Secrets of the Houston Warehouse

It's a cool article, good read but if you follow that thinking you will get your butt handed to you in competition , some of the guys that were their are still around track the, down and get the whole story , check out br.com there's a thread over there on it .
 
Don Giraci

Take notice at end when Virgil said we worked on brass and groups size went down 50% many guys on site claims NK turning a waste of time and uniform primer pockets until you neck turn then you will see Lapua brass has some issues.
Friend who shot at Houston Warehouse Don Giraci sent me this actual target he shot at 200 y I said to him how did you ever get Hornady bullets to do that group, he laughed for two minutes said he bought 10 boxes with different lot numbers and they where all not good
View attachment 96100n
 
I'd love it if my rifles could shoot that well. Personally I don't have the patience to play with brass so I'm happy if I can shoot .5-.75 MOA. Doing that in the wind on the range is a major challenge.
 
Pesky ab said:
It's a cool article, good read but if you follow that thinking you will get your butt handed to you in competition , some of the guys that were their are still around track the, down and get the whole story , check out br.com there's a thread over there on it .
Click to expand...

Do you mean to say it would not be wise not to print the article out and bring it to the clinic with Wayne C?
 
Only if you would like to see it politely shredded by the current world champion , just like tunnels , what works there does not necessarily translate to the outdoors , and we compete outdoors .
 
Pesky ab said:
Only if you would like to see it politely shredded by the current world champion , just like tunnels , what works there does not necessarily translate to the outdoors , and we compete outdoors .
Click to expand...

Hahaha. It would funny to see Wayne give me a look of disgust and then shred the article without a word. See you Saturday.
 
Not quite a "Lazarus" or "Necro" thread, but always worth a look:

http://precisionrifleblog.com/2013/10/18/secrets-of-the-houston-warehouse-lessons-in-extreme-rifle-accuracy/

The most interesting part to me was the "Myth Busting", particularly regarding powder:

Myths Busted:


  • Powder charges, as long as they were fairly consistent and bracketed within a couple of grains, were not important. He threw all of his charges with a Belding & Mull powder measure, and for one experiment he shot groups using three different powder measure settings (51, 52 & 53) … all three groups were identical.
  • Lot variation in powder didn’t seem to have any effect on accuracy, even on when using IMR 4198, which has a reputation for varying considerably from lot to lot. He would just buy powder as he needed instead of laying in a big supply, because he found no evidence to support that powder lot variance affected accuracy in the least.
  • He never saw an inaccurate primer, and was unable to detect any accuracy variances resulting from seating pressure.
  • Rumors have persisted for years that some rifles shoot proportionally better at 200 yards than 100 yards, or vice versa. Virgil files that one under “occultism.” His experience in the warehouse was, if a rifle was shooting a consistent .100″ at 100 yards, it shot a consistent .200″ at 200 yards.
  • He did NOT uniform primer pockets or turn the case bases. He also did NOT size his case necks.

The main heresy is that the powder charge (amount and Lot #) was among the least critical factors.

Those who believe that everything is important, to where they even sort primers by weight can find ways to dismiss these findings, and so they should, but we need more than "All the winners do this list of steps, therefore they are all critical". The value here was that the conditions were controlled, and shooting skill was practically eliminated as a factor.
 
Last edited:
Andy said:
Not quite a "Lazarus" or "Necro" thread, but always worth a look:

http://precisionrifleblog.com/2013/10/18/secrets-of-the-houston-warehouse-lessons-in-extreme-rifle-accuracy/

The most interesting part to me was the "Myth Busting", particularly regarding powder:

Myths Busted:


  • Powder charges, as long as they were fairly consistent and bracketed within a couple of grains, were not important. He threw all of his charges with a Belding & Mull powder measure, and for one experiment he shot groups using three different powder measure settings (51, 52 & 53) … all three groups were identical.
  • Lot variation in powder didn’t seem to have any effect on accuracy, even on when using IMR 4198, which has a reputation for varying considerably from lot to lot. He would just buy powder as he needed instead of laying in a big supply, because he found no evidence to support that powder lot variance affected accuracy in the least.
  • He never saw an inaccurate primer, and was unable to detect any accuracy variances resulting from seating pressure.
  • Rumors have persisted for years that some rifles shoot proportionally better at 200 yards than 100 yards, or vice versa. Virgil files that one under “occultism.” His experience in the warehouse was, if a rifle was shooting a consistent .100″ at 100 yards, it shot a consistent .200″ at 200 yards.
  • He did NOT uniform primer pockets or turn the case bases. He also did NOT size his case necks.

The main heresy is that the powder charge (amount and Lot #) was among the least critical factors.

Those who believe that everything is important, to where they even sort primers by weight can find ways to dismiss these findings, and so they should, but we need more than "All the winners do this list of steps, therefore they are all critical". The value here was that the conditions were controlled, and shooting skill was practically eliminated as a factor.
Click to expand...

This comes around every year , some of the guys from that article are still
With us , 4 out of 5 of those points will help you finish on page 2 and I can’t comment on the 100-200 yard rifle thing ,we usually do it that way as a match strategy ( shoot the best one at 200 ) , keep in mind this article is a great read , but as I have been told “ never won Anything any where “ at The most the info is extremely dated
If your interested in short range accuracy get ahold of someone who is at the top and get info from them most are very interested in helping others improve .
 
Andy said:
Those who believe that everything is important, to where they even sort primers by weight can find ways to dismiss these findings, and so they should, but we need more than "All the winners do this list of steps, therefore they are all critical".
Click to expand...

Here's the joke on weight sorting primers...

Unless you have a very precise > $1,000 0.1 or .01 milligram scale... The variation in primer to primer weight is so small that the weight variation you will find is not actually primer to primer weight variation at all, but actually the variation in accuracy of the scale you are using to measure weight.

I have a Vibra HT scale (awesome scale BTW) and have tried it, and concluded that weight sorting primers is a waste of time. Even if you find a primer weight variation, it will not reliably correlate to a velocity change in calibers I've tried it with.
 
I can’t comment on weight sorting . But different brands do act differently and ignoring seating depth Is not a good idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom