pbroski
Lil-Rokslider
Can you show us some examples of this? Genuinely intesrested.
Help rookie with reloading and shooting data
- Thread starter goldylocks333
- Start date
Can you show us some examples of this? Genuinely intesrested.
Legend
WKR
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2017
- Messages
- 1,246
Yeah I used to believe that subtle things like seating depth good make inorovements as well. Those were 3 or 5 shot groups and it was just coincidence.
As soon as you shoot statistically significant groups...large sample size, then those observations disappear. Hornady has a podcast on it, which I realize they are biased, but held accurate for me. YMMV
As soon as you shoot statistically significant groups...large sample size, then those observations disappear. Hornady has a podcast on it, which I realize they are biased, but held accurate for me. YMMV
EdP
WKR
OK, thanks for clearing that up. Some would argue that shooting using a lead sled is a vice (as opposed to vise).
In my mind, if you are not comfortable handling the recoil, you should either practice until you become comfortable with it or shoot a lower recoiling rifle. Either way, I'm with those who recommend ditching the lead sled. You won't have the lead sled with you in the field so don't let your marksmanship be dependent on it. If the problem is your shoulder getting sore from a high number of rounds, try a PAST pad.
NorthIdahoDude
WKR
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2022
- Messages
- 442
Just to see what you're working with gun wise, I'd suggest you try a 168 Sierra Match King (SMK), seated to about 2.813 (unless that's to long for your chamber, but I've never seen one that it was).
The 168 SMK is consistently the the most accurate bullet I've ever shot in any gun with a .308 bore (30-06, 308 Win, etc), and it shoots great with just about any amount of jump. Those even shoot sub-MOA in my Howa Super-Lite! I don't think I've ever owned a 308 that shot better with something other than 168 SMK's and Varget in well prepped brass.
For powder, N150 is basically Varget with an ever so slightly slower burn rate. In my 308's, I've always found Varget produces noticably better accuracy with 165/168 class bullets than it does with 150's, and given the burn rate of N150, I'd expect it will be about the same in that regard. I've never had bad luck with any VV powders, so I think that's probably good to go, but Varget is the gold standard baseline for 308/168 SMKs.
Anyway - I recommend you try your N150 and 168 SMK's and see what you get. I bet you get some very good accuracy, and then you will have your baseline for how well (or not) other loads shoot in that gun.
The "Easy Load Development" thread is pretty spot on in concept - any given bullet + powder + primer + brass + your loading technique, is probably gonna shoot about how it shoots in your gun. Different combo's can shoot WILDLY different in any given gun also.
Also, I'll re-echo what others are saying - 5 round groups can only tell you if any given load is bad; it's not enough to tell you if it's really good. If you shoot a 5 round group (or even a 3 round group) and think "wow, that sucks", there's basically a 0% chance that group is going to turn around and make you happy if you keep sending rounds. If you shoot a 5 round group that looks nice, all that proves is that those 5 rounds landed close together; you'd need to see a minimum of another 10 before you should get too excited, and another 25 before you start feeling confident about what your+your gun+your loads is capable of. Don't get disapointed if it turns 1.5-2 MOA is all you get - that's all 99% of the hunting-gun class guns is capable of when the round count on group size goes up.
Seating depth is chasing your tail - I have seen guns shoot somewhat better and somewhat worse with seating depth, but you won't turn 3MOA into 1MOA with seating depth, but you might turn 2MOA into 1.75MOA or somesuch.
Powder selection matters a LOT more than I think many people give it credit for. For 150's in a 308 Win, you're probably going to find that powders a bit faster than N150 produce the best groups. Things like H4985, N140, maybe even as fast as H322 or AR-Comp or N13x. My 'money' load back when I ran 150's in a 308 was h4985, and I had experimented briefl with AR-Comp with even better results, but then AR-Comp got hard to come by and I've since moved to 165/168's in all my 308s.
Here's a good example of how much powder selection can matter:
This is 10 rounds of 7x57 Mauser, 162 ELD-X, @ 3.210 OAL, H4350 loaded at 2664 FPS. Not awful, but not impressive either; I'm confident a 30 round group of this would come in arond 2-2.25 MOA.
And this, is also 10 round sof 7x57 Mauser, 162 ELD-X, @ 3.210 OAL, N555, loaded to 2667 FPS, out of the same gun, shot I think 2 days apart. I've drilled 30 rounds of this load into a 1.1 MOA group before. The one and only variable here, is I switched from N555 to H4350.
Anyway, hope all this helps.
The 168 SMK is consistently the the most accurate bullet I've ever shot in any gun with a .308 bore (30-06, 308 Win, etc), and it shoots great with just about any amount of jump. Those even shoot sub-MOA in my Howa Super-Lite! I don't think I've ever owned a 308 that shot better with something other than 168 SMK's and Varget in well prepped brass.
For powder, N150 is basically Varget with an ever so slightly slower burn rate. In my 308's, I've always found Varget produces noticably better accuracy with 165/168 class bullets than it does with 150's, and given the burn rate of N150, I'd expect it will be about the same in that regard. I've never had bad luck with any VV powders, so I think that's probably good to go, but Varget is the gold standard baseline for 308/168 SMKs.
Anyway - I recommend you try your N150 and 168 SMK's and see what you get. I bet you get some very good accuracy, and then you will have your baseline for how well (or not) other loads shoot in that gun.
The "Easy Load Development" thread is pretty spot on in concept - any given bullet + powder + primer + brass + your loading technique, is probably gonna shoot about how it shoots in your gun. Different combo's can shoot WILDLY different in any given gun also.
Also, I'll re-echo what others are saying - 5 round groups can only tell you if any given load is bad; it's not enough to tell you if it's really good. If you shoot a 5 round group (or even a 3 round group) and think "wow, that sucks", there's basically a 0% chance that group is going to turn around and make you happy if you keep sending rounds. If you shoot a 5 round group that looks nice, all that proves is that those 5 rounds landed close together; you'd need to see a minimum of another 10 before you should get too excited, and another 25 before you start feeling confident about what your+your gun+your loads is capable of. Don't get disapointed if it turns 1.5-2 MOA is all you get - that's all 99% of the hunting-gun class guns is capable of when the round count on group size goes up.
Seating depth is chasing your tail - I have seen guns shoot somewhat better and somewhat worse with seating depth, but you won't turn 3MOA into 1MOA with seating depth, but you might turn 2MOA into 1.75MOA or somesuch.
Powder selection matters a LOT more than I think many people give it credit for. For 150's in a 308 Win, you're probably going to find that powders a bit faster than N150 produce the best groups. Things like H4985, N140, maybe even as fast as H322 or AR-Comp or N13x. My 'money' load back when I ran 150's in a 308 was h4985, and I had experimented briefl with AR-Comp with even better results, but then AR-Comp got hard to come by and I've since moved to 165/168's in all my 308s.
Here's a good example of how much powder selection can matter:
This is 10 rounds of 7x57 Mauser, 162 ELD-X, @ 3.210 OAL, H4350 loaded at 2664 FPS. Not awful, but not impressive either; I'm confident a 30 round group of this would come in arond 2-2.25 MOA.
And this, is also 10 round sof 7x57 Mauser, 162 ELD-X, @ 3.210 OAL, N555, loaded to 2667 FPS, out of the same gun, shot I think 2 days apart. I've drilled 30 rounds of this load into a 1.1 MOA group before. The one and only variable here, is I switched from N555 to H4350.
Anyway, hope all this helps.
HandgunHTR
WKR
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2022
- Messages
- 2,063
I have personally had three instances. All of them were early in my reloading career.
The first two were with a Remington Model 7 chambered in .260 Rem. Both were with Barnes bullets. I started with them at 0.020" off the lands and could not get any of them to group. I have a background in statistics, so I completely understand the principal of statistical significance. The group sizes for twenty round samples was over 3", regardless of powder or charge. Once I figured out that they needed to jump at least 0.050" my group sized shrunk significantly and I finally settled on a load that over the 300+ rounds fired on paper gave me an average group size of 1.193" for the X bullet load and 0.987" for the XLC load.
The other instance that I had was the other way. I was using 140 grain Nosler BTs in a Browning 7-08. When I loaded them to the same COAL as the factory loads that shot pretty consistently (1.5MOA) I got very erratic results. My notes show that the average group size for five 5-shots groups were 2.875". I chased it for a while and then a friend suggested I load them out to mag length to gains some case capacity and try a bulkier, slower burning powder. I tried that and while I didn't achieve what I was looking for (better than factory accuracy), I did see a marked improvement. When I left the seating depth alone and went back to my original powder, I found that accuracy was much better. Over the course of the next 10 years of shooting that rifle, my overall average group size (5-shot groups) was 1.112" (over 100 samples).
One thing I will say about today's bullets over the bullets of 20+ years ago is that they seem to have a much larger tolerance band when it comes to jump, but to say that seating depth is totally irrelevant, especially considering what it can affect regarding pressures, is a bit of a misconception.
Mike D Texas
WKR
Get rid of the crutch of using a lead sled. They are horrible for many reasons.
Learn to shoot the rifle without it. That’s probably not the biggest contributing factor but it isn’t helping you or the rifle.
Also, for those bullets specifically, .005 is too close, I personally start all new loss at .020” from the lands.
Berger has a pretty good article on load tuning. Don’t get hung up on micro adjustments on seating depths.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Learn to shoot the rifle without it. That’s probably not the biggest contributing factor but it isn’t helping you or the rifle.
Also, for those bullets specifically, .005 is too close, I personally start all new loss at .020” from the lands.
Berger has a pretty good article on load tuning. Don’t get hung up on micro adjustments on seating depths.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
All I've ever shot is a 308. I own a deer rifle and a target rifle. I've had both rebarreled so you could argue four rifles. Factory to custom chamber is a big difference.
The two easiest bullets I've ever tuned are Sierra 2125 / 2145 and hands down the 168 smk.
Not tipped. Not fancy. The old fudge bullets.
I've been able to set those bullets 0.010 off the lands and run 44 to 46 grains of varget, RL15 or H4895 (slightly lighter charge) and get good groups. I have never used VV powders. 4064 works pretty good too, but I have not personally found it to be the best out of the ones I've tried.
I found sensitivity to seating depth in factory barrels. Precision custom barrels don't care much.
If I were loading FMJ (but see no reason to)
I would use book length. You already have data for close up bullets. And I've also found 150 and 165 Nosler ballistic tips to be laser beams. But they're more expensive and you're shooting FMJ so I was thinking that's a mismatch
That's what I think.
I don't know what you're shooting and what the scope is, but doing a parallax test is pretty easy. If your scope has sloppy parallax you're going to have huge error as you get used to the gun and your cheek weld moves around and your eye point moves around a little bit as a new shooter.
Each scope manufacturer may use a different standard range for setting 0 parallax. Some 50 yards, some at 150. But some scopes have enough to throw you off a couple of inches at 100 yards as your eye point moves around.
The two easiest bullets I've ever tuned are Sierra 2125 / 2145 and hands down the 168 smk.
Not tipped. Not fancy. The old fudge bullets.
I've been able to set those bullets 0.010 off the lands and run 44 to 46 grains of varget, RL15 or H4895 (slightly lighter charge) and get good groups. I have never used VV powders. 4064 works pretty good too, but I have not personally found it to be the best out of the ones I've tried.
I found sensitivity to seating depth in factory barrels. Precision custom barrels don't care much.
If I were loading FMJ (but see no reason to)
I would use book length. You already have data for close up bullets. And I've also found 150 and 165 Nosler ballistic tips to be laser beams. But they're more expensive and you're shooting FMJ so I was thinking that's a mismatch
That's what I think.
I don't know what you're shooting and what the scope is, but doing a parallax test is pretty easy. If your scope has sloppy parallax you're going to have huge error as you get used to the gun and your cheek weld moves around and your eye point moves around a little bit as a new shooter.
Each scope manufacturer may use a different standard range for setting 0 parallax. Some 50 yards, some at 150. But some scopes have enough to throw you off a couple of inches at 100 yards as your eye point moves around.
goldylocks333
FNG
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2026
- Messages
- 39
Thank you to everyone for your replies! Sorry it has taken me a while to get back to this! I should clarify a few things.
- I know better bullets will shoot better. My intent in this load development is not to get 0.5 MOA and make tac drivers (although that would be nice). I know that is not possible due to this bullet alone. My intent with this bullet is simply to gain experience, and learn about the process and intricacies of reloading. That said, my goal is to get this rifle to shoot this bullet as best as possible. I'm viewing it as an opportunity to learn and get more trigger time. In layman's terms, I'm having fun with this goal.
- Tracking on the lead sled. I've actually never shot from one before this, for all the reasons mentioned. You're not really "training how you fight" while using one. My intent was to "take the monkey more out of the equation" while analyzing performance of each load. But I see the other draw backs now too.
Anyways, I made some new loads to test out based on your comments and recommendations. Here's the data from shooting them. Biggest change is new powders, and depth.
Bullet (no change):
Hornady 308 150gr FMJ-BT #3037
BC: .398 (G1)
SD: .226
Brass: Winchester, once fired.
Primer: Magtech.
Powder: N150, N140, and IMR 4895.
Barrel: 20" 1/10 twist.
Distance: 100yrds
N150 48gr (Viht max), 0.030 off lands
1. 2822 fps
2. 2901 fps
3. 2871 fps
4. 2875 fps
5. 2857 fps
AVG. 2855 fps
ES 79 fps
2.8 MOA
N150 48gr (Viht max), 2.700 OAL (Hornady book OAL)
1. 2913 fps
2. 2915 fps
3. 2824 fps
4. 2856 fps
5. 2890 fps
AVG 2879 fps
ES 91 fps
3.2 MOA
N140 45.8gr (Hornady max), 0.030 off lands
1. 2810 fps
2. 2796 fps
3. 2779 fps
4. 2695 fps
5. 2809 fps
AVG 2779 fps
ES: 115 FPS
1.8 MOA
IMR 4895 45.4gr (Hornady max), 0.030 off lands
1. 2812 fps
2. 2812 fps
3. 2781 fps
4. 2806 fps
5. 2814 fps
AVG. 2805 fps
ES. 33 fps
3.5 MOA
So the N140 tightened the groups the most. It also seemed like backing farther off the lands was a good decision.
From here, I think my plan is to test a ladder of the N140. Then take that best group and test seating depth from 0.020 - 0.060.
Any other recommendations? I sincerely appreciate all the help so far.
- I know better bullets will shoot better. My intent in this load development is not to get 0.5 MOA and make tac drivers (although that would be nice). I know that is not possible due to this bullet alone. My intent with this bullet is simply to gain experience, and learn about the process and intricacies of reloading. That said, my goal is to get this rifle to shoot this bullet as best as possible. I'm viewing it as an opportunity to learn and get more trigger time. In layman's terms, I'm having fun with this goal.
- Tracking on the lead sled. I've actually never shot from one before this, for all the reasons mentioned. You're not really "training how you fight" while using one. My intent was to "take the monkey more out of the equation" while analyzing performance of each load. But I see the other draw backs now too.
Anyways, I made some new loads to test out based on your comments and recommendations. Here's the data from shooting them. Biggest change is new powders, and depth.
Bullet (no change):
Hornady 308 150gr FMJ-BT #3037
BC: .398 (G1)
SD: .226
Brass: Winchester, once fired.
Primer: Magtech.
Powder: N150, N140, and IMR 4895.
Barrel: 20" 1/10 twist.
Distance: 100yrds
N150 48gr (Viht max), 0.030 off lands
1. 2822 fps
2. 2901 fps
3. 2871 fps
4. 2875 fps
5. 2857 fps
AVG. 2855 fps
ES 79 fps
2.8 MOA
N150 48gr (Viht max), 2.700 OAL (Hornady book OAL)
1. 2913 fps
2. 2915 fps
3. 2824 fps
4. 2856 fps
5. 2890 fps
AVG 2879 fps
ES 91 fps
3.2 MOA
N140 45.8gr (Hornady max), 0.030 off lands
1. 2810 fps
2. 2796 fps
3. 2779 fps
4. 2695 fps
5. 2809 fps
AVG 2779 fps
ES: 115 FPS
1.8 MOA
IMR 4895 45.4gr (Hornady max), 0.030 off lands
1. 2812 fps
2. 2812 fps
3. 2781 fps
4. 2806 fps
5. 2814 fps
AVG. 2805 fps
ES. 33 fps
3.5 MOA
So the N140 tightened the groups the most. It also seemed like backing farther off the lands was a good decision.
From here, I think my plan is to test a ladder of the N140. Then take that best group and test seating depth from 0.020 - 0.060.
Any other recommendations? I sincerely appreciate all the help so far.
HandgunHTR
WKR
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2022
- Messages
- 2,063
While N140 gave you the best group, it also had the largest ES, which leads me to believe that the group that you got was more luck than anything else.
Based on the data that you showed, I would load a ladder with the H4895. My gut tells me that you will find a load somewhere in the middle-top of the powder charge recommendations (somewhere in the 44 grain range).
Based on the data that you showed, I would load a ladder with the H4895. My gut tells me that you will find a load somewhere in the middle-top of the powder charge recommendations (somewhere in the 44 grain range).
Try a new powder first, I’d pick varget. VV load data is often very conservative so cross reference VV powder with other sources like Sierra, Lee, Barnes, Hodgdon and Hornady are pretty good. I’ve found Hodgdon and Barnes to have higher max loads compared to other data. Look for common powders for the bullet weight you are interested in (doesn’t have to be the same exact bullet just similar weight and design ie bthp ~= eld ~= burger hybrid). I’d take a look at the 168 eld or a 160 class smk. If you want to stay with 150s sierra makes a Palma 155 with a nice bc. I’ve found sierras to shoot really well and be easy to load for.
Like others have said above, minor changes to neck tension or seating depth will have little impact for a “hunting” load. Not worth it until you have easy 5-10 shot moa groups.
As for your flyers, unless you called it as the trigger broke (you were off target) it probably wasn’t a flyer and just variance from the gun. I had a 7prc that was super difficult to load for. It didn’t like 195, 180, or 175 bullets. All grouped 2 touching and 1 an inch away. Dropped down to 162 eld and the “flyers” went away. Do some dry fire practice, if your reticle moves up/down when the trigger breaks you might be moving your head off the stock or something. Left/right your torquing the rifle, for this work on your body position/natural point of aim. Keep dry firing until the reticle stays still.
Like others have said above, minor changes to neck tension or seating depth will have little impact for a “hunting” load. Not worth it until you have easy 5-10 shot moa groups.
As for your flyers, unless you called it as the trigger broke (you were off target) it probably wasn’t a flyer and just variance from the gun. I had a 7prc that was super difficult to load for. It didn’t like 195, 180, or 175 bullets. All grouped 2 touching and 1 an inch away. Dropped down to 162 eld and the “flyers” went away. Do some dry fire practice, if your reticle moves up/down when the trigger breaks you might be moving your head off the stock or something. Left/right your torquing the rifle, for this work on your body position/natural point of aim. Keep dry firing until the reticle stays still.
goldylocks333
FNG
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2026
- Messages
- 39
Please pardon me if this is a silly question, I genuinely don't know better. I also noticed it had a tight spread, but I also had loads with tight ES and terrible groupings with the original set of N150 powders. Is there a difference here that makes you think a ladder of the IMR 4895 will tighten up at a lower charge?
goldylocks333
FNG
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2026
- Messages
- 39
I'm back with some more results from the range.
Bullet (no change):
Hornady 308 150gr FMJ-BT #3037
BC: .398 (G1)
SD: .226
Brass: PPU, once fired. (Previously Winchester once fired, but I ran out).
Primer: Magtech.
Powder: N140
Seating depth 0.030 off lands
Barrel: 20" 1/10 twist.
Distance: 100yrds
N140 44.5gr 0.030 off lands
ES: 22 FPS
MOA: 3.3
Std Dev: 7.82
N140 45gr 0.030 off lands
ES: 33 FPS
MOA: 4.6
Std Dev: 12.32
N140 45.5gr 0.030 off lands
ES: 52 FPS
MOA: 6.0 (2.0 without flyer, but I didn’t call the flyer and that shot felt good)
Std Dev: 21.61
N140 45.8gr 0.030 off lands (shot last week, but am including for comparison)
MOA 1.8
ES: 115 FPS (31 without shot #4)
Std Dev: 42.9 (12.5 without shot #4)
N140 46.5gr 0.030 off lands (I skipped the 46.0 load since 45.8 was so close.)
ES: 18 FPS
MOA: 2.2
Std Dev: 7.36
N140 47gr 0.030 off lands
ES: 42 FPS
MOA: 3.8
Std Dev: 21.2
Here is my analysis:
45.8 -46.5 is right where the velocity curve is flattening
Ignoring the outlier shot, 45.8:
Bullet (no change):
Hornady 308 150gr FMJ-BT #3037
BC: .398 (G1)
SD: .226
Brass: PPU, once fired. (Previously Winchester once fired, but I ran out).
Primer: Magtech.
Powder: N140
Seating depth 0.030 off lands
Barrel: 20" 1/10 twist.
Distance: 100yrds
N140 44.5gr 0.030 off lands
- 2681 FPS
- 2693 FPS
- 2671 FPS
- 2681 FPS
- 2680 FPS
ES: 22 FPS
MOA: 3.3
Std Dev: 7.82
N140 45gr 0.030 off lands
- 2711 FPS
- 2718 FPS
- 2736 FPS
- 2703 FPS
- 2713 FPS
ES: 33 FPS
MOA: 4.6
Std Dev: 12.32
N140 45.5gr 0.030 off lands
- 2703 FPS
- 2749 FPS
- 2755 FPS
- 2749 FPS
- 2727 FPS
ES: 52 FPS
MOA: 6.0 (2.0 without flyer, but I didn’t call the flyer and that shot felt good)
Std Dev: 21.61
N140 45.8gr 0.030 off lands (shot last week, but am including for comparison)
- 2810 FPS
- 2796 FPS
- 2779 FPS
- 2695 FPS (odd outlier)
- 2809 FPS
MOA 1.8
ES: 115 FPS (31 without shot #4)
Std Dev: 42.9 (12.5 without shot #4)
N140 46.5gr 0.030 off lands (I skipped the 46.0 load since 45.8 was so close.)
- 2792 FPS
- 2803 FPS
- 2787 FPS
- 2785 FPS
- 2797 FPS
ES: 18 FPS
MOA: 2.2
Std Dev: 7.36
N140 47gr 0.030 off lands
- Chrono Error
- Chrono Error
- 2793 FPS
- 2819 FPS
- 2777 FPS
ES: 42 FPS
MOA: 3.8
Std Dev: 21.2
Here is my analysis:
45.8 -46.5 is right where the velocity curve is flattening
Ignoring the outlier shot, 45.8:
- Avg ~2798
- ES 31
- SD 12.5
- 1.8 MOA
- Avg 2793
- ES 18
- SD 7.4
- 2.2 MOA
Attachments
NorthIdahoDude
WKR
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2022
- Messages
- 442
No bullet/powder combo that shoots like that deserves any further testing, IMHO. N140 probably wants a heavier bullet, and that bullet probably wants a faster powder.
It's not the changes in powder charge that are causing the accuracy variation you are seeing, it's just that combo is not very accurate at all. And you are seeing statistical variations.
Similar threads
Featured Video
Latest Articles
- Mule Deer Days Wildlife Conservation Mashup
- A Hidden Gem: Hunting Washington with Kari Thomas
- Prime Divide Bow Review
- Knowledge From Storms: Surviving and Thriving in the Backcountry with John Barklow
- DIY Wyoming Pronghorn Hunt
- Unlock Precision Shooting: Master Your Hunting Game with Competitive Insights
- Topo Topper Rincon Review
- Tony Trietch on Big Mule Deer, Desert Bulls & Western Hunting Evolution
- The Right to Hunt & Fish Colorado (and North America)
- Mastering New Zealand’s Mountain Hunts: Challenges and Rewards