Rifle Load Development

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

Wilburt

Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2008
Messages
319
Location
North Carolina
Going to start it for my Fal but have a general question. I know the FAl's not too inherntly accurare but will load for other rifles too. After much research on previous threads not sure which load development to use. I know some use the ladder method but some state it is not good unless you shoot at a distance for the bullet to drop and then human error comes into play. I've read about the chronograph one using low ED and SD with good groups but I just haven't put down the cash on one. There are a few others but...

So what's the best method? :confused:
 
My personal favorite method is the optimal charge weight (OCW) approach documented by Dan Newberry (google Dan's name and OCW). The OCW is an excellent experimental approach and has never failed to produce a good load for my purposes.

A good chrono is not an absolute requirement, but it is one of the most helpful tools in your load development kit.
 
For a rifle, I go to the range and shoot ten round groups over a chronograph. I record the velocities. If ES's or SD's are in the range of multiple hundred's, the combination is probably not so good.

I watch velocities and chicken out when I am exceeding published velocities, or my own limits. My limits are based on my experience with that bullet and cartridge.

If I get pierced primers, blown primers, I stop. I have exceeded safe limits.

I look to see if there is a trend on target. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Sometimes there are times, that I conclude, that I would get a better group if I came back a couple of days later. Sometimes loads are all awful, sometimes with in a load development series, a mid band of loads, looks best.

I will try that load in a couple of highpower matches. If the accuracy is there and I am not blowing or piercing primers, or primers are not falling out of the pocket after a couple of reloads, then I will probably use that load.

I wish I could have found a one stop, slam/bang, solution to load development, but I have not. It takes work, and further testing.

In so far as ES and SD, out to 600 yards, what matters is what you see on paper. I do believe that tighter SD's and ES's are good at 1000 yards, but I can't hold well enough to prove the point. So it may all be in my head.

Yesterday at 600 yards, I shot a 197-8X. Two nines were due to position, not ES's or SD's. (at least one was due to a wind change) What people should work on most is sight alignment, trigger pull, and position.
 
I've tried many methods to find an accurate load, some of which involved loading 100's of rounds. Once I discovered the OCW method (from this board), I never looked back. Bestest loads I've ever developed have used this method. And as a bonus, those loads work very well in various barrel lengths so I only need one load for 18 vs 26 inch barrels. Dan has his stuff togeather, highly recommended.
 
What people should work on most is sight alignment, trigger pull, and position.
Click to expand...

The basic concept behind OCW is to allow for deviations in MV and not make a material difference in you POI. My theory on this is that OCW really ensures the harmonics of the barrel is at the breech when the bullet exits enhansing accuracy. I could be wrong on this as I'm no ballistics expert. I just know it works and accept it for what it is. ES and SD don't bother me.

I wish I had a machine rest to prove this but your right. Psychology, trigger work, sight picture, position and practice will do more to tighten your groups than anything else. A class on reading winds is helpful as well.

Sometimes you just have bad days shooting and others you can do no wrong. Nothing has changed but your psychology. If I'm shooting badly one day, I just chalk it up to experience and have fun. One week I shot 21 targets in HP shillotte and the next month only got 10 and nothing changed but me.
 
Dan's OCW method has worked well for me with several different rifles and chamberings.
 
makes me want to buy an RCBS 1500 Chargemaster
Click to expand...


You won't be sorry if you do. I have had mine for quite awhile. It has been one of the most useful pieces of equipment I own. :D
 
Most of the time, but not always, the OCW that I arrive at also has some of the best SD and ES results. I generally plot SD vs charge wt and overlay a plot of group size and then correlate that with POI. Typically, the smallest group size corresponds with consistent POI and a minimum in SD (not always though).

As an engineer I do a lot of experimentation and work with statistical data and I've got to say that Dan knows what he's talking about.
 
I use the OCW method too and an RCBS ChargeMaster Combo. :D If the only concern is getting the smallest groups possible under specific conditions, then the OCW method won't always deliver the best results. The benefit of the OCW method to me is that once you develop the "right" load, it'll hit POA under a much wider range of conditions (temp, humidity, elevation etc.) This is VERY useful for hunting applications but you may not win a trophy.

:)
 
Well I just looked at his technique, and he shoots three shot groups and allows the barrel to cool between shots. I do not have the time, nor do I want to do this. I will be shooting my match rifles 10 rounds in 60 secs or 70 secs, with a couple of minutes scoring pause before I shoot another 10 rounds rapid. At 600 yards, I will have 22 minutes to shoot 22 rounds. If my rifle cannot shoot under 1 MOA in these conditions, I am not interested in the barrel, or the load.

I want to get the barrel warm and see if groups start walking. If the group moves as the barrel gets hot, I have a barrel problem, or a bedding problem. I want to know that, so I can fix it.

He also recommends cleaning his barrel a lot more than I do. I will easily fire 100 rounds during a load development session, and I don’t clean the barrel till I am done. At a highpower match, ignoring alibi's I will shoot 88 rounds, without cleaning. The barrel and the load better be able to perform. Or I have wasted my day.

His technique appears to be trying to find a broad “sweet” spot in which powder charges can vary. I don’t think that is at all bad. That's why I prefer stick powders, they seem to have broad sweet spots.

Maybe this is difference in developing loads for heavy barreled target rifles and slender barreled hunting rifles.
 
SlamFire1: That is a good point. i often shoot 200 - 250 rounds through my fal without a cleaing. I am going to give the method a try and maybe without the cleaning or cooling and see what happens
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top