300WM Load Development - Barnes 175 LRX

jonesn3

WKR
Joined
Jan 11, 2022
Messages
457
Wondering if anybody has suggestions on interpreting ladder test data, and choosing the “best” load to take to the next stage of development (ie. bullet seating depth)?

I am working on a hand load with H1000 and 175g LRX bullet in my 300WinMag. The 175g already appears promising but I may also try the 190g. My struggle now is picking the “best” one or two loads from the ladder test. I started low and worked up in 0.5gr increments using the data on Hodgdon’s webpage. Based on the velocity data, I didn’t really see any appreciable “nodes” or flat spots in the plotted data. Maybe around 76.5-77.0g and 78.0g. All these loads were using 0.050” seating depth off the rifling.

I’m not too terribly interested in finding the max limit, I stopped at 79.0gr without seeing any signs of pressure or difficult bolt lift or anything like that. Ideally, I’d like to be between 2950-3050 fps and consistently getting sub-1” groups at 100 which it’s already doing pretty consistently if I do my part. 7/10 groups were about 1” or less, and 2 of the >1” groups had one flier where I believe I yanked the shot (so I don’t have a lot of trust in those groups sizes #6 & #9). In my testing, I’m noticing a good place to be is between 76.5-77.0g or 77.5-78.0g based on preference with velocity range and also the SD and groups on papers.

I am thinking the next step will be trying 0.075” and 0.100” seating depth in 3 or 5 rd groups each.

It’s very likely that I’m over thinking this process, but any suggestions or guidance would be appreciated!
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5024.png
    IMG_5024.png
    227.4 KB · Views: 10
  • IMG_5026.png
    IMG_5026.png
    24.5 KB · Views: 11
  • IMG_4957.png
    IMG_4957.png
    146.9 KB · Views: 12
So, the way I was taught, was rather than looking for a velocity flat spot, look for sequential powder loads that result in the same (or very closely so) group center vertical distance from the aim point. For example: If 76.5 grain loads and 77.0 grain loads both have group centers that are 1.5 inches above the aim point, start refining from there.
 
I’ll take a closer look at that vertical grouping comparison between sequential powder charges. One thing I noticed was the groups at lower charge weights (74.6 to 77.0g) the POI was about 1”-1.5” high compared to POA. There was good vertical alignment between 74.6g & 75.0g, and again at 76.0g & 76.5G. Around 77.5-78.0gr the POI shifted down to El. -0.25” and -0.75” (below the POA), respectively. At 78.5g and onward POI remained consistently low of POA by 1-1.5”. That was all without any changes to the zero in the scope at 100yds.
 

Attachments

  • 90AB1800-CC89-4505-BC75-211E92821F45.jpeg
    90AB1800-CC89-4505-BC75-211E92821F45.jpeg
    592.2 KB · Views: 9
  • 90AB1800-CC89-4505-BC75-211E92821F45.jpeg
    90AB1800-CC89-4505-BC75-211E92821F45.jpeg
    161.9 KB · Views: 9
Admittedly, there are folks on this forum who are much more advanced than I in their relocating skills and may have other thoughts. That said, looking at your targets, it appears to me 76.0-76.5 is your sweet spot. It gives you the velocity you want, ES and SDs are good, and vertical POI is consistent. I would start my refinement between those two charges.
 
Painless load development (mine)

Not sure if you’ve seen this thread yet. Your current methodology may lead to chasing your tail. Probably best to just pick something that meets your performance requirements and shoot groups of 10+ rounds to make sure it stays within your specs. Then go shoot/hunt


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Forget you ever heard or read about velocity flat spots or "nodes". Its just statistical randomness...or white noise so to speak from not enough shots/data.

3 shots is also pretty limiting from a data standpoint to make any kind of decisions. (fine for pressure checking)

Load up 10 at whichever one you want and put 10 down range and see what it does. Maybe choose 2 sets to run if you want some kind of comparison, maybe 10 at 76gr and 10 at 78gr and see what it looks like.

What's the rifle?
 
I would just load ten at 79 and see how they shoot.

This.

Unless anything gave you indication that it clearly wasn't good enough, you're looking at data that isn't statistically relevant enough to count on to find the "best". Find good enough and get to being good at shooting it in realistic situations.
 
Thanks for all the responses so far, I should probably better subscribe to the KISS method (“keep it simple stupid”, lol). Agree, 3 rds isn’t much to go off of at each increment especially when you factor in the human element in those groups. I’ve listened to a lot of Hornady podcasts on load development and dispersion, they definitely discuss the ladder test isn’t really a good indicator when they didn’t high round testing.

The rifle is a Christensen Ridgeline, 26” barrel, broken in following manufacturer process, and has about 250 rds on it so far.
 
Painless load development (mine)

Not sure if you’ve seen this thread yet. Your current methodology may lead to chasing your tail. Probably best to just pick something that meets your performance requirements and shoot groups of 10+ rounds to make sure it stays within your specs. Then go shoot/hunt


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I’ll check this out. Haven’t see it before, thanks for the link!
 
Thanks for all the responses so far, I should probably better subscribe to the KISS method (“keep it simple stupid”, lol). Agree, 3 rds isn’t much to go off of at each increment especially when you factor in the human element in those groups. I’ve listened to a lot of Hornady podcasts on load development and dispersion, they definitely discuss the ladder test isn’t really a good indicator when they didn’t high round testing.

The rifle is a Christensen Ridgeline, 26” barrel, broken in following manufacturer process, and has about 250 rds on it so far.

Yeah, so a "stock" rifle. If you can get a 10 shot group to land probably anywhere around 1.5moa or less, your probably in good shape. 300wm "can" be a bit tough on the extreme accuracy arena, they aren't a 6 dasher, not the simplest to shoot off a bench or prone either.

Nothing wrong with experimenting, just gotta understand what makes real world differences, and what generally doesn't.
 
Back
Top