confused, 50 vs 100 yards

brusso89

brusso89

New member
Did some reloads for the new ar15 last week and this week and went to the range. I am shooting a 1-8" 16" barrel with h335 powder and 55 grain nosler ballistic tip varmint bullets. last week my most accurate load was 23.3 grains, 4 shot group 3 were touching and the other was literally a hair off. pretty good but that was only at 50 yards(im using a burris 536 5x fixed scope). so I loaded 23.1, 23.2, 23.3 and 23.4 to test at 100 yards but I had some 23.0 (starting/min load) left over from getting my scope on paper. after shooting everything the 23.0 loads were the most accurate at 100 yards with 3 just about touching and 1 that was a straggler about a inch off. the 23.3 which was great at 50 yards, not so great at 100 yards had 2 touching but the other 2 were about a inch off in different directions.

23.3 grains great at 50 yard but not so good at 100 yards. 23.0 grains more accurate at 100 yards but not as accurate as .3 grains more powder at 50 yards?

hopefully this makes sense haha. but im confused as to how a slower load is more accurate at 100 yards then a faster load and how is a faster load more accurate at 50 yards than a slower load but then not as accurate at 100 yards? if your still with me then any advice/ input is greatly appreciated!
 
Last edited:
speed has nothing to do with the accuracy. shooter error can have a tremendous amount to do with it at 100 yards.
 
I agree. It's hard to shoot itty bitty groups with a low power scope. Another question is how many pounds is your trigger?
 
Temps were pretty much the same. I was kinda thinking the same as far as a 5x scope with a stock trigger maybe I just got lucky. But which one was the lucky group! Idk so I guess back to testing then huh?
 
If you had repeated the same test on the second day, you would have seen how the wind can play heck with groups, not to mention we all have good and better days.
 
Originally Posted By: ninehorsesDon't fall into the trap of basing all your results on one test group.

thumbup1.gif


A gun doesn't make small groups, until it makes them over and over.

You are wasting ammo by making test loads 0.1 grain apart.
 
.3 grain variance isn't enough for testing. Start at the minimum, work up in .5 gr incriments. Very few, of any, typical reloading scales are truly capable of .1 gr accuracy.

Also, I often times find 2 accuracy nodes, one at the low end, another near the top. Keep going on powder.
 
Originally Posted By: pahntr760.3 grain variance isn't enough for testing. Start at the minimum, work up in .5 gr incriments. Very few, of any, typical reloading scales are truly capable of .1 gr accuracy.

Also, I often times find 2 accuracy nodes, one at the low end, another near the top. Keep going on powder.

and a BIG +1 on this.
thumbup1.gif
 
I'm going on my personal experience, but most ARs don't start settling in from an accuracy standpoint until you have about 100 rounds down the barrel...I try to find the cheapest military FMJ that I can get my hands on and just shoot for fun and a little trigger time with the rifle before I ever consider working up loads unless I've put one together with match grade parts...

Contrary to other's statements, I'm one that finds the maximum published loads from a couple of reputable sources and drop down a full grain below the average max and build ten rounds of each in .1gr increments..I shoot five of each at 100 yards on as perfect day as I can find with a very solid platform, whether a lead sled or a set of front & rear bags, to remove as much of the human factor as I can...As stated, shooter error will introduce imperfect results..

Generally, I find my most accurate loads to fall between .4 and .7gr powder charges below my chosen max charge..Then, I turn around and shoot the second five of that powder charge for verification of the first finding...Does it cost me some extra components?? Sure it does..But, when I'm through, I know it's the best that I'm going to get without changing some other factor, such as seating depth, or primer type..My point is that I would rather spend the "wasted" components and have the best, rather that always wondering if I could have done better with more testing...Then, I tear down the extra rounds that didn't produce to my standards and reuse the components..

Below is a target where two decent groups were produced in one session....both are within 1/2", with one flier on the bottom one..
 
Are you trying to do a loading test like Audette's Ladder? I believe it is intended to be shot at 200 yards to come up with the optimum load range.

I would agree on the accuracy of powder scales and measures as well. It is going to take considerable patience to sneak up on a good load by .1 grain powder changes as well.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: CatShooter

There are no groups with fliers - there are only groups (a group includes all the holes).



Yep...

Also .1 way to small to tell anything at 50 or 100 for that matter with a 5x. Do your same test if you want, but make it the same 3 weeks in a row, same charges and at least 100 yds. Then you will have to data points to start from.
 
Originally Posted By: CatShooter

There are no groups with fliers - there are only groups (a group includes all the holes).




BUT....... If I could separate the fliers from the groups, they would all be one holer's

lol.gif
lol.gif
 
Originally Posted By: trimble s6
"Called" fliers are like mulligans in golf.............you can't play with me if you count em' that way.



When you miss that 550 yard groundhog, call a flier or mulligan, and insist on another shot.
tt2.gif
thumbdown.gif
 
Back
Top