rifle reloading ?

[Unclenick]

Bill,

Yes, lots of folks prefer volume for these reasons, but as Bart implies, if you really find the center of the accuracy load range it can be six of one, half dozen of the other, at least in a normal indoor environment. It's when you are out on the edge of the sweet spot range or when you've got a load that is intolerant of variation for some reason that you get problems.

What Bart said he got from the Remington rep is within the range of what my thus-far incomplete data is saying. I'll write it up when I finish getting it figured out.

[Hardbawl]

It has been my experience that seating depth and neck tension are bigger factors in accuracy.

[1stmar]

Kind of a belts and suspenders guy I guess. I have a hornady auto charge that dispenses/weighs and then I reweigh it on an rcbs 505. It only takes a second and since powder. Is being dispensed as fast as I can seat (just about) it doesn't slow me down. Feel better knowing there are no surprises. Never seen more the. .2 tenths of a difference fwiw.

[cw308]

I'm reloading with IMR 4064 308 cal. 168 gr. sierra HPBT. With Winchester brass my charge weight is 42.0 gr. with Fereral brass 41.5 gr. case is a bit thicker. I was trying different OAL didn't do much, Remington 700 has a lot of free bore. My thinking is if most rifles shoot Match ammo that is sized 2.800 OAL to work in all rifles ( 308 cal. ) than I can find a load that works for me without changing the OAL. Once I have a load that works, which I have listed. I weigh each charge, case & bullet. Now I just blame myself. Warm weather my groups shoot higher than in cold. I don't blame the powder just the weather & myself.

[Panfisher]

Some I simply meter and some I weigh. If its a small grain or large volume I generally just meter it. If I'm loading with IMR4831 or something like that I will throw several charges into the scale pan and weigh them, if its not really close and consistent I just throw a short weight into the pan and trickle till where I want it. Since I don't load a couple thousand .308's or so a month (for example) I don't mind spending the time to weigh them individually, besides what else would I do with my time in the evenings, watch American Idol, I don't think so.

[loademwell]

Rifle is my favorite to reload. Just because of the cost of factory. 30 bucks a box? Thats $1.50 each time a pull the trigger. Im not a comp. shooter so Accuracy is not the TOP thing I look for. I do for some extent, but as long as my rounds are hitting pop can at 150 yards, Im happy.
I use the lee single stage kit. 50th anniversary I think. I have the lee safety scale and the lee powder dispenser. While reloading I use the dispenser which in all honesty, looks to keep very close charges, even after multiple charges.
I check my load weight about every 5 times. Just to keep it in check. Never seems to be off a .1 grain tho.

[hooligan1]

I weigh every load because I think, (and wont be told otherwise, even by super marksman) it helps me with repeatability in my handloads....
I guess some may not care what consistancy means in their loads but bygod I do in mine, and every detail that I can pay specific detail to and do all the steps the very same way insures dead targets for me..... I never considered not weighing each and every load, because I read enough literature long ago that prompts me in this direction.... it may not matter to some, but as inconsistant as my shooting form can be, I NEED everything else to be solid.

Kind of makes a fellar wonder what your really lookin at when somebody post their pet loads on the web...

Also before I digress, John Barssness wrote an article in Handloader Magazine that suggested it wasn't that important to hit your set weight in every load, but the Hooligan1 cant wrap his hard head around it... go figure.

[ATPBULLETS]

Interesting thread... I remember reading in the relaoders journal...handloader that did a volume vs weight reloading precision test...using serveral powders and bullets..etc... results surprised me in that volume powder dispenser was capable of statistical precision comparable to weight powder dispensing...and some cases exceeded it.

[Gster]

I have the RCBS scale dispencer so every load is weighed to the grain. I pulled some corelock a while back and there was a 4 grain spread from least to most, no wonder people get 4 inch groups with them.

I might add... Rem. Core-Lokt ammo is the most accurate factory ammo I've ever used in any of my rifles. I've been working on a load with H 4350 and Hornady 100 grn. sp Interlocks for my M77 MK II .243 and am almost there. I'm shooting 1" groups @ 100 yds. Rem. Core-Lokts will shoot 1/2 to 3/4" all day long. Most 3 shot groups you can cover with a quarter and all the holes will be touching each other.
I got off topic and just had to edit, sorry. I trickle up every charge.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by Gster

I have the RCBS scale dispencer so every load is weighed to the grain. I pulled some corelock a while back and there was a 4 grain spread from least to most, no wonder people get 4 inch groups with them.

I'm guessing you mean 0.1 and 0.4 grains?

[Unclenick]

Except at long range, it's pretty hard to see 0.1-0.4 grain difference on the target if the average weight is centered well. The Federal GMM with 168 gr. SMK I pulled from one box had a 0.4 grain spread and shot well. But a 4 grain difference would sure show up, assuming it's a manufacturer screw up.

I've pulled bullets with a 1.2 grain charge variation before, and this was spherical propellant (WC852 in LC 72 ball ammo) that ought to be nearly impossible to throw with that much irregularity. I imagine those same dispensers would throw a stick powder with an even wider spread. But 4 grains ought to take real effort to achieve. Let's see if Roughedge spots these posts and comments further. It has to be assumed he pulled all from the same lot number for this to be meaningful. If not, then it's likely just different lots of bulk powder adjusted by pressure barrel.

[Gster]

[QUOTE}Brian Pfleuger] I'm guessing you mean 0.1 and 0.4 grains?


I'm guessing that's what Roughedge meant too. I was quoting what he said. 4 grains would be a little much.

[pathdoc]

I have recently been weighing every charge on a beam balance, after doing a weighed-charge versus Lee-scoop experiment in which the scooped loads exhibited quite marked vertical variation in impact point and the weighed charges did not (I was using Varget). I still use the scoops, but only to dump a short-weight charge into the pan before trickling up. With a scale (RCBS) that's calibrated to 0.1gn, I'm expecting a variation of this much either way.

My electronic Frankford Arsenal scale seems to be trustworthy to 0.2gn either way. I'm not sure this is enough to change things in a milsurp hunting rifle that's seeking a 12 inch target area at 200 to 300 yards (beyond this, I am worried about sufficiency of energy delivery and wouldn't take the shot). Using the digital would certainly speed up loading a great deal, as it would allow me to use my fancy little scale pan with the built-in funnel nozzle and not have to pick up the separate powder funnel. I see an infinitely adjustable powder measure in my future, but not necessarily an electronic one, and I may yet trickle up still.

[Grundy53]

Originally Posted by Valornor

When it comes to reloading I am OCD about my rifle loads. I try to hold it all to 1/10. I have an electronic powder measure/dispenser. I also hate seeing more then .005in variance in seating depth.

Does it make a difference? Probably not, but I do feel more confident in my loads when I know I've taken every precaution to make them the best they can be. Plus loading quality components for rifle is expensive so I want to take my time.

This is what I do too!

[Mike / Tx]

Years ago I shot at a range that had weekly BR shoots on the weekends. As such there were several of the folks who were out during the week trying this or that load out of their rifles. I got to watching and eventually curiosity got the better of me and I started asking questions. Backing the boat up many more years my pop had always told me that within 2 tenths I would never see the difference in the accuracy of the loads if the powder was right for the caliber being loaded.

Back to the BR group, these folks never weighed out anything there at the range. They simply set the dial on their measure and threw the charges. It was hard to argue with the groups they shot as most were 5 shots inside a 1/2" sticker. As I got to talking with them I explained that I didn't shoot BR but that I did work up many loads. I used RCBS equipment and weighed up my loads at home then came out and shot them in series from low to high. Several of them explained that they DID in fact weigh out the charge weights however they did so at home, then wrote down the low and high end weight for that particular powder. Then when at the range they simply set the measure on the low end and tweaked the amount up looking for the best group.

This was the light going on in my head. I have done the same ever since with my Uniflow. I will weigh out the charge weights for a particular load, jot it down, and then go to the range with my components and a small press. I set up the measure and start throwing loads. As mentioned earlier, with some powders it can and does make a difference with just how temperamental they preform. With other however, you can be off easily by the the 2/10 or sometimes even a bit more and they will still drive the bullet into the same group with the rest.

I used to weigh each charge out until the tip of the scale would settle perfectly on the line. Anymore however I set up the measure to throw 5 charges the same, then I throw my loads. I can record the setting from the stem of the Uniflow and come back a year later and load the same loads up using the same lot of powder. If I change lots, I will then load up 5-10 rounds and test them out for variances. If I see nothing different I go on my merry way.

I also do not load to the top end of the spectrum for most of my loads. I use the middle weight to about 3/4 of the total and try and stay within that area. With the proper burn rate this seems to me to work out the best overall for my uses. It's hard to argue with hunting loads which will repeatedly shoot right at, or just under an inch at 100, that I need to change up my technique. Several of the rifles I have will easily hold this out to 200yds or further if I can do my part.

So to weigh out each and every round isn't worth it to me unless I am working on the very upper end of the loads. I do have two rifles in which I could possibly see a difference in doing this with, but the loads I already have shoot plenty good for my uses.

[Bart B.]

Grundy, are you aware that the dimensional spread from case head to shoulder on a bunch of resized bottleneck cases headspacing on their shoulder can easily be .005"? That's caused by different amounts of case lube on cases being sized as well as how long they're all the way into the die. With bullets seated in such cases with a zero spread in dimension from case head to a reference diameter on the bullet's ogive, there'll be a .005" spread in bullet jump to the rifling.

Such is life with cases headspacing on their shoulder. The case shoulder to bullet reference point should be the dimension to keep the same across a batch of loaded rounds if jump to the rifling needs to be the same for each round. When fired, their shoulders are hard pressed against the chamber shoulder and the space between the bolt face and case head will have about the same spread as case headspace after sizing.

[Grundy53]

Good to know. Thank you!

[jamaica]

I use the Lyman 55 powder measure. I weigh powder until I get the measure set, then throw powder. I do not weigh every charge.

Consistency of operation goes a long way in getting consistent throws. Every stroke the same. I do not use the knocker to settle powder into the measure. I use the knocker after cutting the powder and while the handle is in the down position. This to make sure it all fell. When I go up, I wait a second for the powder to naturally fill the measure, then pull the handle down. I get pretty good consistency doing it this way. The one or two tenths of a grain variance is nothing to worry about. It is a very small percentage of the whole charge.

[jamaica]

When it comes to reloading I am OCD about my rifle loads. I try to hold it all to 1/10. I have an electronic powder measure/dispenser. I also hate seeing more then .005 in variance in seating depth.

If bullet punches hit the very end of our bullets, then you could have consistent OAL. However the bullet punches are concave and hit the bullet back down its profile a ways. There is enough variation in the bullets to give a variation in the OAL. You know what I have decided? It really doesn't matter. Relax.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by jamaica

If bullet punches hit the very end of our bullets, then you could have consistent OAL. However the bullet punches are concave and hit the bullet back down its profile a ways. There is enough variation in the bullets to give a variation in the OAL. You know what I have decided? It really doesn't matter. Relax.

You've got that backwards... The very tip of the bullet is the least consistent part. An ideal seating plug would touch the bullet at the ogive, which is the most consistent part

[Bart B.]

Brian's right.

One thing I would add is that if the seater plug contacts the bullet at the barrel's bore diameter, then those microscopic difference in bullet ogive shapes won't cause a .001" or more variance in case head to bullet contact point. Even with the same pointing die used in the final jacket forming machine, the subtle differences in jacket thickness and metalurgy makes the ogive shape microscopically uneven across a production run, but not enough to loose sleep over.

Consistant bullet jump distance to the rifling's way, way down on the list of things to do making very accurate ammo. New cases machine or handloaded with the right component set with a .004" spread in jump distance, 3/10ths grain spread in charge weight and .003" bullet runout will shoot 1/4 MOA at 100 yards and under 2/3 MOA at 600 yards in well built rifles. There's bigger fish to fry making an accurate meal for your rifle to eat, er.... shoot.

[DannyB1954]

I am a noob, so take what I say with a grain of powder, but from what I have seen the proper length of the round is more important than + or - .2 of a load change. There are Youtube videos on how to determine the headspace for a particular rifle. One method was to make a dummy round with a loose neck to bullet fit. insert it into the rifle and chamber it. carefully remove and measure it. Make your loads to this spec minus .005". You don't want the bullet to actually be touching the rifling in the barrel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW-kpx1rTnc

[Bart B.]

Danny,

Headspace is the distance from the bolt face to the chamber point that stops the case from going any further forward. Over all length is the dimension of the case head to tip of the bullet; I think this is what your referring to.

If one learns how folks winning matches and setting records do that, they'll learn best accuracy with many bullets is when they're seated out to actually set back a few thousandths when chambered; Sierra is one brand. Yes, it often increases pressure so cut the charge a grain or so. Who cares if the bullet leaves a bit slower but shoots 33% more accurate? Some others like a short jump to the rifling; Berger VLD's for example.