POLL for those who use a chronograph.

[R.W.Dale]

I think it's been asked before but I'll start a poll to have some fresh responses.

The question of the day is for those of you who handload and own a chrony. How closely does the velocity you get match the velocity given in the load data or factory ammunition? particularily as it pertains to rifles.

for the purposes of this poll lets call "a little short" 100fps or less


For the most part my guns fall short of the velocity figures given some calibers-loads more than others.

 

[readyeddy]

So long as I use the same length barrel for testing, the velocities are very consistent with the manuals.

 

[mnhntr]

Most published info I use does not state tested barrel length but I am usually higher than whats published.

 

[Walkalong]

None of the above. It depends a lot on where the data came from .......... I find the Speer data shot in real guns tends to be close.

7" pressure barrels for revolver calibers is a waste.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I was about to say the same thing, none of the above... My Marlin 30-03 shoots about 100-125fps lower than the books but my M1917 30-06 shoots slightly higher velocities than most books. (w/26" barrel)

 

[cfullgraf]

I am also a "none of the above".

I have rifles that are routinely faster and others that are routinely slower.

In one case, I have the exact same rifle that Sierra Bullets used for their 223 Remington Service Rifle loads and my rifle pretty much matches dead on. I have a different 20" A2 Service Rifle match rifle that routinely shoots 10% faster than the Sierra data.

Handguns are all over the place as well.

If possible, I like to "calibrate" my firearms with factory ammunition to give me a base line of how the firearm shoots with ammunition that is considered safe for use.

 

[mokin]

None of the above.

It varies. I can work up some rifle loads to the published data but usually find I don't have to for accuracy purposes. The data is usually low in the 10mm Auto. It vairies with the 9mms. Usually they are pretty close for the .40 S&W.

 

[NeuseRvrRat]

I am also a "none of the above".

I have rifles that are routinely faster and others that are routinely slower.

same here

 

[ironworkerwill]

ammunition mfg data is faster usually because they use "full length" test barrels. many times hand load data from bullet mfg's are closer. who wants to wield a 26'' long barrel around specially in Alabama thickets.

 

[Mac45]

Loads out of my Garand tend to be pretty close.
Most others tend to be slower.

 

[wanderinwalker]

None of the above mirrors my experience too.

I had a .260 Remington that never chronographed anywhere near book or factory claims with 140gr bullets. But I could easily match claimed speeds with 120 and 125gr bullets. ??

My Glock 17 routinely chrony's "fast", my first Glock 26 also chrony'ed fast but my current one, I'm not 100%. Hard to find much 9mm data with a 3.5" test barrel.

And it varies from gun to gun too! In 4" .357 revolvers I have a S&W 586 and a 19. The 19 shoots faster than the 586, between 50 and 75 fps depending on the load. (And neither will do 1200-fps with a 158gr bullet with anything but a MAX load of 296 or 2400, in spite of me reading everywhere that it's not hard to do.)

My current 20" Service Rifle AR shoots 69gr bullets at 2850-fps (give or take, I have the data on the computer somewhere) with 25gr of Varget. I can't remember if this is near claimed speed for 20" ARs, but I do know the speeds with near-max loads of 748 and 52gr match bullets were lower than I expected. Not much faster than the 69s as I remember.

 

[dagger dog]

I'm another (D) none of the above.

I have very little experiance with my chronograph, but what I have had ranges from spot on the reloading manual data, to exceeding expected velocity numbers with the same barrel length, load components and exact firearm and recording well under velocities stated in the data.

 

[Hondo 60]

Whether I use factory ammo, or make my own, I don't get close to the "stated" speed.
Usually it's about 100 fps, sometimes it's even more.

By the way, this is for handguns.
I reload 9 calibers, only one is a rifle (223).

One example =
Hodgdon data
125 GR. CAST LRNFP Hodgdon Titegroup .358" 1.445" 3.2 856 8,400 CUP 3.8 985 12,000 CUP

@3.7 grains in my 4" S&W M10 or M65 I get 750 - 800 fps.
That's not the 985 listed by Hodgdon

 

[JEB]

when i use the same barrel length as stated in my hornady manual, i find them to be very close. my 30-06 for example, the manual says it should be at 2900 fps, and they chronograph at an average of 2913 fps. thats plenty close enough for me!

 

[thump_rrr]

When comparing my Savage 10BA to a similar length barrel in the Sierra manual my numbers are higher.
When comparing my Russian SKS to the Hornady manual I'm almost dead on.
When comparing my 14.5" AR-15 velocities to a 20" barrel I'm a little low.

As for pistols I load for minimum power factor.

 

[cemjr]

When I load for my semi auto rifles , .223/5.56 & 308 win. I use the Sierra laod data info ,for a particular bullet, along with Lymans 49th. The Sierra data was shot from a 20 in. barrel, mine is 16 in. so the fps is much less. I have also shot a factory round , of the same bullet type I am loading and tried to get close to the recorded fps.

 

[Pete D.]

None

None of the above. I use a chrono to check the consistency of my hand loads. I never have compared the results that I get to any manual. What the manual says about their test velocity may be interesting but is not important.
Pete

 

[jetinspector]

Yep, i have a Crony Chronograph that worked well up until the time my son shot it! With shipping it'll take about $80 to get new sensors. Need to get it fixed soon because when i tried new loads it was nice to know the velocity, extreme spread etc.

 

[Wil Terry]

NO ANSWER ABOVE APPLIES, SIR. YOU misunderstand what a chronograph does and what it tells you.

 

[Clark]

I use a chrono, but not a load book.

I need the chrono data for making long range drop charts and for bragging on the internet, "My 223 did 4200 fps!"

 

[R.W.Dale]

NO ANSWER ABOVE APPLIES, SIR. YOU misunderstand what a chronograph does and what it tells you.

And what would that misunderstanding be pray tell?

Am I misunderstanding that you can use a chrony to dial in a load for an accurate rifle focusing on reducing ES and SD numbers to absolute minimums?


Am I misunderstanding that I can use one as a safety check in case I'm getting numbers significantly higher than the data would suggest

Am I misunderstanding that one is fundamental in being able to calculate an accurate drop table

Am I misunderstanding that I can use one to ensure I'm using a projectile that can expand on game in my cartridges velocity window.

Am I misunderstanding that I can use one to compare propellants in terms of accuracy and velocity.


Please tell me what you've discovered I'm missing from my question about the validity of published velocities in real world guns?




posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about

 

[hueyville]

I usually only break out my chronagraph/ballistic lab when I am doing experimentation outside of info published in manuals. But when I have, every rifle is different thus this question is a bit odd. If I shoot the same load in four different rifles I get four different distinct sets of data. Which rifle of the four do I use to apply to the question?

 

[R.W.Dale]

Which rifle of the four do I use to apply to the question?

If you're like me and apparently many others any one rifle actually surpassing published velocities is such a rare occurrence it essentially never happens.

Unless you have guns that beat the data and and an equal number that don't you'll be on one side of "spot on" or the other with your collection as a whole.





posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about

 

[targetshooter22]

I use my chrono for all handloads. The rifle data tends to be a little short, but I don't care much as the real purpose is to check consistency/spread/SD of velocity. For the handgun loads, I was initially very disappointed that I wasn't getting the high published velocities for my 357, until it was pointed out that the test gun used was a single shot with a 10" barrel, and that no field revolver would ever get close. This still annoys me, not because I think my gun is bad but because I think the component manufacturer published misleading information.