Bullseye Powder & the chrono

I chrono'd 3 loads last week-6 shots ea. (guy at the range had a chronograph set up). 
Loads 1 & 2 (WST & 700x w/ 185 SWCs) varied by 50-60 fps. --- Load#3: 3.6gn Bullseye 200g SWC: slowest- 646 --fastest 656. Consistent!

What loads were you using for the 700x and the velocities?

Thanks

Jon

Light loads:
4.0gn WST  - MasterCast 185g H&G 68 style - lo:710 / hi: 774 - this shot a great 10 shot 50yd group off a padded rest tho.

3.8gn 700X - Dardas 180g Flat base H&G 68 style - lo: 662 / hi: 718 - no serious accuracy testing - yet.  I like the way this feels shooting T&R.

1st shot was the lowest fps on both. ??    - crimp .468"± both.

Thanks )

I was told a story recently by a well known shooter and reloader active in the 60's, 70's and 80's. He cast all of his own lead (mostly 200 H&G 130) but also from a Lyman mould that is no longer made. At the height of he and his wife's shooting he was reloading 4500 rounds per month of .45 acp. 

His testing regimine once optical chrono's became available, was to put the gun in a Ransom and shoot 30 shot strings (for statistical significance) of the same bullet, powder, case, primer, oal and crimp starting at 5.0 of Bullseye and going down to 3.0 of bullseye (630 total rounds). He discovered accuracy nodes and then used that information to workup .45 acp loads for long and shortline for both he and his wife. 

The reason that I tell the story is that we can learn alot from applying similar scientific and statistically significant methods to serious testing.

Hate to say it but what a waste of time and ammo. Almost any .45 load will shoot sub 1" groups at 25 yards. 50 yards is easy to get 2" groups and with minor effort sub 1.5" groups; obviously a good pistol is required. Unless he was working on a dissertation for his doctorate or publishing the lessons learned, I personally find it to be a waste. He would've been better off practicing with the ammo. As a former 2650 high master I know what it takes to shoot 2650 and it's not a Ransom Rest. An excellent trigger with decent (not the best) ammo (2") is the key to shooting good BE scores. The best ammo typically produces too much recoil and will fatigue the shooter! You will also give up points on the short line. practice, practice, practice.
Jon

Hello all,

Not to take over the thread but you may find it interesting....

....We recently had three shooters set up their chronographs on a private range.  We tested one very meticulously prepared and extremely accurate load in the same pistol and at the same time.  Every reasonable effort to made to keep all variables static.  The net net....no velocity or deviation consensus/agreement between the three units.

I always have felt that most hobbyist level chronographs are useful for comparisons but not for absolutes.

Jim

Jon, 

Husband and wife are both distinguished pistol shots. In their most active phase they were shooting 4500 rounds of .45 per month + the .22 that the wife was shooting for prep for Women's Pistol competition at the International level. 

I believe that both are masters (high master didn't exist when they shot) and 2600 members earned with irons in the 1970's and early 80's. The  accuracy nodes could be dramatic. Three that were confirmed were 3.4, 3.8 and 4.2. 

But my reason for conveying the story is that if you are testing different bullets, different powders, different crimps etc in really small samples you may be doing yourself a dis-service. 

I am nowhere near skilled enough to determine the accuracy potential of a given load based on my shooting skill with the .45. But I can take the notes of others, and with a little testing try to find what will work for me in my gun.

Yep, an affordable chrono is a comparative tool not an absolute tool.

Sorry, I'm opionated and hopefully didn't come across as a jerk. See a lot of shooters spend more time on working up loads than dry firing and shooting. 2600 is rare for women especially with irons. On the bright side two women shooters recently broke 2600!
Jon

It's definitely a problem to spend more time testing than shooting or dryfiring. I understand that concern.

Russ Or,  different lubes on different brands of bullets may have an effect on accuracy/velocity?  I know 22 lr  ammo does. It takes about 10 rounds to recondition the barrel to the new ammo. Not always, depends on the ammo brand.

Jon Eulette wrote:Sorry, I'm opionated and hopefully didn't come across as a jerk. See a lot of shooters spend more time on working up loads than dry firing and shooting. 2600 is rare for women especially with irons. On the bright side two women shooters recently broke 2600!
Jon

IF, and I do mean IF, standard deviation has any effect on accuracy, it is well past 50 yards.
I have yet to see any correlation, particularly for pistols.
Do an external ballistic calculation of the bullet path and you'll see that it just doesn't matter.
The TARGET is what counts.