Load accuracy/powder charge

[Chops]

Muir,

Good call on the reading - I will try to find a copy... but by the sound of it I will be lucky... back the internet!

a standard hunting rifle in good shape, there are a lot more things to worry about than a tenth of a grain of powder: especially if the other items mentioned are ignored or neglected.

I see where you are coming from - but I remember clearly when I started reloading - Lyman press, RCBS dies, lyman lube pad, reloading block.
I guess you and I both reload for comps? I use redding S dies so I can alter neck tension. I spend very good money on my ' case prep' gadgets & 'measuring kit', and try to work to as higher degee of accuracy as possible. Most hunters have teh basic kit that gives them a good level of accuracy - but does not account for neck tension, neck concentricity, case concentricity, etc. Most hunters I know don't bother spending the cash on a Primer pocket uniformer, or flash hole deburrer. Powder qty by weight is about the only thing that one can tinker with to get better results, other than seating depth, and even this is often hit and miss because the cheaper dies ( at least least the Lee and Lyman dies I once used) tend not to give 'even' seating depths. You have to measure each and every round (with a comparitor) and pull poor ones!

I tend to agree that +/- 1/10th grain (ie 0.2grain total ) is often neither here nor there for the majority of hutning rifles - but my old 243 would not take being more that 3/10th's gr out for a group to open from <1/2" to >1".

I would always burn the extra powder to see if the result improve!

Cheers

Chops
(PS, Muir - sorry if my last post sounded stroppy - just got home from hospital following my wife giving birth to our 2nd nipper!!! Goodbye dreams of a 7mmBooBoo F-Class special!!!)

 

[Muir]

Chops: Congratulations! I hope the grand arrival went well and mother and child are well!

I have loaded for competition and that is another game entirely. What ever makes you shoot best goes, and I have gone to Nth extremes chasing that edge in the competition. One of the hardest things I have done is cast bullet benchrest as the dynamics of making the bullet, sizing it concentrically, and then getting it loaded for maximum accuracy. In this competition I learned that case prep and neck tension were very important and that I could meter powder through a good measure and count on as good a result as when I weighed each charge. Conversely, a badly seated bullet or any interference in uniform ignition /pressures would show up immediately on paper.

These are steps I wouldn't take in a hunting round rifle. Your .243 might not like that .3gr variation with that particular powder and if that's what it takes -and you don't mind the effort assuring that level od charge weight accuracy- then you're welcome to weigh each one. Personally, I would try a different powder or seating depth but that's me!

MJR maybe this answers your question too? I don't neck turn hunting rounds but I do believe in accurate resizing. By hunting, I mean deer, elk, and plains antelope found here my locale. It's not that working up hunting loads like they were comp loads won't deliver top accuracy (with al else being right with the rifle) it's just that fighting that 1/4 MOA off of a 3/4 MOA rifle is pretty meaningless on a 200 yard shot. If one can't hit a deer sized creature in the vitals they'd best stay home and spend the time they'd use trimming off that 1/4 MOA practicing with that 3/4 MOA ammo.

Lets face it. The majority of the game killed world wide is probably done in with 2 - 3 MOA ammunition/ rifles. In this country the lowly 30-30 lever action still accounts for most of the deer taken and it is a 3-4 MOA rifle. I doubt if skinning 1/4 or 1/2 MOA from these rifles will effect the statistics much.

I am old fashion. For big game hunting I like a good trigger and lots of practice far more than I like microscopic groups.~Muir

 

[MJR]

Muir/Chops, thanks for both your input. Basically yes you have both answered my question and the fact is that although I agree totally with your observations regarding hunting 'accuracy' I find the pursuit of accuracy fascinating. I am only shooting off the shelf rifles but I can see myself leaning towards a custom rifle and maybe longer range paper punching.

 

[MJR]

ooops, double post.

 

[finnbear270]

If I find myself with now't to do on a rainy day, I'm quite happy to prep brass all by hand, or scoop & trickle weigh every case load on a Rcbs rangemaster (can be up to 200 rounds), It may sound anal, but I can be confident that I have done my part & they are all going to be dead Deer/Fox/Rabbit.

 

[Muir]

And there is the greater truth: Quiet time at a reloading bench is worth all efforts involved. (usually...) ~Muir

 

[ecoman]

Ahuh !
EVERY barrel is different. I had the interesting experience of witnessing two successive numbered Sako rifles in .270 which had different chamber tolerances.
Two P.H. Safari rifles in .243 on of the same age, one of which I used were almost identical - but with different chambers.

Every barrel has it's own 'sweet' spot - if you need to find out - just carry on loading up towards maximum load.
Some rifles will not even accept THAT and demand a lesser loading or they will produce pressure signs on the cartridge.

Happy days and may you experience minimal hair loss.

 

[ecoman]

A lot to think about. Your discussion on forming loads is very interesting indeed.

I'm not into BR work but have a firm belief that the elimination of all the various smaller things which get in the way of accuracy - or should I say get in the way of allowing the full potential of your rifle to do its best must be a good thing on target or beast.

I have always been keen on elimination of distracting side issues during stalking - this includes all equipment.
The mind should be free to absorb the day unimpeded with nuisance factors, and the shot - well - the culmination of the day - if the opportunity affords - should be simply a well prepared extension of the stalk.
The cartridge plays a big part in that.

It was your discussion which reminded me that my first reloading kits - for .243 and .222 were those by Lee in a small portable box which would easily fit in a pocket.
The whole shebang - I still have both - is worked with a mallet or a neat length of log if need's be, but the point of this is that the powder measure was simply the Lee dipper which you filled to capacity with a slight tap with the forefinger to level the top and you then poured the load down the hole into the case before dropping the bullet in and walloping it home with the calibrated punch and mallet.
It worked wonderfully well and gave accurate results despite the mind-cringing relaity that you were walloping a bullet down into a primed case full of powder - despite the primer being suspended over a hole in the anvil base.

So yes, the dipper measure worked very well indeed.
I confess to just calibrating the sizing/loading body of the device to that of a Norma factory round, and got on with it.

The guaranteed 2" MOA of that P.H. barrel - hammer-forged on a mandrel, easily gave 1" MOA and even better on a good day.

Then I got ambitious. The lyman scales - the this and the that. Neck length reamer - inside neck reamer. Yes - the Chrono.

I cannot in all honesty claim that my efforts and increased expense gained me more accuracy, but it did create an added interest.


I don't know if the Chrono works any more as my range is a bit rough and ready in a hill glade and the last time I used it I forgot about the muzzle blast of the .308 and blew the thing away as I set it up too close.

Have a laugh - I deserve it; but yes - using a chronograph in order to set up loads opened my eyes ! The differences in the most carefully measured cartridges - brass to powder - measured for weight and size. Flashhole reamed, etc -etc. I even tried magnum primers to ensure adequate kindling and everything at my disposal for exact sameness - but that sameness seemed to be just a coincidence when it did happen. The difference in velocity from what appear to be the most exactly reproduced cartridges is amazing.

And yes, the other point made about factory ammo is so correct. It is easy to get a bit smug about home loaded ammo quality - but when you think of the many thousands of rifles of the same calibre which every ammo manufacturer has to cater-for - - - -.

Its very nice to be able to sort out a bit of reloading in the bad weather; know that there's a suitable supply in store and that you don't have to worry about the retailer having stocks of your ammo.

This forum certainly gets a body thinking - - - , but as I say, I'm not into the BR aspect of riflework. I was in the Battallion 24 shooting team in the Far East at the age of 18, and wasted a lot of ammo in my time, but this was on a different sort of discipline.

I bow to your specialist skills sirs, I think I'll go and paddle in shallower waters.