Post Your AMP Press Plots

[Rocketmandb]

Which picture goes to which treatment? Sounds like you had three batches, and I only see two pics?

The first picture is the 13 from the lube-before-mandrel group. The second is the 15-shot, no-lube group. I didn't take a pic of standard group because it was the last batch shot and looked through the scope as substantively similar to the first one. The SD was also similar, and I didn't want to make another trip down range to paint the target - we then splattered it up with some 308.

 

[FNG1001]

So, I was hoping to shoot yesterday in this:
View attachment 8390810

Trying to get there, I got this:
View attachment 8390811

When you're going up hill on a shelf road in 4WD low, and you're doing so sideways because you have no traction due to mud filling your treads, it's time to turn around. I have to say that coming down carried much more pucker factor than going up. I don't care to do that again.

The end result is actually positive for the purposes of this thread. We ended up finding a spot just out of the hills and set a target at just under 500 yards to shoot groups.

I shot 14 shots of the "champion" lube process (lube after mandrel - one bad primer in this group), 13 of the one where I lubed before mandrel, and 15 of no lube. The SD results were not surprising.

The first two came in essentially the same at the same of 6.6 and 6.3 fps respectively. The no lube group came in at 8.4 fps.

The big surprise to me was grouping. I hadn't anticipated doing anything group related, but due to my near-death experience on the attempt to get to our normal shooting spot we had the "opportunity" to do so. Below are pics of the 13-shot group and the 15-shot no lube group.

On the 13-shot group these were the first we shot of the day. My scope had gotten away from zero and the first shot was high, I adjusted for the second (still too high), then shot the remaining 11. The results are below:

View attachment 8390817
View attachment 8390818

The dispersion on the no-lube group is measurably higher than the lube group. I frankly didn't expect this. I expected some SD difference (which we got, but not this much dispersion difference.

Could this have been wind? It was maybe 3 - 8 mph all day, so I don't believe wind alone could be responsible. Could it have been me? Yes, I'll never rule that out. I'm not ready to make any conclusions based on this, but I may go run another test at a similar range - where I can actually drive to the target to paint - got to say that hoofing it 500 yards up and down stream beds and along steep terrain just to paint the target was not the most enjoyable.

@kthomas here is first evidence of downrange performance. As I mentioned, I'll likely do another bigger test a couple months down the road.

Great looking day for the range! So with the results, how will your future reloading process look?

 

[Rocketmandb]

Great looking day for the range! So with the results, how will your future reloading process look?

No changes yet - will continue with NeoLube as a neck lubricant and will run another larger test after the BLM land closes down for fire season. I've got a private range I go to that has steel out to 1350, but will likely run tests at 500 yards to be similar to these. I'll expect group sizes to tighten up a bit since I'll be shooting from level ground there in a more controlled environment.

 

[Painterbolt]

Anyone notice a decrease in velocity going from no lube to lube. I’m getting about a lose of 25fps.

 

[memilanuk]

Anyone notice a decrease in velocity going from no lube to lube. I’m getting about a lose of 25fps.

Not enough to notice. How much are you slathering on there?

 

[Painterbolt]

Not enough to notice. How much are you slathering on there?

Just a coating. Did some load development with Neo lube and tried without. Group size stayed the same just gained an extra 25fps. Wasn’t sure if that was normal

 

[Rocketmandb]

Anyone notice a decrease in velocity going from no lube to lube. I’m getting about a lose of 25fps.

You should expect to see some drop since the bullet starts moving slightly quicker, meaning pressure is slightly lower. Same thing happens with lubed bullets. Slightly more powder will make up the difference.

 

[MarkyMark007]

Just a coating. Did some load development with Neo lube and tried without. Group size stayed the same just gained an extra 25fps. Wasn’t sure if that was normal

it's normal.
in firearms, when you lube something or polish things, this will generate less friction and consequently less pressure and therefor less speed.

it's just the opposite what people thinks.

 

[LakuNoc]

Rocketmandb any more testing are you sticking with Neo Lube?

 

[Rocketmandb]

Rocketmandb any more testing are you sticking with Neo Lube?

What I've found:

- I've tested dry moly, graphite, HBN, just using residual carbon in the necks, and NeoLube

- NeoLube has tightest overall plots with occasional minor "flyers" - since I'm running everything through the AMP Press, I just cull those. Probably on the order of 1 out of 15 or 20 or so.

- NeoLube is much quicker when using the dip method of applying - will be showing this in an upcoming video

- NeoLube, contrary to what you might think, is actually less messy than using a powdered lubricant.

- NeoLube is the most expensive of all the lubricants I've tested, but you can get it in bulk from the manufacturer which brings the price per ounce down significantly (I bought a quart size - you can get gallons)

- I think, but am not sure, that graphite is the most benign from a health perspective, so that includes NeoLube.

Before @Rio Precision Gunworks enlightened me to dipping in NeoLube, I had found moly dry lube to be the most consistent. Here is a plot comparing (NeoLube in blue EDIT: ORANGE):

Very similar, which is why NeoLube is winning out for me due to time and ease of application.

EDIT: Note that NeoLube (orange) is tighter except for the highest one - an aforementioned flyer.

 

[LakuNoc]

Very Interesting. What is your youtube? Thanks for the info, do you turn your necks or no?

 

[Rocketmandb]

Very Interesting. What is your youtube? Thanks for the info, do you turn your necks or no?

Youtube link is in my signature. If Lapua brass is available, I don't neck turn. When the best brass I had for the 300 was ADG, I did neck turn and saw a noticeable improvement in SDs. I have thought about doing it on some Lapua - likely will at some point.

 

[bbowles]

How does alpha brass compare to lapua? Landing for 6.5 Creedmoor. Going to order some more brass soon. Thanks

 

[Barelstroker]

You're all barking up the wrong tree.
Looking at graphs plots from Amp Presses is kinda useless information when viewed from the perspective of just the primer pressures involved.

 

[straightshooter1]

How does alpha brass compare to lapua? Landing for 6.5 Creedmoor. Going to order some more brass soon. Thanks

I've not shot Alpha brass a lot, but I have shot Lapua a lot. So far, I like my Alpha brass a lot. . . as much as Lapua. But a lot more time with Alpha will tell the tale. I feel confident you won't be disappointed using Alpha brass. The only "comparison" I have with Alpha vs Lapua is case measurements, which I found interesting. This was for .308 cases, not 6.5 CM, but it still might give you some ideas. . . here (V=virgin, F=fired):

 

[bbowles]

I've not shot Alpha brass a lot, but I have shot Lapua a lot. So far, I like my Alpha brass a lot. . . as much as Lapua. But a lot more time with Alpha well tell the tale. I feel confident you won't be disappointed using Alpha brass. The only "comparison" I have with Alpha vs Lapua is case measurements, which I found interesting. This was for .308 cases, not 6.5 CM, but it still might give you some ideas. . . here (V=virgin, F=fired):

View attachment 8531255

Appreciate the info ss1. Thanks!

 

[Barelstroker]

What I've found:

- I've tested dry moly, graphite, HBN, just using residual carbon in the necks, and NeoLube

- NeoLube has tightest overall plots with occasional minor "flyers" - since I'm running everything through the AMP Press, I just cull those. Probably on the order of 1 out of 15 or 20 or so.

- NeoLube is much quicker when using the dip method of applying - will be showing this in an upcoming video

- NeoLube, contrary to what you might think, is actually less messy than using a powdered lubricant.

- NeoLube is the most expensive of all the lubricants I've tested, but you can get it in bulk from the manufacturer which brings the price per ounce down significantly (I bought a quart size - you can get gallons)

- I think, but am not sure, that graphite is the most benign from a health perspective, so that includes NeoLube.

Before @Rio Precision Gunworks enlightened me to dipping in NeoLube, I had found moly dry lube to be the most consistent. Here is a plot comparing (NeoLube in blue EDIT: ORANGE):

View attachment 8420113

Very similar, which is why NeoLube is winning out for me due to time and ease of application.

EDIT: Note that NeoLube (orange) is tighter except for the highest one - an aforementioned flyer.

If I may ask, what difference do you think how the projectile is seated, could make a difference to anything during the internal ballistics process?

 

[Barelstroker]

Anyone notice a decrease in velocity going from no lube to lube. I’m getting about a lose of 25fps.

What number of samples were measured to determine that figure?

 

[CK1.0]

You're all barking up the wrong tree.
Looking at graphs plots from Amp Presses is kinda useless information when viewed from the perspective of just the primer pressures involved.

How's about just stating your point instead of asking us all to read some long-ass boring paper?

Are you trying to say primers matter more than consistent neck tension or something?

 

[Barelstroker]

How's about just stating your point instead of asking us all to read some long-ass boring paper?

Are you trying to say it's the primers or something?

It's more effective if you read the study & come to your own conclusions. Reading something I've written is simply reading my assessment of one of the possible impacts of the studies conclusions.
I include these kinds of studies in an effort to educate the shooting/reloading community.
In my opinion, seating force graphs have little to no effect on the outcome of accuracy or repeatability due primarily to the exponentially greater forces involved during the IB process.
If you want to learn truth & facts, then read the study paper yourself. If you think it's boring, that would tend to suggest that you're far more interested in reinforcement of your beliefs.
The choice is yours.

 

[CK1.0]

It's more effective if you read the study & come to your own conclusions. Reading something I've written is simply reading my assessment of one of the possible impacts of the studies conclusions.
I include these kinds of studies in an effort to educate the shooting/reloading community.
In my opinion, seating force graphs have little to no effect on the outcome of accuracy or repeatability due primarily to the exponentially greater forces involved during the IB process.
If you want to learn truth & facts, then read the study paper yourself. If you think it's boring, that would tend to suggest that you're far more interested in reinforcement of your beliefs.
The choice is yours.

I'm not interested in reinforcing my beliefs, I started reading it, and it is boring.

 

[Barelstroker]

I'm not interested in reinforcing my beliefs, I just started reading it and it is boring.

Keep reading. You'll get over the boredom.

 

[CK1.0]

Keep reading. You'll get over the boredom.

Nope. I don't care now.

 

[Barelstroker]

Nope. I don't care now.

You read it yet?