Phony baloney, or the real McCoy?

I use a Sinclair concentricity gauge to check my work occasionally. This gauge has no "straightening" feature, just measurement. Does this tool shrink my group size? No, I shrink my group size by ensuring my handloads are as uniform as I can make them.
 
Walkalong said:
I have seen test where concentric ammo shot better, as well as tests where it didn't seem to matter.

Since I can load straight ammo by removing tools or methods that ruin it, I do.

I like straight ammo, I cannot lie.
Click to expand...
The pistol version of testing we saw and discussed months back was nonsensical.... their data showed crooked bullets shot better by a margin that competitors would break out vise grips to start adding error. I have no education in statistics or I may have invested the time to disect and destroy that article....
 
GeoDudeFlorida said:
I believe time is relative. The more time I spend with my relatives the slower it moves.

One of the old guys who taught me to shoot as an enthusiastic youngster told all of us in the Junior’s program that skills are relative. Just because one kid can’t hit the bullseye and another can doesn’t mean one is doing something particularly wrong or that the other is doing something particularly right. Unless you can pinpoint a particular thing one way or the other you have to assume it’s just a difference in natural ability. But if you can find that one thing then you can make one a better shot. Just be careful you don’t also make the other worse as a consequence.
Click to expand...
You know, that's the same thing your relatives say:)
 
AJC1 said:
The pistol version of testing we saw and discussed months back was nonsensical.... their data showed crooked bullets shot better by a margin that competitors would break out vise grips to start adding error. I have no education in statistics or I may have invested the time to disect and destroy that article....
Click to expand...

The take-away from that video is the exact statement I make so often around here... People absolutely LEAP to derive confidence from coincidence. The groups in that video showed a coincidentally improved group size by the damaged ammo, and every willingly accepts that the advantage of bent ammo shown in that video was nothing more than coincidence... But when someone shoots 3 shot groups of 5 different powder combinations, and ONE of them is 1" and the rest are 1.2 to 1.5", for some reason, they proclaim it MUST be because that load is better than the rest...

But when someone calls - as you have here - for analysis of the results, to determine whether the claim being made is actually true, or just appears to be possible based on obviously insufficient data volume, or suggests that the result is more likely coincidence than causation, folks get butthurt...
 
I bought the Hornady unit a few years ago. I used it to validate that my "process" was making good rounds. Everything I checked was at or mostly under .003. It hasn't been out of the box since.
 
Nature Boy said:
I believe the earth is round, but the moon is flat. I’m a flat mooner.

I also believe astronauts successfully landed on the moon but only because it was flat. If it was round they would have slid off.
Click to expand...
Why do I feel like I've just been mooned?

I bought one of the Hornady concentricity tools locally from a guy getting out of reloading. Didn't take me long to conclude it was superfluous. So I pulled the indicator and use it for die adjustments.

index.php
 
Soonerpesek said:
Was it only coincidence because some didn’t agree with it….
Whatever video it was sounded like the fellow showed proof of his claims….
Where does the proof of data have to stop to be considered as acceptable…??
Click to expand...
I listen to people I trust, this guy is reliable to me.

youtu.be

Testing loaded round runout from .003" to .045" at 1000yds.

Join Patreon https://www.patreon.com/fclassjohn for full length videos, live chats and more.Help support my channel by shopping Amazon https://amzn.to/35YA4...
youtu.be youtu.be
 
AJC1 said:
I listen to people I trust, this guy is reliable to me.

youtu.be

Testing loaded round runout from .003" to .045" at 1000yds.

Join Patreon https://www.patreon.com/fclassjohn for full length videos, live chats and more.Help support my channel by shopping Amazon https://amzn.to/35YA4...
youtu.be youtu.be
Click to expand...
Yes….
He also mentioned that, when chambered, the “correction” altered the seating depth…
This confirms to me that concentricity matters, however some here refuse to acknowledge that even AFTER proof is shown…
 
Soonerpesek said:
Yes….
He also mentioned that, when chambered, the “correction” altered the seating depth…
This confirms to me that concentricity matters, however some here refuse to acknowledge that even AFTER proof is shown…
Click to expand...
I stated that .003 or less is good imo. If I have more like Walkalong said I to seak out the source. I don't try and bend it for correction. If it's a known +.003 it gets a sharpy bullet tip and is used as a fowler.
 
AJC1 said:
stated that .003 or less is good imo. If I have more like Walkalong said I to seak out the source.
Click to expand...
This serves as proof to the OP that the concentricity gauge is an informative tool to have (not necessary) but serves a purpose in the reloading sequence should one want to use it…
I’m not FOR or AGAINST it, simply stating to the one that refuses to acknowledge the facts even after proof is shown…. :thumbup:
But, as the Dude sez often, what works for one doesn’t have to work for another….
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
Runout after bullet seating?
Replies
6
Views
672
texasveteod
T
Z
  • Locked
303 British Neck Runout.....AARGH!!!
Replies
6
Views
1K
Gewehr98
G
JCSC
  • Locked
Wilson Case Gauge measurement questions
Replies
18
Views
559
Blue68f100
Blue68f100
M
  • Locked
Concentricity Vs Headspace
2
Replies
30
Views
1K
MKnarr
M
Hypnogator
  • Locked
Hornady Die Problems
Replies
17
Views
4K
jjjitters
J
Back
Top