Most accurate load?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
Messages
3,424
Location
Kansas
AA#5 did not give me great standard deviation or velocity spread, but was one of the more accurate loads I have tested. It meters very well.

This is a quote from a recent spread. Doesn't matter who it was from, but I would like others opinions. I've been reloading under the belief that the most accurate load would likely be the one with the smallest standard deviation and velocity range. Right or wrong?
 
but I would like others opinions. I've been reloading under the belief that the most accurate load would likely be the one with the smallest standard deviation and velocity range. Right or wrong?
Mostly wrong.
 
It comes into play in centerfire rifle loads used for longer distance shooting. It means they will drop the same amount at a given range. At normal pistol ranges, it doesn't affect the groups as much.
 
It's mostly wrong, Those parameters are only about two of the five or six of the things I look for in accuracy loading for pistols. There are other things more important.

Like the OAL of a particular bullet weight to powder charge ratio, chamber length, bullet length to rifling twist, quality and profile of the bullet, working within the accuracy nodes of a given load and so on.

These things are higher on my list then the SDs but they all come into play in the broader scheme of things.
 
Thinking out aloud.

Std Dev for me is a measure of how consistently you load. It is the measure of repeatability of the process and in this case the load and not the accuracy. So surely you could have a bad load (off an accuracy node) but loaded very well, accurate charge thrown, seating depth perfect, case volume identical, all perfectly prepared and blueprinted.

Now what if you were on an accuracy node but your loading technique was poor. You would have good accuracy but perhaps worse statistical data.

Statisticians will argue that a 5 or 10 round group in not sufficient as a sample size to get meaningful results. I still think it is better than nothing.
 
I'm still seeking the answer to this question myself. Chrony numbers help me to understand what's happening inside the barrel but low deviation doesn't always seem to be the answer for me. The charge which gives me the tightest 5-round group with a cold barrel is the one I go with. My fouling shot generally lands dead center, but it's the following four shots that separate the good groups from the mediocre ones. So far my best groups have been the ones that travel clockwise in a small triangle with the fouling shot on the right. Presumably with a pet load I'll be eventually be able to anticipate where each particular shot is going to land within this triangle and compensate to form a single hole, but I haven't gotten there yet. Ceratainly not at 300 yds...
 
berettaprofessor said:
AA#5 did not give me great standard deviation or velocity spread, but was one of the more accurate loads I have tested. It meters very well.
This is a quote ... Doesn't matter who it was from, but I would like others opinions.

I've been reloading under the belief that the most accurate load would likely be the one with the smallest standard deviation and velocity range.
While powder type may be a contributing factor to accuracy, it alone cannot produce "the most accurate load" as there are reloading variables.

And if you use mixed range brass, your SD/MV numbers are only as good as the particular samples of brass you happened to use for the chrono testing. ;)

Lower SD/MV numbers "should" produce more accurate loads but that's not always the case as many produced tighter shot groups with higher SD/MV number loads. While I value chrono data, ultimately I use holes on target to determine which loads I test are most accurate.

IMO consistent chamber pressure is the most important aspect of reloading that produces greater accuracy. You reload to produce consistent chamber pressures and you are likely to get more consistent muzzle velocities and lower SD numbers. There are many threads devoted to producing accurate loads and here's one of them - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9898824#post9898824
These are reloading variables we must work with and ways to optimize for accuracy or compensate for when using mixed range brass:

Bullet selection - As many posted, I think bullet selection is one of the more important factor for accuracy. For me, Montana Gold/Remington/Speer/Winchester etc. jacketed bullets have shown less than 1 gr weight variance compared to 2-3+ gr variance of plated bullets. With lead bullets, I have seen 5+ gr variance depending on the brand/caliber weight. As others posted, lead bullets that are sized .001"+ groove diameter of your barrel and/or of soft enough alloy (12-18 BHN) to match the powder/charge used will better deform the bullet base to seal with the barrel to produce more consistent chamber pressures. But using bullets with longer base has limitations as powder compression may limit powder selection.

Many prefer bullet types with longer base for accuracy (like 9mm 124/125 gr vs 115 gr, Hollow base vs solid base, SWC vs RN, JHP vs FMJ, TCFP vs RN, non-step RN vs stepped RN) as having more weight towards the back of the bullet/longer bearing surface to engage the rifling may produce greater rotational stability in flight. But using bullets with longer base has limitations as bullet seating depth and powder compression may limit powder selection and charges used.

Brass - Unless you use new brass or once-fired same headstamp brass, you are going to get different chamber pressures from varying degrees of brass quality and condition. Also, your resized case length will vary with mixed range brass and for semi-auto calibers that headspace on case mouth, variation in case length will produce different amount of bullet sticking above the case mouth. For greater consistency, you can sort "resized" brass by length - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9606640#post9606640

Neck tension - Same as above, work hardening of brass will vary depending on the headstamp and number of firings and will affect malleability of brass/neck tension. If you are using mixed range brass, this variation is a reloading variable you must work with. You can maximize neck tension by using bullet types with longest base/bearing surface, minimizing expander/flare, and using deeper bullet seating depth (if you are using bullets with short base like 115 gr FMJ/RN). Some plated bullets have softer lead alloy core and bullets like RMR HM plated bullets with harder 11-12 BHN alloy may produce greater neck tension consistency.

OAL/Seating depth - Using longest working OAL/COL will reduce high pressure gas leakage and will produce more consistent chamber pressures. If you are using progressive press, resizing brass in separate step may reduce OAL/bullet seating depth variation from shell plate tilt/deflection.

Crimp - Although I use match barrels with tighter chambers, I prefer not to use excessive taper crimp to prevent reducing bullet diameter. Often taper crimp of .021"-.022" added to the diameter of the bullet will be enough and will freely chamber in even tighter barrels. Depending on the bullet type used, some reloaders won't even use taper crimp as they will simply seat the bullet with minimal flaring of case mouth to not require any taper crimp.

Powder/Charge
- For me, drop to drop variance of less than .1 gr is preferred and is the requirement for my match loads. Some large flake powders like Unique/Red Dot/Promo will meter with .2+ gr variance but still produce accurate loads. Some denser powders like Titegroup, .2-.3+ gr is the full start/max charge load range and will require more precise metering.

IMO, slower burn rate powders than Unique/Universal will obtain optimal accuracy with high-to-near max load data. So if you are loading lighter recoil practice/match loads below high range load data, you want to consider using faster burn rate powders that can produce accuracy with lower powder charges. Fast burn rate powders like Bullseye can produce accurate loads even below start charges that require lighter recoil springs to cycle the slide.

Barrel - Many factory barrels have twist rate of 1:10 while match barrels have 1:16, 1:18, 1:20 and even slower twist rate. IME, KKM barrel with slow 1:20 twist rate has produced greater accuracy than 1:10 factory and 1:16 Lone Wolf barrels with faster twist rate.

There are other reloading variables ...
 
" Std Dev for me is a measure of how consistently you load. "

It's also a measure that shows how well a combination of components work together. X.XX grains weighed exactly on a good scale may still result in high SD.
 
Yep.


I don't care how carefully you reload, some combinations give poor ES & SD numbers.

Some very accurate short range loads have so so ES & SD numbers.

Bad ES numbers hurts you more at long range. Most people don't shoot handgun at long enough range to worry about it.

Many people have worked up some very accurate loads for their intended purposes while never owning a chronograph, never knowing the numbers, and never caring. :)
 
Standard deviation is not just related to "your consistency" at all. It is calculated from the data and includes all the variables. It is total consistency.

The most accurate load is the one that always hits the target you intended. That is not wholly related to consistent velocity or speed.
 
Many people have worked up some very accurate loads for their intended purposes while never owning a chronograph, never knowing the numbers, and never caring.
I would be one of those Neo-Luddites myself!!

rc
 
Walkalong said:
Many people have worked up some very accurate loads for their intended purposes while never owning a chronograph, never knowing the numbers, and never caring.
+1. This was the case for me the past few years during powder shortage as I mainly shot at indoor ranges where I could not set up a chrono and use of outdoor range was not convenient. I conducted powder work up using published start/max charges while monitoring accuracy trends and actually got smaller shot groups than match loads I developed using the aid of chronos. :eek:

All these 9/40/45 loads were developed without chrono data and they are sub 2" groups at 25 yards using unmodified factory pistols except for KKM/LW 40-9 conversion barrels - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9924922#post9924922

I am in the process of relocating for a new job next few weeks but will soon have access to a private range and BLM shooting areas where I can set up the chrono. It will be interesting what numbers I get for the accurate loads I developed without the aid of a chrono, especially if the SD numbers are high. :D
 
Last edited:
"...but was one of the more accurate loads..." That is the only thing that matters. Provided it's consistently accurate. The rest is about having too much unnecessary information that mostly just confuses the issue.
"...consistent chamber pressure..." That you cannot measure or control without very high priced equipment.
 
AA#5 did not give me great standard deviation or velocity spread, but was one of the more accurate loads I have tested. It meters very well.

Well, that original quote was mine. :)

I've seen several cases where the lowest standard deviation in a ladder workup (for pistol) did not yield the smallest group. I've seen powders where the standard deviation was terrible at the lowest charge and best at the highest charge, but the highest charge did not have the best accuracy.

In a given caliber, some powders are just better than others. Each caliber has a pressure range - 45acp is low, 40 is high. Some powders that give low SD in 40 just won't at the lower pressures in 45acp.

In the end, it is about putting the bullet through the bullseye, not about consistent velocity.
 
For my personal loads, I usually only use the chronograph to determine what the final velocity is, or to watch for spikes while working up a load. I hardly ever worry about anything else. As mentioned while it is nice to have low numbers it doesn't always equate to the finest load for the purpose one is looking for.

With my hunting loads I will find the accuracy at the velocity I want or should be at, then I start to tweak little things like the crimp or possibly seating a "little" deeper if I can. Since I usually start off right at the very beginning of a crimp groove sometimes this gives me just a touch more to play with. I also have some molds which cast a two groove bullet which can also effect the accuracy as well.

Overall though it si the load which shoots the best I end up keeping. Kind of like my 41 load which uses 20.5grs of 296 under the Remington 200gr SJHP. While it isn't by any stretch a top end load it produces a consistent 1350'ish FPS velocity from my Redhawk, and is a middle ground load for the combination. It will however shoot far better than I can hold it and has dropped feral hogs a LOT further than one would think it should.
 
While I do own a chronograph, I use it for fun.
A low SD or ES can be VERY misleading.

What if the bullet mfg shutdown on Fri night & reopened Mon am?
There is nothing you can do about that.
If they've got 10 machines swaging a bullet core, are all 10 exactly the same?

These are just 2 issues that affect bullet consistency, and in turn can affect SD & ES
 
AA#5 did not give me great standard deviation or velocity spread, but was one of the more accurate loads I have tested. It meters very well.

This is a quote from a recent spread. Doesn't matter who it was from, but I would like others opinions. I've been reloading under the belief that the most accurate load would likely be the one with the smallest standard deviation and velocity range. Right or wrong?

The most accurate loads in my 30-30 Marlin had the least SD's and ES's and were close to the velocity of factory rounds.

I have chronographed match 22LR ammunition and the SD's and ES's are much less than that of bulk 22 LR. Based on talks with ammunition manufacturer's, velocity is just one variable they control with match ammunition. Bullet weight, crimp, cartridge lube (the entire cartridge is covered with a grease) primer compound weight and distribution, etc, etc, etc. I don't think it is any accident that 22 LR match is more consistent in all aspects to bulk rimfire ammunition.

I do believe that low ES's and SD's are good for automatic mechanisms, particularly auto pistols. That is one reason I use a lot of Bullseye in my 1911's. It gives very tight ES's and SD's. I believe a quick, stiff, and consistent kick to the slide is good for function reliability.

I have shot probably a 100,000 pistol rounds in revolvers and semi auto pistols. Revolvers are very tolerant of what ever you stuff in them. I have had good accuracy with Blue Dot (out to 50 yards) in the 38 Special and 45 LC even though the ES's were in the hundreds of feet per second. Like 300 feet per second. Maybe 50 yards was not a stressing enough test, and, I shoot offhand. I am happy to hit a 12" gong at 50 yards, so we are talking about 24 MOA . I did come to the conclusion that high ES's, that is ES's in hundreds of feet per second indicated a poor cartridge/powder combination.

I can hold and shoot a rifle much better than 24 MOA, and ammunition requirements are tighter. I have Long Range Bud's who are national champions, they look for loads with very tight ES's, and SD's. I have heard numbers such as 10 fps SD and 20 FPS ES. I have looked at my rifle data and I think that has happened twice to me. The good shooters share data and they test at range and it turns out they use the ammunition that makes the smallest groups regardless of any other characteristics. These shooters expect to shoot HM scores at distance. I am not a Long Range HM. I am more of a long range disaster. I did shoot a 196 at 1000 yards and have been wondering what I did, so I can do it again.

I have shot indifferent ammunition out to 300 yards and shot HM scores. Three hundred yards is not all that difficult. However things are tough at 600 yards. Six hundred yards is a good test of a man, his rifle, and ammunition. On a good day I shoot HM scores at 600 yards. I do believe low SD's, ES's are desirable, but what is most desirable, is small groups. Palma Shooter Bart Bobbit claimed that of all the Dillion loaded 308 ammunition, IMR 4895 had the best groups, but some of the worst SD's and ES's.

At some level, accuracy issues due to velocity changes are less than the inaccuracy created by shooting errors. For many people, their shooting errors are so large, esoteric bench rest loading techniques won't make the slightest difference in group size.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walkalong View Post
...Many people have worked up some very accurate loads for their intended purposes while never owning a chronograph, never knowing the numbers, and never caring.

I think I resemble that remark

I do to.
Still don't own one, would be nice to know how fast their going but it was never a necessity for me.
 
Thinking aloud again.

Why ES and SD perhaps don't always translate onto the target is that if one calculates the vertical displacement of different velocities one would be amazed at how little it can be in real terms.

Here is my 30-06 with a 165gr. SGK modelled in Sierra Suite 6. The headings are wrong, should be 2650, 2700, 2750 fps.

SD.gif

What can be seen is that the ES at max is 100fps which results in a maximum vertical displacement of 0.21" at 90 to 100 yds or +- 0.105" about the POI. So on the face of it, 100fps ES would be rejected out of hand while in reality one can still shoot excellent groups.

I remember reading the article on the "Huston Warehouse" I think it was where the best were shooting the best rifles in the best conditions and they could not resolve 1gr of powder on the target. The were shooting groups that measure in the fractions.
 
All, er...most of my loads were developed without a chrono. Now that I have one; I know they are accurate AND consistently fast!
 
When I first started reloading (not that long ago, really) I simply started at the lowest charge. If it cycled my gun reliably and hit the target consistently, I did not work up any higher.

Then I got my chrono. I began working up loads, looking just at the velocity. I thought when I found low standard deviations that I had a good load. I also watched for velocity to make sure I wasn't exceeding the published velocity, for safety. I have stopped a few ladder loads since I reached that number sooner than expected. I also, in some cases, started to see correlation between SD and how clean the powder burned. During most of this time, I was just shooting at steel so never really noticed accuracy.

Then I started doing accuracy testing. Now, accuracy is what I am after. I use the chrono to figure out, based on SD and ES, how well the powder is matched to the gun, caliber, bullet. I use the max velocity to know if I need to continue increasing charge. But, accuracy is my main concern.

All this time I have been learning. The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know. And I have not really started loading for rifle yet.
 
All this time I have been learning. The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know.

So true for us all and good words of wisdom. Confidence is built from ignorance, learning teaches us that there are gaps to what we know.

And interesting article, and one whose theme you will see played out again and again in forums, is the phenomena of Confident Idiots. Doc Dunning shows that the more ignorant the idiot, the more confident the idiot!

We Are All Confident Idiots by David Dunning.

http://www.psmag.com/health-and-behavior/confident-idiots-92793

And, eventually on some topic, we are All Confident Idiots. :uhoh:
 
I do to. Still don't own one, would be nice to know how fast their going but it was never a necessity for me.

Yep, maybe one of these days....
If you're careful, I think you can find very accurate loads for your favorite weapons, especially with all the input & suggestions from the folks here. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top