- Joined
- Dec 4, 2009
- Messages
- 7,529
- Reaction score
- 8,177
Consistency, is there an extreme limit?
I guess I have too much time on my hands, which gets me to thinking about stuff that may or may not significantly matter.
This subject likely isn’t for muzzleloader hunters or even those who just like shooting. This is directed to those who are looking for the extremes in accuracy, especially long range.
The sizing of bullets and the end results brings up questions. I suggest most serious shooters believe that there is a “sweet spot” with each individual rifle as far as bullet loading force. Even for different weight and style bullets. I see where some shooters may state that “two fingers” works best for them. Others may say they need to load at around 20#. If that’s the case, then it should be true that each individual rifle has its own bullet “sweet spot” loading force.
Force can be subjective to each individual. What one person feels may be 20# could feel like 10# to another. In most cases, both are wrong. Force can actually be accurately measured with the proper equipment. There is in general just one way to measure force, in this case bullet loading force, and all other methods are inaccurate.
I would imagine I have a few already questioning my ability to make the above statement. For the record, I’m a retired Ergonomist and have accurately measured 10’s of thousands of forces over my working career. I’ve used extremely specialized equipment and gauges, including accelerometers. Bullet loading force can accurately be measured with proper tooling such as a force gauge. Force is measured when the object moves continuously steady at the slowest speed possible. Any acceleration will provide inaccurate readings in higher numbers. There are exceptions to that rule, but it’s unnecessary for this application. I own and use a force gauge for verifying all loading forces.
There is no question that some shooters using their consistent methods of sizing shoot very well and accurate. However, can their accuracy be even better? So if shooter “X” sizes their bullets to load at exactly 20#, how much difference in extreme accuracy might there be if the loading force fluctuated 5# both ways? If one bullet loads at 15# whereas the next bullet loads at 25#, how much could this affect extreme accuracy, especially at distance? Would there be a significant change in velocity, SD or ES?
I understand that there are some shooters that run their bullets through a sizing die just once, whereas others may run each bullet through the sizer 3 times. Could one process be more beneficial than the other? I guess both can be right if the results are acceptable to the shooter but, could one process actually be better for the extreme?
I have identified while sizing bullets, that only sizing them a single time varies the ACCURATE loading forces significantly, up to +/- 5#. I have also identified that if a bullet is sized 3 times, that the spread is lower and vary +/- 3#. A conclusion could be that sizing a bullet more than once provides a more consistent loading force. If that’s true, then how much could a consistent loading force contribute to extreme accuracy at distance?
I must note that to date my specific rifle shoots extremely accurate with a bullet loading force, in a clean barrel of 9#.
I sized up a couple boxes of bullets and one box I sized each bullet 3 times. I wanted a finished loading force of 20#. I noticed that they would vary +/-3# or so. I measured quite a few and was extremely careful not to accelerate loading and yet the force to load still varied. It brought up the question in my mind; can the spread be closed even tighter?
With the second box of bullets, I wanted a finished loading force of 15#. Thinking more about the difference between a single pass and three passes through the sizing die, I decided to run these bullets through the sizer 5 times each. It took a couple bullets to get the die set for a 15# loading force with 5 passes but it settled right in. I very carefully measured the loading forces of at least ½ that box of bullets, and again being careful not to accelerate loading. I actually found that after sizing each bullet 5 times, that there was the least amount of variance between bullet loading forces. The accuracy of each bullet loading force was so close to identical, that any differences in measurements were a direct reflection on me.
My conclusion is, sizing a bullet a single time has the highest amount of loading force variances, whereas sizing bullets more than a single time lessons the variance. From my testing it identifies that sizing a bullet 5 times makes loading forces of each bullet as identical as possible. However, how extreme does one want to go? Is the difference significant enough to change your process?
I guess I have too much time on my hands, which gets me to thinking about stuff that may or may not significantly matter.
This subject likely isn’t for muzzleloader hunters or even those who just like shooting. This is directed to those who are looking for the extremes in accuracy, especially long range.
The sizing of bullets and the end results brings up questions. I suggest most serious shooters believe that there is a “sweet spot” with each individual rifle as far as bullet loading force. Even for different weight and style bullets. I see where some shooters may state that “two fingers” works best for them. Others may say they need to load at around 20#. If that’s the case, then it should be true that each individual rifle has its own bullet “sweet spot” loading force.
Force can be subjective to each individual. What one person feels may be 20# could feel like 10# to another. In most cases, both are wrong. Force can actually be accurately measured with the proper equipment. There is in general just one way to measure force, in this case bullet loading force, and all other methods are inaccurate.
I would imagine I have a few already questioning my ability to make the above statement. For the record, I’m a retired Ergonomist and have accurately measured 10’s of thousands of forces over my working career. I’ve used extremely specialized equipment and gauges, including accelerometers. Bullet loading force can accurately be measured with proper tooling such as a force gauge. Force is measured when the object moves continuously steady at the slowest speed possible. Any acceleration will provide inaccurate readings in higher numbers. There are exceptions to that rule, but it’s unnecessary for this application. I own and use a force gauge for verifying all loading forces.
There is no question that some shooters using their consistent methods of sizing shoot very well and accurate. However, can their accuracy be even better? So if shooter “X” sizes their bullets to load at exactly 20#, how much difference in extreme accuracy might there be if the loading force fluctuated 5# both ways? If one bullet loads at 15# whereas the next bullet loads at 25#, how much could this affect extreme accuracy, especially at distance? Would there be a significant change in velocity, SD or ES?
I understand that there are some shooters that run their bullets through a sizing die just once, whereas others may run each bullet through the sizer 3 times. Could one process be more beneficial than the other? I guess both can be right if the results are acceptable to the shooter but, could one process actually be better for the extreme?
I have identified while sizing bullets, that only sizing them a single time varies the ACCURATE loading forces significantly, up to +/- 5#. I have also identified that if a bullet is sized 3 times, that the spread is lower and vary +/- 3#. A conclusion could be that sizing a bullet more than once provides a more consistent loading force. If that’s true, then how much could a consistent loading force contribute to extreme accuracy at distance?
I must note that to date my specific rifle shoots extremely accurate with a bullet loading force, in a clean barrel of 9#.
I sized up a couple boxes of bullets and one box I sized each bullet 3 times. I wanted a finished loading force of 20#. I noticed that they would vary +/-3# or so. I measured quite a few and was extremely careful not to accelerate loading and yet the force to load still varied. It brought up the question in my mind; can the spread be closed even tighter?
With the second box of bullets, I wanted a finished loading force of 15#. Thinking more about the difference between a single pass and three passes through the sizing die, I decided to run these bullets through the sizer 5 times each. It took a couple bullets to get the die set for a 15# loading force with 5 passes but it settled right in. I very carefully measured the loading forces of at least ½ that box of bullets, and again being careful not to accelerate loading. I actually found that after sizing each bullet 5 times, that there was the least amount of variance between bullet loading forces. The accuracy of each bullet loading force was so close to identical, that any differences in measurements were a direct reflection on me.
My conclusion is, sizing a bullet a single time has the highest amount of loading force variances, whereas sizing bullets more than a single time lessons the variance. From my testing it identifies that sizing a bullet 5 times makes loading forces of each bullet as identical as possible. However, how extreme does one want to go? Is the difference significant enough to change your process?
