What is the order of importance of cartridge parameters?

B

briannmilewis

Guest
Greetings:

I am brand new to this forum, and while not going the benchrest route yet, I am very interested in rifle accuracy. I have just started centerfire with my teenage sons and we are having a lot of fun reloading our modest little 22 Hornet. We started small and cheap to learn the ins and outs and have fun at the same time.

I have learned enough to think we know what we are doing, and I have even done a few activities like separate cases and bullets by weight, just to see how things stack up. I am intrigued by the mechanics, precision and control one has with reloading, and at age 55 I kick myslef for not getting into this many years ago. A late starter, what can I say.

To my point, as far as reloading goes, in order of importance, that is, the effect on accuracy, where do the following cartridge paramaters fall on the scale most to least. I tried finding an answer to this without success, and I apologize ahead of time if 1) There is a previous thread, or 2) This is the kind of question that 20 benchrest shooters would have 25 answers for.

I am talking only about variation within a batch of the same bullets and cases:

Bullet weight
Bullet length
Bullet diameter
Bullet concentricity
Case weight
Case length
Case neck concentricity
Case nech thickness
Case base perpendicularity (New word?)
Primer pocket diameter
Primer pocket depth
Flash hole diameter
*Fill in the blank with whatever else I have missed, I am sure there will be something

Thanks for any help, I really appreicate it.
 
These are trees and...

if you ever want to shoot well you gotta see the forest.

Each item you list has some importance in the scheme of things regarding a quest to greater shooting ability. Each can be attended to in one fashion or another. For example you can uniform primer pockets and flash holes. You can buy better bullets. You can weigh and separate cases.

However, this is about shooting and if you really wanta be good you have to learn to shoot in the wind. Nothing on your list is remotely as important as good wind flags and a Wind Probe or two.

Dick Wright.
 
In addition to what Mr. Wright said it is essential to have a rifle and rest setup that will allow you to determine if those changes you are making will make a difference. You can do all the weight sorting, neck checking, etc. that you can stand, but your rifle may not up to the task of allowing you to reap the benefits. This is not to say that trying to make your rifle perform at its best isn't a worthwhile pursuit, but if your goal is extreme accuracy you have to have a platform, including the right case (i.e. ppc, br, or other proven case design for the distance you are shooting) to allow you to evaluate your experiments with as valid results as possible.
It's a slippery slope, but SO much fun!
Mike
 
You also might want to consider a good..........

.222 rifle, maybe an ex-benchgun from long ago. If it has any accuracy left, or if you need a new barrel, its worth considering. The reason I mention this is because this was THE cartridge before the PPCs came on the scene, and it uses smaller charges than the bigger PPCs. You can use this, since it will give you a better learning curve than the Hornet, and the .222 doesn't have as fragile a case neck like the Hornet has. You can purchase, say, 500-1000 custom bullets, and buy some "box" bullets, too. Shoot the factory bullets as you learn, then guage your progress from time to time with the custom ones. You should see some realistic progress in six months or so, maybe less, and, if you run into problems, you can consult with some of the guys here. And go to some matches if any are within a reasonable distance(and maybe even if they aren't)and watch, listen, and ask questions. Don't be afraid to say you're wanting to learn, these guys will talk your EARS off. And "stupid" questions are always better than stupid actions, so don't worry about the questions you ask, EVeryone has been there when they started. You may even go into brain-lock(sensory overload) as a result of so much info coming so fast. And don't forget to take your sons along, too. You'll never have such a rewarding experience as you do in good company. Welcome to the sport, you'll have a great time. :D
 
briannmilewis said:
Greetings:

I am brand new to this forum, and while not going the benchrest route yet, I am very interested in rifle accuracy. I have just started centerfire with my teenage sons and we are having a lot of fun reloading our modest little 22 Hornet. We started small and cheap to learn the ins and outs and have fun at the same time.

I have learned enough to think we know what we are doing, and I have even done a few activities like separate cases and bullets by weight, just to see how things stack up. I am intrigued by the mechanics, precision and control one has with reloading, and at age 55 I kick myslef for not getting into this many years ago. A late starter, what can I say.

To my point, as far as reloading goes, in order of importance, that is, the effect on accuracy, where do the following cartridge paramaters fall on the scale most to least. I tried finding an answer to this without success, and I apologize ahead of time if 1) There is a previous thread, or 2) This is the kind of question that 20 benchrest shooters would have 25 answers for.

I am talking only about variation within a batch of the same bullets and cases:

Bullet weight
Bullet length
Bullet diameter
Bullet concentricity
Case weight
Case length
Case neck concentricity
Case nech thickness
Case base perpendicularity (New word?)
Primer pocket diameter
Primer pocket depth
Flash hole diameter
*Fill in the blank with whatever else I have missed, I am sure there will be something

Thanks for any help, I really appreicate it.
Click to expand...

Number one, ditch the Hornet! :) You did ask about "order of importance of cartridge parameters" right? Well, re "parameters," first comes BALANCE and then comes FIT with balance being the powder-to-bore ratio and fit being the way the cartridge case fits the chamber. You can achieve neither. I'm not saying not to run the Hornet raggedy learning to reload etc....... just don't spend any money on it (IMO)

The Hornet case has too small powder capacity VS primer effect to be tunable and achieving tidy headspace will be nigh on impossible.

Try:
-necksize only. Let the cases get as tight as possible.
-Loading "long," meaning bullets as deeply jammed as possible.
-Compressed loads. Jam as much powder as possible, packed tightly as possible.
-Experiment with primers, they're possibly your most effective tool. Try the gamut of different primers with each powder.

Before you'll see the benefits of any of the things on your list you'll need a more accurate platform. (((IMO ;) ))) May I suggest you'se purchase used a Savage bolt actioned rifle in 22-250, .243, .260, 7-08, .308 or the like. Get a short action with the .473 boltface. This is the boltface diameter used for the .308 and 30-06 family of cartridges, as well as the -250/.257 family and the Rem's like 6MM Remington.



NOW you've got an experimental platform worthy of pursuit. You'll wear out the barrel trying the things you've listed above.


You'll have tremendous FUN in the process.........



Now get'cherself's a 6BR barrel in 8" twist.






Welcome to another world!!!






al
 
Everyone, thanks for the feedback, it is all appreciated. I am pretty sure that being relatively new to centerfire shooting is where my question fell down. I ignored the rifle in the question because I assumed someone would have a good platform, and I did not mean to imply the Hornet was in any way approachng a very good accuracy platform.

Put another way, if you could work on only one parameter of a cartridge as far as making all cartridges consistent in that way, which parameter would you choose first. Then, ask the same question again for each remaining parameter. However, I think I have already answered it, by sensing that each parameter could be a different order of importance in any individual rifle. Do I understand it better now?
 
OK, I was unclear, incomprehensive.

The hornet case itself is poorly designed for accuracy. It can't be made to FIT properly because it's designed to be headspaced on the rim instead of the shoulder. Rims vary wildly in thickness and even if you take the time to headspace "short" and laboriously hand-fit each and every cartridge rim on a lathe you'll never achieve the FIT necessary for true accuracy. And the cartridge can't be headspaced properly on the shoulder because of it's shallow shoulder angle.

Thus to "K Hornet" conversion.

BUT, even if you spend the money and get your Hornet "K'd" it still won't shoot really well because the case is simply too small. I know. I know, I'll prolly get a buncha' Hornet apologists all riled up here but it's just how it is. Hornets don't shoot.

among those cartridges which DO shoot I'll stand by my analysis and note that FIT and BALANCE still outweigh all of your listed factors. I have properly fitted rifles which will shoot circles around lesser rifles, which will WIN in competition with none of the aforementioned sorting parameters met.

hth

al
 
Al: Sorry for dragging this out and thanks for hanging in with me. Nope, you were not unclear or incomprehensible, I have been looking at this from a particular perspective and have not expressed that clearly, and I threw in a few irrelevancies as background that messed things up. I don't care at all about the Hornet, so it should no longer be a part of the discussion.

Is this the way I should interpret your answer: As far as accuracy is concerned, the rifle is by far more important than anything to do with the cartridge specifications in the first instance? In other words, as an example, it doesn't matter what factory ammunition you feed the rifle, the rifle always dictates the basic accuracy you get? Does that mean that once the rifle is in place and established as the primary accuracy component, the cartridge physical specifications are pretty much insignificant in comparison and singly or cumulative can't have a "gross" effect on accuracy like the rifle can? For example, if I have an out-of-the-box rifle that shoots 1" groups@100 yards, and I work on the rifle to produce 1/2" groups at 100 yards, does that mean I could not get those same 1/2" groups by working on the cartridge parameters and the loads and do nothing to the rifle? Or is it just a matter of it requires a heck of a lot more work making changes to the cartridge and load side of the equation to get significant improvements in accuracy, than working on the rifle side of the equation?

I know there are a few questions in there, but I think your expansion and replies are leading me in the right direction of an answer.
 
briannmilewis said:
Al: Sorry for dragging this out and thanks for hanging in with me. Nope, you were not unclear or incomprehensible, I have been looking at this from a particular perspective and have not expressed that clearly, and I threw in a few irrelevancies as background that messed things up. I don't care at all about the Hornet, so it should no longer be a part of the discussion.

OK, we'll drop the Hornet. :)

Is this the way I should interpret your answer: As far as accuracy is concerned, the rifle is by far more important than anything to do with the cartridge specifications in the first instance?

YES and NO..... here's how I'll slice it. YES, the rifle is big, huge even...... but given similar rifles your FIT and your choice of cartridge is ALSO huge. I'll make this simple, to achieve real accuracy you will have to explore only bolt actioned rifles and THEN only Rem700 or Sav110-based rifles need apply. Or custom-actioned rifles.

Given an accurate platform we can now explore your actual question(s).




In other words, as an example, it doesn't matter what factory ammunition you feed the rifle, the rifle always dictates the basic accuracy you get? Does that mean that once the rifle is in place and established as the primary accuracy component, the cartridge physical specifications are pretty much insignificant in comparison and singly or cumulative can't have a "gross" effect on accuracy like the rifle can?

Well, not really. Yes a bolt action platform will always be more accurate than the others all things being equal, BUT...... cartridge spec and fit is such a big deal that well spec'd and good fitting ammunition can make a poorer platform (say a single shot falling block rifle) perform better than a bolt action. YES the race car is ready and hot but even a RACE CAR can't run on bad fuel....



For example, if I have an out-of-the-box rifle that shoots 1" groups@100 yards, and I work on the rifle to produce 1/2" groups at 100 yards, does that mean I could not get those same 1/2" groups by working on the cartridge parameters and the loads and do nothing to the rifle?


It takes BOTH....generally. Rare is the box stock rifle capable of 1/2" accuracy no matter WHAT the chambering, although mild and easy to shoot rounds like the .222. .223 or the new .204 Ruger are much more forgiving in this regard.


Or is it just a matter of it requires a heck of a lot more work making changes to the cartridge and load side of the equation to get significant improvements in accuracy, than working on the rifle side of the equation?


I'll keep with the car analogy......Adding higher octane fuel can only do so much to make the factory car act like a hotrod..... Build a hotrod AND give it good fuel and you've got something. You really can't skimp on either side. That said, getting a rifle up to the hotrod stage piecemeal is a serious endeavor. The learning slope is STEEP und't SLIPPERY..... It's not quite like a hotrod in that just throwing money at it won't fix it. You'll have to actually hands-on learn to load and tune the thing yourself. AFTER establishing solid parameters.

I know there are a few questions in there, but I think your expansion and replies are leading me in the right direction of an answer.
Click to expand...


To go clear back to your original post. Even if you weren't hampered by the Hornet chambering and given that your rifle is a bolt actioned Rem or Savage and given that you've taken the time to pillar-bed and float it and get the trigger working. Even if you've gone so far as to have lapped the lugs, polished the cocking ramp and reworked the innards of the bolt. Even if you've completely gone through the factory rifle end to end...... I don't believe that ANYTHING on your initial list would show you anything.

!!

:(

There is absolutely nothing on your list that would show a visible effect on a factory rifle. In fact, cumulatively, if you did everything re prep work and double-blind fired head-to-head against unprep'd and unsorted loads you couldn't find a difference.

(I'm trying to save you a BUNCH of headbanging here! :) )


My initial assertion stands, and until you work up to the custom barreled 6BR you will not be able to even see any of the gains achievable by your list of spec'ing and prep'ing.


So, I guess in this sense the rifle IS paramount. But even the absolute top end rifle will not, CANNOT perform without properly fitted ammunition. "Factory ammo" won't do it. Nor will "Pet Loads" from some reloading manual. An example of this happened in an Outdoor Life article about 6-8yrs ago. No less personage than Jim Carmichel hissownself tested a bunch of rifles. Now Jim can SHOOT, f'r real. Jim pitted a bunch of factory 22-250 offerings against each other AND against a pro-built Speedy Gonzales 22-250 assembled to exacting Bench Rest specs. The kicker was, all rifles were firing the same factory ammo. The Savage rifle won, not only did it beat the other factory guns but it waxed the $3500.00 BR Rifle!

This DOES NOT mean that "A Savage shoots as well as an SG&Y Rifle."

Nor does it prove that this pertickler Speedy gun was deficient in any way.

It only shows that ammunition FIT is important. (And BTW only the Savage rifle is adjustable in this regard. Only rifle design on the planet that could actually be adjusted to fit the ammunition.)

And then we get to cartridge design. Some designs ARE more inherently accurate than others. Examples of inherently accurate chamberings include (but are not limited to) the PPC/BR family of rounds, .308Win family of rounds including even such marginal variants as 7mm-08, .260Rem or .243Win, and the .222/.223 family of rounds. In fact many rounds can be made quite accurate provided FIT and some semblance of BALANCE are maintained. An example of a "family of rounds" that crosses the spectrum would be the WSM/WSSM/RUM/RUAM group. The 300WSM is a wonderfully balanced round and very accurate whilst the .243/.25 chambers are so hideously overbore and poorly shaped as to be nearly useless.


Soooo, dunno if this has been of any help, but we're muddling along eh!!

it's all fun


al
 
Al, I think you nailed it and I've got it. Absolute clarity on your part, and 100% absorption on mine. Yes, it answers my question in great detail and to more than my satisfaction. Thanks for persisting and doing a very thorough knowledge dump for this newbie. I am saving the topic in my shooting section as a webarchive for future reference. Thanks. You must have worked up a sweat over this one, have a cold one of your choosing on me. Thanks mate, and everyone that is responsible for helping develop the answer.
 
Brian,

6 months ago, I was exactly where you are now.

After talking with folks here, I bought a used benchrest rifle out of the classifieds, put on a Weaver T-36, ordered Lapua brass, bought some good dies, *finally* found some 205M primers and N133, bought some Berger bullets locally, and went from there.

From there, the combo was good enough that I could easily see the difference in things like powder charge and seating depth. It also removed the rifle from the equation and let me start learning bench manners and reading the wind flags.

In that, neck turning the brass was about the only challenge.

I'm now hip deep in this and my son and I are having a blast.

I sincerely recommend this as a great approach to learning the accuracy game and having fun with your sons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top