Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Ammo & Reloading
.300 PRC Satterlee Test Results
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="diggler1833" data-source="post: 3976294" data-attributes="member: 48072"><p>My .02, which is worth .00... which is what you paid for it (other than wasting your time reading this).</p><p></p><p>I'm not a fan of the "Saterlee method" a couple of reasons (please don't get defensive just yet).</p><p></p><p>1) Seating depth plays an effect on velocity too. That includes ES and SD, not just average. Find your Saterlee node, and end up having to adjust seating depth .030 from your test...and I bet you're a solid .1 - .2gr off in charge weight to get back to that velocity. That means you're screwing with charge weights again AND who knows if your new COL is as flat in the same spot...unless you run another test.</p><p></p><p>2) Unless you can guarantee a <5 FPS SD and maybe 10 FPS ES when you shoot for groups, a sample size of (1) is a great way to get misleading results. Chances are if you're messing with a new rig, there's zero possibility you can guarantee an ES low enough to remotely validate a 10 individual shots at 10 different charge weights. </p><p></p><p>Don't get me wrong, it will give you some sort of number to go off of quickly...but it isn't high on repeatability. This is why you may see guys who favor a PRS discipline use this method, while the long range benchrest and F-class dudes avoid it.</p><p></p><p>3) I know you take a bit more care in throwing charge weights, but for the 98% of guys using the ~$500 electronic powder dispensers and scales, or just the scales in general...those frequently have an error of about .1gr every couple of throws or measures. That isn't squat for most hunting setups...but for the guy who's trying to shoot a single shot in .2gr intervals it certainly invites the possibility of one charge being .1 high, and two charges later being .1 low...thereby creating a false data point where velocity looks flatter. </p><p></p><p>*****</p><p></p><p>I will play a bit with velocity ladders if I have to switch lots of the same powder in a particular rifle, but I'll usually shoot at least 3 - if not 5 - confirmation shots to reduce error.</p><p></p><p>I'm still not a fan of 3 shot data inputs. I learned my lesson 15+ years ago when I shot a 3-shot group of .289" (I still remember the size) during load development for my 5R. I was so excited that I raced home and loaded 100 rounds of that recipe...only to discover on subsequent range visits that the load was a consistent 1 MOA load, not down near 1/4 minute. Lesson learned for life there. </p><p></p><p>*****</p><p></p><p>Now, a "Saterlee" style I'm more comfortable with is 10 shots at a waterline at distance. If you can get 3-4 of those to consecutively group close together (vertically), you might be a bit closer to that ever-elusive "node". </p><p></p><p>*****</p><p></p><p>Everyone has their own preference. As long as you end up where you want to be, I would argue that there is no harm in going whatever route.</p><p></p><p>I just hate surprises that cost me components. I remember the crappy shooting sessions a lot more vividly than I do the good ones.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="diggler1833, post: 3976294, member: 48072"] My .02, which is worth .00... which is what you paid for it (other than wasting your time reading this). I'm not a fan of the "Saterlee method" a couple of reasons (please don't get defensive just yet). 1) Seating depth plays an effect on velocity too. That includes ES and SD, not just average. Find your Saterlee node, and end up having to adjust seating depth .030 from your test...and I bet you're a solid .1 - .2gr off in charge weight to get back to that velocity. That means you're screwing with charge weights again AND who knows if your new COL is as flat in the same spot...unless you run another test. 2) Unless you can guarantee a <5 FPS SD and maybe 10 FPS ES when you shoot for groups, a sample size of (1) is a great way to get misleading results. Chances are if you're messing with a new rig, there's zero possibility you can guarantee an ES low enough to remotely validate a 10 individual shots at 10 different charge weights. Don't get me wrong, it will give you some sort of number to go off of quickly...but it isn't high on repeatability. This is why you may see guys who favor a PRS discipline use this method, while the long range benchrest and F-class dudes avoid it. 3) I know you take a bit more care in throwing charge weights, but for the 98% of guys using the ~$500 electronic powder dispensers and scales, or just the scales in general...those frequently have an error of about .1gr every couple of throws or measures. That isn't squat for most hunting setups...but for the guy who's trying to shoot a single shot in .2gr intervals it certainly invites the possibility of one charge being .1 high, and two charges later being .1 low...thereby creating a false data point where velocity looks flatter. ***** I will play a bit with velocity ladders if I have to switch lots of the same powder in a particular rifle, but I'll usually shoot at least 3 - if not 5 - confirmation shots to reduce error. I'm still not a fan of 3 shot data inputs. I learned my lesson 15+ years ago when I shot a 3-shot group of .289" (I still remember the size) during load development for my 5R. I was so excited that I raced home and loaded 100 rounds of that recipe...only to discover on subsequent range visits that the load was a consistent 1 MOA load, not down near 1/4 minute. Lesson learned for life there. ***** Now, a "Saterlee" style I'm more comfortable with is 10 shots at a waterline at distance. If you can get 3-4 of those to consecutively group close together (vertically), you might be a bit closer to that ever-elusive "node". ***** Everyone has their own preference. As long as you end up where you want to be, I would argue that there is no harm in going whatever route. I just hate surprises that cost me components. I remember the crappy shooting sessions a lot more vividly than I do the good ones. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Ammo & Reloading
.300 PRC Satterlee Test Results
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom