New to reloading - to what fraction of a grain do you test new loads? 0.5gr, 0.3gr...

New to reloading - Just wondering to what fraction of a grain does everybody generally test to when making a new load? 0.5gr, 0.3gr?
Current cartridges are .308 and .222 predominantly used for hunting with a little target shooting for good measure.
Am I right to assume that a charge difference of 0.3gr will have a more noticeable result in the smaller 222 case than it would in the 308? And to what fraction have you noticed significant variation in results before you contend with human error etc in charge weights eg. 0.2gr, 0.1gr?
Cheers

I dont bother with less than half grain change in larger case...or quarter grain in little one.....unless you chasing the last little bit of accuracy or velocity its not worth it in my book.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

I dont bother with less than half grain change in larger case...or quarter grain in little one.....unless you chasing the last little bit of accuracy or velocity its not worth it in my book.

---

That's what I like to hear!
So far I've only started some test loads for the 308 on the weekend and found a nice combo producing satisfactory results at 42gr but wondered if I needed to reduce the loads down to say 0.2gr and test either side or if I'm better off to settle on that and be done.
Haven't started on the treble yet...

.2 in the trebly and .5 in the 08 while working up to find pressure.
Half grain steps in a small case can go from mild to wild .

Its a good idea to look for "resilience" in you load, I try and find a spot where +/- 0.5 gn (in 308 class cases) doesn't open up the ES or group . . . .

There is no one answer. Figure on roughly 10% steps of the nominal load. So yes, catridge capacity dependant.
0.5 gr for say 308 sized, for a 22 Hornet 0.2 gr dropping to 0.1 gr when approaching book max.
Once close to desired result a smaller final change may be in order.

1gr (full) initially, then half either side of the more promosing region

For my 22-250 I'm going up in 0.2gr as new to reloading. Shot my first ever own loads on Friday, results were average as I was starting at the min recommended charge weight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pav

New to reloading - Just wondering to what fraction of a grain does everybody generally test to when making a new load? 0.5gr, 0.3gr?
Current cartridges are .308 and .222 predominantly used for hunting with a little target shooting for good measure.
Am I right to assume that a charge difference of 0.3gr will have a more noticeable result in the smaller 222 case than it would in the 308? And to what fraction have you noticed significant variation in results before you contend with human error etc in charge weights eg. 0.2gr, 0.1gr?
Cheers

---

Avoid over thinking, if possible, find yourself a local reloading guru/sensei. Grey hair and hearing loss are usually good signs that they have been shooting for a while :P

Read this first (Richard Lee's Modern Reloading) : http://marvinstuart.com/firearm/Manu...%20-%20ocr.pdf

Most important factors in descending order:

1. Tools used for measuring and dispensing powder

2. Type of powder

3. Case capacity

1. Tools
Try and avoid weight measuring with the whole beam scale balance and powder trickling setup. Waste of time, money and sanity if you are just making rounds to go hunting and plinking with. Use a volumetric measuring system (Lee scoops or powder thrower) with a small set of electronic scales to measure the initial charge then work from there. No point trying to measure down to 0.1 grain if your equipment only has an accuracy of +/- 0.3 grains.

2. Powder
Choose a good powder that 'meters' easily (ball powders or smaller stick powders). If you can get some Varget powder then you should be covered for both .308 and .223/.222

3. Case capacity
As you rightly pointed out, a 0.3 grain difference will matter a lot more in a .222 case vs a .338LM case. You might encounter the problem of compressed charges further down the line, but really nothing to worry about. There are some guys who literally use a primed case as a scoop, credit card to strike off the excess powder at the neck and crunch a bullet down onto the powder (really depends on the components, don't try this!). Not best practise but hey ho it works for them!

Best of luck and enjoy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by caberslash

There are some guys who literally use a primed case as a scoop, credit card to strike off the excess powder at the neck and crunch a bullet down onto the powder (really depends on the components, don't try this!). Not best practise but hey ho it works for them!

---

I want to meet these guys!
then stand some distance away while they try their latest hand loads:thumbsup:

1% of case capacity, rounded to the nearest .1 is a decent guideline.

You can go 0.5 if you want to revisit a node or do further testing you can always fill in the gaps. obviously depends on calibre smaller cases maybe not like the guys have said as above.

EBF wrote an interesting piece on load development for the now defunct guns and hunting magazines website which has got me rethinking load development.
He said don't worry about groups initally look at velocity and extreme spread or std deviation in your load ladder, there will be a point where small changes in powder weight make virtually no difference in speed after which it will jump with the next increment those nodes are what to look for as they allow for errors in weighing.
At 100 yards most loads will group well but the shooter will tire and loose focus especially if there are multiple lots to test and introduce another possible error. Everyone has said I pulled that shot haven't they.
If you are only shooting short ranges say to 3 or 400 yards maximum a difference of 50 fps between shots won't have any significant effect on point of impact but at 600 yards it could be up to 12 or more inches.

Same as most here, I go up in .5 grain increments, but my smallest cartridge a .270. Once I have a load with good ES I then test loads at different seating depths until I’m happy with group size. After that is when I sometimes fiddle about with smaller powder increments of .1 or .2 grains to see if I can tighten groups up.

.3 and reduce to 3 round groups for load development. I usually get a really good idea of nodes over 9 groups.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zimmer

There is no one answer. Figure on roughly 10% steps of the nominal load. So yes, catridge capacity dependant.
0.5 gr for say 308 sized, for a 22 Hornet 0.2 gr dropping to 0.1 gr when approaching book max.
Once close to desired result a smaller final change may be in order.

---

Dickhead this should have read 1% not 10% :pissed off: Back to school....
As per @Pommy post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pav

New to reloading - Just wondering to what fraction of a grain does everybody generally test to when making a new load? 0.5gr, 0.3gr?
Current cartridges are .308 and .222 predominantly used for hunting with a little target shooting for good measure.
Am I right to assume that a charge difference of 0.3gr will have a more noticeable result in the smaller 222 case than it would in the 308? And to what fraction have you noticed significant variation in results before you contend with human error etc in charge weights eg. 0.2gr, 0.1gr?
Cheers

---

Greetings Pav and All,
The curmudgeon in me forces me to say that with the two cartridges you mention just about any reasonable load will shoot well. Returning to the actual question you asked it is probably more important how you test your loads. One three shot group tells you nothing. you could shoot the same string of loads again and get completely different results. For serious testing a better measure would be the average of three three shot groups. Also it is a good idea to set a goal of what you are trying to achieve. Look at a few of the manuals, in particular the manual of the projectile you plan to use. Select a load that will fill your needs and test first with three shots of the start load shot over a chronograph. If the velocity is similar to the data, you need to make an adjustment for barrel length, pressure is likely to be similar as well. If this checks out you can work up to your goal load in grain or half grain steps chronographing along the way. Once you get close to your goal load you can go to .2 grain steps for the .222 and .5 grain steps firing three three shot groups to test for accuracy.
I have to admit right here that once I have an accurate load that gives me the velocity I am after I stop right there. I don't do endless testing chasing that last erosive foot per second or the last millimetre in group size. The law of diminishing returns does apply to load development.
Regards Grandpamac.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by caberslash

Avoid over thinking, if possible, find yourself a local reloading guru/sensei. Grey hair and hearing loss are usually good signs that they have been shooting for a while :P

Read this first (Richard Lee's Modern Reloading) : http://marvinstuart.com/firearm/Manu...%20-%20ocr.pdf

Most important factors in descending order:

1. Tools used for measuring and dispensing powder

2. Type of powder

3. Case capacity

1. Tools
Try and avoid weight measuring with the whole beam scale balance and powder trickling setup. Waste of time, money and sanity if you are just making rounds to go hunting and plinking with. Use a volumetric measuring system (Lee scoops or powder thrower) with a small set of electronic scales to measure the initial charge then work from there. No point trying to measure down to 0.1 grain if your equipment only has an accuracy of +/- 0.3 grains.

2. Powder
Choose a good powder that 'meters' easily (ball powders or smaller stick powders). If you can get some Varget powder then you should be covered for both .308 and .223/.222

3. Case capacity
As you rightly pointed out, a 0.3 grain difference will matter a lot more in a .222 case vs a .338LM case. You might encounter the problem of compressed charges further down the line, but really nothing to worry about. There are some guys who literally use a primed case as a scoop, credit card to strike off the excess powder at the neck and crunch a bullet down onto the powder (really depends on the components, don't try this!). Not best practise but hey ho it works for them!

Best of luck and enjoy.

---

Cheers. I have someone from my Nzda branch who is an experienced reloader showing me the ropes, and I'm actually reloading with his gear at his house while I slowly put together what I need to get started by myself so have that one covered.
After browsing alot of threads and doing plenty of reading I have decided to start with Adi AR2206H, measuring with Lee powder thrower and Hornady digital scales.

Poll results are useless without the cartridge size as context

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 300_BLK

Poll results are useless without the cartridge size as context

---

yes AND no......even with .222 sized cases.... the half grain (which is big jump) would be my way to go...not exceeding book max of course.... if for arguments sake book start load is something like 20grns going up to 24 grns thats 8 jumps....or 8x3 loads 24 to test.
IF YOU WERE starting at the start load...or the 10% below other load thing.....and you went with .2 of a grain that makes it 20 jumps and 60 loads to test....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

yes AND no......even with .222 sized cases.... the half grain (which is big jump) would be my way to go...not exceeding book max of course.... if for arguments sake book start load is something like 20grns going up to 24 grns thats 8 jumps....or 8x3 loads 24 to test.
IF YOU WERE starting at the start load...or the 10% below other load thing.....and you went with .2 of a grain that makes it 20 jumps and 60 loads to test....

---

I go this route - Lot of work and expense but i dont get out much so i have the time. Never found a 'perfect' load for me between increments but could miss it if i dont look...

.222 is a low pressure cartridge, load specs to work in rear locking actions like the Anschutz 1700s. I have no concerns doing my initial .222 and .223 ladders up in .5 grain increments as long as you are focusing on accuracy, looking for pressure signs and not going stupid hunting velocity. 0.5 and 1 grain increments in 08, 06 and magnum cases.

As others have said 1% of case capacity as an initial test, then smaller increments between the two groups that shot best or +/- the best group.

There's no point in doing small increments with a large case when working up to max unless you particularly like wasting powder, primers and projectiles.

Thanks for all the responses so far.
Reading through them all, something about skinning a cat springs to mind...
Good to hear how different people approach it.
My reloading sensei (as @caberslash called it) said to me the other day before we began "this is just how I do it, somebody else will do it slightly differently"
How many of you are still loading with the same process and testing etc as when you first began reloading?
I'm guessing not many, as I've already seen from the responses that the process varies depending on many circumstances such as the calibre and purpose eg. Short range hunting round vs. Shooting F class
Cheers

I think it all depends for me what powder I am using and whether it's pistol or rifle and how close I am to published max loads. I have a lot of reloading manuals so I cross reference everything and do my research to get a consensus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pav

Thanks for all the responses so far.
Reading through them all, something about skinning a cat springs to mind...
Good to hear how different people approach it.
My reloading sensei (as @caberslash called it) said to me the other day before we began "this is just how I do it, somebody else will do it slightly differently"
How many of you are still loading with the same process and testing etc as when you first began reloading?
I'm guessing not many, as I've already seen from the responses that the process varies depending on many circumstances such as the calibre and purpose eg. Short range hunting round vs. Shooting F class
Cheers

---

Greetings Pav,
Your question above got me thinking. Rather than major changes I seem to have refined the process as my understanding of it has increased. Initially I was limited partly by my equipment and partly lack of understanding. Time seems to deal with both of those. I moved from full length re sizing to neck sizing early on to help with brass life but now use minimal full length re sizing for some of the more tapered cases which seems to work better for them. Early on I chased the maximum velocities for my hunting rifles but currently am happy with the softer current book max loads with some exceptions. Rifles used for target shooting and my old soldiers get reduced loads. Interestingly my handloading started with a Lee Loader and a .303 which was none too successful for a number of reasons. Currently 50 years later I am loading for a .303 using a Lee Loader and reduced loads and getting good results. The difference is knowledge.
One thing I do quite differently now is the use of graphs in load development. I plot the load data from different sources on an A4 sheet of graph paper with velocity on the vertical axis and charge on the horizontal. This gives some interesting results. I then plot my chronographed selected start load and you can see how your powder and rifle compares with the various data sets. You need to make an adjustment for barrel length, about 20 fps per inch of difference for the two cartridges you mention.
Last year I wrote some articles that were published on the NZ Guns site. These are now open access so you can read them on line. One talked about graphs and loads for the 6.5 x 55 and there was a two part one on loads for the .308.
Happy to answer any specific questions.
Regards Grandpamac.

what was the difference using the lee loader @grandpamac
i am very much a novice and have been mucking about with one for some 303s. Or should i say 1, but have another in the wings

Well, not wanting to be too much of a contrarian, I like small steps, so 0.2gr would be my call. I'm having some success with the Eric Cortina method of load development, and small steps with powder weight and seating depth work for me (see some write-ups in the thread on this forum). I used to do 0.5grn steps, and 0.5grn steps might be OK in a 308, but I now do smaller steps. Definitely 0.2grn in your 222. And hey - good luck! Cheers, M

0.1 / 0.2 grains will make a difference in a small case like a hornet, 222, 223 etc; otherwise 0.5 grains in larger cases

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by csmiffy

what was the difference using the lee loader @grandpamac
i am very much a novice and have been mucking about with one for some 303s. Or should i say 1, but have another in the wings

---

Greetings Csmiffy,
The chief finding with .303 rifles is that you have to load to suit the rifle. I think that my first .303 had an out of round chamber and cases sized in the Lee Loader chambered hard. I solved the problem by full length sizing which would have got me into trouble with head separations if the necks had not cracked on their second or third load. What I should have done (and now do) is to keep the pressures down to about 38,000 CUP or less to keep them from stretching. I could have also full length sized the cases just enough to allow them to chamber which would have reduced the stretching but would not have helped the neck cracking. The latter was likely due to the poor quality of CAC cases at the time. I have also found that a tight case fired with a light load chambers easily thereafter. I was only using start loads, 34 grains of AR2201 behind the 180 grain Norma projectiles, so I probably would have been able to go back to the Lee Loader after the first handload. Annealing would have solved the neck cracks as well. Alas as a newbie handloader with one manual (Reloading Simplified by Cyril Waterworth) and no mentor I had no idea. To find the no stretch pressure you can try a light load, say a start load or a little less with AR2206H and see if the primers back out a little. If so there is no case stretching. I am using 32 grains of AR2206H behind the 174 grain Hornady round nose in my scoped no4. This gives 2,080 fps and great accuracy. I have also tried 34 grains of AR2206 H behind the Norma 150 grain for about the same speed and good accuracy. The barrel is a two groove in new condition and a reasonably short leade. The 174 grains are seated 3mm short of touching.
Happy .303 loading,
Grandpamac.

Thanks Gmac. The one i have been playing with to no avail is a BSA E P14 sporter. Barrel a bit naff but you would still think it could be ok (bullets arent keyholing) and you cant get any bullet out far enough to touch the rifling so the throat is probably poos
As in the projectile is only in the neck 1-2mm and barely touching. That is with a 200+gr projectile timattalon lent me.
Chamber is quite large also as cases have no show of fitting the other 303 i will be experimenting with.
Presently Ive tried a couple of projectiles out of the P14 and really only a bush rifle accuracy-3-4" at best. puts a couple close together then throws the rest. Bedded it, and even tried a bunch of pressure under the fore-end. Still the same.
Have a couple of other bullets to try but suspect its a done deal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by csmiffy

Thanks Gmac. The one i have been playing with to no avail is a BSA E P14 sporter. Barrel a bit naff but you would still think it could be ok (bullets arent keyholing) and you cant get any bullet out far enough to touch the rifling so the throat is probably poos
As in the projectile is only in the neck 1-2mm and barely touching. That is with a 200+gr projectile timattalon lent me.
Chamber is quite large also as cases have no show of fitting the other 303 i will be experimenting with.
Presently Ive tried a couple of projectiles out of the P14 and really only a bush rifle accuracy-3-4" at best. puts a couple close together then throws the rest. Bedded it, and even tried a bunch of pressure under the fore-end. Still the same.
Have a couple of other bullets to try but suspect its a done deal

---

Greetings Again,
One thing worth trying is to re crown the barrel, possibly including shortening is a bit. .303 barrels are often worn at the muzzle from dragging a gritty pull through string across the crown. The first barrel I had in my scoped no4 was badly pitted but still shot well as the crown was OK. It was a mission to clean so I had a near new barrel that had been sitting in the cupboard fitted. Shot the same but cleaning was easy. Most riffles benefit from a re crown. I have a P14 in the cupboard that has been fitted with a target barrel and stock so that is an option as well. I have also found that flat base round nose projectile like the Hornady 174 grain RN shoot well in rough barrels.
Regards Grandpamac.

Back when I had access to a lathe i did just that.
And yes I have a dozen of those to try as well

It has been a while since I worked up a load with a new projectile & caliber for target shooting.
I use ADI2208 for both .223 and .308

With my .223 it was 0.1 gr steps up to the point of pressure signs, then I backed of 0.2 gr.
That load groups well and shoots well.

The last (target) .308 load I worked up was from 41.5 gr to 45.0 gr in 0.3 gr steps.
I found two nodes in that range that grouped well.
Then I retested with 0.1 gr steps from 0.5 gr less to 0.5 gr more around the apparent nodes.

From memory this testing took about 100 rounds and found two accurate nodes that group well.
The nodes are separated by 2.7 grains.
One can be used for shorted ranges (up to 600 yards) and the other longer ranges.
To keep things simple I use to longer range load at both short and long ranges.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pav

Thanks for all the responses so far.
Reading through them all, something about skinning a cat springs to mind...
Good to hear how different people approach it.
My reloading sensei (as @caberslash called it) said to me the other day before we began "this is just how I do it, somebody else will do it slightly differently"
How many of you are still loading with the same process and testing etc as when you first began reloading?
I'm guessing not many, as I've already seen from the responses that the process varies depending on many circumstances such as the calibre and purpose eg. Short range hunting round vs. Shooting F class
Cheers

---

The general process is unchanged, but various ways of getting a good load quicker with less rounds down range changes.

The difference between load development for a hunting rifle and F class rifle is the same, just the process should bequicker for a hunting rifle as you typically aren't chasing the tiniest group possible.

I don't like load development so once I get a 1/2 moa load sorted I'm happy. I don't fancy wasting a box of projectiles on a huge seating depth test if I don't need to

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings Pav,
Your question above got me thinking. Rather than major changes I seem to have refined the process as my understanding of it has increased. Initially I was limited partly by my equipment and partly lack of understanding. Time seems to deal with both of those. I moved from full length re sizing to neck sizing early on to help with brass life but now use minimal full length re sizing for some of the more tapered cases which seems to work better for them. Early on I chased the maximum velocities for my hunting rifles but currently am happy with the softer current book max loads with some exceptions. Rifles used for target shooting and my old soldiers get reduced loads. Interestingly my handloading started with a Lee Loader and a .303 which was none too successful for a number of reasons. Currently 50 years later I am loading for a .303 using a Lee Loader and reduced loads and getting good results. The difference is knowledge.
One thing I do quite differently now is the use of graphs in load development. I plot the load data from different sources on an A4 sheet of graph paper with velocity on the vertical axis and charge on the horizontal. This gives some interesting results. I then plot my chronographed selected start load and you can see how your powder and rifle compares with the various data sets. You need to make an adjustment for barrel length, about 20 fps per inch of difference for the two cartridges you mention.
Last year I wrote some articles that were published on the NZ Guns site. These are now open access so you can read them on line. One talked about graphs and loads for the 6.5 x 55 and there was a two part one on loads for the .308.
Happy to answer any specific questions.
Regards Grandpamac.

---

Thanks @grandpamac, I have found and read the two parts on 308 last night but can't seem to find the 6.5x55 article. Does anyone have a link they could please share...?
There was something strangely satisfying shooting my own hand loads for the first time last weekend, and fair to say I've now got the reloading bug to go with all the others:D... can't wait to load some more rounds for the 308 & hit the hills and get started on a load for the Vixen. This week I was offered an old .303 from a hunting buddy so I may need to pick your brain in the near future.
Cheers
Pav

Hey @Pav, this is the same advice I give to anyone about measuring powder...

Scales come in 3 broad categories - beam scales, strain gauge electronic, and force restoration balance scales.

Strain gauge (aka load cell) electronic scales are the cheaper ones. These drift. You can reduce the drift by letting it warm up, keeping it connected to a stable power source etc.

Electromagnetic force restoration balances cost well over $ 1 K. If you want repeatable accuracy down to 0.1 gr, then this is what you need to look at.

Lastly, the humble beam scale can by surprisingly accurate. One trick with them is to raise the scale to eye level, so that your view of the needle is consistent.

Do some reading about "nodes" and try to find the middle of a node, that way minor errors in powder dispensing will not have a drastic effect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pav

Thanks @grandpamac, I have found and read the two parts on 308 last night but can't seem to find the 6.5x55 article. Does anyone have a link they could please share...?
There was something strangely satisfying shooting my own hand loads for the first time last weekend, and fair to say I've now got the reloading bug to go with all the others:D... can't wait to load some more rounds for the 308 & hit the hills and get started on a load for the Vixen. This week I was offered an old .303 from a hunting buddy so I may need to pick your brain in the near future.
Cheers
Pav

---

Greetings Pav,
The article showing the graph is in an article called "Managing Component Variations" published March last year. In light of your recent acquisition of a .303 you might also be interested in an article called "Care and Feeding of Old Soldiers" published in May.

One thing I started doing early in my handloading is keeping records.
Attachment 158701
This is a sheet I drew up in about 1978 once I had been bitten by the handloading bug. I was loading for one rifle, a .308 which I still have, and had just started doing my first load development. I gave a copy to a young hunter starting out handloading a few years later and he is still using them. My son uses an improved version. We all keep hard copy data as this remains if your computer craps itself. Some handloaders just write the loads on the box of cartridges but this leaves no permanent record. I started with one ring binder in 1978 and now there are about eight. As well as the load records load data from the internet, some old targets and relevant notes and articles are in the ring binders. Most of my loads are stored in plastic boxes each with a slip of paper recording what they are. You will develop a system of keeping track of things that suits you, earlier would be better than later especially as the number of rifles you load for grows.

Getting back to the original question my first load development I worked up from the Speer mid load of 41.5 grains of IMR4064 behind a 180 grain Norma projectile to the max of 43.5 grains. The steps were one 1.0 grain followed by two 0.5 grain steps. The loads were fired in one session two shots per load. The impact moved up the target and the shots became closer together as the charge increased. Back home the remaining 32 cases were loaded with the top load ready for hunting. This was October 1979 a rather simpler time.
Regards Grandpamac.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ebf

Hey @Pav, this is the same advice I give to anyone about measuring powder...

Scales come in 3 broad categories - beam scales, strain gauge electronic, and force restoration balance scales.

Strain gauge (aka load cell) electronic scales are the cheaper ones. These drift. You can reduce the drift by letting it warm up, keeping it connected to a stable power source etc.

Electromagnetic force restoration balances cost well over $ 1 K. If you want repeatable accuracy down to 0.1 gr, then this is what you need to look at.

Lastly, the humble beam scale can by surprisingly accurate. One trick with them is to raise the scale to eye level, so that your view of the needle is consistent.

Do some reading about "nodes" and try to find the middle of a node, that way minor errors in powder dispensing will not have a drastic effect.

---

Thanks @ebf for the lowdown on scales. I have been looking at different reloading kit options or deciding whether to piece together my own kit with various components from different manufacturers... so from what you've said I would be better going for say a Redding model #2 beam scale over a Hornady g2-1500 or equivalent lyman electronic scale?

If it was me I would go for the beam scales. Just my opinion, and when it comes to reloading, there are lots of different opinions.

The RCBS scales are good as well, especially if you can find one of the older Ohaus models. I have an old 5-0-5, the 10-10 is great as well.