Magnetospeed Sporter review

[Tikka223]

Got out again today and I’m still chasing a good load for my 6.5 Creedmoor and 140gr ELDM.

Magnetospeed sure does change POI and now I’m certain it affects group size. However, there is a conundrum: when doing load development we are relying on such a small sample size that we might get caught by chance and land on a load that we probably shouldn’t use.

For example:

My initial load development suggested 40.0 (2468 FPS, ES of 1), 40.6 (2498 FPS, ES of 2) 41.2 (2540 FPS, ES of 3) and 43.0 (2640 FPS, ES of 7). I went with the fastest velocity. I’ve now fired 43.0gr of H4350 a total of 23 times over 3 range and 3 reloading sessions. The average remains 2662 PFS but the ES has grown to 71 with an SD of 20. My targets haven’t been very impressive either with this load:



The lowest bullet hole wasn’t pulled and the Magnetospeed gave a velocity of 2561 FPS. No clue what happened there and I didn’t include it in my data output.

I also tried 42.5 hoping for a load with a more narrow ES. The data came in pretty decent but I’ve only got a sample size of 5 (2632 FPS, ES of 14) but a pretty crappy target:



After realizing I was probably back to the drawing board, I took off the Magnetospeed and played around at different distances with the remaining ammo. I had a couple of surprising misses which made me wonder about the impact of the ES. However the last 5 rounds of the day pulled off this group at 600m:



Either I got really lucky and the large ES didn’t rear its ugly head, or, the other groups would have been much smaller without the Magnetospeed. At the end of the day I’m a bit frustrated chasing these numbers and burning powder, ammo and barrel life. I’m tempted to drop back down to the 40s or 41s and see if I have better luck with the ES problem. I was as careful as I could be reloading so hopefully the problem doesn’t lie there. I’d rather have good vertical consistency with a lower velocity and take my chances with the wind.

Any thoughts out there on what I could improve or a load I should be trying?

 

[ChewyChewbacca]

Tikka
Your right. Your back to the drawing board. Take the Magneto Speed off, build yourself some rounds 1/2 to 1 grain apart, do ladder tests, groups, what ever you want, there is more than one way to find nodes. Watch for pressure signs along the way. Doing what you’re doing your just slinging lead around hoping for the best. You’ll never get any thing but what your getting with that chronograph hanging off the end of your barrel.

 

[Maple57]

Before everyone gets all hot and heavy for a Magnetospeed, I would like to suggest that you run an experiment...

For those of you who can, try shooting through both Magnetospeed and a light curtain like a Chrony and or a Labradar and compare the results between them all to see if they generally agree or confict.

I did a test between a light curtain and Labradar and the results were less than inspiring.

We do have a Magnetospeed as well which was not used that day, but we do plan to construct yet another test day using 2 Ladradars, 2 light curtains and one magnetospeed. That will be interesting.

 

[titch--]

I got a magneto myself, but never use it for my load development. To tell you the truth, I dont care what my numbers are, cause I go by what the paper/steel tell me. In the end if its shooting good out at range, then who cares how you got there...

I dont do competitions, so this works for me.

 

[Alpheus]

Before everyone gets all hot and heavy for a Magnetospeed, I would like to suggest that you run an experiment...

For those of you who can, try shooting through both Magnetospeed and a light curtain like a Chrony and or a Labradar and compare the results between them all to see if they generally agree or confict.

I did a test between a light curtain and Labradar and the results were less than inspiring.

We do have a Magnetospeed as well which was not used that day, but we do plan to construct yet another test day using 2 Ladradars, 2 light curtains and one magnetospeed. That will be interesting.

I have shot a ladder test using my Magnetospeed side by side with a Labradar and then plotted the results in Excel. The two lines followed each other exactly, with the difference staying right around 2-3fps.

I have also talked to other shooters who have done the same test with identical results.

In your test, I'd bet the light Chrony was the problem, not the Labradar.

 

[Maple57]

I have shot a ladder test using my Magnetospeed side by side with a Labradar and then plotted the results in Excel. The two lines followed each other exactly, with the difference staying right around 2-3fps.

I have also talked to other shooters who have done the same test with identical results.

In your test, I'd bet the light Chrony was the problem, not the Labradar..

If your values correlated so perfectly, I am quite certain there is an error. Perhaps you never fired enough shots to see the randomness?

Actually it wasn't a chrony we used, I forget the brand, but the Labradar is certainly not blameless. It produced different results depending on the bullet size we fired and there was no consistency to which method was faster or slower. It was quite random. I'm quite certain the loads being tested were far more consistent than the measuring systems showed. I have it all on video and hope to find the time to post it before long.

It is possible that the light curtain chronograph obstructed the Labradar somehow even though it had a clear enough view and generated numbers.

I would caution anyone not to make biased assumptions and instead take the time to run their own tests by measuring the same shot using multiple systems and you will quickly find it produces a roulette wheel of values that rarely correlate.

Its well known point that consumer grade chronographing systems are error prone to no better than about 30 FPS. All we need to do to verify that is measure the same shot using multiple systems at the same time.

 

[Alpheus]

If your values correlated so perfectly, I am quite certain there is an error. Perhaps you never fired enough shots to see the randomness?

It was a ladder test in 6x47L for 105gr Berger Hunting bullets. 18 rounds from around 33gr to 35gr IIRC. The two curves matched identically, with the MS consistently giving 2-3fps slower at the muzzle versus the Labradar. Another shooter at my range did a similar test, but I think he was doing groups. Anyway, he also found the consistent 2-3fps difference with completely different equipment.

I just went through my notebook and found the data. I even recorded the LR reading at 10m and 50m.

I'm not sure why you are saying if the values correlated so well, there must be an error.

 

[6MT]

It was a ladder test in 6x47L for 105gr Berger Hunting bullets. 18 rounds from around 33gr to 35gr IIRC. The two curves matched identically, with the MS consistently giving 2-3fps slower at the muzzle versus the Labradar. Another shooter at my range did a similar test, but I think he was doing groups. Anyway, he also found the consistent 2-3fps difference with completely different equipment.

I just went through my notebook and found the data. I even recorded the LR reading at 10m and 50m.

I'm not sure why you are saying if the values correlated so well, there must be an error.

Yep, that's pretty much what I found When I did my tests. A very consistent 3fps average difference between the 2 units.

 

[Tikka223]

When I was researching LabRadar vs Magnetospeed the reviews all had a very high rate of confidence in the data produced. There are some very smart people out there (ex: Precision Rifle Blog) that have good things to say about both products.

 

[Mystic Precision]

My tests have shown my magnetospeed and the labradar tested were very close in values.

I don't use the MS when I am load tuning although it showed no affect on my load tuning using heavy barrels.

When I have figure out my best load based on holes in paper, strap it on, get a velocity reading... done. I don't bother with ES/SD readings cause the target will tell me everything I need to know.

with Berger 140gr VLD target that I used in all my 6.5 Creedmoors, I would start at 40.5gr and work towards 41.8gr in 0.2gr increments (10 thou off the lands). Testing as far out as possible with 300 being fantastic. In one work up, I will have my load narrowed down. I can also get solid results if I shot Lapua 139gr Scenars or Sierra 142's. I don't shoot hornady anymore.

I prefer to shoot bullets capable of 1/4 to 1/3 moa accuracy. Anything else is simply too expensive....

Jerry

 

[Maple57]

Your results are far better than mine, but 2-7 fps in actuality with an average difference of 4.4 fps. Still pretty good though.

I am curious why your results are so much better than our findings. We had discrepancies up to 100 FPS, but we tried different calibers in the tests, not just one rifle.

2757 2759 2
2813 2816 3
2816 2822 6
2818 2821 3
2828 2832 4
2977 2983 6
2977 2983 6
2982 2987 5
2972 2975 3
2991 2995 4
2957 2962 5
2962 2968 6
2974 2980 6
2983 2988 5
2836 2837 1
2799 2803 4
2801 2804 3
2809 2816 7

2891.8 2896.2 4.4

 

[kthomas]

While I haven't seen too much of an effect with a magnetospeed on my heavy contour barrels (MTU & heavy varmint), if this does bother you, there are accessories available that mounts the magnetospeed in a manner in which it doesn't touch the barrel, and thus doesn't effect the shot at all. David Tubb shoots ELR comps with a magnetospeed mounted in such a manner.

A 2-3 fps difference between different chrono's is negligible, and within the realm of the tolerances that these devices can measure. I wouldn't sweat a 2-3 fps difference.

Load development is it's own separate discussion, but the Scott Satterlee method is complete junk. The sample sizes are statistically insignificant, any so-called "nodes" you would find in the Scott Satterlee method is a mere illusion, or if it does turn out to actually be a node, then you ran into it by pure luck. If you don't believe me, load up two identical ladders and see if there's a single consistent "node" that is present on both ladders. I've done it numerous times, and I can tell you that I've never found a consistent "node" between the two ladders. There just isn't a big enough sample size to have any statistical significance.

Chrono's are great for establishing/testing loads to see their ES/SD, and from there you can tweak the precision with bullet seating depth tests. Listen to the Applied Ballistic guys (Bryan Litz, Emil Praslick) when they joined the Every Day Sniper podcast to talk about reloading. Lot's of great information to glean from those podcasts.

 

[Tikka223]

I’m plan in listening to that podcast. Thanks for that!

 

[kthomas]

I’m plan in listening to that podcast. Thanks for that!

July 28 is the date of the specific podcast episode.

It's well worth a listen, enjoy!

 

[Tikka223]

Started listening to it. Very interesting to hear some very knowledgeable folks talk about reloading.

 

[Tikka223]

Great podcast with lots of info. Part 2 had the information I was eager to hear. After reading many of the comments here and elsewhere, I hit the range today for a more traditional ladder test. This process has left me thinking a Lab Radar may have been a better choice to get to a good load with the least amount of rounds possible. However, I enjoy shooting so I still don’t think I’d be ahead of I had spent the additional 300-400$ on a LabRadar.

BUT ... once again I leave the range a little frustrated. My ladder test was shot at 260m to make sure I could see bullet holes, still be far enough to hopefully see some vertical dispersion, but not too far that the wind could throw off results. It really would have been nice to have some velocity data to go with this. A search on YouTube finds some pretty expensive products from Weiser and David Tubb as well as some decent DIY solutions like this one:

https://youtu.be/8vZ49ZHtXpg

This is the limitation I ran into with load development: the group was too hard to read:



Loads fired were 42.4,42.5,42.6,42.7,42.8,42.9,43.0. After realizing that 260m was too close I went to 600m. It would be great to have been able to see which bullet hole was which load but it would have taken forever to go down range after every shot.



I’m going to load up and shoot some groups and see what happens. That should be the end of my load development. The Magnetospeed will go on at the end to get some velocity numbers and that will be that. I think it’s safe to say that the Magnetospeed probably does have an effect on what your group looks like and thus likely invalidates a ladder test that’s shot with the Magnetospeed on the barrel. With any luck I’ll have a mount system figured out. To do it all again, it might have been worth spending the money on the Ladradar.

 

[Tikka223]

Note, the target with the orange paint needs to be rotated 90’ clockwise.

 

[Forest1488]

Very informative and interesting post.

 

[Mystic Precision]

Go back to 260m... load 3rds at each powder charge... shoot each load at a separate target... I use the RED STAR TARGET 9 cross hair target.



It will be very obvious which load is working best when you separate each charge on a clean target... if you prefer 4 or 5 rds per step, have at it. Target for my FTR 308Win work up using the "then new" Matrix bullet.

I think you are making this ALOT harder then it needs to be. This is pretty much the pattern you see going into and out of a node... so yes, the group pattern for B and D are repeatable.. some close together then a 'flyer'. Increase the rd count and the central cluster will increase BUT there will also be a ring of flyers.

Why being able to plot each impact in real time is important... always compare the impact to the group center.. and the wind.

B and D are the "must have pulled that shot" loads.... when more then likely it is a load out of tune with the barrel (but then some don't consider barrel movements relevant anymore... they make me smile)

Load C will just get rounder and slightly bigger as you put more bullets through the small group. Pretty sure each letter is 0.2gr apart... you can muck with seating depths for Load C if you want to see if there is anything left to tune out.

I know C is ideal because loads B and D confirm it.... with A and E (and F ) bracketing the entire node.

FYI, if there were an 'F' load, it would be big and non descript... just like 'A'. Keep adding powder and this pattern will repeat.. with pressure being your limiting factor. I don't use this highest node anymore... just too fussy for my tastes

Jerry

PS.. if you are using a Tikka and hornady bullets, I would be very happy with consistent 1/2 to 2/3 MOA groups that far out. If you want tighter, you should consider better bullets as a min... and then a match barrel as ideal.

 

[Tikka223]

Once again thank you for the thoughtful and informative replies Jerry. The plan is to get a match barrel once this one has been shot out. Maybe I’ll switch back to Bergers when that happens.