Chronographing Loads

First topic message reminder :

Chrono'd some CCI SV & Aguila SV last night. Used a friends Labradar. Cool device.
CCI for 5 shots was 998, 998, 997, 999, 998 fps from 6" Marvel conversion barrel.
Aguila for 5 shots was 999, 1040, 1020, 1015, 1005 fps same pistol.

Shot some handloads through a 5" Clark .38 spl and 6" Clark longslide .38 spl. Difference in barrel length was 30 fps. Found out my handloads are really way to HOT. Load 1 was 2.8 gr BE with 150 gr cast solid 850's fps. Load 2 was 2.9 gr WST with Magnus 148 hbwc 850's fps as well. Gonna reduce charges to get into low 700's. Clark uses Douglass barrels (back in the day) that are typically 0.355 bore. Not sure if tighter bore contributes to higher velocities. Excellent accuracy even at these velocities.

Just thought I'd share.

Jon

robert84010 wrote:I can tell Jon is not going overboard with testing here but it seems like too many rifle shooters go from OCW into OCD testing with these tools. Accuracy is not an inverse function of low ES, that would be too easy.

Besides a person still has to align those sights and squeeze that trigger. The great equalizer.

The SR, SR3 and MR are big targets. I think when people get a little OCD they are looking for small advantages. Those mean something at the top but bring fewer benefits to the rest of us. Then again, the teams have people testing, Lympians run tests or have them run in certain lots of ammo. 

But I get the point that marginally better ammo doesn't make an expert a high master.

robert84010 wrote:I can tell Jon is not going overboard with testing here but it seems like too many rifle shooters go from OCW into OCD testing with these tools. 

It depends on the rifle event, XTC guys get a load from a friend and shoot their way to HM with it, some of the precision (bench) rifle guys are one step away from counting the granules of powder in their loads , but then they are trying to put all their bullets in one hole @ 100-1,000yds!  I guess I'd be a little OCD too the records are: 100yd record 5 shot group .0077", 1,000yd record 10 shot group 2.6872"
-Dave

Dave,
do you have data to back that up. Low ES does not guarantee the tightest group. I see over on 6mmbr that almost every shooter on the 100 yard BR line just drop VV133 from a Harrels. Many of them say they have terrible ES and don't care because it's 100 yards and they are shooting for groups. If you look on their official Nationals equipment used list it doesn't mention what chronograph they used.
It has been documented many times that the most accurate load is not always the lowest ES/SD. If that correlates then fine. Since they are shooting for accuracy they test for accuracy and look for low ES, but it is the accurate load not the lowest ES load that gets used. Like I said that would be too easy, and their sport is not that easy.

Personally I put 46 grains of Varget, measured on a 100 dollar beam scale, into a 308W  case topped it with a 155gr. SMK and got my HM card by learning how to read the wind out to 1k.
Got my speed from a chony one time to find my come ups but never cared about ES, just shooting. At that time all the high masters around me shot 46gr of Varget so why shouldn't I? I used to shoot with a guy that did the same thing and won two Palma titles at Perry and shot on the Palma Team in 2015.
 People make too much about a chronograph readout and should be getting better at shooting instead of constantly testing, that stands true no matter what sport.

robert84010 wrote:...
 People make too much about a chronograph readout and should be getting better at shooting instead of constantly testing, that stands true no matter what sport.

Agreed. Get a good load and shoot it. That works for Marksman through Highmaster. Above that to the level if National Champion you are scratching for Xs. At that point testing is very good. 

I developed my current long line load wirh some trial and error. It turned out ti be accurate and then a mentor pointed out that it was Doc Youngs load too.

When I tested it with the chrony, I answered my own question about why it seemed to shoot inside call. What that did for me as soneone whos 45 scores were holding him back and who winds up running more matches than he gets to.shoot, is give me confidence. 

Dryfire will almost always give better redults than load testing. That's a fact that most people dont want to admit. 

But at the 2600+ level finding a minor advantage could mean the difference between winning and coming in second.

jmdavis wrote:

 

Dryfire will almost always give better redults than load testing. That's a fact that most people dont want to admit. 

But at the 2600+ level finding a minor advantage could mean the difference between winning and coming in second.

The first line is all that I try to advocate. It applies to rifle also. It's the fact the most people don't want to admit it is why I keep repeating it.

The second line I don't agree with. You are not getting an advantage, it is still a shooter contest. At the top it is even more of a shooters mental contest. The ammo will still only shoot to the ability of the shooter. But you can have that mental approach, the guys at the top that I have met don't have that mentality. Just because something shoots inside your call doesn't mean it is gaining you something, it means your call is not as accurate as it should be.

 If we shot laser's there would still be marksman and there would still be people trying to build a better laser instead of practicing. Look at the ability of an air pistol and how many people shoot 580+, or even 570+. I think it is kind of insulting to the people that work so hard to achieve the wins to say the ammo gave them an advantage. The bottom line is the guy that stands at the top of the podium at Perry is not there because he has a chronograph and you and I are nowhere near that because we are here typing instead of practicing . But I did shoot smallbore rifle this morning for a match next weekend.

robert84010 wrote:Dave,
do you have data to back that up. 

I can see how you misread my post, I was talking about how "SOME" rifle shooters were OCD with stats.

- fixed it.
- Dave

Testing like shooting is fun and I enjoy both.  Probably never will make Master as i spend a lot of time trying new equipment and should be dry firing.  If I spent the time dry firing that I spend on this forum I might even get a classification. 

All one has to do is look at the data on gun test and ammo test in magazines every month.  Seldom is it the ammo with the lowest ES/SD that gave the best groups.  Don

If rifle guys are chasing what is the most accurate ammo in their firearm why shouldn't we do the same as pistol shooters?

Magload wrote:

All one has to do is look at the data on gun test and ammo test in magazines every month.  Seldom is it the ammo with the lowest ES/SD that gave the best groups.  Don

here is an article that looks at accuracy and ES/DS and accuracy, if you have not seen it already:

https://americanhandgunner.com/exclusive-consistent-velocity-accuracy/

w4ti wrote:

Magload wrote:Testing like shooting is fun and I enjoy both.  Probably never will make Master as i spend a lot of time trying new equipment and should be dry firing.  If I spent the time dry firing that I spend on this forum I might even get a classification. 

All one has to do is look at the data on gun test and ammo test in magazines every month.  Seldom is it the ammo with the lowest ES/SD that gave the best groups.  Don

+1

An apt analogy is the old "Ford v. Chevy" argument that I remember many people participating in at the dirt track of my youth. Does anyone really believe that The Intimidator himself could only drive, well, whatever company it was that sponsored him? 

Similarly, many believe that folks who like to talk about equipment, for its own sake, is somehow disregarding that you have to execute whatever the proper behavior/process is for you to make a good shot. I often think of those folks as a bit blinded about process- not that process isn't important, but it is yet another fascinating part to a hobby- one that is multifaceted. There is plenty of equipment to learn and experiment with, there are many paths to the one true god named X, and there are some good folks out there to chat with (and even some chuckleheads are fun to watch, too). 

Nice post, Don.

Thanks,
Chase

Thank you. Don