Opening Your Eyes - Use a Chronograph
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 11:47 pm
I recently was given a most generous and gracious present from a close friend: a chronograph. This is a device I'd been doing without for about 20 years.
The last chronograph I owned was an Oehler 33, and it was a pain-in-the-butt to deal with. No digital readouts, everything was on thermal paper, and even at that, you had to do a ton of math to interpret many of the numbers you got; you had to make sure that you wrote everything down on the spot, and even guard the print-outs from daylight or they'd fade from sight before your eyes (thermal printer paper again).
When I first bought this thing, you had to replace these little plastic/paper thingies that you had to shoot through. And they had to be replaced for EVERY SHOT.
I got an "upgrade" for this beast that used "skyscreens." Not really that big an improvement, in my opinion now, but back then, I thought I was in pig heaven.
Now I have a really modern chronograph that has to be the coolest toy I've been given since I was a 9-year old boy on Christmas day.
It does almost all my work for me.
Most importantly, it tells me what I'm doing right and what I'm doing wrong in my handloading.
In a 10-shot string, who wouldn't want to have an Extreme Spread (ES) of only 21.7 fps??? Or a Standard Deviation (SD) of only 6.63???
That's what I was getting with my "plinking" 9mm load with Win cases, WSP primers, 4.0 gr. of HP-38 and hard-cast 125 gr. LRN bullets. Oh, the velocity over 100 rounds averages out to 1,060 fps.
My recent experiments with gently hot-rodding the .45 Colt in a SAA clone have been less-than-satisfactory. I can't seem to land on anything that gives me any consistency whatsoever, and all I want is accuracy (above all) and a velocity level between 850-900 fps with either a 215 gr. LSWC or a 255 gr. LSWC. I've tried Accurate #2, #5 and #7 as well as Hodgdon HP-38.
I've been thinking of buying some of the "Dot" powders that used to be made by Hercules, but I don't want to use any of the data in my older manuals because I'm not certain that [Alliant or whoever the hell it is] followed the original "recipes" faithfully.
I've been handloading since I was about 13-14 years old, but will readilly admit that I'm now getting confused. ALL the manuals keep "downloading" everything in dosages with the powder. Is it for liability purposes or not? Are the powders being re-formulated, which results in the lighter charge weights??? I keep getting different answers from different (authoritative) sources.
Nevertheless, everyone who handloads should squeeze all the dimes and nickels they can and save up and buy a chronograph. One of these little machines will really tell you a lot about which loads you have are good and which aren't.
My pistol loads are great as they are. However, I've had to greatly alter all my .22-250 and .243 loads. They were accurate before, but now I'm getting much greater case life.
I can't say enough about getting a chronograph. Hell, you can get a great chronograph for just over $100 now, so why not???
I paid about $600 for the old Oehler that I had back in the 1970s, and by today's standards, it did suck eggs. But it made me a better handloader.
Just my two cents' worth.
Allen
The last chronograph I owned was an Oehler 33, and it was a pain-in-the-butt to deal with. No digital readouts, everything was on thermal paper, and even at that, you had to do a ton of math to interpret many of the numbers you got; you had to make sure that you wrote everything down on the spot, and even guard the print-outs from daylight or they'd fade from sight before your eyes (thermal printer paper again).
When I first bought this thing, you had to replace these little plastic/paper thingies that you had to shoot through. And they had to be replaced for EVERY SHOT.
I got an "upgrade" for this beast that used "skyscreens." Not really that big an improvement, in my opinion now, but back then, I thought I was in pig heaven.
Now I have a really modern chronograph that has to be the coolest toy I've been given since I was a 9-year old boy on Christmas day.
It does almost all my work for me.
Most importantly, it tells me what I'm doing right and what I'm doing wrong in my handloading.
In a 10-shot string, who wouldn't want to have an Extreme Spread (ES) of only 21.7 fps??? Or a Standard Deviation (SD) of only 6.63???
That's what I was getting with my "plinking" 9mm load with Win cases, WSP primers, 4.0 gr. of HP-38 and hard-cast 125 gr. LRN bullets. Oh, the velocity over 100 rounds averages out to 1,060 fps.
My recent experiments with gently hot-rodding the .45 Colt in a SAA clone have been less-than-satisfactory. I can't seem to land on anything that gives me any consistency whatsoever, and all I want is accuracy (above all) and a velocity level between 850-900 fps with either a 215 gr. LSWC or a 255 gr. LSWC. I've tried Accurate #2, #5 and #7 as well as Hodgdon HP-38.
I've been thinking of buying some of the "Dot" powders that used to be made by Hercules, but I don't want to use any of the data in my older manuals because I'm not certain that [Alliant or whoever the hell it is] followed the original "recipes" faithfully.
I've been handloading since I was about 13-14 years old, but will readilly admit that I'm now getting confused. ALL the manuals keep "downloading" everything in dosages with the powder. Is it for liability purposes or not? Are the powders being re-formulated, which results in the lighter charge weights??? I keep getting different answers from different (authoritative) sources.
Nevertheless, everyone who handloads should squeeze all the dimes and nickels they can and save up and buy a chronograph. One of these little machines will really tell you a lot about which loads you have are good and which aren't.
My pistol loads are great as they are. However, I've had to greatly alter all my .22-250 and .243 loads. They were accurate before, but now I'm getting much greater case life.
I can't say enough about getting a chronograph. Hell, you can get a great chronograph for just over $100 now, so why not???
I paid about $600 for the old Oehler that I had back in the 1970s, and by today's standards, it did suck eggs. But it made me a better handloader.
Just my two cents' worth.
Allen