The things we do that effect accuracy, or don't

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, again I find myself in agreement with @Varminterror

If I was to state a goal here it would be simply to lean something meaningful that helps improve my reloading and shooting abilities as it relates to percision and accuracy with a rifle.

It was not my intent to represnt myself as a pioneer in the field of “reload-ology”. I apologize if I came across that way. I’ve only been doing this for a few years.

My biggest constraint is time. When I don’t have enough of it to test something to myself I’m perfectly happy to start with what works for others, particularly people who are champions or do this stuff for a living (Brian Litz fills both of those categories) Having said that, there’s always a nagging thought in my head that says, “one of these days I’m going to prove that for myself”

My career has also involved data driven analysis. As a yong staff engineer I used to do designed experiments and process validations as part of my duties. Now I sit behind a desk managing others who do it. I recall a story back then when we were attempting to perform a designed experiment on an injection molding machine. 32 different process controls affecting time, temperature and pressure. Some directly proportional to each other, some inversely proportional, all related and confounding.

Where do begin with such a daunting task?

Well, you start with the machine operator who’s been running that press for 20 plus years who has process set ups on note cards in a reciepe box.
 
I’m off today and don’t have to be anywhere till noon so I’m just gojng to shoot this test and see what the results are. I’ll post it when I’m done.

If it doesn’t yield anything meaningful that alone will be worth it.

Be back in a couple of hours

C24C45DD-1EA5-49E2-BD50-D3F9CD86B58B.jpg
 
Well, best laid plans.

Just as I was getting set up I see my wife calling to tell me we have plumbing issues.

Where’s @DRAINSMITH when you need him.
 
Ok, here is a data point. Crimped vs No Crimp.

Let me say upfront that there are reasons why you want a crimp. Loading for a semi-auto, revolver, or tube-fed magazine rifle may require a crimp to prevent bullet setback or jump. For instance, I have a Ruger Mini-30 that slams the rounds into the chamber so hard that it will cause bullet-jump - the OAL will increase, as if the cartridge were in a kinetic bullet puller. In that case, I had to keep increasing the crimp until I no longer observed bullet jump occurring. A blanket statement can't be made for these situations, as every gun, brass, and projectile can have an effect.

In the one case where I ran a quick test, the results were interesting. Using a 20" AR, I first checked with no-crimp and ran tests involving chambering several rounds multiple times to make sure I did not see any change in OAL. With the bullets used (Hornady 55SP) the neck tension alone was enough that I did not see any bullet setback or jump after multiple chamberings, so I proceeded to the range.

As I mentioned, this was a quick test, so I only loaded up 5 rounds each, with no crimp, light crimp, and heavy crimp. Below are the results.

26.4gn Varget powder, CCI 41 primers, 2.200" OAL, LC once fired brass.
No crimp. 2990.2fps, 7.0sd, 18es. 1.4" @ 100.
Light crimp. 3007.8fps, 15.4sd, 34es. 1.7" @ 100
Heavy crimp. 3021.4fps, 17.8sd, 44es. 2.3" @ 100

Admittedly, this was not a large population, and was only run with one projectile, with one charge level, in one gun. If I were to improve upon this test, I would work up loads for each of the crimps. But, for me, it was enough to convince me that in this one situation, no crimp was the best option.
 
If I was to state a goal here it would be simply to lean something meaningful that helps improve my reloading and shooting abilities as it relates to percision and accuracy with a rifle.
Click to expand...

One of the things I have done to get good repeatability in results was to make a good rest. It helps in sight in and testing.



That along with a remote trigger means you are just testing the firearm and load, an individual is no longer a variable.



Not to mention they let you waste time in a whole new way like multiple targets at different ranges hit with the same bullet.

 
Nature Boy said:
Well, best laid plans.

Just as I was getting set up I see my wife calling to tell me we have plumbing issues.

Where’s @DRAINSMITH when you need him.
Click to expand...

Whatever opinion I had of you before (not that it was in the least negative) it just went up twice. Nobody and Nothing is more important than your wife. (Father of 3 daughters and 2 sons and they are all married)

REALLY interesting thread, drainsmith.....I've never taken the time to go this far myself, but I sure as hell am interested in learning....especially since in the next year I will have more time for the shooting sports (planning retirement from building construction/design....in my line of work, plumbers are especially important....and I choose only the best)
 
good thread.

my approach is somewhat different. although over the past 20 or so years i have tested many of those myself, when making decisions, i include the input of others, but in a different way because I don't think you can test every one of those in every setting. way too many variables.

essentially, my logic goes like this: if someone else gets the results that I want, WITHOUT doing an operation, it must not be necessary.

so I never mess with flash holes. I never sort bullets by weight or base-to-ogive length. I don't sort cases by weight or volume. i don't even wet OR dry tumble anymore; i just run some steel wool around the neck to knock any chunks off before it goes in the sizing die. and I still get single digit ES, and 1/2 MOA groups.
So... I think I can say with some confidence, that none of those things are necessary for anyone satisfied with those results. If you're looking to be competitive benchrest matches where you only shoot a handful of rounds, maybe they are. If you have to shoot 300+ rounds in a PRS match, it's way way too much work and expense. I mean if you bought 1000 pc of brass, you'd wind up throwing out half your brass, and then you'd lose half in the weeds while shooting the match, and have to start all over again with a new lot.
Will I get an occasional flyer, or a round that's 20fps fast or slow? sure. but it's usually not the end of the world for me.

Now, I admit I DO still do a few things that others i follow don't do. So I know they're unnecessary but i do them anyway because they're easy. One example is trimming after every firing.

the things I think are important are:
consistent neck tension (controlled by bushing size and proper annealing, and not crimping)
runout (i like LE Wilson chamber type seating dies)
weighing powder to the kernel (doesn't matter for short range benchrest, but it does matter if you're shooting LR or ELR)
properly seating primers, and using a brand that's consistent
 
So... I think I can say with some confidence, that none of those things are necessary...
Click to expand...

As long as not doing those things do not affect the mental game, I agree.

Kind of like the one thing folks that say they can’t and those that say they can, have in common, they are both right.
 
jmorris said:
As long as not doing those things do not affect the mental game, I agree.

Kind of like the one thing folks that say they can’t and those that say they can, have in common, they are both right.
Click to expand...

i agree

but to the extent that is true, does it not completely invalidate the entire point of this thread? how would you propose eliminating the mental aspect during testing?
 
Yes and see post #56.

I call it the loud muffler syndrome. Hundreds of thousands of teenagers have put loud mufflers on a car and they thought that turned them into a race car. Just because one puts effort and/or money into something doesn’t mean they will get the return on investment in performance.

If you “think” it’s faster/better, that’s nice but unless you can measure the improvement quantitatively, your likely just making more noise.
 
Last edited:
curious what kind of groups you can get from the rest and remote trigger
do you have to aim between shots? or it always come back to original POA?
 
taliv said:
the things I think are important are:
consistent neck tension (controlled by bushing size and proper annealing, and not crimping)
runout (i like LE Wilson chamber type seating dies)
weighing powder to the kernel (doesn't matter for short range benchrest, but it does matter if you're shooting LR or ELR)
properly seating primers, and using a brand that's consistent
Click to expand...

This pretty much describes the current state of my reloading process
 
curious what kind of groups you can get from the rest and remote trigger do you have to aim between shots?
Click to expand...

Both depend on the rifle and load.
 
taliv said:
the things I think are important are:
consistent neck tension (controlled by bushing size and proper annealing, and not crimping)
runout (i like LE Wilson chamber type seating dies)
weighing powder to the kernel (doesn't matter for short range benchrest, but it does matter if you're shooting LR or ELR)
properly seating primers, and using a brand that's consistent
Click to expand...

:thumbup:
I really like the Wilson chamber seating dies. I first bought one for 30-30, as the round/flat nosed bullets did not center well in the seating die I was using. It worked so well for 30-30 that I decided to get one for .223 and .308 as well. I did end up with a Forster seating die that I think performs as well as the Wilson, and works in the press.
 
Nature Boy said:
5. Wet vs dry tumbling (my favorite)
Click to expand...

This is one that I have tested.
After I bought a HF dual drum tumbler, I found it makes no difference in accuracy.
I've even tested how many cases to tumble at the same time.
(50 cases gets it the cleanest & purtiesed lookin' but makes no diff in the accuracy dept)
 
taliv said:
good thread.

my approach is somewhat different. although over the past 20 or so years i have tested many of those myself, when making decisions, i include the input of others, but in a different way because I don't think you can test every one of those in every setting. way too many variables.

essentially, my logic goes like this: if someone else gets the results that I want, WITHOUT doing an operation, it must not be necessary.

so I never mess with flash holes. I never sort bullets by weight or base-to-ogive length. I don't sort cases by weight or volume. i don't even wet OR dry tumble anymore; i just run some steel wool around the neck to knock any chunks off before it goes in the sizing die. and I still get single digit ES, and 1/2 MOA groups.
So... I think I can say with some confidence, that none of those things are necessary for anyone satisfied with those results. If you're looking to be competitive benchrest matches where you only shoot a handful of rounds, maybe they are. If you have to shoot 300+ rounds in a PRS match, it's way way too much work and expense. I mean if you bought 1000 pc of brass, you'd wind up throwing out half your brass, and then you'd lose half in the weeds while shooting the match, and have to start all over again with a new lot.
Will I get an occasional flyer, or a round that's 20fps fast or slow? sure. but it's usually not the end of the world for me.

Now, I admit I DO still do a few things that others i follow don't do. So I know they're unnecessary but i do them anyway because they're easy. One example is trimming after every firing.

the things I think are important are:
consistent neck tension (controlled by bushing size and proper annealing, and not crimping)
runout (i like LE Wilson chamber type seating dies)
weighing powder to the kernel (doesn't matter for short range benchrest, but it does matter if you're shooting LR or ELR)
properly seating primers, and using a brand that's consistent
Click to expand...
what brand(s) of brass do you use?

murf
 
murf said:
what brand(s) of brass do you use?

murf
Click to expand...
taliv,

i think case brand is the most important ingredient in the precision handloading process. and while a discussion of case brand quality deserves a separate thread, asking what brand of case you are using (and what everybody else is using) is a very important consideration discussing extreme accuracy. it should be listed in natureboy's list, imo.

murf
 
Sorry for delayed response

It varies by cartridge

223 - lapua
6dasher - Norma
6.5x47 - lapua
300norma mag - Norma
260AI - lapua and blem hornady (both 243win necked up and fireformed

To be honest I’ve been able to regularly achieve single digit ES with all of the above including blemished hornady brass from midway. Accuracy has been fine with all of the above.

However some needed more work. Neck turning, trimming Etc.
Some had trashed primer pockets after first firing.
Some had split necks more often. Eg trying to neck Winchester brand brass up to 260, I’d split a lot more necks than lapua.
And some just didn’t shoot well
 
Nature Boy said:
There are always multiple discussions running where the question is:

Is it worth it to do (____)

Worth is usually defined as improving accuracy, precision or consistency of down range results. Sometime we take the extra time to prove that doing something vs. not doing it has merit, but more often than not we take it on faith based upon conventional wisdom or forum feedback.

I propose we take some of these "things" and do some testing to see if we can discern their value. There will have to be some established predicates for these tests. Looking for feedback from you all to flesh this out and help with some of the testing if you find that sort of stuff enjoyable.

So here's a short list of some of these "things" that often get debated regarding their value:

1. Deburring flash holes (there's a thread running now on that, which gave me the idea)
2. Sorting brass by weight
3. Sorting bullets by weight
4, Sorting bullets by base-to-ogive measurement
5. Wet vs dry tumbling (my favorite)
6. Run Out
7. Primer brand x vs y
8. Neck tension

Some of these are either/or so a test might involve 2 sets of 4 groups, 5 shots each (4 groups for the "not doing the thing" and 4 groups for "doing the thing") 40 rounds total.

Then you have the issues where you're looking at variable data like bullet weight. For instance you could sort bullets where you get most of your 168 SMKs measuring 168g +/- 1g. Take 20 of those and compare them to 20 from the extreme ends (highest and lowest) of your weighed bullets. In this case, if you saw no discernable difference between these two sets, you'd never weigh another bullet in your life.

If the test is set up properly, I don't think you'd need to be a world class record holding bench rest champion to do these tests. As long as you and your rifle are reasonably consistent, the comparison between sets should reveal meaningful results.

So what do you guys think? Is this worth doing and do you have an interest in participating?
Click to expand...
There is a great fallacy in the way many people go about improving their loads, and another in the way that they test them.

The variation in cartridges is the sum of many sources of variation: bullet weight, neck tension, charge, etc. Random variation does not add linearly. The contribution of the smaller sources of variation is usually negligible. You have to find the largest single source of variation, and work on that first. If you're shooting offhand, the largest source of variation is you, unless you have an awful sewer pipe of a gun. If you can shoot 6" groups with a gun that averages 2 1/2" groups from a bench rest, and switch to one that averages 1/2" groups, the difference in your average offhand group size will be almost undetectable. Working on the minor contributors is an exercise in futility.

Many reloaders will shoot a five-shot group with one load, and then a five-shot group with another, and think that they have shown that one load is superior to the other. That really doesn't work. A single five-shot group (let alone a three-shot group) is so statistically weak that the results will often reverse themselves when the experiment is repeated. The average of three five-shot groups will give you an estimate of long-term performance that is within about plus or minus 25%. Any difference smaller than that, or from fewer groups, is likely imaginary. A rifle that has a long-term average of 1" groups will routinely print groups as small as 1/2" and as large as 1 1/2" with no change whatever in the load, firearm, or shooting technique.
 
Blue68f100 said:
Neck tension is going to be a hard one. Like you I anneal every cycle so I have the same neck tension throughout it's life.
Click to expand...

Neck tension is actually easy, once someone shows you the secret. The trick is to put a force transducer under the shell holder and measure the force needed to seat a bullet.
 
taliv said:
Sorry for delayed response

It varies by cartridge

223 - lapua
6dasher - Norma
6.5x47 - lapua
300norma mag - Norma
260AI - lapua and blem hornady (both 243win necked up and fireformed

To be honest I’ve been able to regularly achieve single digit ES with all of the above including blemished hornady brass from midway. Accuracy has been fine with all of the above.

However some needed more work. Neck turning, trimming Etc.
Some had trashed primer pockets after first firing.
Some had split necks more often. Eg trying to neck Winchester brand brass up to 260, I’d split a lot more necks than lapua.
And some just didn’t shoot well
Click to expand...
no problem. i asked again, pretty much, to bump the thread. it is important, imo.

i consider 30 shots minimum to verify the accuracy of a particular firearm/load combo. would be interested in your number. i think you already expressed that in another thread, but thought you could share that info here.

good brass, like you are using, eliminates a lot of brass prep. the only thing i would add to your list is: make sure all primer pockets are of a uniform depth. i think lock-time consistency is important when going for accuracy.

murf
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
brass/bullet help
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
Archie
Archie
J
  • Locked
Question about sorting for the Truly Organized
Replies
6
Views
460
evan price
evan price
C
  • Locked
Reloading for rifle accuracy
Replies
9
Views
664
gdcpony
G
O
  • Locked
Bullet Uniformity Testing - 7mm Bullets
Replies
11
Views
847
Orkan
O
azar
  • Locked
Bullet weight fluctuations
Replies
12
Views
791
RecoilRob
R
Back
Top