• RIX Storm S3 Thermal Imaging Scope WINNER!

    Thank you to everyone who particpated!

    See the winner

How does Hold affect Harmonics and Load Development

JimTheLad

Private
Minuteman
May 11, 2018
7
1
Greetings folks,
I just recently began experimenting with different holds while training for precision rifle competitions. I am relatively new to precision rifle and am shooting RDF 105s out of a 6x47 Lapua in an MPA chassis. I noticed a significant change, both in velocity and group size, when going from a very light hold (almost free recoil with very light shoulder, cheek, and trigger hand contact) to a strong hold with cheek weld. I ran a new ladder test which revealed MV had increased slightly and my accuracy node had shifted from 39.6 gn of H-4350 to 38.8 gn. Atmospheric conditions have been stable and consistent in the morning where I shoot in southern NM and I am confident in the consistency of my reloading process (powder charge within .06 gn, shoulder bump .002, seating depth within .002, runout at ogive equal or less than .002). My questions are as follows:

1) Is this a reasonable change caused by the hold changing harmonics?

2) For you experienced tactical match shooters, what hold is going to lend itself better to positional match shooting or is it completely preference?

3) Do harmonics change from position to position during a match? How do you manage these changes?

-My rifle is currently averaging .42 moa from prone (roughly same with both holds). I lean toward the light hold because it helps eliminate the heart beat.

Any insight would be appreciated! Thanks in advance!

James

rifle-
Rem 700 trued
6x47 Lapua
Brux m24, 7.5 twist, 272 nk, .1 freebore
MPA BA chassis

Loads-
RDF 105, cci 450, 39.6 gn H-4350 at 3.062 (.02 jump), 3130 MV with light hold
RDF 105, cci 450, 38.8 gn H-4350 at 3.062 (.02 jump), 3087 MV with hard hold
 
Spending way too much time on things that don't matter a whole lot.

How do I know?

Easy: the typical PRS steel targets (1 - 2 MOA) are the same size as the X and 10 rings of the NRA highpower rifle targets. I never worried about anything remotely close to the things you're worrying about yet I had no issue making Master and winning/placing/showing in local and regional matches.

All that time spent on these experiments will serve you best spent practicing positional shooting and learning how your system behaves in the wind.
 
It can affect several things, including MV of your load.



I don't doubt that there is an effect on muzzle velocity from changing how one addresses the rifle. The data doesn't lie. I suspect the mechanics of a system of moving bodies (rifle and bullet, while the bullet is in the barrel) would explain what you measured.

The real real question is what one does about it? I think the OP is missing the point. Rather than worrying which recoil control method is "best" or how one "manages" the difference in bullet impact/trajectory caused by different recoil control approaches, he would be better served focusing on picking one particular approach to recoil management and being consistent with it.

And even more fundamentally, the question one has to ask is this: is this source of variation significant (within the context being discussed) or not?. One of the things I've learned in two and a half decades of working to understand/control/manage the cause of process variation is that not all inputs into a process have the same magnitude of effect on the output: that's how you can run a DOE changing multiple variables at the same time and still understand the relative effect of each one.

In other words, some things don't mean shit in the overall scheme of things, and some mean a whole lot.
 
Spending way too much time on things that don't matter a whole lot.

How do I know?

Easy: the typical PRS steel targets (1 - 2 MOA) are the same size as the X and 10 rings of the NRA highpower rifle targets. I never worried about anything remotely close to the things you're worrying about yet I had no issue making Master and winning/placing/showing in local and regional matches.

All that time spent on these experiments will serve you best spent practicing positional shooting and learning how your system behaves in the wind.
I'm sure your right! It's just my nature, especially when new to something, to analyse things. I will make sure to focus on practice. Thanks for the input.
 
I don't doubt that there is an effect on muzzle velocity from changing how one addresses the rifle. The data doesn't lie. I suspect the mechanics of a system of moving bodies (rifle and bullet, while the bullet is in the barrel) would explain what you measured.

The real real question is what one does about it? I think the OP is missing the point. Rather than worrying which recoil control method is "best" or how one "manages" the difference in bullet impact/trajectory caused by different recoil control approaches, he would be better served focusing on picking one particular approach to recoil management and being consistent with it.

And even more fundamentally, the question one has to ask is this: is this source of variation significant (within the context being discussed) or not?. One of the things I've learned in two and a half decades of working to understand/control/manage the cause of process variation is that not all inputs into a process have the same magnitude of effect on the output: that's how you can run a DOE changing multiple variables at the same time and still understand the relative effect of each one.

In other words, some things don't mean shit in the overall scheme of things, and some mean a whole lot.
Thanks for the input and I understand your point. As you, and others have suggested, I'll just use the light hold and get back to learning the wind and working on my positions.