Target interpretation help.

kaskin · Thursday at 10:19 PM

Need a little help deciding what loads to pick from on the ladder test. I’m thinking 44.5-44.8 gr varget in .1 increments to find the winning recipe?

REM700
1:12 20” factory barrel
lapua brass
WLR primers

No exactly sure where to go from here.

Any help would be appreciated.

Gentleman4561 · Thursday at 10:40 PM

Tough to tell much from 3 shot groups, what velocity are you shooting for?

I would shoot a 10 shot group at whatever charge weight provides satisfactory velocity and see if it groups.

Csafisher · Thursday at 10:58 PM

Pick a velocity and run with it….

Long Range 338 · Thursday at 11:15 PM

Well, considering this is a ladder test you are looking for the least amount of vertical dispersion. 44.8 grains looks pretty good.

kaskin · Thursday at 11:35 PM

I figured somewhere in the 2600 fps range. Not married to a velocity really. I would like for them group tight and consistent and let velocity figure itself out… maybe that’s not the right thinking..? Not sure

spife7980 · Thursday at 11:36 PM

Based on the evidence presented the 44.2-44.8 is where I would look into more like you said

straightshooter1 · Friday at 12:26 AM

Long Range 338 said:
Well, considering this is a ladder test you are looking for the least amount of vertical dispersion. 44.8 grains looks pretty good.

Yeah, and I'd say 44.5 to 44.8 even though that "flyer" on 44.5 might be from who knows what. I would have shot another 44.5 round to see if that "flyer" might be shooter error. This is why I load up more than 3 for each powder charge (like 5) in case I see something in one of the 3 shot groups that I can't explain. And though 44.5 -44.8 look good on the vertical, it needs to be verified with another trip to the range, no matter which load one thinks is "the one." It's all about being able to repeat the results one is after.

Old Man with Gun · Friday at 4:54 AM

3 shot groups don't produce repeatable results. Chrono SD data is a far more reliable starting point than group size IMO. I Chrono 5 shot groups to find a good node then 10 shot a few loads that look promising for group size

Rio Precision Gunworks · Friday at 6:13 AM

Making any decisions based on this target alone is likely no better than pulling a charge weight out of a hat.

Doom · Friday at 7:27 AM

Assuming you are using OCW then the 44.5 to 45.1 gn has a pretty consistent point of impact. Would test again in that range with a smaller increment. of 0.2gn. There should be a lower"node" about 1.2 gn below this which would be around 43.2 to 43.9 gn. 43.2 is in the range of a known load with Varget and 168s.

A note though on the 168 BTHP Hornady Match bullet. I have recently been working with that bullet and have not found it to be very consistent in my Rem 700 Tactical. Best groups seem to run about 2x the size of my 168 SMK groups. Not terrible but definitely larger.

ShtrRdy · Friday at 8:01 AM

I agree with your thoughts. Also, 43.6 to 44.2 seem to have a similar point of impact.

It this a 308 Win?

kaskin · Friday at 8:33 AM

Thanks for all the input guys. Yes, you are assuming correctly about the OCW.
Based on all the above, i think the next plan of action is to load 5 shot groups from 44.3-45.0, get some chrono data and see what they do on paper.

I'll try to get to the range this weekend and see.

kaskin · Friday at 8:37 AM

Doom said:
Assuming you are using OCW then the 44.5 to 45.1 gn has a pretty consistent point of impact. Would test again in that range with a smaller increment. of 0.2gn. There should be a lower"node" about 1.2 gn below this which would be around 43.2 to 43.9 gn. 43.2 is in the range of a known load with Varget and 168s.

A note though on the 168 BTHP Hornady Match bullet. I have recently been working with that bullet and have not found it to be very consistent in my Rem 700 Tactical. Best groups seem to run about 2x the size of my 168 SMK groups. Not terrible but definitely larger.

Funny thing you say that, I was loading 43.9 for a while, but got "inconsistent" results. Some days they would group great, some days would be all the way out to 1.1" group.
After a shooting a 600 yd competition and not getting the results i expected, figured it was time to run the OCW again... I kept thinking it wasn't in the right node... ?

I may need to try the SMK's. Problem is, i have a bunch on HDY BTHP...

918v · Friday at 10:11 AM

Maybe change the coal a little

kaskin · Friday at 11:37 AM

The throat on this factory is a country mile long... .126 jump to the lands... You think COAL will make that much of a difference with a jump like that?

918v · Friday at 11:43 AM

kaskin said:
The throat on this factory is a country mile long... .126 jump to the lands... You think COAL will make that much of a difference with a jump like that?

Yes because accuracy has nothing to do with jump.

KYAggie · Friday at 12:23 PM

kaskin said:
I would like for them group tight and consistent and let velocity figure itself out… maybe that’s not the right thinking..? Not sure

I can’t tell you how many times the best group when testing new loads was also, by far, the worst as far as ES and SD go. It seems to happen often. You definitely need chrono data to see this as it would not otherwise be noticeable until you start shooting longer range and see unexpected vertical dispersion. My best SD’s are sometimes not the best group until I do a seating depth test, which according to the brain trust here, doesn’t matter

, despite targets that appear to indicate that it does. Start with chrono data.

918v · Friday at 1:08 PM

I would redo 43.6 through 44.2 using a chrono at a different coal. I think 44.2 might cloverleaf if the coal was maybe .005” longer or shorter. And at that coal you may see another good accurate charge with a lower sd.

kaskin · Friday at 2:22 PM

If memory serves me right 43.9 varget with HDY BTHP was giving 2680 fps. This is just for benchmark purposes.

So, at this stage, is the consensus load 5 rounds from 43.6 to 44.8 in .2 increments, .1 increments??
or
43.4 - 44.5 in the same fashion? Get MV for all loads and see what prints?
or
...?

Didn't want to load 100 test rounds (exaggerating), then, have even more confusing data for this ole mind to try and sort...

I have a Creedmoor that needs the same thing done to it.. and while i love reloading, i'm not as good interpreting data as i thought...

918v · Friday at 2:47 PM

I think .3gr increments are fine until you find something with potential.

918v · Friday at 2:53 PM

What’s your coal anyway?

kaskin · Friday at 3:07 PM

CBTO: 2.182
Max CBTO: 2.310

918v · Friday at 3:15 PM

Ok so you have plenty of room to play.

Taylorbok · Friday at 3:29 PM

Honestly I'd try a different bullet. It doesn't seem to like that one.

kaskin · Friday at 3:39 PM

I figured i could get these to shoot... After all, i do get some cloverleafs.. occasionally that is... LOL

I my grab 100 SMK's and see what's up.

Sidenote: the gold standard FGMM will not group in this rifle. 1.5"+ at 100 yds

Csafisher · Friday at 4:51 PM

kaskin said:
Funny thing you say that, I was loading 43.9 for a while, but got "inconsistent" results. Some days they would group great, some days would be all the way out to 1.1" group.
After a shooting a 600 yd competition and not getting the results i expected, figured it was time to run the OCW again... I kept thinking it wasn't in the right node... ?

I may need to try the SMK's. Problem is, i have a bunch on HDY BTHP...

OCW is worthless. Even if it worked, 3 shot groups vary in size way too much to gather any legitimate data. You can’t have a consistent POI to look for in OCW if your group sizes vary by .75in at 100yd….. You might consider another bullet or powder. Or if it has great SD and ES just shoot it.

kaskin · Saturday at 7:53 PM

Update, range day.
Here are the findings.

918v · Saturday at 8:56 PM

What coal did you use?

kaskin · Saturday at 9:03 PM

918v said:
What coal did you use?

CBTO: 2.182

918v · Saturday at 9:08 PM

You probably want to use that 45.1gr load, don’t you?

straightshooter1 · Saturday at 9:19 PM

kaskin said:
CBTO: 2.182

Note: CBTO is not the same as COAL that was asked for.

Also . . . sharing the CBTO isn't really any help without knowing the diameter of the hole in your particular comparator insert. Different comparators have variations and sometimes very significant difference. CBTO's are good do know for one's own use as that'll be consistent, but not same as with my comparator.

918v · Saturday at 9:21 PM

Yeah but it gives people a general idea.

straightshooter1 · Saturday at 9:26 PM

918v said:
Yeah but it gives people a general idea.

You mean like where there's a .067" difference between his comparator insert and someone else's when measuring the same bullet?

918v · Saturday at 9:28 PM

straightshooter1 said:
You mean like where there's a .067" difference between his comparator insert and someone else's?

Why not a wrong insert altogether?

918v · Saturday at 9:30 PM

Mr. Kaskin,

Are you around 2.8 base to tip?

kaskin · Saturday at 9:31 PM

The numbers from 45.1 look good. I wonder if I can fine tune it with seating depth?

I don’t have COAL on my notes. I get the comparator difference, but, I only use this comparator to load bullets for this gun… so for me, it’s a non issue. These bullets are restricted to internal mag length. When I load another batch, I’ll note COAL.

918v · Saturday at 9:33 PM

I think you can tighten up that group with a small coal change. Although you might get sticky bolt in the summer.

kaskin · Saturday at 9:35 PM

I measured a dummy round I had on the bench. 2.783 COAL

straightshooter1 · Saturday at 9:40 PM

918v said:
Why not a wrong insert altogether?

Good point, as that's a possibility too. That .067" I mentioned is actually the difference between my Hornady insert for a .308 and my Sinclair insert for a .308. And I've seen some significant difference just between two Hornady inserts. . .though nothing near that much.

Though significant variations in a bullet's meplat is normal, having some idea of what the COAL (preferably the average), it's a lot easier to figure out and get better idea for what the cartridge configuration actually is. I think that's why an app like QuickLoad uses COAL rather than CBTO???

918v · Saturday at 9:45 PM

kaskin said:
I measured a dummy round I had on the bench. 2.783 COAL

Up the coal to around 2.800” plus/minus in .005” increments. I think you’ll cut that group in half.

kaskin · Saturday at 10:10 PM

10-4. I’ll stretch the next batch .005 at a time.

Funny thing, the 44.8 charge seems to shoot tight, but that ES was quite extreme. Hard to move on from a group with sizes like that. Such is life though. Haha

sinister · Saturday at 11:03 PM

Remington factory barrels were always lawyer-proofed -- long-throated for the lowest denominator -- for someone shooting 200-grain round-nose.

Hornady 308 bullets never grouped as well for me (in factory or custom rifles) as Sierras and Bergers.

For years 44 grains of Varget with any bullet seated to 2.800" cartridge overall length was considered an index load -- if your rifle doesn't shoot it well there is something wrong with it.

Do your bullet ogives contact or have minimal free-bore jump to the lands?

XP1K · Saturday at 11:31 PM

How many of these hornady 168's do you have to burn up ? With the luck I've had out of hornady lately I'd abandon them.

And you've tried the 168 and 175 sierras and your rifle didn't care for them?

I've been using my 308 to burn up boxes of random bullets lately and 45gr of varget regardless of whatever bullet sits on top of it seems to shoot pretty good. 2.800 oal for everything.

I'm curious why you started at the short oal, is that max mag length in your rifle ?

kaskin · Saturday at 11:49 PM

I have about 3-400 of these rascals left.
Lands were way out there, so I was limited to internal mag length.

I haven’t tried sierras or 175’s. I have tried nosler 168 and it seemed ok. They are hunting bullets, so I haven’t burned a bunch up.

jpjulian · 2025-01-12T00:22:44-0500

I have to question your chronograph data as you had quite a few shots not recorded. I'm also thinking there's some inconsistency in your technique as your groups show some pretty wild horizontal and verticlal. That said, I'd pick a load that has worked for many others, ie; 44.0, or a velocity that has worked for many others, say 2550 with the 168, and run with it.

Doom · 2025-01-12T00:56:34-0500

kaskin said:
Update, range day.
Here are the findings.

Having seen two sets of targets I am going to say that something is wrong here. There seems to be some consistency in point of impacts but there is more scatter in the shots than I believe can be explained by either charge or seating depth. Several things come to mind.

I am assuming this is a SPS Tactical of some vintage and flavor and probably is a Hogue Overmold stock. These stocks have a lot of flex on the fore end and can flex to put pressure on the barrel. This is especially true with a bipod.

Without knowing the OP I think based on the target that he may be having trouble with getting a repeatable setup. The could be based on front/rear bag issues or body position. Is the rifle coming to the same position after recoil? This can be exaggerated if the groups are shot round robin.

What I would suggest is to load ten round (or less if you like) with 43.0 grains of Varget and a COAL of ~2.800". Shoot that load at 100 yds. either as 2x 5 shot groups or one ten shot group while being cognizant of the items above. This load should put you in a known "node" that should give better than 1 MOA groups. It will be a lower recoiling load probably around 2550 fps.

You can chronograph those shots but don't look at them while you are shooting. There will not be a good correlation between the POI and changes in velocity.

Based on the second set of targets you seem to have a "node" around 44.1 gn.

kaskin · 2025-01-12T10:10:00-0500

I wouldn't be telling the truth if i didn't start questioning my technique when i saw some of these groups... Then again, I was conscientious about loading the bipod, cheek & rifle position and recoil management...

These were shot in sequence. All the bullets for 1 charge in 1 run. 1 minute or so between groups to download the chrono data.
30 shots total. Leave the bolt open while downloading data. Rinse and repeat. Once the bolt was closed, tried to keep things moving so the round wound warm up in the chamber...

talking about the rifle:
Rem 700 SPS 1:12 twist
Boyd Stock: Devcon bedded
Scope: Vortex 6-24 FFP
Chronograph: Magneto Speed Sporter...

Regarding the "no data" shots... This magneto speed is not mounted on the barrel as it was intended by design. The rifle has 2 slot picatinny rail on front / side of the stock. The magneto is mounted to an articulating arm that allows for positioning under the barrel, but not touching. It can be tricky at times to keep it where it needs to be due to recoil. The thought behind this was to have the ability to capture data without disturbing harmonics... Is it possible that it touched on a bullet or two? maybe. I would like to think the set up was perfect every time, but... we are human...

If it helps, when the trigger broke, i saw the reticle lined up with the target on every shot....

The vertical stringing was weird to me as well...

918v · 2025-01-12T10:20:30-0500

kaskin said:
I wouldn't be telling the truth if i didn't start questioning my technique when i saw some of these groups... Then again, I was conscientious about loading the bipod, cheek & rifle position and recoil management...

These were shot in sequence. All the bullets for 1 charge in 1 run. 1 minute or so between groups to download the chrono data.
30 shots total. Leave the bolt open while downloading data. Rinse and repeat. Once the bolt was closed, tried to keep things moving so the round wound warm up in the chamber...

talking about the rifle:
Rem 700 SPS 1:12 twist
Boyd Stock: Devcon bedded
Scope: Vortex 6-24 FFP
Chronograph: Magneto Speed Sporter...

Regarding the "no data" shots... This magneto speed is not mounted on the barrel as it was intended by design. The rifle has 2 slot picatinny rail on front / side of the stock. The magneto is mounted to an articulating arm that allows for positioning under the barrel, but not touching. It can be tricky at times to keep it where it needs to be due to recoil. The thought behind this was to have the ability to capture data without disturbing harmonics... Is it possible that it touched on a bullet or two? maybe. I would like to think the set up was perfect every time, but... we are human...

If it helps, when the trigger broke, i saw the reticle lined up with the target on every shot....

The vertical stringing was weird to me as well...

How are you loading these rounds? Regular dies or bushing or something else? How many firings on this brass?

kaskin · 2025-01-12T10:41:20-0500

Redding Body Die
Lee Dies for Neck, Seat and Crimp.
Lapua Brass x 3. Next loading will be 4...
Annealed, sized and Trimmed, chamfer, deburr.
Lyman single stage press...

918v · 2025-01-12T10:46:14-0500

Lee collet neck die?

Having trouble using the site?

Target interpretation help.

Private

Attachments

Luke Crawford

Sergeant of the Hide

Professional Ammo Waster

Private

Luchador

Private

Major Hide Member

Supporter

Balding Eagle

Gunny Sergeant

Private

Private

Reaper of benefits

Private

Reaper of benefits

Private

Reaper of benefits

Private

Reaper of benefits

Reaper of benefits

Private

Reaper of benefits

Private

Private

Sergeant of the Hide

Private

Attachments

Reaper of benefits

Private

Reaper of benefits

Private

Reaper of benefits

Private

Reaper of benefits

Reaper of benefits

Private

Reaper of benefits

Private

Private

Reaper of benefits

Private

Rifle Pointer

Private

Private

Private

Balding Eagle

Private

Reaper of benefits

Private

Reaper of benefits

Similar threads