Hi Guys,
Thanks for all the good info!  Much to digest and share with my friend.  In hindsight I should have put "reloading for idiots that suck at making precise loads and wind calls" in the subject line. 

Pew - that is pretty impressive.  Are you using a magnetospeed?  What program are you using to make that spreadsheet and graph?

I think I've been reading the same postings/articles as you regarding finding a "plateau" where speed stays same while powder increases.  (I was planning on finding the "plateau" for my 223 rifle and then throwing the charges instead of weighing them)

For the velocities, I used a Caldwell chrono (Gen 1). To make the spreadsheet and graph, I used Excel.

Regarding the flat spots in the graph, it was based on the concept that Satterlee (I might be spelling his name wrong) uses. The idea behind it is really similar to the Audette ladder test and the OCW test.

If we had a range that was longer than 100 yards, I would definitely try the Audette ladder test. I tried the OCW test on a few occasions, but it is difficult to get good results. As Satterlee pointed out, the big problem with the OCW test is the fact that you're basically shooting a dot drill, which leads to inherent inaccuracy. The constant switching of targets usually results in larger groups. He said that his groups for one of his guns will shoot in the 0.1 MOA if he is just shooting at a single target, but it will open up to 0.5 MOA (1/2 MOA) if he shoots an OCW-style dot drill.

For the velocities, I used a Caldwell chrono (Gen 1). To make the spreadsheet and graph, I used Excel.

Regarding the flat spots in the graph, it was based on the concept that Satterlee (I might be spelling his name wrong) uses. The idea behind it is really similar to the Audette ladder test and the OCW test.

If we had a range that was longer than 100 yards, I would definitely try the Audette ladder test. I tried the OCW test on a few occasions, but it is difficult to get good results. As Satterlee pointed out, the big problem with the OCW test is the fact that you're basically shooting a dot drill, which leads to inherent inaccuracy. The constant switching of targets usually results in larger groups. He said that his groups for one of his guns will shoot in the 0.1 MOA if he is just shooting at a single target, but it will open up to 0.5 MOA (1/2 MOA) if he shoots an OCW-style dot drill.

0.5 MOA mean spread?

0.5 MOA mean spread?

Sure. Duh! Mac, don't you know that everyone measures their groups by mean MOA?!?!

No, just me...

Pew - I have been reading similar write ups as you..... I read about Satterlees method/system on 6.5 guys.  I think their site is going to bankrupt me.

I didn't know that excel could make graphs (showing my age).  I'll ask my daughter or wife to create a template.
Graphs make the data so much easier to interpret/analyze

Anyhoo.  My thinking was a heavier bullet might make the "plateau" wider if there is a small error in powder (more forgiving for idiot/new reloaders)

Similar for wind calls.  Heavier bullet may be more forgiving.  My recent readings suggest that from a 168 to 200, the added weight doesn't make a noticeable difference in regards to wind.

I'll read up on the various "shape" bullets like the eld's that Bushido mentioned.  They seem to be more forgiving in the wind.

No, just me...

and this is why newbs need to be careful when asking reloading advice on the internet...

and this is why newbs need to be careful when asking reloading advice on the internet...

he needs a prescription for tooth infection