Good point, I didn’t consider that.

I've been following Hodgdons recommendations, but I'm wondering if I should test out Sierra's as well.

For the rounds I shot today, I loaded them to Varget specs:
Varget - 42.0 -> 45.0

I didn't follow any from Sierra:
36.3 -> 41.7

Has anybody tested lighter loads like these from Sierra?

Okay I tested up the next batch. This time Federal GMM brass, CCI BR2 Primers, Varget Powder, 175gr Sierra Tipped Matchking bullets. Bullets are all 10/1000 off the lands. The only thing I'm changing is the bullet, and the amount of powder. Shot at 200 yards, chrono'd with the Labradar. (Note that I moved from .5gr changes to .3gr changes for the 2nd 10.)

I'm having fun, but not sure what I'm learning. Learning that additional powder increases velocity pretty consistently, but doesn't have much of an impact on how high the rounds hit on the target. I had expected them to march themselves up the target with the increase in velocity.

The rifle is pretty consistently .5 MOA. I wonder if this work can get it down to .25MOA.

I love the spreadsheet!

“I’m having fun, but not sure what I’m learning.” Yeah ... I know the feeling.

Your 42.0 charge had 0.05 MOA. That’s world-record material right there ... but if you made up 50 rounds of that charge and went back out, would you get similar numbers? Probably not. But worth a try!

It’s frustrating.

That is pretty cool! Are you using and target analysis software to get your offset data from? I have use Ontarget in the past to do that sort of thing. Any chance you could share your spreadsheet?

Congrats on finding a sweet shooting load!! I am curious do you shoot round #1 of each load, then go back thru and shoot #2?, etc, etc? or do you shoot all of one load then move to the next load?

Interesting that you were not seeing much offset with powder increases. In my limited experience I have normally seen some vertical offset with increased velocity. Last time out though I saw big offset as I got higher in pressure range with my 308. It was pretty surprising as it moved well over 3" up and right at one point.

Yeah the "see if you can do it again" is pretty strong. The group does look amazing though. I did a 1-hole group at 300 yards. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.


Yes I use Ontarget. Set the aimpoint for each group, then mark all 3 holes.

Spreadsheet is attached.

I shoot all 3 rounds from each load, then move onto the next load. I took a break between 10 and 11.

Thanks!
Yeah I have seen some people that will do one shot of each load then back around and do next of each load, then 3rd., etc.. I think the idea was to even out the heat in barrel across all the shots and take temp changes out of the equation as well as good group/bad group out of the shooter per-se. might be tired late in string making a good load actually look bad due to fatigue, etc.. I might just incorporate your spreadsheet into my logging. I use Google sheets to keep all my log's from reloads.

If you like excel files, check out the one attached to this. I use it to print my data

Nice. I use 50rnd boxes for my loads and always load groups of 5. picture of my range notebook page and the box labels attached.

Next batch! This time Federal GMM brass, CCI BR2 Primers, Varget Powder, 168gr Sierra Tipped Matchking bullets. Bullets are all 10/1000 off the lands. The only thing I'm changing is the bullet, and the amount of powder. Shot at 200 yards, chrono'd with the Labradar.

It started getting windier later in the shoot. Not sure if it was just that, or the higher speeds that the bullets don't like. But the group size gradually increased.

Snozz, I gotta say . . . even though you're cheating by shooting 3-shot groups , you're doing some damned good shooting.

Oh it's totally cheating.

I had a long discussion with a buddy about how useful the MOA group size definition is. We ended up reading an article like this: https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/under ... precision/

I'm not really that concerned about the MOA group sizes in these tests. Trying to learn more about the velocity, and where they print on the target in relation to the aim point. Trying to find flat spots in the powder charges, and grouping in the vertical offset. In this case, I think charges in the 5,6 group would be best to explore.