ACCURACY SEARCH PROTOCOL

Standard Member

shooter93 posted this 12 November 2007

Well...not everyone agrees and I did respond It certainly isn't clear to me and I've looked over your “test" Some people are more capable than others

Attached Files

Standard Member

CB posted this 12 November 2007

shooter93 wrote: Ok Joe...you mamaged to lose me a bit....this whole thing started with an accuracy search for Mil surp or stock guns and has run away....I seriously doubt you gain much different information using the ladder method with Mil surp rifles....occasionaly there is a good shooter but I don't think often...factory rifles...any bodies quess as to what your get. I still believe...again after shooting a number of ladder tests that it's most beneficial when it's an accurate rifle and shot at a longer range...and not anymore beneficial to me than the way I normanaly test. Thirty six shots away from a new found knowledge???/...today I fired 36 rounds for a friend of mine to find his load for his Martini cadet...I elimnated 4 of the 6 powders tested with those shots which work for me. One will stay the same and I'm 95% sure it's the powder and load right now but from watching the chrno I will bump up the second place powder to try again. It very often works for me this way...will I still fiddle around with it...probably....not because I need to and in the vast majority of cases I will be back where I am now....but because i like doing it.

The search is over, see “The Return Of Accuracy Search Protocol” under Cast Bullets, the section above this. It's written, done, everyone agrees since there is no response.

It is clear that ladder testing works at LV with cast bullets, see my data. I've invited others to test the method, and will do so myself in the future.

If you can test 6 reasonable powders with 36 shots and reach ANY conclusion, you are in a completely different world of capability than I. I'm humbled.

joe b.

Attached Files

Standard Member

shooter93 posted this 11 November 2007

Ok Joe...you mamaged to lose me a bit....this whole thing started with an accuracy search for Mil surp or stock guns and has run away....I seriously doubt you gain much different information using the ladder method with Mil surp rifles....occasionaly there is a good shooter but I don't think often...factory rifles...any bodies quess as to what your get. I still believe...again after shooting a number of ladder tests that it's most beneficial when it's an accurate rifle and shot at a longer range...and not anymore beneficial to me than the way I normanaly test. Thirty six shots away from a new found knowledge???/...today I fired 36 rounds for a friend of mine to find his load for his Martini cadet...I elimnated 4 of the 6 powders tested with those shots which work for me. One will stay the same and I'm 95% sure it's the powder and load right now but from watching the chrno I will bump up the second place powder to try again. It very often works for me this way...will I still fiddle around with it...probably....not because I need to and in the vast majority of cases I will be back where I am now....but because i like doing it.

Attached Files

Standard Member

CB posted this 11 November 2007

Ken Campbell, Iowa wrote: At CB low velocities there are a lot of close together, so that depending on how you define barrel length there's almost always a match between a node and barrel time. Thus I suspect this whole business for CB applications. If somebody could get Quickload going on this, or send me a pirated copy, we'd know for sure pretty quick. I'll attach the workbook with what I got, see the node times.

joe b.

Hey thar, Joe, I am losing out here, I guess ... is the purpose of the ladder method to save ammo searching for a ” good load” .... like maybe in a survival situation, where we are using old 35mm film negatives for gunpowder and matchheads for primers ??

Here is what bothers me a bit ... if we assume you don't have a good load yet, say your ammo groups about 3 moa ..... then each individual shot can be thought of as pretty sure to be somewhere in a 6 inch circle... ( 100 yds ) .... so just draw a 6 inch circle around each shot, heck, put the shot in the middle of the circle. After 20 shots, you have 20 of 6 inch circles on your target; the twenty of them making what looks a lot like a thick rimmed wagon wheel.

For the ladder method to work well, it seems that it would require a rig/load that is shooting about 1/2 moa or so, these would make high probability circles about 1 inch in dia at 100 yds ... and might show up something to a critical observor.

But then a REAL critical observor might bring up the fact that that method of finding an accurate load/barrel match/.......requires that you already have a good load/barrel match ...

Kinda like the observation that if you have terrific concentric bullets, ie perfect bullets, you can get by with a twist that is on the slow side of recommended .... which helps accuracy because the twist is gentler on the perfect bullet, and not so much “flip” upon muzzle exit.

So, if you have great bullets, you can fudge a little on some other things .... and with the ladder method if you have a rig/load that shoots great groups, it will help you find a rig/load that shoots great groups. (g) ...

Anecdotally speaking, I do have something of possible interest to add .... in using a chronograph when adding incremental powder charges, I have noted that there are times when adding a little powder does not result in the same increase in velocity as usual in that series ... kinda like “stick-slip” in bearing applications. Regards, ken campbell, iowaKen;My par. on top is about optimum loads, nothing about ladder testing.My request or suggestion is that some others do some testing of the ladder test procedure. If you'd like to join in, have at it.Unfortunately my “It won't work” bin is full, so I'm not able to comment on your other matters, maybe after the scope testing.How are you doing with the two molds I sent? joe b.

Attached Files

Online CBA Member

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 11 November 2007

At CB low velocities there are a lot of close together, so that depending on how you define barrel length there's almost always a match between a node and barrel time. Thus I suspect this whole business for CB applications. If somebody could get Quickload going on this, or send me a pirated copy, we'd know for sure pretty quick. I'll attach the workbook with what I got, see the node times.

joe b.

Hey thar, Joe, I am losing out here, I guess ... is the purpose of the ladder method to save ammo searching for a ” good load” .... like maybe in a survival situation, where we are using old 35mm film negatives for gunpowder and matchheads for primers ??

Here is what bothers me a bit ... if we assume you don't have a good load yet, say your ammo groups about 3 moa ..... then each individual shot can be thought of as pretty sure to be somewhere in a 6 inch circle... ( 100 yds ) .... so just draw a 6 inch circle around each shot, heck, put the shot in the middle of the circle. After 20 shots, you have 20 of 6 inch circles on your target; the twenty of them making what looks a lot like a thick rimmed wagon wheel.

For the ladder method to work well, it seems that it would require a rig/load that is shooting about 1/2 moa or so, these would make high probability circles about 1 inch in dia at 100 yds ... and might show up something to a critical observor.

But then a REAL critical observor might bring up the fact that that method of finding an accurate load/barrel match/.......requires that you already have a good load/barrel match ...

Kinda like the observation that if you have terrific concentric bullets, ie perfect bullets, you can get by with a twist that is on the slow side of recommended .... which helps accuracy because the twist is gentler on the perfect bullet, and not so much “flip” upon muzzle exit.

So, if you have great bullets, you can fudge a little on some other things .... and with the ladder method if you have a rig/load that shoots great groups, it will help you find a rig/load that shoots great groups. (g) ...

Anecdotally speaking, I do have something of possible interest to add .... in using a chronograph when adding incremental powder charges, I have noted that there are times when adding a little powder does not result in the same increase in velocity as usual in that series ... kinda like “stick-slip” in bearing applications. Regards, ken campbell, iowa

Attached Files

Standard Member

utk posted this 11 November 2007

Joe, I was more trying to point to the OCW way of shooting the test loads as opposed to the Audette way with a “ladder". A flier could be easier to spot (and disregard) with the OCW targets...

Urban

Attached Files

Standard Member

CB posted this 11 November 2007

utk wrote: Has anybody heard about this method of finding the “sweet spot": "Dan Newberry's Optimum Charge Weight (OCW)"? (You can also Google for more information).

http://home.earthlink.net/~dannewberry/dannewberrysoptimalchargeweightloaddevelopment/>http://home.earthlink.net/~dannewberry/dannewberrysoptimalchargeweightloaddevelopment/

In a .pdf file:

http://www.twincityrodandgun.com/PDF%20files/Dan%20Newberry%20-%20OCW.pdf>http://www.twincityrodandgun.com/PDF%20files/Dan%20Newberry%20-%20OCW.pdf

Another interesting paper:

http://www.the-long-family.com/OBT_paper.htm>http://www.the-long-family.com/OBTpaper.htm

Yes. I read it some time back and tried to drum up some interest here. Got some people to send in their favorite loads, but the Quickload guy and QL didn't seem able to produce the numbers required.

At CB low velocities there are a lot of close together, so that depending on how you define barrel length there's almost always a match between a node and barrel time. Thus I suspect this whole business for CB applications. If somebody could get Quickload going on this, or send me a pirated copy, we'd know for sure pretty quick. I'll attach the workbook with what I got, see the node times.

joe b.

Attached Files

Standard Member

CB posted this 11 November 2007

pat i. wrote: shooter93 wrote: After shooting a fair number of ladder groups I'm back to group testing at 100 yds my old way and watching the Chrnograph Two opinoineers that tried it came to the same conclusion except I only use the chronograph to find out how fast the bullets going after I've found a load not in load development.

It could very well be that the reason you two gave up on ladder testing is that you did it wrong. If you would like to leave your opinioneering badges behind, and join the ranks of the experimenteers, here's how.

Ladder testing at lower velocities at 100 yards requires some changes from the published methods. Ladder testing is based on the premise that a series of increased loads will cause bullets to increase elevation for some increments of charge, then cluster at about the same elevation, then commence to increase elevation again.

At LV 100 yards it is necessary to shoot enough charges so that the difference between “increasing elevation” and “about the same elevation” can be seen. You can't see this with 5 increments.

For a test of LV 100 yard ladder testing, select a load with known good accuracy, where the powder charge can be increased ~2 1/2 grains safely. Load 11 cartridges, starting 2 1/2 grains below the accurate load, ending 2 1/2 grains above the accurate load. Or approximately.

Then load three-minimum-sets of these cartridges.

Fire them at three aimking points at 100 yards, annotating your notes and sketch of the target after looking through the spotting scope after each shot.

When done, retrieve and mark the target with the shot numbers.

Then, using the devilishly clever analytical tool explained above, see if the ladder testing worked.

You're 33 shots away from DATA!!!, cast off your chains of opinion and join the ranks of Jonas Salk and J.K. Galbraith and Dr. Shockley and Soichiro Honda and me-become an experimenteer!!!

"Courage is a matter of decision.” Major Major, I think.

joe b.

Attached Files

Standard Member

CB posted this 09 November 2007

shooter93 wrote: After shooting a fair number of ladder groups I'm back to group testing at 100 yds my old way and watching the Chrnograph Two opinoineers that tried it came to the same conclusion except I only use the chronograph to find out how fast the bullets going after I've found a load not in load development.

Attached Files

Standard Member

utk posted this 09 November 2007

Has anybody heard about this method of finding the “sweet spot": "Dan Newberry's Optimum Charge Weight (OCW)"? (You can also Google for more information).

http://home.earthlink.net/~dannewberry/dannewberrysoptimalchargeweightloaddevelopment/>http://home.earthlink.net/~dannewberry/dannewberrysoptimalchargeweightloaddevelopment/

In a .pdf file:

http://www.twincityrodandgun.com/PDF%20files/Dan%20Newberry%20-%20OCW.pdf>http://www.twincityrodandgun.com/PDF%20files/Dan%20Newberry%20-%20OCW.pdf

Another interesting paper:

http://www.the-long-family.com/OBT_paper.htm>http://www.the-long-family.com/OBTpaper.htm

Attached Files

Standard Member

CB posted this 09 November 2007

If any of you opinioneers want to do some testing, I'll be happy to include the results. I may do more tests, but for right now I'm happy to conclude that ladder testing with cast bullets at 100 yards may help the load developer zero in on a few charges of a particular powder. Further testing will be required.

joe brennan

Attached Files

CBA Member

billwnr posted this 08 November 2007

when Audette did his ladder testing he also used a chronograph to verify his individual velocities.

Attached Files

Standard Member

shooter93 posted this 08 November 2007

My thoughts....If you ladder test at 100 yds...velocities need to be slow...sub sonic loads show differences at 100 yds. 200 yds and farther for high velocity loads. The same conditions for the whole string...no wind. As Pat said...the rifle needs to be very accurate to start with. Extreme spread should be very close. After shooting a fair number of ladder groups I'm back to group testing at 100 yds my old way and watching the Chrnograph

Attached Files

Match Director

linoww posted this 08 November 2007

RicinYakima wrote: Just a thought here: If you shot this twice more, you could overlay all of the 1's, all of the 2's, etc., and have ten 5 shot groups to calculate also. Ric I agree with Ric.

I also think using the same aiming point would help the confusing cluster of shots on multiple targets. My friend works loads up in a similar manner to achieve the same thing. He starts with a low powder charge on one target and keeps upping the charge. He stops when the shots level out with a charge increase and no longer rises as Joe noted. He then shoots multiple groups with the lower level load and the top level load in the “cluster' that had the same general point of impact. He has the advantage of living on his personal shooting range and loads and shoots from his bench. I am very jealous. When I go to his place for the weekend its like being on F.W. Mann's “homesteadÃ¢â‚¬? range with the amount I learn in the short period of time.

Geo.

"if it was easy we'd let women do it" don't tell my wife I said that!

Attached Files

CBA Member

RicinYakima posted this 08 November 2007

Just a thought here: If you shot this twice more, you could overlay all of the 1's, all of the 2's, etc., and have ten 5 shot groups to calculate also. Ric

Attached Files

Standard Member

CB posted this 08 November 2007

Ladder Testing To Date, 11/8/07

Attached, perhaps, is the 7/11/07 ladder testing target. This is with 31141, 100 yards, IMR4198. The bullet holes are numbered. 1 = 18 gr., 2 = 18.5, 3 = 19, 4 = 19.5, 5 = 20, 6 = 20.5, 7 = 21, 8 = 21.5, 9 = 22, 10 = 22.5. Ladder testing is a method of quick and easy and not-many-shots getting a clue about which of a series of powder charges might be found to be the most accurate. It isn't and never was touted to be the secret to accuracy testing, and it won't make your hair grow back. The theory behind ladder testing is that as powder charges are increased, bullet hole impact rises. Then, around the best charge, over some few increasing charges, elevation doesn't change (much). Then, still increasing the charge, elevation continues up. The object of this exercise is to see if ladder testing with cast bullets at 100 yards works-will it give us that clue about where on the scale of powder charges we should look for best accuracy? As you can see, we've got 30 holes in the paper, in ten sets. Perusal of the target and much thinking may get us to some conclusions, but I think analysis is better. We're looking for a series of consecutively made holes where the elevation doesn't change much. We don't care if hole 1 is close in elevation to hole 10, or to hole 3. So the questions are, Is the elevation of hole 2 about equal to the elevation of hole 1? Code the question to Is #2 E ~ = #1 E?. Then, since there are 10 holes/loads, there are 9 questions, ending with Is #10 E ~ = #9 E? Put the questions in a column, put the answers for the first, second and third targets in adjacent columns. Here's what I got. 11/7/2007 11/7/2007 11/7/2007 IMR4198 First Second Third Grains Is #2 E ~ = #1E? No Yes No 18 Is #3 E ~ = #2E? No No Yes 18.5 Is #4 E ~ = #3E? Yes Yes No 19 Is #5 E ~ = #4E? Yes Yes Yes 19.5 Is #6 E ~ = #5E? Yes Yes Yes 20 Is #7 E ~ = #6E? Yes No No 20.5 Is #8 E ~ = #7E? No No No 21 Is #9 E ~ = #8E? Yes No Yes 21.5 Is #10 E ~ = #9E? No Yes No 22

We're looking for clumps of adjacent Yes answers. It's clear to me that the Yes answers clump about #3 to #6, about charges from 19 to 20.5 grains of IMR4198.

Are the Yes/No answers subjective? Yes. Why did I do 3 tests? Because I don't believe much of any conclusion from a single test. More data is more better, and in this case doesn't cost much time or money. What should the shooter experimenter do next? Load some cartridges with each of the charges, and test for group size. What do we know about ladder testing at 100 yards with cast bullets? At this point it looks like ladder testing may give us a clue about the powder charges to concentrate on in accuracy testing. How can we be more sure about ladder testing? Do some more tests. Take a known good/best powder charge, EX: 28 gr.. Select a set of safe loads around that load, EX: 25.5, 26, 26.5, 27, 27.5, 28, 28.5, 29, 29.5, 30 Why half grain steps? I suspect that the sensitivity of the test requires these half grain steps. That the test isn't sensitive enough to provide meaningful information with .1 grain or .2 or .3 grain steps. Suspect. Do we have to do three tests, shoot three sets of cartridges? I think so, and think that more would be better.

joe b.

Attached Files

CBA Member

billwnr posted this 07 November 2007

pat i. wrote: My thoughts on ladder testing. 100 yards to too close and you have to have a pretty accurate rifle to draw any conclusions.

This was my thought too. From groups and sighter targets I've seen, shots move all over the place from many reasons. Wind direction and velocity, hand position, shoulder position, case neck thickness, case neck tension and then the mysterious reasons I can't even come up with an explanation for.

After I mentioned (to Joe) that Audette had done his testing at 300 yards I remembered how much cast bullets moved around at 200 yards (in the matches) and realized it would be hard to draw “ladder testing” conclusions based on bullet location on the targets. Other variables, mainly wind direction and velocity, would affect bullet location more than the variable powder charge.

Attached Files

Standard Member

CB posted this 07 November 2007

My thoughts on ladder testing. 100 yards to too close and you have to have a pretty accurate rifle to draw any conclusions.

Attached Files

Standard Member

CB posted this 07 November 2007

Joe - Some miscellaneous comments.

You appear to be dead wrong about nobody being interested. With over 600 views it seems there are several interested but maybe have nothing to say.

Dan Willems question was excellent and overdue. Your answer was excellent and I'm sure it helped some of us lurkers get up to speed on what you are trying to do.

Audette might rotate a bit in his grave but he had some quirks of his own not to mention the ego. Why isn't it a good idea to shoot say three shot groups with different powder charges instead of single shots as Geo. suggests? Looks like it would be easier to see what was happening. I can see that using ten shot groups might lead to groups being shot under different conditions.

Glad you brought up such an interesting topic even if some of us didn't know what the hell you were talking about at first. When I get back to shooting I will do a little “ladder” shooting with the small bore.

John

Attached Files

Online CBA Member

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 06 November 2007

Hey Pete... in your Schuetzen shooting, does anyone play with the ” Neidner” system ... bullet pretty much bore riding, just an enlarged rear on the bullet, no throat in chamber, .... I just finished reading for the nth time ” Bullet's Flight.. Mann ” and I noted he thought that was the very best... he did get pretty good results with that method, .... well, for those times ... For a while, he even squoze down jacketed bullets to be bore riders ... not sure if he ever changed that technique ...

Just wondering, for years now I keep bidding/begging on a genuine HiWall .22 Baby Neidner, but the owner keeps stalling ... must be obeying my own Rule1 .. don

regards, ken campbell, lower Iowa

Attached Files

ACCURACY SEARCH PROTOCOL

Categories

Search

Popular Tags

This Weeks High Earners

Hot Topics