Sorry if this has been discussed, and I feel it has , but I couldn’t find anything on it. I have shot one prs match last year and am doing 3 more this season, I don’t mind reloading but it isn’t my favorite thing to do. I would rather spend more time shooting. I have been listening to a bunch of podcasts lately and keep hearing from different people how they have basically stopped doing load development. Pick a velocity, pick a seating depth, maybe mess with that a little, and go shoot. Part of me says that it could work and part of me doesn’t as that’s “just not that way I do it”. Basically for people that have tried both, what have you find and what are your results?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Load development or not?
- Thread starter smokinbobf4
- Start date
It will work for inidivuals with a high level of experience or a lot of help from someone with that experience. If you really knos what you’re doing you can easily shoot under 15sd without a single round of load development.
This comes down to three things being well refined:
1. Components - these shooters know what components work well together and have likely used them in the past (
2. Tools - they have vetted reloading tools that work already to a high degree of accuracy
3. Process - they have developed an efficient and accurate process for handling, prepping and loading ammo
That is what was said by all I heard it from. Good brass prep, quality components, and just keep the same thing barrel to barrel with slight adjustments to powder to keep velocity the same. Would really be kind of handy
Depends on what your "accuracy" goals are. If you're shooting in the bean bags and barricades circuit, you can expect more competitive performance based off of skill and not have to obsess over the minute details that consume a lot of reloading time. If you compete in the gray hair prone position circuit, then every little detail counts.
IMO - which is worth what you paid for it - finding a bullet and powder combo that your barrel likes will get you 75% of the way there without much additional fussing.
I like to fuss though.
IMO - which is worth what you paid for it - finding a bullet and powder combo that your barrel likes will get you 75% of the way there without much additional fussing.
I like to fuss though.
Listen to this:
You’ll waste a lot less time and get better results then if you were meticulous and shot 3 or 5 shot groups
This is somewhat what I figured. I am not looking for benchrest accuracy nor am I that good of a shooter! Lol
I'm not that good of a shooter either, but I have a very hard time with leaving potential consistency on the table (or reloading bench).
I had some preconceived notions about how this post was gonna go and I am glad I was wrong. Excellent points/questions brought up about this hobby hitting on the macro scale. Ironically, and after nearly 30yrs of handloading, I asked myself, "Are you a shooter, or a fucking bullet maker?" As I look at all the various loads I've developed per rifle and the rutted cycle of constantly tweaking zeros between the loads per gun. I bet if I were to spend as much time shooting as I have making bullets/load developing, I would be the World's champion 10 times over. LOL
I then thought I can't be that hard on myself, because realistically nobody can be shooting all the minutes that are put into handloading and handloading has provided quite the active meditation activity to sooth the brain. I have way too much into components and equipment to start buying factory ammo, so I decided to sell off guns and reduce my loads/grain weight/bullet type to two per the rifles I've kept. Trying to be a shooter and hunter is a chore. Basically I have short range terminal ballistics optimized loads and long range external ballistics optimized loads per gun for 4 guns remaining. (That shit needs to be culled as well, but culling is a mental obstacle too)
I do some micro things that I think help make more consistent/precise ammo, and understand these come after the macro results are observed , like bullet & powder combo. If a combo prints over MOA out the gate, then I abandon one of the 2 variables and tweak on the combos that print tight. A streamlined approach I guess I can say I've evolved to.
After all that rambling, I say if one were to handload, do "Pick a velocity, pick a seating depth, maybe mess with that a little, and go shoot". Make bold adjustments to the load development process as I described, and most importantly see if you can shoot the difference...
I then thought I can't be that hard on myself, because realistically nobody can be shooting all the minutes that are put into handloading and handloading has provided quite the active meditation activity to sooth the brain. I have way too much into components and equipment to start buying factory ammo, so I decided to sell off guns and reduce my loads/grain weight/bullet type to two per the rifles I've kept. Trying to be a shooter and hunter is a chore. Basically I have short range terminal ballistics optimized loads and long range external ballistics optimized loads per gun for 4 guns remaining. (That shit needs to be culled as well, but culling is a mental obstacle too)
I do some micro things that I think help make more consistent/precise ammo, and understand these come after the macro results are observed , like bullet & powder combo. If a combo prints over MOA out the gate, then I abandon one of the 2 variables and tweak on the combos that print tight. A streamlined approach I guess I can say I've evolved to.
After all that rambling, I say if one were to handload, do "Pick a velocity, pick a seating depth, maybe mess with that a little, and go shoot". Make bold adjustments to the load development process as I described, and most importantly see if you can shoot the difference...
Everyone thinks about this differently. I tend to do load development matched to a barrel and rifle, dial it in to (a) velocity slightly below pressure sign speeds, COAL based on 2-to-3 hundredths off the lands, and powder/primer/bullet combinations that settle into single-digit SD's and accuracy at distance. Once I have that (what I call) "Reference Load" .... I settle in and just shoot until something tells me my load needs to be reviewed (accuracy degrades, pressure signs, significant decrease/increase in velocity). I have a couple of loads I haven't adjusted in "years", because they just keep shooting great. Others I've had to tinker with along the way. That's how I roll. I let the results of the load tell me when it's time to re-run my load development processes.
Brian Litz posted a discussion where he stated that he no longer did load development, but with the caveat that with the barrels being used in LR it wasn't necessary.
I have done enough load development with varmint barrels using OCW to believe that barrel harmonics do play a factor. If I can ever get back to shooting I am going to run a test to see if the scatter nodes that I've seen will actually shoot well.
I have done enough load development with varmint barrels using OCW to believe that barrel harmonics do play a factor. If I can ever get back to shooting I am going to run a test to see if the scatter nodes that I've seen will actually shoot well.
The more time you spend with a cartridge the more you will know what it likes. For familiar cartridges I still do a bit of load development but it's basically to the effect of load a few charges 1 gr apart (or .5gr for small cases) shoot 10 of each and see which one I think it likes the best. If it's a new to me cartridge or combo I haven't run before I will take a bit more time.
All good info and somewhat what I expected. I did think there were more that would say it’s ludacris than what did. Thanks all for the opinions and keeping it on track!
Personally that’s how I proceed.
Load 10 rounds at whatever charge that is about 1gr below book maximum recommend charge at mag length.
Shoot a single group of 10 shots - record speed and check group Mean radius and etc if necessary)
Get back home plug all those information in GRT and use the OBT simulation. Take the charge that is recommended ( close to max but still safe)
I load that and shoot another 10 shot groups but at 300+ yard and check velocities and the groups.
99% of the time my load correlates with GRT and the results are great. Ill shoot it some more after that on steel and evaluate if it’s consistent.
I actually really enjoy tinkering with loads but since having a family I'm much shorter on time.
If I could shoot from/ near my loading bench I'm sure I would tinker a lot more but driving to and from the shooting spot is a pain.
Maybe I need a mobile loading bench.
If I could shoot from/ near my loading bench I'm sure I would tinker a lot more but driving to and from the shooting spot is a pain.
Maybe I need a mobile loading bench.
That is a lot of my frustration also, I think that’s the part I don’t like the most is the back and forth to a range. If I was able to shoot it out my back door it would save a lot of time.
^ Being blessed with the ability to load and shoot from my shop or porch, I certainly tinker more with loads than the average guy.
*****
I know the current climate of "it isn't necessary" is popular these days, but for me, that 1 - 3 tenths of an inch is enough to put forth the effort.
I think a lot of that effort depends on the niche of the hobby/sport you're most interested in, and the availability of time to mess with it.
I think a lot of folks are in the same boat as you . I can shoot out my back door so I am in constant test mode. If I had to pack everything to the range I would do way less testing . I enjoy the loading just about as much as I do shooting so having a bench/range at home is a blessing. I belong to 3 ranges locally, from 5 to 17 miles drive and still just shoot at home unless there is a comp/event to attend .
OMG! Join the club!
Even a 10 min drive to the range is still a pain. Stretches out load development (If we're still gonna do it) a bit.
The ability to load and shoot at home would be a game changer!
Such a huge part of it is having high quality components. . .especially starting with the gun itself. Take a custom gun that's got a blueprinted action to barrel (heavy contoured custom barrel) and it'll shoot just about any load really well, though load development can still make improvements.
When swapping out barrels that are configure the same, there's not much load development needed, if any, to shoot well. You'll already know what works and was doesn't from past experience. It should be noted that barrels built to the same specs don't necessarily shoot exactly the same, as there a tendency for something to be just a little different.
So, yes . . . one can get by without any real load development. And that often depends on just how much precision is needed for a particular shooting discipline.
If you have a load worked up it may transfer to another barrel. For example, I have a good load for my TRG-22 that happens to shoot awesome in my AI. I would venture to say that there are some loads that just happen to shoot well in a variety of firearms. But to say pick a velocity and forget it is pure unadulterated bullshit.
Then again, what do you expect from people who failed at reloading.
Then again, what do you expect from people who failed at reloading.
It’s not bullshit. I encourage you to test it yourself.
Once you shoot large enough sample you understand speed nodes and many other things we are feed by the masses don’t exist.
Load development and nodes are a myth.
Pick a speed you want and run it.
Use quality components and a consistent reloading process.
With virgin brass and powder weighed on a Frankford Arsenal scale, I’m gettin SDs in the 4s on a 10-shot string and shooting 0.2-0.4 MOA 5-shot groups with a 6GT PRS rig.
Pick a speed you want and run it.
Use quality components and a consistent reloading process.
With virgin brass and powder weighed on a Frankford Arsenal scale, I’m gettin SDs in the 4s on a 10-shot string and shooting 0.2-0.4 MOA 5-shot groups with a 6GT PRS rig.
"Velocity nodes" or flat spots somehow determined by a single shot ladder test is definitely a reach. I've never bought into that. I also learned my lesson with three shot groups a couple decades ago when I wasn't able to replicate an awesome initial result.
I've had barrels where the initial, slapped-together handload was awesome...and after repeating the test a couple of times I was done.
I have a .223 Krieger right now where I didn't think it could shoot OVER MOA, regardless of the load...but my last test where I tried the 80gr Nosler CC proved that even it has components that it hates.
But to dismiss load development entirely is not something I agree with. I've yet to see a barrel that didn't have a sweet spot in a powder weight range. Same with a preference to seating depth. It might not be night and day, but to me (and a lot of other dudes) a little bit matters.
I've had barrels where the initial, slapped-together handload was awesome...and after repeating the test a couple of times I was done.
I have a .223 Krieger right now where I didn't think it could shoot OVER MOA, regardless of the load...but my last test where I tried the 80gr Nosler CC proved that even it has components that it hates.
But to dismiss load development entirely is not something I agree with. I've yet to see a barrel that didn't have a sweet spot in a powder weight range. Same with a preference to seating depth. It might not be night and day, but to me (and a lot of other dudes) a little bit matters.
I just shoot a 30 shot aggregate group with powder bullet combo. I know some guys use 20s and that’s fine, but I like to be sure I can eliminate or accept that combo with no doubts. Then if I wanna squeak some more out I’ll adjust other things, but usually they don’t change accuracy too much so I don’t find it worth the time and money.
this is absolutely true. i started shooting F-Class over ten years ago with a nice GAP 308 rifle using factory ammo. I learned a lot but never shot well enough to win medals. For my next two custom rifles I did a lot of research. I copied what the guys were using who won the US Nationals, SW Nationals etc etc. I bought two Borden Rimrock actions, two same-twist and same contour Bartlein barrels (same reamer specs and freebore as most use on US FTR team), March scopes, SEB rests. For loading, I copied exactly what the guy used to win that year’s US national championship: same bullet, same brass, same powder, same grain charge. the only thing I did different was start with a load 1/2 grain lower. That’s it. My results in the last six years have been rewarding. So my advice is, as @straightshooter1 says, start with the best quality components and equipment you can afford and what the winners are using. Do the same for your loading equipment and loads. There is no need to do blind time-consuming trial and error load testing when others have already cut the trail. You will need to be consistent and meticulous with brass prep, powder charging, bullet seating, etc.
Last edited:
this is wrong approach, imho.
EVERYBODY is leaving potential on the table, it is just matter of time and money how much are you willing to spend to leave less potential on the table.
if you get good components, throw ball powder and use lee dies you can get 80% of precision, for 100$ equipement and 30 seconds of time for making round.
if you step it up and buy better equipement and do some thing manualy, you can get 90% of precision for 500$ and a lot of time.
than you can get electronic equipement and get same 90% precision for 3000$ and a lot less time and no more manual labor.
than you can sort some components and get 95% precision with same equipement and a lot more time.
than you can sort all your components for 10 different parameters and get 98% precision with some more fancy $$$ equipement and realy long time for sorting...
and even than, when you are going crazy with reloading, you leave some potential on the table... this is never ending story...
But is that large sample showing how good the load is, how good the barrel is for a large samples, or how good/bad you shoot large samples? I test my BR loads in 5 shot groups and my f-class loads in 20 shot groups. I think it’s all about how the entire system performs for the task at hand.
When I started reloading, which was only about 3 years ago, I did 3 rounds per charge for testing. Now I do 5 and usually do the better ones multiple times. Sometimes I see different numbers and results from session to session. Not extreme and not always but sometimes, which makes me wonder if there is some truth to it. And also going to bigger sample sizes makes sense for testing and zeroing my rifle. I will be doing some of that in the future.
Nobody wants to work. Sweat isn't going make you melt? Best to copy the success of others instead of tuning your own rifle is the theme I'm getting is the new way to slay.
I don’t know if I would say that, for me anyways. I want to do what is the best and quickest way to get there allowing more time to “work” at the range. I kind of feel like the thing out of all of it that needs the most work is me…..haha!
You totally can shoot 5 shots groups and make an aggregate. The funny thing is that aggregate will be the distribution of a 20 shots group most of the time.
Large sample just tells you the reality. You’ll see it quickly if the barrel/powder/bullet combination is good or not with poor numbers and a weird shaped groups.
Anyhow it’s worth testing it that way especially for F-class. BR is just weird.
Exactly, which is why I love reloading so much. I am always improving myself in the process.
It is my "zen".
That is why you and I will not see eye to eye.
A theme I see in this thread I have a slight bone to pick with : "load to a velocity and go"
The velocity isn't what makes the load shoot well. I can make the same bullets shoot 0.5 moa or 2-4 moa at the same velocity with 2 different powders. There's something to the combination of bullet, powder, and barrel that makes things happy.
There is some nuance that makes some load testing worth while. With enough powder options most any quality bullet can be made to shoot well in a quality barrel. With enough bullet options a quality powder can usually be used to shoot well. But randomly assembling them and loading to a velocity isn't a guaranteed option to get great results.
The velocity isn't what makes the load shoot well. I can make the same bullets shoot 0.5 moa or 2-4 moa at the same velocity with 2 different powders. There's something to the combination of bullet, powder, and barrel that makes things happy.
There is some nuance that makes some load testing worth while. With enough powder options most any quality bullet can be made to shoot well in a quality barrel. With enough bullet options a quality powder can usually be used to shoot well. But randomly assembling them and loading to a velocity isn't a guaranteed option to get great results.
Please elaborate. I think this is what inquiring minds are wondering. Thanks
I assume most people are using a known good combo, eg. Dasher with 105 Hybrids on 32.5 ish grains of Varget.
I could be wrong, but I see this statement more as a "I want to shoot 130 AR hybrids and only need about a 2780 fps MV to be competitive" type of mindset. So then you try to load to that MV and maybe tweak a bit whether up or down on your powder charge to stay just around said MV once you find acceptable accuracy.
Maybe I'm wrong and maybe they are indeed saying "load to a certain velocity" because they have a mindset that such a velocity equates a good load, etc.
But I would assume the first option is probably what they mean .
I agree with you when we're talking about statements on the hide. I think that mindset is what you see on this site from people who have stopped the "traditional" load development.
That second paragraph describes the guys who still use the word "node" or try to tweak powder charge based on quickload or GRT optimal barrel time calculator - so it's still fairly prevalent, IMO.
This is the part that I don’t get. People will tell you not to waste time on load development and if you want to shrink your groups you should spend your time shooting. What do you think you are doing when you are doing load development? You’re shooting! I just got a 7PRC. I have tried 5 different bullet and powder combinations to see what the gun likes. Why not? It gives me trigger time and helps my familiarity with the gun. Am I burning components doing “unnecessary” load development or am I getting trigger time? After 150 rounds I’m now much more confident and competent with the gun AND have a load that the gun loves. It’s a win win in my opinion.
Should I do a live not real load development for the thread ?
What do you want, 300winmag with 208 eldm, or 308 with with a 178 eldm?
powder for the winmag will be magpro. The 308, I have 1½lbs of varget, 1lb of pp2000mr, plenty of imr 4064, cfe223, AA2495 and a little win760.
The 308 will be a little different though. Virgin sig fury hybrid cases formed into 308.
I usually load one round at a time in 1gr increments until I find pressure. Then, I back off 1gr and work up in .3gr increments until I find something I like. If nothing turns up I change a component.
I have had a few loads in ar's that I just had to go with the components on hand. Sometimes pushing the seating depth back a little helps, sometimes I put a light crimp on them. I have seen a light crimp do wonders for sd.
What do you want, 300winmag with 208 eldm, or 308 with with a 178 eldm?
powder for the winmag will be magpro. The 308, I have 1½lbs of varget, 1lb of pp2000mr, plenty of imr 4064, cfe223, AA2495 and a little win760.
The 308 will be a little different though. Virgin sig fury hybrid cases formed into 308.
I usually load one round at a time in 1gr increments until I find pressure. Then, I back off 1gr and work up in .3gr increments until I find something I like. If nothing turns up I change a component.
I have had a few loads in ar's that I just had to go with the components on hand. Sometimes pushing the seating depth back a little helps, sometimes I put a light crimp on them. I have seen a light crimp do wonders for sd.
you should not do that. that's a bunch of mediocre powder (minus varget) and crimping is wildly unacceptable for precision ammi
Swapping component types is the quickest way to find the bulk of precision potential. Most situations people aren't in a position to swap the barrel so that typically means trying out different bullets and powders.
In my experience whatever subtle "tune" can be achieved by playing with seating depth within about .100" of jump, or trying powder charge ladders within 1.0 gr are not likely to show bigger changes in performance than what you'll see from swapping powders. You can mess with seating depth and powder charge and neck tension and wrangle in the last little bit of performance if you care to test so much (or don't if you want the 90% solution), but none of it is going to fix a combination of bullets and powder that don't shoot well, and that entire window of performance, if you care to test it to death, is going to be eclipsed by swapping components.
So IMO it's worth swapping components around a little to find one or many suitable combinations for your barrel, but the bulk of the rest of what has traditionally been done, especially in 3-5 round increments are noisy wishy washy wastes of time, albeit theraputic and confidence inspiring to some.
No two barrels are the same, so while Varget and 110 A-tips is a go-to for most of the ARC/BR/Dasher/GT sized 6mm's, I promise you there are barrels out there that will not shoot the combination better than 1-1.5 MOA. However, if you were to try 110 Atips with RL 15.5, RL-16, H4350, XBR 8208, etc... You can probably find something that works great. Likewise if you keep varget and swap the 110's for 105's, 109's, 108's, etc... you are likely to eventually find a bullet that will shoot with Varget in that barrel.
On top of all of that, you can swap or omit muzzle devices and get different distinct performances. Worth a test/try IMO, especially with gas guns. It's not as pronounced a difference with bolt guns but it's still there.
PRS is such a skill game that you can't reload yourself into even the mid-pack no matter how much time you spend on it, and that in the hands of a skilled shooter even a mediocre gun can win. I know of a national championship being won with a gun shooting 3/4 MOA+ a few years back. You've got a healthy perspective wanting to focus on spending more time shooting.
The caveat about load development is that most guys who say they don't do load development are shooting 6mm Dasher/BR/BRA and are using a good bullet like a Berger 105 hybrid. That combo will shoot sub 1/2 MOA with almost any charge weight, most of the time better than that.
I started out doing load development years ago, testing multiple powder charges and seating depth. Nowadays I don't bother at all. My daughter's Dasher gets 31gr of Varget, 105 hybrid jumping somewhere between 20 and 50 thou and has shot that load for the last 3 barrels. My 6BRA gets 29.3 to 29.5 of H4895 and a 105 hybrid. The last barrel I didn't test at all, just shot some leftover ammo and it was shooting in the 0.2's so I didn't change the load. I started a new barrel this month and out of curiosity tested a couple five shot groups of 29.3, 29.5 and 29.7. All shot great, both 29.3 and 29.5 shot the same around 0.2-0.3 so still running the same load 3 barrels later.
I'm loading for two shooters and shooting a busy schedule so it's all about efficiency for me. Dillon presses for brass processing, loading on a Dillon, etc. Don't spend time on anything unnecessary, and that includes load development.
So, using my normal method, I loaded four rounds in 1gr increments,43-46gr, and fired them all at the same target. Just judging by what I saw on paper, and what the chrono showed, I'd choose 45gr and load five to verify. 45gr was the load reccomended by @Chris1972. Had I seen his post before I headed out I'd have just loaded that and shot it. I've got five loaded now but my son has Teeball this evening so, to be continued...
I'll add that 46 showed no pressure and bolt lift wasn't out of the norm. I'll push it a little more. Hornady says max load for this combo is 42.4gr.
Also, I elected to use the primers that came in the cases for the first firing. Primers aren't getting any cheaper, may as well use them to fire form. These are pulled down cases from American reloading.
Here are the results thus far.
I'll add that 46 showed no pressure and bolt lift wasn't out of the norm. I'll push it a little more. Hornady says max load for this combo is 42.4gr.
Also, I elected to use the primers that came in the cases for the first firing. Primers aren't getting any cheaper, may as well use them to fire form. These are pulled down cases from American reloading.
Here are the results thus far.
You have been one the biggest perpetuators of this trope, at least on this forum. Yourself and Dthomas have pounded the statistically relevant sample size and dispersion drum pretty hard. This seems like a retraction?
This topic is the Tide Pod Challenge of our era’s reloading forums, future shooters will wonder how it was ever taken seriously. I’m hesitant to respond, but for the sake of the historical record, I will, again.
Here’s a few pearls:
Barrels have bullets and powders they don’t “like”.
There are internal combustion ballistic “sweet” spots.
Barrel harmonic “happiness” effects POI consistency.
*For the culture
- The words happy, like, and sweet are often used interchangeably with the word, node.Similar threads
