I've seen where at least one poster here wouldn't give Melvin Forbes the time of day so the value of experience is subjective. I've never seen a NULA not shoot well so there in lies my opinion on Melvin's rifle building know how. Personally I would expect him to know a thing or two on reloading as well...

What you and others are saying about OCW loads being finicky is a little troubling in that myself, and the ones around me, have found that OCW reduces and in some cases nearly negates most"finickyness". I've found, with my/our application of OCW during load work up, that the temperature sensitivity of powders becomes less of an issue. This I know from cold hard data collected across a broad range of seasonal changes, which in my locale can occur all in the same week. It's still May here last I checked,and there's a chance of a snow storm for at least another two or three weeks. Snow in June surprisesfew. A month ago though, it was nearly 80 for a solid week.

The point is, we are no stranger to the effects thatweather may have on a load. I've asafe or twofull of rifles that get shot all year long, be it hunting or just swinging steel, a range trip is merely a walk out the back door.

Inherent accuracy of a good rifle is a given and that of a slouch is what it is. Premium barrels, bedding, floating, trigger work, ect., all add to the value of thesystem, but I've at least one example in my safes where those rules are blown out of the water by what I've personally seen.

I don't buy into the marketing hype over temp insensitive powders as I see no difference beween them and other powders thought to be very sensitive....when shooting OCW loads. The worry, for me at least, simply isn't there.

I choose a powder based onknown attributes and it's potential for a goodload density, as that is a governing factor for a given chambering regarding efficiency, not whether or not it'll be insensitive to weather changes or not.

Probably a good aspect of this discussion to cover would be the individualsdefinition of the "accuracy". During load work up I find that MOST of the "groups" I shoot across a range of powder increases which span several grainswould meet and likely exceed many folk's"accuracy" standards."Groups" too, fired at 100 yards won't tell anyone as much as groups tested beyond 250 or 300 yards. Once a shooter's accuracy expectations are defined it then becomes easier to compile an R&D system that meets the requirement.

First, let me say that there is nothing new or novel about my approach, and it may not even be the best one in any way. A lot of what previous posters on this subject have offered may be a lot better!! This is just the way I learned it, and so far the results have been acceptable. However, even though it hasn't happened to me yet, I can see where my method might result in using up more powder, primers and bullets than some of the ways other folks do it.

When trying to find an accurate load, I never change more than one variable factor at a time. I start with a bullet known for accuracy, usually a Sierra of the weight I want to use in my final load. Then I select a starting load, usually 2 grains under what the manual says is maximum for that powder type & bullet weight.

Next, I load five rounds using that starting load & bullet, loaded to an overall length 2mm less than touching the lands. Next, I increase the powder charge 1/2 grain, and load five more, etc.,until I have reached one grain OVER BOOK MAX., five rounds at each 1/2 grain increase. I then go to the range, and, starting with the lowest powder charge, fire five-shot groups at each level. I fire each group on a separate target, and fire each five-shot lot, noting such thigs as primer appearance & bolt-lift, case appearance and examine each case head for unusual marks, etc. IF I SEE ANY SIGNS OF EXCESSIVE PRESSURES FROM A PARTICULAR 5-SHOT BATCH, I will NOT fire any of the heaver loads!I realize that appearance is no proof of anything- I use my Lyman 310 decapping tool to remove fired primers and then to recap at the range. This lets me know if primer pockets have begun to enlarge!


If any of these five-shot batches shows acceptable accuracy, I choose it and load up 20 more exactly the same! Then I shoot these to verify that the load is indeed acceptable.

IF the load is generally acceptable, I will load 10 more identical loads but with the same weight Nosler Partition bullet instead of Sierras, (hunting mmo) and see if this change is OK too. So far, almost every load I have switched from Sierras to Noslers in, w/o any other change, has given equal or better accuracy. The exceptions only required a minor powder weight adjustment to start performing well.

IF my first effort did not result in an acceptable load, I will change ONE VARIABLE (ie, the bullet or powder type) and do the workupagain. Rarely have I had a problem getting the accuracy I want the first time, but it has happened. Many will tell you that accuracy always is best 2 grains or so under MAX. I have NOT found this rule to work out all the time-many of the loads I have gotten the best performance from were either at or over a book-maximum. However, I will not continue to use a load which will not allow cases to last as long as I want-I like 10 loadings or moreout of a batch of cases.

With modern, medium to large capacity bottleneck cases, I begin load development with a powder as slow as can be used for a specific cartridge & bullet weight-usually IMR 4350, N204, MRP, RE 22, or IMR 7828. Slow powders have less propensity to jump to too-high pressure spikes as quickly as faster ones. This is especially true of large-grain, extruded nitrocellulose types as opposed to double-based, small-grain or ball powders.

What is OCW never heard of it? But you have to find every guns max load might as well due it at the closes to the lands you can can get and that gives you the option shorten the Over all Cartridge Length todetermin the sweet spot.

Sorry you have a short mag to work with, with the exception of the accubond in the 358win I have no issues with any of my 30-06 cased cartridges and the rifles magazine length. Sounds like a exception in my experance.

LINK:
http://home.earthlink.net/~dannewberry/dannewberrysoptimalchargeweightloaddevelopment/

And you are one of those that insist it's harder than it really is...

End of story.

So by your estimate, velocity is the sole key to accuracy, since you've mentioned that more than once...

Interesting.....

Wonder then, how I can work up sub MOA loads across a 145 degree change in anualtemperature, using powders considered temp sensitive, change lot numbers, use brass that is not sorted by weight or volume, with bullets that the vast majority of internet gurus consider inaccurate....but I am an example of only one.

Wonder also how Federal Gold Match can be so successful across such a wide dispersement of arms day in and day out, month after month, season after season.........I highly doubt they tweak powder charges at the change of the four seasons.

Simple laws of physics are sometimes very hard for some to grasp...

So I'm a liar....

Geez guys, I was just asking opinions on how each of you individually work up loads. I didn't intend to have everyone at each others throats!

Let's remember we are all on the same team! I'm going to try that ocw method first and try as many different powders as I can with my single shot 30-30 contender. Keep the "spirited" discussion up, but please, no body count!!!! I need to research this ladder thing next.

RR...

We could almost agree on this and if a communication barrier of some sort didn't exist we'd be in near lock step.....

The "accuracy nodes" as you put it, for whomever's benifit that needs it, are when the muzzle of the barrel is at it's calmest point of occilation during the resonation of the harmonics. It's at that instant that you want the bullet to exit the barrel and that condition occurs at several points in the work up.

What I'm looking for is the highest velocity "node" I can find before the load peaks at too much pressure. I've proven many times over in the rifles that I've tested, which btw range from bedded premium customs to as issued factory, that once this is found it becomes very variable tolerant. The load is not AS sensitive to weather changes, the load is not AS sensitive to lot number changes, and is not AS sensitive to case capacity differences.

If the OCW load work up is done properly then it is PROVEN that pressure differences within that particular "node", or 'sweetspot"will not cause the bullet to impact out of the expected "group". This in effect RECREATES the variable that weather changes, case capacity differences, ect., put on a load. If three consecutive increases of powder charge weight, sometimes four, do not cause the bullet to swing out of the test "group", then it's easy to realize that50 or60 degrees of temperature diifference will not affect it either, and I've proven in my rifles thatit DOESN'T. I've proven in my rifles that a spread of different case weights out of the same box of brass will not cause a noticable difference either, different lot #'s don't matter, yada, yada yada.....

This is NOT to say that keeping things as close to perfect isn't prudent, because the more you CAN reduce variables the better the whole system probablyis. The whole thing though can be done overboard, and knowing where theline of diminishing returns begins, is valuable. Many reloaders do go overboard and get carried away....

I'll repeat...it STARTS with knowledgeable informedchoices of bullet, brass, powder and primer....stabs in the dark don't work well for the most part. From there it's a simple matter ofmanipulating the physics of the entire system to work to your advantage.

What OCW work up has done for me is:

1.) Make me decide that weighing cases is a waste of time providing I've bought a fresh box of Lapuas to draw from, when those are dead and dying, I buy a new box.

2.) Make me decide that primer pockets are fine the way are, flash holes are fine the way they are, and the only real case prep I need to do is an initial trim to make sure that's consistent on virgin brass. I only check it after the third or fourth firing.....

3.) it's made me decide that I don't need toclean brass beyond a quick dunk in IOSSO if the cases might show contamination that would harm my chamber. The interior of the case concerns me none. I'll still clean primer pockets but that's just an old habit I still haven't convinced myself to try and quit.

4.) it's made me decide thatan ever soslight bump of the shoulder in a FL die is all the sizing a case needs and I've gotten rid of all my neck dies. Life is just much simpler knowing my cases are going to chamber every time.

5.) it's made me realize that, even though I still weigh every charge, volume measured charges can and do work very well despite the risked variable of different charge weights across the board.

6.) it's allowed me to realize that the barrel is tuned to a given bullet weight, and in most cases, as long as profiles and B.C.'s are close, a load can be used with at least two different bullets. I call them "swap" loads. An example is my 30-06 that shoots 168 TSX's and 168 Hornady Match into the same point of impact/aim through out the tragectory curve,with no need to make adjustments to thezero for either bullet.....all year long. Same charge weight all year long, no fuss, no muss. I can use the same drop chart for either bullet and twist turrets out to at least 500 yards with that rifle and still maintain at least 1/2 MOA with both bullets. The only differences are that when switching over to TSX's for hunting season I clean the barrel very good, but that's a needof the TSX's, not the load itself. The other difference is that the TSX's are seated to within .050 of the lands and theMatch are seated to within .030...I attribute that mostly to aknats azz difference in bullet profile resulting from the slightly shorter length of the Match. Their not kissing lands becasue of mag box dimensions.I offered this load to a friend of mine down South and he had the exact same results in HIS 30-06, right down to the size of the groups. He even took it a step further and tried a slightly faster burning powder for the hell of it,and was able to get the same two bullets to swap with that load.Another swap load was my 25-06 with 115 TSX's and 115 Nosler ballistic tips, another is my son's .243 with 85 gr TSX's and85 gr Sierra HP's....and on and on. Proven hands downby lots of spent primers.

I'm currently waiting for a rifle to return from my 'smith that's being rechambered Ackley Improved, I'll gladly document my load work up in that rifle and can confidently state right now what the components will be for a succesful OCW load. Lapua Brass, Federal standard primers, RL-15, 85 grain TSX's and 85 grain Sierra BTHP's in a swap. Of course we'll hafta wait out a lot of woodchuck killin', deer killin' and steel swingin' with fireforming loads before the real R&D begins.....

I simply cannot deny myself what I've already proven to work.......

I find a load described above in 20 rounds or lessvia OCW at 150 yards. If everything is right, that load can be confirmed at 250 or 300 yards with a couple or three groups.Another 10 or 15 rounds might show a need to tweak seating depth. It might take 40 or 50 more rounds to confirm a drop chart.From there on out it's just shootin' and gaining knowledge of the load/rifle...having fun doin' it. So I fail to see the need to worry over killin' the barrel during R&D.

A barrel is meant to shoot bullets out of and since they roll new ones out every day I dont fret it in the least.

I don't hunt at 1K as I tend not to stretch it past 6 or 700 yards very often,so a near max load in a standard or AI'd chambering with a good bulletis all I need. I'mfine with 1 MOA, but can like 1/2 MOA better. I deal with standard type gearand mostly light for caliber bullets, and work within those limits wilst puttin' the boots to the dirt...don't much care for "huntin'" out of a shootin' tower and such.

Did do a short stint with a 300 RUM once but didn't like thecase life. My kid just talked me into a 300 Weatherby and we'll see how that goes. The RUM and the Roy is about my upper limit on "high intensity" and I see zero shame in that.......