Best Load Development Method

What is the best method of load development? How many load development methods are there? Is there even such a thing as "the best load?" Which method did I choose or did I, and how might it look if we combined all the methods of load development?
Precision Reloading Essentials
A&D FX-120i Precision Balance Scale
amzn.to/3zLhNSK
Creedmoor Sports TRX-925 Precision Reloading Scale
amzn.to/3ZYbSo4A&D EJ-54D2
Dual Range Portable Balance 22/52 gx 0.0002/0.001mg, Ext. Cal, 1EA amzn.to/3zK1d5Y
RUISHAN High Precision 300g x 0.001g Scale 1mg Lab Digital Precision amzn.to/3KPhGvU
Mitutoyo 500-196-30 Advanced Onsite Sensor (AOS) Absolute Scale Digital Caliper
amzn.to/3KNtAX1
Lyman 50th Edition Reloading Handbook
amzn.to/43ol5cw
Lyman Long Range Precision Reloading Handbook
amzn.to/3UocfXY
Shooter's Bible Guide to Handloading
amzn.to/41frxjT
00:18 About "The Best Load"
01:46 Issues We Face in Load Development
02:08 Six Methods of Load Development
03:52 What I Was Developing a Load For
07:30 One Shot Ladder/Sweet Spot Method
10:10 Vertical Deviation Method
13:55 OCW - Optimal Charge Weight Method
17:24 3 Shot Group Method (or 5 or 10)
18:38 OBT Optimum Barrel Time
24:15 SD/ES Method
25:30 Graphical Depiction & Intersection of Methods
27:28 Verification Groups
28:25 Final Thoughts & Results

[@NH48-24]

Loved the video, have noticed that quite a few shooters at matches don’t do load development. They pick a recipe from an article, or web site, or a buddy and that’s it. When I develop a load for a particular bullet I use a similar chicken scratch board, and use a 3 or 5 shot group. And after I find the best group I’ll use the chronograph on another range date. I use LC brass, some times mixed,some times same lot and date, powders are Reloader 15: AA2520, or MR2000. Primers are REM 7/12, or CCI 450. Bullets are Sierra or Hornady. Great videos good shooting this year.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Thanks! I used mixed brass last year on 200/300. Used straight Lapua loaded long on 600. This year, I got a boat-load of Starline for 200/300, sticking with the Lapua for 600. A buddy convinced me that the Lapua for 200/300 wasn't worth the cost vs reward. SMK 77 HPBT for 200/300 and switching to Nosler 77 RDFs for 600

[@stephenkrampert3430]

Purchased 200 rounds of Norma match 223, SMK 77 grain loaded ammo just to shoot up in a 223 Ackley Imp.got 1- 1/4 inch groups at 300 out of a bolt gun velocity was only around 2500. Figure that out was not a one time deal I did have 200 rounds. My question about using the graph and the velocities. How do you know if you're at one end of the other of an extreme spread when you're using one shot?

[@NH48-24]

@@stephenkrampert3430 once I have the most accurate loading, I load up about 10 then run them through a chronograph. And hope foe a good standard deviation.

[@davidreed6779]

I believe you can learn a lot from 3 shot groups. Every time I go to the range I shoot several 3 shot groups. I keep a record of every trip I take after several trips and many groups I take the average. I think that works great for hunting rifles and I never fire fouling shots just like I wouldn't on a hunting scenario

[@CrustyOldMarine]

And, I like using photoshop to overlay groups on each other for comparison. You're spot on for a no-fouling, cold bore shot for hunting!

[@YERAFirearms]

As for OBT and GRT, I advice to tune to the GRT to match your actual MV measured by Labradar

[@trason8118]

So far I don't understand much about guns, this video made me understand more about guns. Thank you you have share will

[@analog3132]

24.6 gives a velocity node and accuracy node

[@CrustyOldMarine]

I wouldn't argue that but, you think so from this testing and rifle or your own?

[@luvtahandload7692]

Out of YOUR gun. Lol

[@Honezjr]

Velocities are always changing based on atmospherics. There is no “node” or stable spot. The correlation doesn’t equal causation. Hornady has proved this if you listen to their podcasts.

[@jznightmare]

you explained things quite thoroughly even though I only understood half of it, it was nice to learn to something new today. thanks for this video.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Thanks for watching!!

[@qaiserrehman515]

That's amazing work 👍

[@balunideep]

Thanks for another interesting video. Everything thoroughly explained. I enjoy hearing your process!

[@manii78]

Love this video Amazing work

[@backacresalaska2272]

I develop loads for hunting and defense of dangerous game. I use Hornady's ballistic calculator for initial load development, then 3 shot groups at the range to check accuracy, then a swinging bucket of sand similar to the one in the back of P.O. Ackleys book to test performance. I consider barrel harmonics when building a rifle but never in regards to my reloads but have fired a friends Safary grade Browning in 338 with the Boss system and was quite impressed. I think I'll have to look into that aspect further. Consistent trajectory is more important to me than flat shooting. Not being a competitive shooter my accuracy only needs to match down range performance. My loads vary to the task at hand and the best depends on it's purpose. There always seems to be a trade off.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Sounds like a good process. In reality rounds for hunting aren't that dissimilar than those for competition except perhaps for competition we'll spend more time and resources looking for "perfection" that doesn't exist...lol For hunting and dangerous game, I think knowing a round will shoot well and RELIABLE would be the top concern. And for you in Alaska, temperature performance would be paramount. Check out Gordan's Reloading Tool. It's a learning curve but really interesting and would give you great info on the temps you shoot in.

[@backacresalaska2272]

@@CrustyOldMarine In a quick comparison Gordan's reloading tool has graphs Hornady does not but factors in similar information. Hornady's calculator has 2 calculators built into it. One is ballistics calculator the other is a 4dof for target rounds. I'm currently comparing ELD-X 220 grain that are hunting target boat tails with a special tip designed not to melt and deform in flight and listed in 4dof calculator to my old reliable 220 grain Round nose interlock only listed in the traditional ballistics calculator. The ELD-X has a big advantage at distance but in my book is rated for hunting big game where the RN interlocks are rated for dangerous game with no further explanation. Designed for cell phone is great for field use and if I really wanted more there is a 500 dollar accessory that measures wind, temperature, air pressure, etc. Some of the factors are beyond anything I'd even considered before like bullet yawl and even latitude. Amazing what can be factored in these days quickly in the field.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

@@backacresalaska2272 One of my shooting buddies has gotten into rifle with us and he uses/likes the Hornady calculator. And, I have been using 140 gr Hornady ELD Match in my 6.5 CM, a pretty decent round but going to try Nosler RDFs in 140 gr... a little longer and a higher BC

[@maxwellibrahim2501]

Love the video, very interesting and informative. Thanks for sharing

[@ajalagoke3291]

Another very interesting video. Very detailed and easy to understand.

[@stephenkrampert3430]

Man, that was a great video in depth yet simplified, been doing this for 60 years try to keep up with new stuff ;old dog keeps going back to three and five shot groups change the charge weight try to learn and have fun doing it! Brass prep is a pain in the butt

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Thanks! Yep, whatever method one uses, it's hard to argue the results of the holes on the target

[@stricklyreloading8494]

Nice video. You could try the Cortina seating depth method, where he only changes seating depth by .003" from group to group

[@CrustyOldMarine]

That's been done after this velocity node testing. It works well too !! Thanks for watching!

[@anandjaiswal4407]

Thanks for explaining in detail about load developement. Very nice information provided by you in the video. I like it.

[@zahidulislamrazu9086]

Thanks for the insight. Your explanation about "LOAD DEVELOPMENT METHOD" is very easy to understand.

[@leyderness3553]

Great information, I know will put a couple ways into my next development for my results. I have always done a five shot group for a node and also look at velocity to what I am trying to accomplish.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

I just started a proper F Class Rifle build that will be 7 PRCW. I used this on my 6.5 Creedmoor and, I will use the EXACT same load development method for the 7 PRCW. It has worked wonderfully so far

[@bd71Alonegameryt]

That's amazing work 👏👏

[@OlakunleAyodele-no6kq]

Your explanation is amazing I learned something new

[@timothym2241]

Very good video. It was great to see a head to head comparison of the various methods. It’s a science, but a lot of art too, considering the hard choices one must make in deciding on what is the optimal charge. What amazes me is how different winners use such different methods to find their way to the podium.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

All true. I think Cortina nailed it with his saying/axiom of "believe the target" Doesn't matter how you "got there" what the target shows IS the unvarnished truth.

[@rabbikhan8864]

Very good job. Great learning method. Describe nicely. You are very good.

[@kenl2861]

Hi Crusty. First time seeing one of your videos. AWESOME summary, with details and data. I’ve been studying in this area for a while, very familiar with the different methods you presented, but I’ve never seen (or even considered!) them all rolled together like this. VERY CREATIVE approach, really informative. I think I’m going to do this on my next load development. 1 comment though: as long as the groups are limited to 3 shots, the statistical issue still exists. Even so, the video shows how the various methods can converge when using the same base data. Awesome, a new subscriber today!

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Thanks Ken! Always appreciate good feedback and new subscribers! And, you're absolutely right about the 3 shots not being statistically significant. That's why I did/do more to verify once that velocity node appears to be found. It has held up in further testing and matches as well.

[@ayezaShaikhvh3fx]

Amazing work

[@introvert9805]

Wow it's a really cool and outstanding method. Thanks for sharing with us❤️

[@sgulden6276]

Wonderful test comparison!

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Thank you and thanks for watching!

[@thecrusaders2516]

Thanks for the great comparison.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

You're welcome, thanks for watching!

[@preetkumarsharma2.0]

Your videos is really innovative

[@whliving]

I haven’t seen anyone else combine all of them in this manner. That was interesting to see them all laid out like that. I believe that will be insightful for many. I’ll be checking out your other videos.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Thanks! Yes, it revealed a few unexpexted results. I've also done the same with my 6.5 CM load, maybe I'll get time to actually edit snd upload that video too. Thanks for watching and the comment!

[@222triple]

Excellent video. I’d go with your analysis. I liked your data acquisition technique. Plan your work and work your plan. I’ve been hand loading since 72’ still using my trusty Bonanza CoAx press I bought in 72’. I don’t shoot over 400 yards or heavy for caliber bullets. I’m old school as far as hardware goes but do go along with more scientific methods such as OBT. I bought QuickLoad several years ago and put in my loads for my 222, 244, & 7x57 and they were very close to OBT times. My loads were developed in the mid 70’s and early 80’s with no chronograph. Again your video showed a lot of thought and work went into your bench work, computer work and presentation. Kudos and thank you for your service. One of my best friends (RIP John Hilmer) was a Marine, VN Vet and got me into centerfire shooting and reloading in 72’. I was in the AF and in VN for TET 68’. Keep on keeping on. I’ll have to check out the software you’re using. 👍👍

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Thanks for watching and thanks for your feedback! Sorry your Marine buddy has gone on to guards the gates of Heaven and thank you both for your service as well!

[@daviddudley5895]

You cannot learn enough from a 3 shot group.

[@anthonykaiser974]

Unless it is a bad group. Then you may have learned all you need to know about that combo.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

I disagree and agree. A 3 shot group by itself doesn't tell you a whole lot. But, a 3 shot group that also meets other parameters such as great SD/ES, an OPT and/or OCW node gives fantastic information... to go verify. Check out the 2 videos on load development and accurizing my 6.5 Creedmoor. kzbin.info/www/bejne/ipannKSLrNCkZ6c kzbin.info/www/bejne/j3LOammdiMqqq9k

[@Honezjr]

Hornady found that true dispersion results can be safely calculated after shooting a 60 round group….seriously. 3 rounds ain’t enough for sure.

[@th9797]

Fantastic content! Your overlay of the combined methods data is the best use of crayon cookies I’ve seen in a long time. EmpIrical data beats theory every time, so as Jacob Bynum says, believe the bullet. The OCW that Dan Newberry developed continues to prove itself and is very efficient on components.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Thanks for watching and thanks for the comment! I think that's just the way my mind works. "why not try all of them?" ...lol. Worked out well and similar with my 6.5CM. Might get around to posting a vid on that too someday.

[@rashidmahmood7103]

Very informative video thank you sir

[@user-re7qn6ye6f]

great content keep it coming thank you

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Thank you !!

[@AJMAL470]

This is actually 'Best load development method '❤

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Thanks

[@cacinaz8802]

Very helpful. 24.3gr then vary the seating depth if you can until you exceed mag length.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Or if single feed slow fire for matches, beyond mag length 😁

[@bijeeshbm3379]

Great content sir. I get the clear information of subject" LOAD DEVELOPMENT METHOD ". I am a physics student, so its more helpful for me. Your presentation was very understandable and unique. Thank you sir❤❤

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Thanks !! I envy you being a Physics Student and understanding all the aspects

[@ahmedraza1491]

Great informative video thanks for share

[@zackogden716]

I try to choose a powder to achieve the velocity I want, that will achieve close to 100% case fill. Nosler data has case fill percentages in their load data. Had good luck with this method.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

That is a good method, I also prefer near 100% fill as it minimizes any inconsistent burn across "flat spots" in the powder lying in the case. I would also add seeking the powder that is most temperature tolerant with minimal variations across temp ranges

[@sajidimran1492]

Nyc contents about development method

[@haseebakram5545]

Your explanation is very good,very infomative content,I like it very much,well done,keep it up,thnks for sharing this informative video❤❤.

[@USAACbrat]

I am 2300 rds into 300 BO 100 yd accuracy. I am not at the range my usual mon. shooting session. Cold and windy, i was looking forward to testing 168 Hornady AMAX compared to Nosler Custom competition. 10 mph 168, .76, 175 Nosler, 1". today is just cold with 10 mph done that. i use 2 shot groups at 50 yds to compare different powder levels. Check best a 100. 3 & 5 shot groups. Then i go to seating depth at 50 then 100. I had no luck with boat tails, not bad accuracy but tear drop bullet holes. E. Cortina Break solved that problem. My mish mash of what works for me.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

LOVE my Cortina Tuner on my RPR !!! Curious if you're 300 BO is Sub Sonic and if that's a possible reason for the tear dropping? I use the 168 AMAX in my M1 in 30-06 & they have been GREAT so far. Thanks for watching and your comment !

[@USAACbrat]

i do not get the accuracy from subsonic, i am running 1700 fps or so. Flatbased not boattail. my best is 130 gr Speer Varmint HP, with 20.8 gr CFE/BLK 1 hole@@CrustyOldMarine

[@davestrohmeyer-saddleupsho8009]

3 shot method, lowest SD's, group size and close to bullet makers book listed velocity. Then everything changes on your next change of components. That is why it is fun to reload and test. Then of course there is shooters ability.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Bad thing about bullet mfg listed velocity is that those are fired from special built test barrels and the info for that is not often published, outside maybe barrel length.

[@arafatkhan1234]

Very nice video

[@haseebzaman9202]

Amazing

[@YERAFirearms]

After many years of loading development, I settled on the following method to identify a practical node. It is more or less a compromise between lowest SD and smallest groups. To verify my method, I observed many reloaders independently develop their loads and the same exact phenom happens. The smallest SD load, then followed a smaller group size. The theory of accurate loading process: In Physics, there is no free lunch. In closed thermodynamics systems such as the internal ballistic solution, the goal is to get: 1) A very low MV SD vs powder charge load 2) Small groups vs powder charge load 3) MV velocity stability vs powder temperature 4) MV velocity stability vs small powder variations 5) MV velocity stability vs primer choice 6) Low vertical dispersion at very long and extremely long ranges vs bullet selection First, let us solve the issues related to goals that we can control pretty easily. More specifically, 3) 4) 5) and 6) 3) Use temperature stable powder such as IMR endurance, Hodgdon Extreme Powder, etc. There are many online tests that you can search and find what powders are the most temperature stable (e.g., H4350) 4) Measure each powder drop to less than 0.1gr accuracy. It is easy to get to 0.02gr (1 extruded kernel) which is worth 0.3fps out of typical load 5) Make a small ladder test and see if the selected primers would produce a smoothly rising curve, if not, do not use those primers. There was a test in this video, do not use the primers that generate seesaw graphs. 6) Use VLD bullets with very low variations in G7 BC. For example, pick VLD bullets with less than 1% variation in G7 BC. Now, here we finished the goals that are virtually 100% influenced by the components Now, let us focus on the loading for the node. What is the node after all? Optimum Barrel Time, OBT node: It is the node (with respect to time) where the bullet leaves the barrel when the muzzle is subjected to the least dilation/contraction due to the powder explosion shock waves Optimum Charge Weight, OCW node: it is the node (with respect to time) where the bullet leaves the barrel when the muzzle is pointing to the same point of impact due to the powder explosion shock waves Optimum Feet per sec, OFPS node: it is the node (with respect to time) where the bullet leaves the barrel with the minimum SD of MV due to the powder explosion shock waves Keeping all parameters the same, changing the powder charge can change the MV and inversely the actual barrel time of the bullet Note: OFPS is my theory why MV SD would shrink for the same powder but by just changing the powder charge. What node are we after? Goal 1) is solved with OFPS node, a theory I introduced in September 2018. Goal 2) is solved with OBT time. The good news, OBT is numerically computed. With the advancement of very accurate radar-based chronographs and internal ballistic solvers, the OBT charge load can be accurately calculated. I had success doing that for few competitive shooters as proof of concept. How about Goal 1) the best way to find it in my experience is to shoot a group of 3-5 shots in a ladder test such as the 6.5group spreadsheet test and find the lowest MV SD The bad news is OBT node (smallest group) and OFPS node (lowest MV SD) don't overlap. Remember, in Physics, there is no free lunch. The good news is both nodes are adjacent and in my experience, if you find the OBT node, the OFPS node is the next step load in the ladder. As groups shrink MV SD will increase and vice versa. So, the best is to find a compromise load between OBT/OFPS nodes that works for the shooter.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Great info and thanks for sharing! I'm going to have to read this a few times to get my head completely wrapped around it. Also could you reference and or link some of the places where one can find searchable online tests that you mention that list powders/temperature stability?

[@alexnelexojo3373]

A nice video

[@zahidali-jw5re]

It is amazing

[@danielfinke6677]

Enjoyed the video. I’ve struggled getting the OBT software to match any physical results I’m measuring to the point where I’ve completely stopped using it. There seems to be too many variables for it to work regularly.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

I agree that the software is, at best, only a helpful tool. It's no substitute for real, verifiable, on the range results. Like you said, there are too many variables. I'm going to try to utilize it for some guidance on some winter testing of a great load (warmer temp developed) to attempt to adjust the charge wt t& attempt o match the known velocity node. There will be a video on that. Thanks for watching !!

[@danielfinke6677]

@@CrustyOldMarine I shouldn’t say I’ve completely stopped using it, but I have stopped using it to help find accuracy. I still use it for bullet/powder selections and combinations.

[@shadowraithxi2167]

Great job going through the data! Really thorough and appreciate that you tried a bunch of different methods. Quick question - since you shot this at 50yds, your 0.48 inch group is actually pretty close to 1 MOA, right? Because 1 MOA is 1 inch at 100 yards and 0.5 inches at 50yds. Either way, solid group for a gas gun and you may be able to tighten it up by adjusting the seating depth! I've been going through the same challenges you have with some .308 load development. Tried a bunch of different methods and landed on a decent powder load, then had to mess with seating depth testing.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

No, the rifle and optic had a 50 yd zero on it but, the test was shot at 100yd. Thanks for watching!

[@kenl2861]

Thanks for answering this, I had the same question!

[@markworkman6576]

Awesome video!. I am new to reloading and was curios once you found your charge weight how did bullet seating depth impact it. Is seating depth the final tuning method or does it completely change the harmonics and results of these tests?

[@CrustyOldMarine]

In my experience, the seating depth only fine tunes it. Thanks for watching!

[@USAACbrat]

When i shoot 2 shot groups of 5 groups with the same horizontal line. i use desk calanders from wallmart with a 3/4" dot from office section at each line intersection. I am handicapped with no chrno. i would rather spend the money on bullets,

[@CrustyOldMarine]

LOTS of Lab Radar Chronos on the market relatively cheap now that the Garmin is out

[@aaawman2280]

A grain off max load, bullet seating depth to adjust group size. Send it..

[@michaelruebusch2275]

Wait a minute, at 17:40 you say your group was .384 inch/moa, but if you're shooting at 50 yards then there's no way that .384 inch equals .384 moa. Maybe at 100 yds, but not 50.

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Yeah at 4:07, I say the rifle was ZEROED at 50 yds. 50 yards is really close to a 200 yd zero and we start SR @ 50 yds, that's why I zero at 50, to me it's easier to get a good grouping/zero than at 200. But, the test fired in this video was done at 100 yds. Sorry for any confusion and thanks for watching!

[@readyalready4697]

Eat a lot of proteins??

[@CrustyOldMarine]

Sure used to...