Question for the members or visitor about the factory ammo test sheet

[Intercooler]

    Recently I added one of Raggedyman's gel videos in the last block. I kind of like the idea but the sheet is getting kind of large for viewing.

Here it is BTW:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ak5OC6bPsjO8dEh6eGZ3N3hpUU13SXM5cm9pZy16T0E#gid=4

I have time to condense it and make changes this weekend. A few of the items I am thinking about eliminating:

Difference
Count
Cost
Per Round

Anyone really use those and want to keep them?

[RRMan03]

As far as I am concerned they can go.

[Intercooler]

They change too. Thanks for the feedback!

[Patriot]

One thing I have wondered about this document is the powder charge. Are we getting confirmation on the type of powder or going by sight? I'd hate for it to be wrong and have someone attempt to duplicate the round.   

[REDLINE]

Nope, don't use them.  I say streamline it any way you see fit.

[Intercooler]

    Identification is visual. I have thought about doing a % certainty with the charges. I know 100% Kevin's 800-X due to the huge flakes and Blue Dot in the RightToBear with blue dots. After that it's The Shadow comparing to powders he has.

[DM1906]

One thing I have wondered about this document is the powder charge. Are we getting confirmation on the type of powder or going by sight? I'd hate for it to be wrong and have someone attempt to duplicate the round.

The_Shadow is doing it right.  Confirming the powder can be simple (like in the case of 800X or BD), or more involved.  Once a "match" is identified, the charge weight and bullet is compared to published load tables and performance data.  Some of them may be an "educated guess", but the issue of duplicating the round isn't risky, as the loads are verified with publicly available data, such as velocities and pressures.  People will do stupid stuff, even without your help.  Also, the purpose of the pull-downs isn't, necessarily, to duplicate the loads, but provide a better understanding of what the mfg's are doing to produce their performance, good or bad, and it isn't only about the powder charge.  It is also helpful if a firing or feed issue comes up, for diagnostic purposes.  Cartridge construction often plays a significant roll with failures.

[The_Shadow]

Many of the powders have been easy to identify in the pull-downs, the ones that pose the unknowns are the Big Factory stuff like Winchester, Remington, Federal, CCI, PPU and Hornady as they can have non-canister types blended for a specific application.  Even then the charge weight can be compared to known values to find what canister powders provide similar results. 

Powders like 800X (ID-tan flakes), Blue Dot (ID-blue flakes) and others have specific identifiers mixed in, others have been visual size, shape, texture and checked against know powders visually, by performance values and yields via research.

Warning: Also anyone can make mistakes, reading the wrong values, typing the wrong info, etc.

When I do the pull-downs, I work to fill out the data on a form, so I can transfer/upload to the forum for others to see.  This helps keep things organized so I don't miss things, and recheck values more than once to confirm the data.

Anyone trying to use any of this information should consult other sources of loading data and follow the procedures of safe loading.  But I will say I place a lot of passion in what I do when it comes to handloading!

[The_Shadow]

DM1906, thanks for the flowers...I try!  And you are correct statement about learning what is being done by the cartridge makers!

[DM1906]

DM1906, thanks for the flowers...I try!  And you are correct statement about learning what is being done by the cartridge makers!

Just saying it like it is, but you're welcome.  I appreciate your efforts.  If I had the time, I might be doing the same.  I have no interest in duplicating their loads (I do just fine on my own), but it often does offer some insight into their train of thought.  It's also helpful for calculating the internal performance data of handloads, using their published data as a benchmark.

[Intercooler]

    All updated. I added all the gel videos to date and put "Sent" next to the rounds Raggedyman has there for gel testing.