JFrank
Member
Speaking in generalization ( present company excluded) my opinion is guys that struggle just don’t put in they’re own or enough work to find the answers.
I’m nearly at the end of my rope with my 308.
- Thread starter thump_rrr
- Start date
Charlie98
Member
There are some of us who have lives besides the rifle range. Time is a finite thing, and everyone has their own unique commitments.
As far as my 'answers,' I've been working with my Savage for nearly 2 years, working on loads. My results are my results, for better or worse.
JFrank
Member
we all have lives outside the range, but you get out and put in the work and see results.
That’s the goal isn’t it ?
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 14,933
Gotcha - eh, I think among most forums online, and forgive me for paraphrasing your post a bit here, we generally observe a trend where folks can either have relatively consistent and simple success reloading - in the most general sense - or they don’t. But “VLD’s” are just long radius, secant ogive bullets.
There are a lot of secant ogive bullets out there. Not all are long ogive, high BC bullets, not all are match bullets, but there are a lot of secant ogive bullets out there.
Hornady SST’s are another example of highly common secant ogive bullets, as are ELDm’s and ELDx’s. Specific Sierra Matchkings have also used secant ogives, as do the Tipped Matchkings, as are Rem Tipped Corelokt ammunition. Swift Sciroccos, Lapua Scenars, Bart’s Hammers… there are a LOT of folks shooting small with secant ogive, “VLD type” bullets.
Maybe the Ford vs. Chevy analogy could be apt - but not for a meritous comparison of valid objective comparison, but rather that lots of folks only ever buy/own/use one brand and personally identify with their subjective preference, and resultingly vilify any opposition, regardless of objective demonstration of inferiority.
Charlie98
Member
Socking in the time and effort is not a guarantee of success, however.
JFrank
Member
How else would you suggest a guy go about load work. What other methods can you recommend ?
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 14,933
Good bullets, proper powder for the cartridge & bullet, good barrels, and good reloading practices. In general, rifles want to shoot small - if a load doesn’t wanna shoot in a rifle, better bullet or better barrel, or fix the reloading practice.
It’s the dudes who find themselves wasting time trying to get a tomato-stake to shoot bugholes instead of just acknowledging when a dog don’t hunt.
Last edited:
Charlie98
Member
My point was, considering the OP, sometimes all the time and effort in the world still doesn't result in a satisfactory result... that's all.
In my case, with my Savage 10TAC, I think I was actually overthinking it. I did what I call 'return to zero'... that is, just scrapping all the workups, and starting over with known good components... IMR4064 and the 168grn SMK.
I think sometimes we are our own worst enemy. After my own epiphany, and reading some of the recent threads here, I realized it's hard to let go of old ideas that you firmly believed were correct.
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 14,933
All the more reason to NOT make reloading processes any more unnecessarily convoluted than they need to be - and all the more reason to not waste time trying to make a silk purse from a sow's ear.
I coach youth sports 5 seasons per year, have a kid of my own to raise and a wife to keep happy, have a farm to keep running, run an international engineered technology company, operate two side businesses and a 3rd consultancy, manage grounds for a rodeo arena which hosts 30+ events in 6 months, help run our state PRS group, and I shoot a couple matches per year... I won't waste time asking a bum barrel to do something when all of the early load dev tells me it won't, because it can't.
The last 8yrs, all I have done for load dev has been 40 rounds - and for what I'm putting together, that usually means sub-half MOA. 10 to foul, 30 in a charge ladder, and I have what I need. I don't waste time with jump sensitive bullets, and I don't need to refine down so I never shoot larger than sub-quarter MOA, so I'm happy to not waste time, money, or energy casing smoke. More time for me to be shooting, and chasing all of my other passions, rather than wringing my hands about 3 shot groups from 5 different powders and 3 different bullets at 10 different seating depths...
This is really the truth of the matter. Not everyone is actually committed to finding the small shooting loads they say they're after.
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 14,933
It's a hard pill to swallow, but the medicine works! I had the blessing of being raised with the paradigm - the way we're doing things is probably wrong (in that it COULD be better), so we should fix it... That was hammered into me starting as a kid, and then I realized a handful of years after college that I even needed to apply that to how we fix things... As I quote quite often around here - Twain once said, "It's not what you know that gets you into trouble, it's what you know that just ain't so." I swore that I was doing good reloading work by testing different powders and bullets over and over... there was a time when I just KNEW that trimming meplats and pointing bullets would make my long range groups smaller... But then I read science being done by others, did my own validated science in some cases, and realized how much time, energy, and money I was wasting, and too often basing ALL of my decisions on the fact a coin happened to flip to heads 4 times in a row, instead of tails, and instead of 2 of each...
JFrank
Member
Are we talking about competition rifles or hunting rifles ?
JFrank
Member
point was, considering the OP, sometimes all the time and effort in the world still doesn't result in a satisfactory result... that's all.
I get what your saying, i just haven’t really seen anything from the first post or so that suggests more than trying a few loads hoping to hit on one , that’s not load development .
I get what your saying, i just haven’t really seen anything from the first post or so that suggests more than trying a few loads hoping to hit on one , that’s not load development .
Charlie98
Member
That was, in essence, what I was saying as well. I feel for the OP... I had very much the same issue with my Savage. All that time and money spent on test loads... none of which shot better... or equal... than FGMM?!?!
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 14,933
For me, personally, anything which is "non-BR or F-class". Even for my PRS rifles, I just don't benefit - AT ALL OR IN ANY WAY - from having sub-quarter MOA vs. being satisfied by sub-half MOA. Many of my load dev groups for my custom rifles ARE sub-quarter, but even my anti-nodes would be sub-half, any of which will yield the same score at any PRS match in the country - and obviously would do the job hunting as well, and even if those results spread from 1/4-1/2 in custom barrels to 1/2-3/4 in factory drain pipes, they'll all do what I need for hunting... so I party on with a easy, quick, inexpensive, and non-complex load dev process, and don't let myself chase rabbits which won't get me fed.
I usually discourage folks from trying to chase factory ammo - for several reasons, including reloads = lower cost, and generally, superceding factory ammo with reloads is a very simple process, but, 308win FGMM offers very specific opportunities:
We have info out there about FGMM, and unlike many factory ammo offerings, we have the rare opportunity to replicate it, because it is known to use cannister powders which are available to civilian reloaders. We know the bullet, and we know it has been loaded with IMR4064 and with RL-15 (maybe others, but certainly with these two). The evolution of M118 through "Mexican Match" ammo, to another designation - I think M852? - then eventually back to M118LR also documents the same. So if I put 43.5-43.8grn of 4064 under a 168 SMK and it doesn't shoot, but FGMM factory ammo DOES shoot in my rifle, then I've eliminated the rifle/barrel, the bullet, the powder, and the marksman as the faulty attribute of the process, and have successfully deduced that only the reloading process could be the broken attribute. So while I might not USUALLY like the idea of chasing factory ammo with reloads (if I'm building a NASCAR stock car, I don't try to replicate a Ford Fusion factory model), but FGMM offers a unique barometer for our reloading process performance. At the end of the day, it's still machine manufactured, mass-production ammo, so a good process with a lot of hand-to-product connection always should at least meet their performance, if we fall short, then we fix the loading process.
Yep, although I did it with RL-15 in my rifle, which my son now has. Some barrels are a waste of time, the sooner we recognize them, the less costly in time and money.
Failure isn't always the reloader though, it can be the barrel, it can be the bullet in that barrel.
My first venture into "precision reloading" was with a Sako heavy barrel in .222 Mag. Found a load right off, then two, then practically wore out the barrel and 1K primers looking for more and/or better combinations. Woke up one day and realized how much ammo I had shot "testing" and the light went on. I had a couple of very accurate loads nearly from the git go, 1/4" to 1/2" loads. Sigh, never again, and that was a long time ago.
Not that I didn't have fun doing it, just saying.
JFrank
Member
That’s what you did say, I just quoted you.
JFrank
Member
Personally I can’t put a book load or my buddies recipe into a case and expect it to shoot and if it doesn’t shoot scrap the barrel or component. I’m in a different camp whether a sporting rifle or a comp rifle. I have to qualify components and develop a load that hits where I’m aiming, hunting doesn’t have to be fine tuned to a razor edge of course but I stay with a process.
Just me of course.
My comp rifle , I’m willing to put in whatever work is necessary to achieve the goal.
Just me of course.
My comp rifle , I’m willing to put in whatever work is necessary to achieve the goal.
Attachments
Last edited:
Nature Boy
Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2015
- Messages
- 8,256
I fully admit I go overboard with load development for my hunting rifles. It’s part of the hobby for me.
Charlie98
Member
thump_rrr
Member
I am back and admitting defeat with this barrel bullet combination.
You were all right and I was wrong.
I tried the Berger seating depth test and after the first round I still held out hope for the last group.
On the second go around I realized that I am just chasing my tail.
I have 2 more 308 barrels that I may try or if I find some 175SMK’s or 185 Juggernauts I will try again.
Both shot at 200Y
First Test
Second Test
You were all right and I was wrong.
I tried the Berger seating depth test and after the first round I still held out hope for the last group.
On the second go around I realized that I am just chasing my tail.
I have 2 more 308 barrels that I may try or if I find some 175SMK’s or 185 Juggernauts I will try again.
Both shot at 200Y
First Test
Second Test
JFrank
Member
The powder charge just doesn’t look right to me.
Even good bullets don’t perform well in a scatter node, I would suggest to re work your ladder test before making further decisions.
Q~ how many rounds are on this barrel and when was the last cleaning ?
Even good bullets don’t perform well in a scatter node, I would suggest to re work your ladder test before making further decisions.
Q~ how many rounds are on this barrel and when was the last cleaning ?
thump_rrr
Member
774 rounds prior to the test.
804 Currently.
It was cleaned at 774 then 3 foulers were fired as seen on the target at the left.
I have a clinic/competition on the 20th and 21st.
This weekend will be the first time this year I will be shooting with my shooting partner.
I will be shooting my Ultimatum Deadline in 6.5 Creedmoor.
The weekend of the 27th- 28th we have our annual guys weekend away which will be at Foxwoods Casino in Connecticut so I won't be getting back to the 308 for a little while yet.
I will try another charge ladder when I get the chance.
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 14,933
In watching your methods these few years, I'm not sure I think that's an apt evaluation of your process. Sure, maybe your process yields results far beyond necessary for your hunting, but even in your F-class load dev, I'm not sure I'd count what you do as "overboard." Broadly, I'd describe your methodology as substantiated and efficient - and you're not taking much time to produce quality results. Is the performance overboard for what you need for hunting? Eh, maybe, maybe not - I'd rather know I can punch through the center of a heart and end life quickly rather than disrespecting the animal with a gut shot because I was satisfied by a pie-plate sized group in load dev. But I don't think it's apt to say your load dev methodology is overboard.
JFrank
Member
@Nature Boy is the man !!!
Nature Boy
Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2015
- Messages
- 8,256
That’s what I meant. It’s not necessary for a successful hunt to have a developed load that shoots 0.5 MOA five shot groups but I have hunting rifles capable of that so I take the effort to find the node.
Even with hunting rifles that don’t have that accuracy potential, I’ll still spend the time going through the load development process.
If anything, it gives me a reason to get the hunting rigs out of the safe and exercise them at the range with more rounds than it would take to just check zero.
The more familiar I am with the rifle and load I’ll be hunting with can only improve the chances for a better outcome.
But here’s where I think you’ll agree it’s excessive. I’ll develop at least one new load every season. There’s no practical reason for doing that other than the fact that I enjoy the process.
