TPM - Intro to Precision Rifle Reloading - Fine Tuning Your Optimal Charge Weight Load 

Thank you very much. I have a follow-up reloading video in the works with some new tips and tricks.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you!

Any time!

Sounds like you are doing it right. Just work your way up slowly, pay attention to any pressure signs, and don't worry about your velocity. I've never chased velocity. It's a good way to prematurely kill your nice brass and it really doesn't make a huge difference down range. I know folks who get bent out of shape about being 50 FPS slower than they think they should be, chase the higher velocity accuracy node and end up with 2-3 firings out of nice expensive brass, lack of pressure tolerance, and worse accuracy. Keep doing what your doing and trust the results. You're on the right path and please reach out with any questions. My email is on the triggeredprecision.com website. Cheers! -TPM

This whole process is really interesting. Some bullets will show even more change with various seating depths like the VLD bullets. On the other hand, bullets like the 168 Gr. Sierra Match King (.308 cal) and the 77 Gr. Sierra Match King are very tolerant of jump distance. I've shot the 77 SMK's at jump distances as far as .180" and still had great accuracy. Interesting stuff.

@@triggeredprecisionmachinellc Well, thats a whole other curve ball. I use SMK in my rifle, I comonly run about .010 short. I was always told that was a good jump. Its really interesting to see the difference on paper

That's interesting. Those SMK's are about the most forgiving bullet out there. I love loading the 168 and 175 SMK's for 308 Win.

Give it a go, let me know how it works out.

Thank you, sir!

I'm in the same boat. I used to load everything at the lands... VLD's and tangent ogive bullets. No more. I just came up with a load I developed with absolutely no thought to where the bullet was seated and it shoots 1/4 MOA. I've learned a ton about rifle chambers in the last decade and have seen a direct relation between easily tuned cartridges and a few key chamber dimensions. Tight throats seem to help alot!

@@triggeredprecisionmachinellc I've loaded to Sami oal lengths and have gotten several loads to shoot. 2" to .3" at 200 yards with them after ladder testing. Never had to play with seating depths for fine tuning yet but I'm sure I will soon.

I've never gone that fine of change for seating depth. I have some load development coming up so I'll experiment around with it!

@@triggeredprecisionmachinellc Winning In The Wind Has a great video on how he does it with big jumps since he's looking for nodes in seating depth

I've played with closer intervals as well and you are right. What I've seen is it is often determined by the bullet. The VLD / Hybrid (Secant / Hybrid Ogive) bullets benefit from the closer intervals more than some of the other tangent ogive bullets like the Sierra Match King. Depending on how the initial seating depth goes, I might find one node that is better than the rest on the "rough test" and do another seating depth test above and below that depth in smaller increments like .0025" or .005" That is a great point! Thank you for bringing that up.

Oh Gosh.. finding Federal Match grade primers for just one person is a challenge.. you have your work cut out for you looking for 2..!

Those are two great calibers to start out loading for. Both have a great range of bullets available to suit different needs and are generally easy to load for with good results.

@Foonus Man, FGMM LR and LR Magnum primers are virtually non-existent. Thats all I load with and I haven't been lucky enough to find any in probably a year. I'm not sure what is going on.

@@triggeredprecisionmachinellc I was lucky and found a good bit of primers a while back.

I'm looking for Hodgdon Retumbo and FGMM Mag LR primers in case anyone sees them pop up somewhere, shoot me an email.

Very cool! I've been playing with an EC tuner on my NRL 22 match rifle and so far I must say, I am very impressed. I'll take a look at the Wolf Precision stuff, I've honestly never heard of that brand. Thanks!

@@triggeredprecisionmachinellc The manufacturer says it´s a solution for chambers cut crooked. I think most of us know how to indicate a barrel based on many videos on RU-vid. Really it´s a vibration container. Taqom HQ makes a structured barrel and they essentially achieve the same thing. A harmonically dead barrel. In a drastically different way. They too have the different loads hitting the X-ring without sight adjustments. Their solution is much bulkier and more expensive I believe. I think Taqom HQ users know more about what it´s like to shoot a harmonically dead barrel. My theory is the charge will matter less. So you should be able to load to close to max pressure with decent accuracy. However you will likely still have to tinker with the seating depth.

Man, very interesting. Consider me intrigued. I just spent an hour reading about those structured barrels. Amazing stuff. Thanks for bringing this up, I'm going to look into this some more. -TPM

@@triggeredprecisionmachinellc Great that you found this helpful. -Kaj

@kajhelin6822 I dug into those barrels more and wow, I am amazed. As soon as I have the funds, I am buying one. Thanks again. -Shawn

EXACTLY! That is the beauty of it this test, but its also the beauty of having a well built, accurate rifle. At that point, any of that accuracy is acceptable for hunting, PRS, or recreational long range shooting. You're just finding the best of the best. That makes the task a little simpler in the end.

Hmm.. Factory rifle or custom? Which caliber? I'll answer this in two parts since this questions brings up several great points... 1. What I and many others have found in regards to jump distance, is there are generally two lengths the bullet will shoot best at. The first is fairly near the lands, and the second distance is a country mile off. 2. After you decide on which bullet you want to shoot, it's important to measure that COAL like you did and record that measurement which gives us a baseline. From there, I usually load up a dummy at max overall length before hitting the lands, and make sure it fits in my magazine, since all of my rifles run on AICS mags. If its doesn't fit, I'll seat the bullet in the dummy round down until I have about .030" - .050" of clearance from the tip of the bullet to the front of the mag. This allows for some adjustment in the future and deviation in the bullet tips.. I'll record that length using the base to ogive method, and start my OCW there. Because you are going to be seating the bullet another .160" into the case, that is a significant amount and could potentially bump your pressure way up to an unsafe condition. If it were me, I'd find that sweet spot to fit the mag length and do another OCW. When you are done with that, run a seating depth test with increased and decreased seating depths to fine tune your accuracy. I wouldn't worry about the jump at all, most times you can still get a great load with a big jump like that. Keep me posted and let me know if there is anything else I can help with. Thanks! -Shawn

@@triggeredprecisionmachinellc Thanks so much for taking the time to consider my question and deliver a well thought-out response. It means a lot to me and I really appreciate it. I'll do exactly as you recommended and let you know how it goes. I'm excited for your upcoming series of reloading videos and will be staying tuned. Thanks again!

Your'e welcome, thank you!

Thank you, it's a private range north of Boise.

You can swap the shell holders out for that little precision ground disk for seating operations. I can't say I've honestly noticed any substantial increase in accuracy by using it, but like you said, it definitely makes sense because those shell holders are definitely not precision tools. Even if I know a bullet likes to be seated at the lands, I do the load development with the bullet seated .020" off. That does seem to be a more neutral way to conduct the OCW test and save you from dealing with unnecessary pressure issues. Then the seating depth test will dial things in.

For hunting rifles, generally no. For match rifles, I might run a follow-up seating depth test in a finer graduation around the seating depth that gave me the best accuracy. You can accomplish a couple things with this.... first you may very well fine a more accurate seating depth which is always nice. Second, depending on how coarse or fine your graduations are and how far of a jump you go, you can see how the load will react to throat erosion and an increasing jump distance. Its nice to see a load that will give you the same accuracy within a range of seating depths so during a big match or training event, you can be confident you will retain accuracy. On some of the big multi day matched, I've seen this happen to friends. Fortunately PRS doesn't require a sub .25" rifle so even if your groups open up a little, you should still be good as long as you can make wind calls.

I have. A variation of that is what I use when I re-barrel a rifle with the same chamber, profile, and length. I can usually use that to re-dial my load for the new barrel very quickly. I understand the premise behind it and agree with the attempt to reduce the time and rounds expended in load development, but you will never get any statistically significant load data using that method. Also…. Some calibers are just plain. Easy to load for. 6mm BR, 6mm Dasher, 308 win, 6 & 6.5 Creedmoor. With a solid foundation in precision rifle cartridge reloading and a well made rifle, it’s almost difficult to find a bad load as kind as you stay within known parameters. My last 6CM load development showed sub .75 MOA 3-shot groups across the board for almost a 6% spread in powder charges. The best groups were in the .300” range. There are several methods out there and all have their advantages and disadvantages. Mess with them all and see what works best. Some cartridges are easier than others to dial in depending on your requirements.

@Triggered Precision Machine LLC I've used the Satterley method for a few different rifles now. Identifying the node is usually enough for hunting rifles, for target rifles i always go back and mess with the seating depth. No problem getting sub .25 groups doing it that way with very low es numbers.

OCW testing is done off the lands for a few reasons. First, most bullets, with the exception of VLD bullets, don't mind being jumped. Second, staying off the lands will safely provide you a better understanding of the pressure tolerance of your rifle without having the interference of the lands. Also, when people measure the lands using one of the Hornady modified cases, or a few of the other methods, you are getting a rough estimate of your lands. With the taper of the leade, the profile of the bullet, it is EXTREMELY easy to push the bullet .005" or more into the lands without feeling much pressure at all, so at that point you are technically jammed into the lands. Staying .020" off for the testing is enough to eliminate this and give you a starting reference point. During the OCW testing process, we're looking at several things at once. One of the most important things is looking for pressure signs as we work are way up the load ladder. If done correctly, your last charge weights should be at or very, very near the peak pressure for that combo. We document this, along with the environmentals to set a theoretical boundary for future loads. For example, if we are doing load dev. on a blistering hot day and I start to see definitive pressure signs at 45 grains, I know that is my pressure ceiling and I will work backwards from there and aim to be at least 2% lower in my final charge weight. Conversely, if we are doing load dev. in the winder at 20 degrees and I hit pressure at 45 grains, I know that will almost certainly not be the case with triple digit temperatures hit in the summer so I am much more cautious here, if I am planning to load ammo that will be shot in the hotter times of the year. I will back off 3% of more from that top load and go from there, or re-do the load dev. in the summer to be 100% safe. All that being said, when the OCW process is done correctly, you will generally find two "nodes". One high, and one low. Many times the high node will be too close to the pressure ceiling for comfort, so I default to the low node. These are generally separated by 3-4 increments in powder charges. Take the safety over a little extra speed. Its easier on brass and the target won't know the difference. Now circling back to your question about conducting the OCW off the lands and starting a seating depth test at the lands. Referencing the above, if the test is done correctly, you shouldn't be so close to your pressure ceiling that seating another .020" forward to just barely touch the lands, would cause any problems at all. If you do end up accidentally picking a load that is on the warm side and seat it at the lands, yes, chances are you will see a bit more pressure but on a modern, properly built rifle, this should show up as possibly heavy bolt lift, ejector marks, and worst case, a pierced primer. I've personally never had an issue after using this method for over 20 years. I see a much greater pressure spike if I'm shooting in field condiditons and get moisture in my chamber or on my ammunition. That was long winded, but I thought your question was excellent and brought up a great point some other people were curious about too. Hope that helps, thanks for watching!!! Shawn

I had issues at first and it took a lot of experimenting. In a nutshell, here's what I found: - If you have the LabRadar too close to the brake (6") the concussion will knock it over... lol 🤣 - Try moving the unit to the rear, maybe 6" in front of your bolt handle. I run my chrono there and offset another 6" from the side of the rifle. - Start here and adjust the sensitivity to about the middle and it should work, if it is still giving you headaches, try boosting the sensitivity or moving it out the the 12" offset mark. The biggest thing was just dealing with the pressure coming out of the sides of the brake. Moving it back definitely solved that and the velocity is spot on when compared to my trusty Magnetospeed. Thanks for watching! -Shawn

@@triggeredprecisionmachinellc Thanks brother, I'll try those tips.

Any time.