Working Up Loads - Methods

[ArtP]

Hi,

I am wondering if anyone has a more efficient way to work up loads that might be faster and use less resources than the method I use.

This is how I've worked up loads for my .243 if I'm after a target load. A hunting load would be a little different - obviously favoring velocity at the expense of some accuracy.

The values I'm giving are hypothetical book values. Not using actual values.

1. Choose a bullet - Sierra 70 Match

2. Choose a powder - This is where hunch comes in. I usually try to choose something in the middle of the range. That is, if starting loads are between 30 and 40 grains, depending on the powder, I would choose something in the middle. Also considered are what I have on hand (5 or 6 powders) and what the reloading manual says. For this instance I'll choose IMR 4064.

3. Determine max load for me. This is usually somewhat less than book values for me. Odds are the most accurate load will be less than book maximum. Additionally, I like to save wear, tear and resources. Since book says 38.5, I'll consider my max 37.8

4. Choose four or five different charges to narrow down what the rifle likes. For this caliber I'll choose to 5 loads in .7 grain increments - 35.0, 35.7, 36.4, 37.1, 37.8.

5. Make two groups of 3, total of six rounds at each charge (total 30 rounds). I use two groups to eliminate a lucky group skewing the results. Test at 100 yards.

6. Using the best group, let's that's at 36.4, I'll make two groups of three charges, surrounding the 36.4 group at .2 grain increments. That is I'll make two groups at 36.2, two groups at 36.4 and two more at 36.6. Total of 18 rounds.

7. I'll pick the winner and consider that to be the best recipe for that bullet/powder combination.

If I'm using a bigger caliber I would make the increments larger. For a .270, I would make the first test at 1 grain increments and the second at .3 grain increments.

This method requires 48 rounds. I came up with this on my own, but I'm quite sure others have better methods. I have tried the ladder test but found the random errors in my equipment or skills can throw off the test significantly because every single round contributes to how the test is interpreted.

I have heard of people that really know what they're doing can get pretty far with just 25 rounds.

 

[Walkalong]

Start low and work up. You will find more than one "sweet spot" on the way up. Assuming you are using a powder that has proven to shoot well in the caliber you are testing, the biggest differences will be trying different bullet to see what your barrel likes. Obviously you have a better chance with match grade bullets. Your barrel and action are the most limiting factors. A poor barrel won't shoot the best bullets well, but a great barrel will shoot most decent bullets well, and the great ones really well.

When I shot Benchrest I wouldn't decide on a bullets worth (In my barrel) until I had shot an agg or two with it. If it seemed to want to shoot I would tweak the powder up or down. Weight? Have no clue. I would just bump it up or down a click or two. Who cares what weight it is.

One group, especially one 3 shot group, means nothing. The ability to repeat a good group over and over is what a good target load is about. I haven't found any shortcuts. It's expensive.

At least a couple of 5 shot groups of each weight. You have to be able to judge what is shooting well, and when you make mistakes.

I loaded up some 55 Gr V Max bullets in .222 Mag the other day. I shot one group with them. Looked like about a 3/4" group. Poor for that gun. I shot another. Same results. I drug out a proven load. Put 4 in one ragged hole with one out of the group. That gun likes the Hornady 50 & 55 Gr soft points. It shoots them as well as the Sierra & Speer 52 Gr match bullets. It shoots great with IMR 4598 & H335. I haven't tried any others. No need to.



Short story. Pick a proven powder for the caliber. Pick two or three bullets you think will work. Try all three to see if one stands out. If one does tweak it.

 

[~z]

Typically I load for hunting the same as target, both favoring accuracy over speed (to an extent). For long range stuff I try to get going about as fast as safe but I’ll sacrifice 50-75 fps for 1/8” any day.

As for the powder choice, the stuff on the shelf always beats a trip to the store, BUT I typically grab the Nosler book to see what powder will provide 85% or greater case capacity. This has provided my best accuracy in most cases.

Next, instead of loading two batches of the same load (at this stage) I load 4 of each. This allows Mr. Murphy to do his deed and not have me wondering. The most important part (in my mind) is the shot. After I touch off the trigger I close my eyes and ask myself “was that a good shot”. Then look to see where it went and note it. The 4th rounds allows you to omit one if it was not clean. This could be due the guy next to you sending one at the micro-moment you completely unslacked your trigger.

It is just like dating…once you have narrowed the pool down to the girls you wanna dance with again, load up 3 batches of 4 for each and see which one shines best. If you don’t have the result you wanted change something and try again. It is an iterative process and you will spend some time and money at the dancehall (gun range) before you find your wife (right load). And just like dating, you will have some fun and get pretty close once and awhile only to find you have some irreconcilable differences and scratch the whole thing only to start again with a different girl (powder/ bullet/ primer).

No doubt about it you will spend money along the way.

Sorry about the metaphor, it may only make sense to me.
~z

 

[gearheadpyro]

I wrote an article on load development on my website. So far I haven't found a faster way to narrow down loads with access to only a 100 yard range. I've gotten a chrony recently though and plan to go through and re-work my process integrating it. In my head it makes sense that a ladder test is basically a test of velocity variations, and therefore should be measurable on my chronograph. I plan to write an article on my findings as soon as I'm satisfied with the test results. If I'm right, this method should bring me to my best charge weight within about 20-30 rounds. After that it will just be fine tuning, which I do every time I go to the range anyways.

 

[BsChoy]

Look up the Crieghton Audette (sp?) method. I use nothing else now. Basically you load 20 or so rounds in total. All to the same OAL with the same bullets, primer, and powder. Now you go up in .2-.3 grain increments in EACH round until the listed max for that bullet and powder. So when you are done you will have approx 20 or so rounds each with a different powder charge in them. Then you take them to the range and set a target at least 200 yards out. Slowly fire each round into the target using the same point of aim and starting lowest charge to highest. As you do that have a, identical target neat to you and mark where on the target the bullet went.

As you go slowly up the ladder you will end up with 2 or 3, 3 round groups that are tight together. They will probably be sequential like round# 6,7, and 8. Thats a node. That is what your rifle likes. When you are done, go home reload a 5-10 round batch of each node and shoot them at your desired range. Play with seating depth and that should be all you need. This saves a metric BUTTLOAD of components.

 

[WNTFW]

The post above is describing a method known as the ladder method.

The Ladder method has some good points and some bad - But it is a method.
OCW - Optimal Charge Weight is based on the ladder method. I have found some loads within 35 rounds that worked quite well.

http://optimalchargeweight.embarqspace.com/

Even if you don't use the method it is worth reading the info.

 

[WNTFW]

Gearhead Pyro
I read on your site you didn't use the OCW method because you only had access to 100 yds.

I have used the OCW method at 100yds with good results. Once in a pinch I used it a 50yds with a .308". It was a rifle I had some experience with, so that helped. I couldn't get Varget and I finally went to the RL15 I had on hand, so I had to decide on a charge weight. I just went to the local indoor range and gave it a go.

Quote from website
" All rifles and shooter’s are not capable of this level of accuracy, make sure you strive for what you can achieve. "
Been there, done that. I have had days where I just didn't shoot well enough to be satisfied that my results were conclusive enough. I forced myself to accept that the best group/load was the best group/load. Eventually I shot that load into tight groups.

 

[esheato]

I start with twist rate and find a bullet with a good reputation that fits that twist.

Using quality brass (eliminating problems from the onset), I usually cross reference a few manuals and pick the most recommended propellants; sometimes 2-3, sometimes 5-6.

Say load spectrum for powder X is 52-60 grains. I'll load a group at half grain intervals starting at 54 to 58 grains...IME, most accurate loads are in the upper spectrum while most low end stuff doesn't give me what I want in velocity and energy. If I get to 58 without exhibiting problems, I'll push a bit more being very cautious, but most of the time I don't have to. One group an accurate rifle does not make...usually, you'll see the groups progressively tighten as the powder goes up though.

I do the same thing with all the powders that were recommended...

Next, pick 2-3 loads that work and do it again shooting multiple groups and taking averages.

Then play with OAL.

If after all this, I'm still not getting what I want, I pick a different bullet and start over. At this point you could have conceivably gone through quite a bit of powder, primers and bullets...starting with high quality bullets is critical.

Lapua brass, Federal Gold Medal Match primers, and (IMHO) Sierra, Berger or Lapua bullets and your powder of choice. If you can't find something with that combination, you're doing it wrong.

BTW, I did a ladder test with a 243 at 100 the other day...put 10 bullets into about 1.5" over a 5 grain increase. Complete waste. On the other hand, did it again with a 338 LM at 200 and got a lot of useful data.

 

[WNTFW]

ArtP,
Your method seems sound & well thought out.

"1. Choose a powder" - I ask around, look at load density and pressure to velocity relationship. Availabilty and what other caliber the powder might cover are factors.

"7. I'll pick the winner and consider that to be the best recipe for that bullet/powder combination." - That is pretty much all you can do. You can look further or decide to use that load as is. Shooting more will prove the load further.

"I have tried the ladder test but found the random errors in my equipment or skills can throw off the test significantly because every single round contributes to how the test is interpreted." That is one downside to the method. I loaded up a ladder and never got to shoot it because of longer range was not accessible and weather was prohibitive.

I have settled on a load and didn't change a thing. My groups shrunk due to my acceptance I was the issue. I think having a stable load helped as opposed to always trying something new. Change 1 thing at a time mentality works well at times.

"I have heard of people that really know what they're doing can get pretty far with just 25 rounds." I think that is possible when some of the load development is sorted out somewhat. In the example below I already had the load figured with Varget. So powder was the only variable. The rifle is a stock Rem 700 barrel/action. I can't reach the lands and feel comfy with my seating depth. So I seat the bullet 1 diameter and that has worked well in 2 different rifles of different brand and caliber. Eliminates some testing right there.

Here is a list of a Quick and Dirty load development session for my .308 with a 168gr BTHP. I did have some other guys RL15 charge weights as a general guide. Grain X quantity of cartridges.
--------------------
Rem 700 with Super Sniper Scope
Using this load to shoot 600 yds.

.308 Winchester
CCI 200 primer

168 Grain from Wideners (Privi Partizan)

Brass is R-P
FL resized

Trimmed to 2.006 with Lee Trimmer
OAL = 2.769 Varies due to tip

Dies were RCBS & Redding on Lee Press

Tested at 50yds indoors

RL15 40 min to 44.8 max

41.50 x 2
42.50 x 2
43.50 x 2
43.75 x 2
44.00 x 6
44.10 x 6
44.20 x 6
44.30 x 6 This was the best load tested @ 50 yds indoors Bayou Dragon.
44.40 x 3
------------------------
35 rounds was a tad excessive - but I only had 1 chance at it. I had to look at the targets as a composite to decide.
Picking the increments can be little tedious. .1 was small but it worked in this case. A lot of load testing is just decision making. Be safe, decide, verify. Decide again, proceed safely, verify. repeat. I look at the OCW & ladder method as a fast track to a good starting point. It show you where to look for the better loads, not necessarily what the ultimate load is.

I hope you get a good load easily and update here with your results.

 

[ArtP]

One group, especially one 3 shot group, means nothing. The ability to repeat a good group over and over is what a good target load is about. I haven't found any shortcuts. It's expensive.

.

I'm not as concerened with cost and effort as I am with wearing the barrel out and starting over. Part of the problem is this particular 243 ideally will shoot two different bullets - a heavier hunting bullet and lighter target/varmint bullet. That just means twice the wear and tear. Maybe I'm asking too much.

I have a load I've developed that will shoot pretty consistently 1/2 MOA with the Sierra match bullets. Half inch aint bad but could be better. I'm considering switching powders and trying to better it, but wonder if that's a waste of time, to ask a factory Tikka rifle to do better than a half MOA consistently.

Part of what makes me greedy is that with IMR 4064, Winchester brass and Wolf primers, I'm able to get that half MOA. From what I've read, Varget is highly regarded in 243 and 6mmbr. I was unable, because of the shortage, to get any Varget until now. I'm trying to decide if it would be worth it to half-way start over with Lapua brass, Remington primer and Varget. I have all three of those components in good supply now.

If I were to start over with those better components wouldn't I be able to narrow the initial powder charge/spread based around the successful 4064 charge?

For example, what works with the cheaper components is 36.1 grains of IMR 4064 with a OAL of 2.625. 36.1 grains is 95.3% of max load. could I start my Varget testing at 94.8% through 95.8%? Or does using a different powder completely negate what the rifle/bullet seemed to like as far as a percentage of max charge? Would I have to start from scratch, testing the whole chargfe weight spectrum? I'm trying to build on what I've already found successful and not have to start over.

I hope I didn't lose anyone here with my thought.

FYI - I did a small test just substituting Lapua brass for Winchester and found the Lapua, everything else being the same, did not shoot quite as well. I know the Lapua brass is thinker and must have less capacity, creating higher pressure with the same amount of powder. I know I could add/subtract to/from the charge and solve this. My real question is about switching all the components.

I've tried the ladder test in the past with two different rifles and found results conclusive once and non conclusive the second time. Obviously the successful test required a lot of tweaking after. Personally, I do not find the ladder test to be much of a time/resource saver for me.

 

[cheygriz]

Just an added comment.

For accuracy loads, such as varmint loads, when I think I've "found" my load, I load 50 rounds, thoroughly clean the gun, and then shoot five groups of ten shots each and aserage my group sizes.

It's often a very humbling experience, and causes me to start over.

 

[ArtP]

We were all posting at the same time, so I copy/pasted so that it shows here, too, as a reply.


I'm not as concerened with cost and effort as I am with wearing the barrel out and starting over. Part of the problem is this particular 243 ideally will shoot two different bullets - a heavier hunting bullet and lighter target/varmint bullet. That just means twice the wear and tear. Maybe I'm asking too much.

I have a load I've developed that will shoot pretty consistently 1/2 MOA with the Sierra match bullets. Half inch aint bad but could be better. I'm considering switching powders and trying to better it, but wonder if that's a waste of time, to ask a factory Tikka rifle to do better than a half MOA consistently.

Part of what makes me greedy is that with IMR 4064, Winchester brass and Wolf primers, I'm able to get that half MOA. From what I've read, Varget is highly regarded in 243 and 6mmbr. I was unable, because of the shortage, to get any Varget until now. I'm trying to decide if it would be worth it to half-way start over with Lapua brass, Remington primer and Varget. I have all three of those components in good supply now.

If I were to start over with those better components wouldn't I be able to narrow the initial powder charge/spread based around the successful 4064 charge?

For example, what works with the cheaper components is 36.1 grains of IMR 4064 with a OAL of 2.625. 36.1 grains is 95.3% of max load. could I start my Varget testing at 94.8% through 95.8%? Or does using a different powder completely negate what the rifle/bullet seemed to like as far as a percentage of max charge? Would I have to start from scratch, testing the whole chargfe weight spectrum? I'm trying to build on what I've already found successful and not have to start over.

I hope I didn't lose anyone here with my thought.

FYI - I did a small test just substituting Lapua brass for Winchester and found the Lapua, everything else being the same, did not shoot quite as well. I know the Lapua brass is thinker and must have less capacity, creating higher pressure with the same amount of powder. I know I could add/subtract to/from the charge and solve this. My real question is about switching all the components.

I've tried the ladder test in the past with two different rifles and found results conclusive once and non conclusive the second time. Obviously the successful test required a lot of tweaking after. Personally, I do not find the ladder test to be much of a time/resource saver for me.

 

[cheygriz]

Just my opinio0n, but trying to improve on 1/2 inch is a waste of time.

 

[ArtP]

Just my opinio0n, but trying to improve on 1/2 inch is a waste of time.

I tend to agree. Why is it we hear of all these people with clover leaf (.25") groups from factory rifles?

 

[ArtP]

Just an added comment.

For accuracy loads, such as varmint loads, when I think I've "found" my load, I load 50 rounds, thoroughly clean the gun, and then shoot five groups of ten shots each and aserage my group sizes.

It's often a very humbling experience, and causes me to start over.

I hate that.... Shooting a couple groups that perform well and you think you have it, only later you find it wasn't so hot.

I shoot groups of three because I have a sporter barrel. How many groups until you're confident? After about 8 I feel pretty good about it.

 

[ArtP]

ArtP,
Your method seems sound & well thought out.

"1. Choose a powder" - I ask around, look at load density and pressure to velocity relationship. Availabilty and what other caliber the powder might cover are factors.

"7. I'll pick the winner and consider that to be the best recipe for that bullet/powder combination." - That is pretty much all you can do. You can look further or decide to use that load as is. Shooting more will prove the load further.

"I have tried the ladder test but found the random errors in my equipment or skills can throw off the test significantly because every single round contributes to how the test is interpreted." That is one downside to the method. I loaded up a ladder and never got to shoot it because of longer range was not accessible and weather was prohibitive.

I have settled on a load and didn't change a thing. My groups shrunk due to my acceptance I was the issue. I think having a stable load helped as opposed to always trying something new. Change 1 thing at a time mentality works well at times.

"I have heard of people that really know what they're doing can get pretty far with just 25 rounds." I think that is possible when some of the load development is sorted out somewhat. In the example below I already had the load figured with Varget. So powder was the only variable. The rifle is a stock Rem 700 barrel/action. I can't reach the lands and feel comfy with my seating depth. So I seat the bullet 1 diameter and that has worked well in 2 different rifles of different brand and caliber. Eliminates some testing right there.

Here is a list of a Quick and Dirty load development session for my .308 with a 168gr BTHP. I did have some other guys RL15 charge weights as a general guide. Grain X quantity of cartridges.
--------------------
Rem 700 with Super Sniper Scope
Using this load to shoot 600 yds.

.308 Winchester
CCI 200 primer

168 Grain from Wideners (Privi Partizan)

Brass is R-P
FL resized

Trimmed to 2.006 with Lee Trimmer
OAL = 2.769 Varies due to tip

Dies were RCBS & Redding on Lee Press

Tested at 50yds indoors

RL15 40 min to 44.8 max

41.50 x 2
42.50 x 2
43.50 x 2
43.75 x 2
44.00 x 6
44.10 x 6
44.20 x 6
44.30 x 6 This was the best load tested @ 50 yds indoors Bayou Dragon.
44.40 x 3
------------------------
35 rounds was a tad excessive - but I only had 1 chance at it. I had to look at the targets as a composite to decide.
Picking the increments can be little tedious. .1 was small but it worked in this case. A lot of load testing is just decision making. Be safe, decide, verify. Decide again, proceed safely, verify. repeat. I look at the OCW & ladder method as a fast track to a good starting point. It show you where to look for the better loads, not necessarily what the ultimate load is.

I hope you get a good load easily and update here with your results.

I find it interesting how you made smaller increments and more groups around the charges you suspected would work well. Good idea.

Do you dissassemble ammo you know will not work? I have. But I don't care for the thought of re-seating bullets.

 

[WNTFW]

If it is a factory Tikka you might be reaching the limits of diminishing returns. I'm not saying in can't be done. You just might be getting into a lot of work for that last bit of performance. That can be more rewarding and fun.

You definitely are doing well with it. You are at the point where you need to consider yourself, rifle fit, shooting setup and other aspects. Your cheekweld may need to be a little more consistent, breathing just a tad better. The trigger may be whats next in line as a place for improvement. I have 3 ranges I shot at where the benches were horrible and shook. I don't shoot well off a bench and that is not my interests, but they wouldn't be helping at trying to reduce a 1/2" group. Target carrier movement can also be a problem.

I don't think any body can help with any authority without seeing your shooting setup or seeing some groups on paper. A little parallax error might be hindering you.

Overall you seem to have a good handle on things.

 

[ArtP]

If it is a factory Tikka you might be reaching the limits of diminishing returns. I'm not saying in can't be done. You just might be getting into a lot of work for that last bit of performance. That can be more rewarding and fun.

You definitely are doing well with it. You are at the point where you need to consider yourself, rifle fit, shooting setup and other aspects. Your cheekweld may need to be a little more consistent, breathing just a tad better. The trigger may be whats next in line as a place for improvement. I have 3 ranges I shot at where the benches were horrible and shook. I don't shoot well off a bench and that is not my interests, but they wouldn't be helping at trying to reduce a 1/2" group. Target carrier movement can also be a problem.

I don't think any body can help with any authority without seeing your shooting setup or seeing some groups on paper. A little parallax error might be hindering you.

Overall you seem to have a good handle on things.

You're right about doing better on my part. I'm certainly not perfect. I'd like to think I'm responsible for a quarter inch of error. Considering that is half of my deviation, I should shut up and sleep well tonight.

My scope has a parallax adjustment.

I also really like your idea of shooting more groups at charges that are suspected to work well. Did I already mention that? Thanks!

 

[WNTFW]

"I find it interesting how you made smaller increments and more groups around the charges you suspected would work well. Good idea."

Part of that was so many guys had loads working in that range with 168gr SMKs. Part is because OCW blows past the lower charge weights fairly quickly as a pressure/safety check. As the pressure builds smaller jumps are safer. I have some other loads I did .3 increments across a range. I didn't have time to make a second pass so I was reaching fo straws and got lucky. I just was able to use a large sample size of other guys results. I parsed some recommendations here on THR as well.

I was a tenth of a grain off of an aquaintances load. It was tempting to go to his load, but my targets showed me the .1 grain higher worked better in my case.

Putting expectations out of my head needs to be done at times. When what I think is not lining up with the results - the results win. I'm not smarter than a rifle about will work, I figure I better let the rifle decide. My neighbor is a shooting/reloading buddy. A lot of time we get the other ones opinion about what groups look better.

"Do you dissassemble ammo you know will not work? I have. But I don't care for the thought of re-seating bullets." I have not had to disassemble many rounds. I might disassemble the ladder I never got to use. A while back a guy gave me 1 or 2 hundred bullets of unknown origin. I decided I didn't want to develop a load for a bullet I can't get more of. He ended up giving me 500 total. Problem is the bases have a lot of defects. I don't know if they are worth wasting any resources on.

I don't like to get up to the high end near max loads, so I tend not to get pressure signs.

My brother has a tikka in .270. He also has a .243, I got all the dies and such to load for it, just never came up yet.

 

[ArtP]

You know, I think there's some merit in the pattern of the groups too. But I only shoot three shot groups. If I get a group on horizontal plane, I consider it better than a vertical plane of the same size. I'm still learning.

I've been a gun owner my whole life but have only been reloading for six months. It's been a very intense six months with a lot of activity. Put differently, I've only been afflicted with the accuracy virus for six months. I wasted the first 250 rounds down the tube leaning and such. I'm trying to be more careful so that I don't have a worn out barrel by the time I get it all figured out.

Thanks for your help and thoughts.

 

[gearheadpyro]

WNTFW:

I have tried the OCW way, and I tried the ladder, both at 100 yards. Total vertical dispersion across somewhere around 3 -4 grains (it's been a while now) was less than 1.2". I couldn't really get a good read on that, especially since most of the groups were around .75". The method I wrote about on my website it what has worked for me. It does take a lot of components, but it leaves me with a load I feel is the best. I'm confident in it, and that alone probably makes up enough of the equation to make me stick with it.

I'm headed to the range now to try the ladder test with my chrony, we'll see if I can't change my mind.

 

[JimKirk]

Lots of good advise has been given, it seems that we all have various methods to arrive at the same point.

I have tried the ladder test but found the random errors in my equipment or skills can throw off the test significantly because every single round contributes to how the test is interpreted

The high lighted words above, are the areas that you have the most control over, improve those and your accuracy will improve greatly. If your equipment is not up to the standards that you need, then it is time to purchase some that will. You skills will improve by doing, but you need to make the conscientious effort to eliminate the errors you make.

Jimmy K

 

[gearheadpyro]

I agree fully with Jim Kirk, 100%

I put a post on my results from a ladder test at 100 yards this morning up on my blog. Found some interesting results.

 

[~z]

ArtP, your comment

If I get a group on horizontal plane, I consider it better than a vertical plane of the same size

may be a shade to the left of correct (in my experience anyway).
I am typically quite happy when I get a load stringing vertical. This usually means I am almost there. The fix is usually a bit more powder or alter the seating depth. I typically only get the horizontal stringing when I misread the wind.

Tinker with that vertical load a bit, it may be very close to right!
~z

 

[Walkalong]

A nice straight vertical line could be as simple as inconsistent shoulder pressure.