The "accuracy spec" of 1% given for a chrono does not mean it reads 1% above or below another chrono, or that it ALWAYS reads 1% high or low. It means that each reading you get may be inaccurate by as much as 1%. For example if you fire a round and the true velocity is 3080 fps then the chrono may read as high as 3110 or as low as 3049. You don't know what the true velocity is, if you read 3080, you can only say it is between 3110 and 3049.
I'm sure the limit on accuracy given by most chrono manufacturers is the maximum and is dependent on temperature, voltage, and other variables so that in most cases you don't get readings spread to the maximum. You probably get only half or a quarter of the maximum. So maybe you only have a 15 fps error instead of 30 fps. What this means however is you can't draw any conclisions as to what caused a 15 fps difference in velocity readings. You can't say something like "water" caused it, when it may in truth be just a variation in the chrono readings
In your testing you had a spread of 48 fps. Was this caused by water, or by powder variations, or bullet variations, or lube variations.......or was it caused by chrono variations?
I'm not trying to disagree, or find fault with anything or anybody. I'm just stating some facts about test measurements. You and Tim can keep on making whatever assumptions you want - keep on kidding yourselves - and in the case of Tim , keep on reading what you want to read from the forum postings.
Fowlers, as in a fowling shot - one not on target but used to prep the bore for consistency. I thought the context of the statement would have indicated that. Since both of your "after the wait" shots had the same velocity, making ALL of your shots fit the same "after the wait" conditions to try and further improve the ES.Vibe
You mentioned shooting "Fowlers" and I don't shoot his bullets since his passing.
Lynn
Fowlers, as in a fowling shot - one not on target but used to prep the bore for consistency. I thought the context of the statement would have indicated that. Since both of your "after the wait" shots had the same velocity, making ALL of your shots fit the same "after the wait" conditions to try and further improve the ES.
Ahhh.He was using humour to point out that you misspelled foulers.
In your initial post you stated that your muzzle was stopped. Later you said you had a bad day that started with a 246 and got worse from there....and thought your bore might need cleaning. Have you figured out anything more?
I have been out of town since the match, so I have not been able to do any further testing. I did not mention the particular barrel because I didn't want this thread to go off on a tangent other than the issue at hand; since that has already happened I may as well say it, the barrel is a Benchmark reverse taper 2 groove 17-1/2" twist. As you may remember, a lot of folks thought very highly of this barrel a couple years ago, but it has since fallen out of favor, so much so that I prolly couldn't get five cents for it now. That's the reason I did this test, to try justifying (in my mind) to not spending the money to re-barrel. It's funny about how barrels come in and out of fashion, last year it was Lilja, this year it is Shilen. A friend of mine says he's going to get a Adams & Bennet, carbon steel, put flat black spray paint on it, good for a laugh I guess.
All the scientific thoughts that have been expressed here is way beyond my mental capacity to comprehend, it gives me a headache. It's all good stuff, don't get me wrong, but just not my thing. All I wanted to do was follow the procedure, not draw any conclusions about theory.
Thanks, Douglas