so I have this issue.....bad scope possibly?

[limige]

So I bought this model 12 from a forum member..single shot laminate 22-250. First thing I did was bed it with acraglass gel plugging tbe existing mag well. She already has a basix 2 trigger so that was good. Dropped on a demo vortex pst 4-16x50 mil scope and loaded up a ladder test with H380.

First test I didn't load hot enough. 325 yrds everything was pretty evenly spaced rising up.
loaded another a bit hotter and shot same yardage.
7/10 shots formed a 2" group...
hot dog! Loaded up some for group shooting and everything was horrible 3" or so. Mirage and wind were worst so I tried on a different day. Still crap. Tried shooting 100 yrds and groups are around an inch.

I dont get how its possible to shoot a ladder like that and have it go south. Tried cleaning the barrel and re torqueing everything. I ready to swap scopes. I have tried slightly different seating depths and charges.

[limige]

]http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e256/limige/20140418_101120_zpskftzg8ap.jpg

http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e256/limige/20140418_100549-1_zpsczbi59pk.jpg

[earl39]

First things first here. What cartridge are you shooting? H-380 is a good powder but has never been one looked at for the best accuracy except in the 22-250. I think i would try another ladder working in the load 5 and 6 area changing the charge .2tenths at a time and worry with the seating after i pick a load. Remember most times it is vertical for the load and horizontal for the seating.

[Ackevor]

If you have even a cheapo scope to test out you might as well try it just to see if it makes a difference. If it does, use that bulletproof warranty from Vortex to get it fixed/replaced. If no difference is noticed then try what earl mentioned, maybe space out the ladder loads a bit more.

The groups at 100, were they spaced apart vertically, horizontally or equally in both directions?

[jonbearman]

I would start with separate groups first as ladder tests can be confusing if you for get which is which.Your first target looks like right around 38.0 grains is where to start testing seating depths.

[earl39]

I believe Bruce Hodgdon found the 22-250 liked 38 grains of powder under a 55 grain bullet and that is how H-380 got it's name. But looking at your ladder and taking that it was shot at the 325yds mentioned, i would start with 37.0 and work my way to 38.5 changing nothing but the charge and look for ZERO vertical with 3-5 shot groups of each charge. The horizontal you can work out later.

[Bigguy]

I did the same thing as you with my 22-250. However the culprit is the distance you are sighted in for. If sighted in for 300 or even 200, your groups will not spread over 4" from slowest bullet to fastest bullet. Spend some time with a ballistic program and you will see what I mean. Sight in at the closest distance possible, say 50 yds. Then your groups should spread close to 8" at 325. The first ladder test I did, at 400 yds, gave me a sub MOA group over a 10 shot spread from lightest to heaviest load. Thinking I wasn't far enough away I repeated at 650 yds with the same result, but I was adjusting the scope to those distances.

[therichardpowell]

Curious what the response to that last post will be...

[joeb33050]

Curious what the response to that last post will be...
Well, I'll respond. After exercising the Hornady ballistic calculator; and drawing a lot of lines on paper; I've decided that the sight-in distance has absolutely nothing to do with group size/shape/dispersion at any other range, 10 feet to 1000 yards.

[joeb33050]

So I bought this model 12 from a forum member..single shot laminate 22-250. First thing I did was bed it with acraglass gel plugging tbe existing mag well. She already has a basix 2 trigger so that was good. Dropped on a demo vortex pst 4-16x50 mil scope and loaded up a ladder test with H380.

First test I didn't load hot enough. 325 yrds everything was pretty evenly spaced rising up.
loaded another a bit hotter and shot same yardage.
7/10 shots formed a 2" group...
hot dog! Loaded up some for group shooting and everything was horrible 3" or so. Mirage and wind were worst so I tried on a different day. Still crap. Tried shooting 100 yrds and groups are around an inch.

I don't get how its possible to shoot a ladder like that and have it go south. Tried cleaning the barrel and re torqueing everything. I ready to swap scopes. I have tried slightly different seating depths and charges.
I don't know what I'm looking at. The top target has 9 holes and 11 charges listed and the holes aren't numbered.
The bottom target has 9 holes, no 10th, no charges listed.
When Creighton Audette invented the ladder test, it was intended to give the shooter a SET of charges where elevation didn't vary (much), amongst which the "best" charge lurked.
In the top target, the lurker is within the 7 middle holes-whatever the charges were.
With this set of components you know everything the test will tell you; and now need to load sets of ctgs with the charges shown.
Groups ~ 3" at 325 yards are very good. 100 yard 1" groups are far from bad, and will shrink with development.

[OMGTKK]

Joeb33950, you have two posts up right now regarding reloads and accuracy issues. What I see on both is a lack of knowledge of load development. As been mentioned above, I have no idea what in looking at with your first pic. Shooting 12 single shots of differing charge weights isn't telling you a thing. A ladder test involves loading 3-5 cartridges of each charge and shooting each charge at a different target dot to evaluate group size. Once you determine which charge gives you the best group you can either further refine it by doing the same style test with varying seating depths, or load up a batch as is. THEN you can adjust you scope for zero. It looks like you are loading one of each charge to see which gets you closest to zero. You're blaming the scope here, and the barrel in the other thread when the obvious problem is your data gathering. Read up on ladder testing and run a proper one. Then report back. I'll venture a guess you'll find your scope and barrel are both just fine.

[joeb33050]

Joeb33950, you have two posts up right now regarding reloads and accuracy issues. What I see on both is a lack of knowledge of load development. As been mentioned above, I have no idea what in looking at with your first pic. Shooting 12 single shots of differing charge weights isn't telling you a thing. A ladder test involves loading 3-5 cartridges of each charge and shooting each charge at a different target dot to evaluate group size. Once you determine which charge gives you the best group you can either further refine it by doing the same style test with varying seating depths, or load up a batch as is. THEN you can adjust you scope for zero. It looks like you are loading one of each charge to see which gets you closest to zero. You're blaming the scope here, and the barrel in the other thread when the obvious problem is your data gathering. Read up on ladder testing and run a proper one. Then report back. I'll venture a guess you'll find your scope and barrel are both just fine.
That's "joeb33050". I don't know what you're talking about, just seems like you're confusing me and the fellow who started this thread. I'd advise you to read carefully, maybe several times, before responding. That helps me to keep from making confusing mistakes.

[earl39]

Joeb33950, you have two posts up right now regarding reloads and accuracy issues. What I see on both is a lack of knowledge of load development. As been mentioned above, I have no idea what in looking at with your first pic. Shooting 12 single shots of differing charge weights isn't telling you a thing. A ladder test involves loading 3-5 cartridges of each charge and shooting each charge at a different target dot to evaluate group size. Once you determine which charge gives you the best group you can either further refine it by doing the same style test with varying seating depths, or load up a batch as is. THEN you can adjust you scope for zero. It looks like you are loading one of each charge to see which gets you closest to zero. You're blaming the scope here, and the barrel in the other thread when the obvious problem is your data gathering. Read up on ladder testing and run a proper one. Then report back. I'll venture a guess you'll find your scope and barrel are both just fine.

That's not a ladder thats just shooting groups.

[OMGTKK]

That's "joeb33050". I don't know what you're talking about, just seems like you're confusing me and the fellow who started this thread. I'd advise you to read carefully, maybe several times, before responding. That helps me to keep from making confusing mistakes.

Joeb33050, I'm sorry. My response was meant for the original poster, not you. My mistake as I was posting off my cell phone.

Earl39. If loading 3-5 cartridges each of progressively higher charge weights and shooting each at different targets to evaluate for grouping isn't a ladder test, perhaps you will educate me and tell me how I should be doing my ladder tests

[OMGTKK]

Actually, my apologies to both posters. I just looked up and read the Audette article on ladder testing and that is not how I do load development. I guess I'm doing OCW testing and have been calling it ladder testing. Sorry for any confusion I may have provided. However, I still don't understand what the OP is showing with the original pie plate photo as there is no data on the plate that corresponds impact holes to charge weight.

[earl39]

Actually, my apologies to both posters. I just looked up and read the Audette article on ladder testing and that is not how I do load development. I guess I'm doing OCW testing and have been calling it ladder testing. Sorry for any confusion I may have provided. However, I still don't understand what the OP is showing with the original pie plate photo as there is no data on the plate that corresponds impact holes to charge weight.

You need to look at both pictures. One shows bullet order and the other shows charge weight for each.

[joeb33050]

Mystery, requiring my Sherlock Holmes hat. These 2 pix are front and back of the same target, 2 holes are missing, 1 and 2 are a problem and 9 looks like a fluke. More 100 yard work needed, I think. The ladder test didn't quit work out.

[therichardpowell]

Well, I'll respond. After exercising the Hornady ballistic calculator; and drawing a lot of lines on paper; I've decided that the sight-in distance has absolutely nothing to do with group size/shape/dispersion at any other range, 10 feet to 1000 yards.

It was very late and I thought maybe, just maybe, I missed something, and I didn't want to be a dick, but that made ZERO sense to me. I've never shot a ladder test, but I can say with a fair amount of confidence that your rifle's zero has NOTHING to do with it so long as you are hitting the cardboard...

[earl39]

Mystery, requiring my Sherlock Holmes hat. These 2 pix are front and back of the same target, 2 holes are missing, 1 and 2 are a problem and 9 looks like a fluke. More 100 yard work needed, I think. The ladder test didn't quit work out.

there is nothing wrong with this ladder test. It was done at 325 yards.going back to 100 yards would be a waste of time.

[joeb33050]

there is nothing wrong with this ladder test. It was done at 325 yards.going back to 100 yards would be a waste of time.
So, should he just keep shooting at 325?
I called Creighton about this.