My OCW Test

Reloading equipment, methods, load data, powder and projectile information.

Re: My OCW Test

Post by Berto » 05 Jan 2018, 5:22 pm

37.6 shot again
Attachments
take 2.jpg
take 2
take 2.jpg (44.89 KiB) Viewed 405 times
Berto
Private
Private
 
Posts: 7
Victoria

Re: My OCW Test

Post by tom604 » 05 Jan 2018, 5:40 pm

should of tried 36.8 or 38 again as well, if it was the heat that caused the spread on 37.6 and then it tightened up that much those two groups should pin hole :D
what rest were you using ? did you try any other loads? nosy bugger arn't i :lol: :thumbsup:
User avatar
tom604
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 1146
South Australia

Re: My OCW Test

Post by sungazer » 05 Jan 2018, 6:10 pm

Should of shot the 37.2 again if you were the fault of the horizontal at 37.6 it was probably the same fault at 37.4 other have said go for the outlies due to better looking groups again I would suggest you go for the mid range 37.4 as you have good groups on each side, where fliers are less likely to happen. You can see what I meant about the true results getting lost in the noise of errors.
sungazer
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1515
Victoria

Re: My OCW Test

Post by Berto » 05 Jan 2018, 6:20 pm

37.8 shot similar to 37.6 in the retest, 37.4 had a bit of verticle spread but im blaming that on me.

I think ill be trying some seating depths at 37.6 as it appears i have a rather long node and it is rather stable either side
Berto
Private
Private
 
Posts: 7
Victoria

Re: My OCW Test

Post by bladeracer » 05 Jan 2018, 6:24 pm

Berto wrote:I have since reshot the grp at 37.6 and there is far less horizontal spread


That's exactly why I wouldn't be making these decisions based on three rounds of each load.
How do you know the other groups are truly indicative if you haven't shot any more than those three rounds?
Practice Strict Gun Control - Precision Counts!
User avatar
bladeracer
General
General
 
Posts: 3794
Victoria

Re: My OCW Test

Post by sungazer » 05 Jan 2018, 6:35 pm

The theory is that charge weight is only responsible for vertical spread. The ability to group is all based on seating depth. A lot of people will only shoot one shot at each charge normally a bit closer together based on others experience or velocities wanted. then a flat spot selected and that charge weight then shot at different seating depths to look for grouping. Lots of theories out there with some guns you cant afford to shoot lots in load development unless you purchase 6 barrels and have them all chambered at the same time and then also grade barrels.
sungazer
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1515
Victoria

Re: My OCW Test

Post by bladeracer » 05 Jan 2018, 6:38 pm

sungazer wrote:The theory is that charge weight is only responsible for vertical spread. The ability to group is all based on seating depth. A lot of people will only shoot one shot at each charge normally a bit closer together based on others experience or velocities wanted. then a flat spot selected and that charge weight then shot at different seating depths to look for grouping. Lots of theories out there with some guns you cant afford to shoot lots in load development unless you purchase 6 barrels and have them all chambered at the same time and then also grade barrels.


True, but if you own a rifle like that it generally drops all the bullets through one hole so you don't need groups to know where it's shooting.
If you can't shoot that consistently though then you need to shoot a much larger sample to determine the potential of each charge weight - including horizontal and vertical displacement.
Practice Strict Gun Control - Precision Counts!
User avatar
bladeracer
General
General
 
Posts: 3794
Victoria

Re: My OCW Test

Post by marksman » 05 Jan 2018, 9:02 pm

this is a true OCW test
what Apollo is referring to is the Audette ladder system
I recon your pretty close with what you have :thumbsup:
marksman
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 1009
Victoria

Re: My OCW Test

Post by Gwion » 05 Jan 2018, 9:50 pm

I'm with Brett. Load up a bunch at 36.8 and 38 to confirm. Personally the 38 looks the best but not enough data to know for sure. You need a few more 5 round groups to get a good indication. Some times you fluke a good group just like sometimes you shank a flyer. That is, it's not uncommon to actually pull a shot into the group that would have been a flyer if your aim was true.
Numbers count when it comes to averages.
User avatar
Gwion
Field Marshal
Field Marshal
 
Posts: 4662
-

Re: My OCW Test

Post by straightshooter » 11 Jan 2018, 7:27 am

This whole exercise seems like a waste of time to me. Similarly with some of the attendant advice offered.
So the rifle is intended for hunting, right.
Shoot a numerically significant group, like at least 10 shots, at 200 yards or meters or at your preferred zero range depending on what you have access to.
Then adjust your scope to correctly center it for that group and your desired trajectory.
Then fire a confirmation group.
If the confirmation group shows that you have done things right and provided you don't do any further tinkering, then you can happily pack up and proceed to a successful hunting career.
Don't give a second thought at all to the actual group size because in reality, over a sufficiently large sample size, no amount of minor tinkering will improve it.
An appreciation of statistical analysis would help to grasp why.
Unfortunately many people cherry pick and fall in love with factors they believe will improve accuracy while ignoring or being totally ignorant of other factors that swamp the effects of their preferred minor adjustments.
In your case for example you have chosen 2208 for a 75 grain projectile in a 243. This results in a loading density of at best about 80%. You will thus inherently have significantly greater variations in ignition and pressure and chances are that this will overwhelm the effects of tinkering with minor variations in charge weight or seating depth.
"There is no expedient to which a man will not resort to avoid the real labor of thinking." Sir Joshua Reynolds
straightshooter
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 219
New South Wales

Re: My OCW Test

Post by in2anity » 12 Jan 2018, 9:54 pm

Did you have few minutes break between groups? What sort of rest were you using? Did you only shoot a group of 3 per increment? Was there any wind? Are you a good shot?(I.e. can you rule out human error)

Point is, IMO three shots per increment is not a big enough sample size to identify trends. I say run the test again and see if the results are the same. And then do it again, even try 5 shot groups.
User avatar
in2anity
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 875
New South Wales

Re: My OCW Test

Post by marksman » 13 Jan 2018, 10:23 am

I'm usually cocky enough that if when I do an OCW test if 2 holes are way apart I wont shoot the third and move to the next
saves my barrel life, I never do more than 3 shot testing, if it don't work for 3 shots its not going to for 5 or 10
when finished and have decided what I want to explore I will definitely reshoot what I call the OCW as well as just above and just below to verify the OCW
exactly how you are supposed to do when doing an OCW, there is usually more than one load you would want to explore
I have seen too many people who don't verify then call the OCW a waste of time when there load does not perform
after shooting this load for a while you will need to retune your loads as well as retweek your rifle, its called maintenance
marksman
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 1009
Victoria

Re: My OCW Test

Post by tom604 » 13 Jan 2018, 5:44 pm

seems a waste of ammo :unknown: but each to their own :thumbsup:
User avatar
tom604
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 1146
South Australia

Re: My OCW Test

Post by in2anity » 13 Jan 2018, 5:53 pm

tom604 wrote:seems a waste of ammo :unknown: but each to their own :thumbsup:


Nope for trend analysis, the larger the sample size the more acurate your trend identification will be. Three shots per increment is NOTHING. But as BF has already said, if this is not for competition, there’s not a huge reason for getting caught up on the details. Find a decent enough load and go out and shoot!
User avatar
in2anity
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 875
New South Wales

Re: My OCW Test

Post by tom604 » 15 Jan 2018, 7:45 pm

in2anity wrote:
tom604 wrote:seems a waste of ammo :unknown: but each to their own :thumbsup:


Nope for trend analysis, the larger the sample size the more acurate your trend identification will be. Three shots per increment is NOTHING. But as BF has already said, if this is not for competition, there’s not a huge reason for getting caught up on the details. Find a decent enough load and go out and shoot!


but he had two groups that were better than what he was looking at and then he was going to have to play with the seating to get it to group :unknown:
three shot is the min for an average,the more you shoot the better the info :thumbsup:
User avatar
tom604
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 1146
South Australia

Re: My OCW Test

Post by bladeracer » 15 Jan 2018, 8:20 pm

tom604 wrote:seems a waste of ammo :unknown: but each to their own :thumbsup:


No shooting is a waste of ammo in my book, it's all good :-)
Practice Strict Gun Control - Precision Counts!
User avatar
bladeracer
General
General
 
Posts: 3794
Victoria

Re: My OCW Test

Post by Daddybang » 15 Jan 2018, 8:49 pm

No shooting is a waste of ammo in my book, it's all good :-)[/quote]

I don't understand most of the technical sh@t being discussed ...but this I get!!!! :lol: :drinks:
We are The paint where there ain't supposed to be paint
Daddybang
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Posts: 1753
Queensland

Re: My OCW Test

Post by tom604 » 16 Jan 2018, 6:02 pm

bladeracer wrote:
tom604 wrote:seems a waste of ammo :unknown: but each to their own :thumbsup:


No shooting is a waste of ammo in my book, it's all good :-)



true that :lol: better if it's at a critter :thumbsup:
User avatar
tom604
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 1146
South Australia

PreviousNext

Back to top
 
Return to Reloading ammunition