6.5/06 AI 500 yard ladder results

[Ralt71]

If you are trying to establish a node on two or three shots, I am afraid that your sample size is way too small to get reliable data.

Has not been the case for me. In 3 shots you know for sure what isn't going to work. Although the internet today with all the podcast talk and new ideas says you have to shoot something 50 times to know it's good. All that does it wash the small detail out. In a hunting rifle, I care where my first and second shot are going to hit from a cold barrel. One a rare occasion may be shot 3 and 4 too haha

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

Thanks fellas. Makes it easy when you have a great rifle put together with quality parts.

Like I said will probably shoot a few more groups just so I can make sure I'm in the middle of this node. 57.5-57.8 is definitely a good spot to be, so I will try 58.1 just to see if it overlaps with 57.5/57.8. If it does, I'll say 57.8 will be my load in the middle of that node. My scale doesn't measure in hundreds to split the difference at 57.65g so not sure if I should go 57.6 or 57.7 if 58.1 doesn't print the same point of impact.

What do you guys think?

 

[Wis65x55]

I'm going to respectfully disagree with that. This works for many of us that do it. It gives a great deal of data and starting point without wasting a bunch of time, components and barrel life. I've found 1K loads this way in all my rifles the last 10 years with under 40 rounds fired at most. I have never done a ladder test that didn't shoot the nodes they printed over 1 MOA. And most are typically around the 1/2 MOA area.

If your first 2 or 3 shots aren't 1/2 MOA or better, no amount of shots after that is going to do any better or prove anything. Time to move on.

Do what works for you.

When I look back at my notes from Vortex intro to reloading, and their long range shooting schools, they say you need a large sample size. Who is correct?

 

[salmonchaser]

I learned the large sample size idea, for 20 years I saved my cold barrel target in a note book, then graphed it from 0. Overall The group size was larger than the best three shot group, however within one standard deviation I could have called the rifle a 1/2 MOA after three shots or 3/4 MOA rifle after well over a thousand shots.

 

[salmonchaser]

If you shoot 1/2 MOA every time you shoot and you shoot once a week you got a half minute rifle.

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

When I look back at my notes from Vortex intro to reloading, and their long range shooting schools, they say you need a large sample size. Who is correct?

When I look back through my notes and targets, I would say I'm correct.

If you like wasting time and components on large sample sizes, that is fine. Do it your way.
Id rather do a simple 2 shot ladder and do follow up confirmation. Only be in it 20-25 rounds. I mean it obviously works, the targets don't lie. You may have to switch powder or bullets to get the accuracy you're looking for, but the process and outcome remains the same.

My point is, your group is never going to get smaller after the first shot. If it's not going to stack the first 2 or 3 into 1/2 MOA, than why even keep going?

I already know this rifle will put 10 rounds under 1" at 100 yards, and 20 rounds just over 1". See the more shots you shoot, the bigger your group gets. It doesn't get smaller. So for me, 3 shots at 1/2 MOA is plenty good and more than enough of a sample size.

I also have plenty of long range shooting experience to back up my claims. Almost 30 years worth now. I've had access to 1K+ private ranges that I can shoot anytime I want to. I also dabble in local competitions, have never placed outside the top 10, and have been on the podium with 1-3 place finishes as well. So with all that said, I'll continue doing it the way that works for me. There is always more than 1 way to skin a cat, some are just faster and better than others...

 

[Wis65x55]

My understanding is that a small SD in velocity equals very stable pressure which improves accuracy?

 

[RL338]

Here's tonight's groups from the 57-58 area.

I went with 57.2/57.5/57.8 at 500 yards.

Pretty happy with it. All 3 groups were right at or around 2.5" or 1/2 MOA.

The POI from the 57.5/57.8 were pretty much on top of each other versus the lower 57.2 charge.

Might reshoot 57.5/57.8/58.1 just to see where and what 58.1 does. But I think I've pretty much settled between 57.5/57.8

Who says ladder tests don't work...25 rounds and I have a proven 1/2 MOA load at 500 yards.

View attachment 29915

View attachment 29916

I like that 57.5 gr load , looks like 1/2” verticle.

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

My understanding is that a small SD in velocity equals very stable pressure which improves accuracy?

Not always the case. Just because a load produces the smallest ES/SD doesn't always translate to the smallest group or groups. A lot of times it is quite the opposite actually in my experience. There are times when you get lucky and achieve both fairly quickly, but not always.

I'm the type that always believes the target. I don't get to hung up on crono numbers. If it shoots good, than it shoots good, who cares what the numbers are. I would rather have a load that shoots consistent 1/2 MOA with slightly higher ES/SD than a load that shoots 1 MOA with a lower ES/SD. There are times when you can have and get both. Just really depends on how much time, components, and testing you're willing to do.

I don't claim to know everything, but I have a pretty good idea of what works for me and my rifles over all the years and rounds I've sent downrange testing and shooting 1K.

There are several methods of load development. You have the ladder, OCW, OBT, and seating depth. I started out with basically the OCW type. This is basically shooting 3 shot groups and looking for similar POI across several weights. Then I started doing ladders at 300 or 500 yards. Which is loading 1 or 2 rounds while looking for a few charges that all group together. The further out you test this method, the easier it is to decipher. You really need a cronograph for this to help map out your velocities and see where it "flattens" out for a series of charges. I have never done the OBT method. The final steps are doing a seating depth test in .003"-.005" to really fine tune the load. If shoot a horizontal line of targets with different depths, you'll see your groups start to open and close up. Ideally you want to be in the middle of that also. Some guys also like to be at the closer depth of that node so it will give you some leeway to throat wear over the course of the barrel. The last thing you can do is primer testing after you have figured out your charge/seating depth. Try another primer or 2. 99% of the time, your rifle/load will show a preference with 1 of the primers giving better accuracy, or better ES/SD. The other thing you can do is test different neck tension. You just need bushing dies for this and different size bushings to give anywhere from 1-5 thou of tension. I typically start around 2 thou neck tension on my 22 and 6mms, and 3 thou on my magnums. That seems to give me good enough results to where I don't tinker to much with neck tension. Most 22 and 6mms typically like to be anywhere from 1-2 thou. On hunting rifles or magnums, most guys are and like to be in the 3-4 thou area.

Like I said there are many ways to do load development. Not really a right or wrong way as long as you get the result you're looking for.
Sometimes I use a combination of the OCW and Ladder method. But lately I've just been doing the ladder test method at 300 or 500 yards. Its quick and easy to decipher the good loads from the bad real fast without wasting a bunch of time and components. The one big thing with ladder testing is you really need to have an accurate rifle, load consistent match grade ammo, and be able to shoot well and know your way around reading targets and having sound bench/shooting mechanics. It's very easy to have 1 or 2 bad shots or pull shots with an inaccurate rifle give you bad data and inconclusive results. This usually just results in chasing your tail and not knowing what to do and where to go from there.

Also the 1 big thing with any type of load development is to only change 1 thing at a time. This way you know what is and isn't working, and which way to go from there. That's also again where reading targets comes in to play.