you have to allow for the case further sizing in the chamber. Hatcher found the 1917 Enfield could size a case up to about 0.006” shorter just by working the bolt fast.

The second issue is not a problem in principle, but rather is a problem with common measuring methods used to determine the bullet ogive’s location in the bore and not with the consistency of loaded ammunition itself. The RCBS Precision Mic and the Hornady OAL (nee Stoney Point) come to mind. Both determine the land-touching ogive location by measuring from case head to the bullet ogive. But the method has the case head at the breech when the ogive fixes its position, while the latter uses a new case that has its shoulder, or rim, or belt pushed forward to stop in the chamber. In the instance of rimless cases especially, the difference in the two can equal the difference between a minimum case and a maximum chamber. So, which do you believe? If you neck-size only, the former two will be accurate enough. The latter can easily make you seat the bullet more than 0.010” or more deeper than you think you have it.

For full length resizing with the sizing die turned all the way down to a standard shell holder rather than just 0.002” of setback, you will usually land you somewhere between the two types of measurements made above. The only way to make an absolute measurement that is accurate is to measure the difference between whatever determines the headspace (shoulder, rim, or belt) and the bullet ogive, and not the case head except when you are neck sizing only. Then, like the Sierra shoulder setback, you can stay within a couple thousandths, plus with some bullets there another 0.003” or so from ogive variance against your seater stem. 0.005” out of 0.020” is good enough, as you can usually see a group change in as little as about 0.010” seating depth change. But if your measuring method misses by that amount, you may have a problem. This is why I suggested tuning seating depth to the loading method, and not worrying about some specific number.