Lubes, velocity and accuracy

[45 2.1]

Originally Posted by 45 2.1
Now that is a set-up if I ever saw one...........
One thing you have to remember when testing individual items involved with the load, and that is: "You have to be a good enough shot to tell the difference when you see it". Those who shoot +1 MOA groups will probably not see the difference with most component changes.
A 10% difference in average 5-shot group size, with 2 different loads, requires 23 groups be shot with each load to be 90% sure that there's a difference. To be 95% sure, 38 groups with each load must be shot.
So from 1.1" to 1", or 2.2" to 2", or from .55" to .5", we must shoot a lot of groups to know, at some % surety, that there's a difference.
Wednesday I shot 6 groups, 2 loads, a 12% difference in group size. To be 90% sure, I'd have to shoot a total of 16 groups with each load.
This is why data and opinion differ.

Joe, i'm quite familiar with statistics and confidence levels. What they do not take into account is human variability, skill level and various light conditions along with weather unpredictability. I would say that the conditions are never the same along with your ability to judge light and mirage at any given time. Unless your shooting an unlimited class rifle (in a controlled atmosphere), your test results are going to vary outside where you think they will.


357 Max has formulated several lubes which do very well in high velocity/pressure situations and has the ability to see the differences. In dealing with target velocities mentioned, you might pay attention to what Felix has said about lube viscosity, i.e. use as low of viscosity lube as you can for the situation. Accuracy will improve when you do.

[Larry Gibson]

45 2.1 is correct in that a comparison of todays accuracy of a given load might very welll be different than yesterdays or last weeks. This is especially the case if we are making "comparisons" of a load with a change made if the tests are conducted on on 2 different days. Also as he mentions when yopu get down to under 2 moa (at 100 yards or more) then a difference of .1 or .2" does not give us a sure idea of accuracy. The difference may be more of a random shot dispersion than of any increase or decrese in accuracy.

In my opinion for a comparative test to be valid the variations of the load must be fired on the same day with as close to the same conditions ("condition" includes the ability of the shooter on that day also) as possible. A sufficient number of shots or groups in the test group of each variation must also be tested. A single 3 or 5 shot group tells us only that we may or may not be on the right track. A minimum of a 10 shot group or three 5 shot groups is really necessary to make any kind of conclusion as to accuracy potential. Then to confirm that conclusion another three 10 shot groups or five 5 shot groups should be fired to statistically validate our conclusion. We must also remember that the accuracy potential of any load is not the smallest group fired nor the "average" group size fired. The true accuracy potential is the size of the largest group fired. The other two figures just make us feel good about a load that in reality may not be that good.

Larry Gibson

[Bass Ackward]

<<Lyman Alox worked fine for many years, then didnj't. Maven sold me some Lyman Super Moly, which worked far better than the defective Alox, shooting 5-shot 100 yard group averages of 2"-2 1/2" or so in my Savage Striker pistol. This with both grooves lubed on 314299. The barrel has a LOT of lube, black, in it. Wednesday with only the bottom groove lubed, and the nose wiped off= no lube, 17/IMR4227 averaged 2.121" for 6 groups, and 18/IMR4227 averaged 1.879" for 6 groups.
I shot 75 shots, never cleaned, the last 5 = .975".
Pat I. said several times, and I have tried, lube in ONLY the groove just above the gas check. It worked for me, but made me very nervous. Chicken.
I think that less lube shoots better and reduces cleaning required, but more data is needed.
I don't know that cleaning all the black moly lube out of the barrel is necessary, it takes a lot of brushing and patches, and seems to screw up accuracy for the first ?10? shots.
joe b.>>


Joe has me in stitches again!!!

This is a very interesting discussion EACH and EVERY time it comes up. Sad thing is that we forget the lessons that are learned each and every time. Thank God I can be the one to address it because " I am not confrontational".

I have stated that a gun changes over the course of it's lifetime and that it will require different things at different times. So this doesn't surprise me at all. I have also stated (and was maligned by Joe) that the best accuracy occurs just before leading begins. Ala George Marshall. This also mirrors my experience. The smoother a bore becomes, the more critical conditioning will become. The less lube a bullet carries, the more sensitive it will become. These aren't laws, but trends that support Marshall's conclusion.

The tough part with top end cast performance of all kinds, whether that be accuracy or accuracy with velocity is translation. Take the last statement about best accuracy just before leading begins. That can also be said to be exactly the same thing as , "don't use any more lube than necessary for conditions". Or change the viscosity of your lube. Plus maybe a dozen other ways to say the same darn thing!!!

What you ARE doing is creating a scenario where the best accuracy occurs JUST BEFORE leading begins!!! Ala Marshall God rest his sole. And Joe, you hate Marshall!

Some loads require seasoning and some don't. These are invariably the PREMIER loads for long shot strings if that is what is required. Many guys here have said that it takes 100 rounds or more to see what you really have. How is this news? This is particularly noticeable with 22LR loads. Winchester used to make it's 52 barrels like a corn cob inside to beat this effect. But it remains load, bullet design, and gun dependent. Each 52 will invariably perform better with one brand of ammo.

I have seen bullets (designs) that didn't shoot for squat later become the prize mold to own. And this didn't always follow a logical pattern that we would deduce. I can develop loads that do their best work up front. This works better for hunting or high velocity. Or for the guy who cleans after every time. Warning: You can't have a load that requires conditioning that will stay stable though all climatic conditions. Just ain't gonna happen. Sorry, I don't care what velocity level you are running. So it depends on what I need from a load and how I go about achieving it.

Lubes go from winners to losers. And back if you follow it long enough. To put it in many peoples point of view, as a bore smooths, the requirement of a lube goes from one that "seals" to one that lubricates to prevent galling. This happens to EVERY gun over time unless a single load is used with lube volume that is in VAST excess of what is required. Seasoning is buildup of fouling to reproduce "a perfect" condition that is eventually replaced by smooth, dimensionally correct steel. How do we translate that? Another thread.

Well all that means that it is STILL gun, load, hardness, pressure, velocity, temperature, humidity dependent. You get the idea. The closer you work to the edge of any of these variables, the more sensitivity you are going to see regardless of cartridge or velocity level. That is right up until your gun changes conditions and changes what " IT " defines the edge to be.

So from what point do our statistics come? From the bad point or after the good takes over. Define bad and good? Because what is one to one man is the opposite to another. With a handgun I want VAST, multiple, accurate shot strings. For my rifles, I need three shots. PERIOD.

This is the big "complexity" with CAST that some never get over. PEOPLE looking for mathematical formulas and theories that have to be based upon fact. There are no facts with shooting. This is the sad part that the MOST CONCIENENCIOUS of us CAN NOT GET passed. And it dooms them accordingly. And poor Joe keeps on knocking at that door that no one can be behind. God bless him.

So what good are statistics? 1000 people use LLA and 975 say it sucks. But for 25 it works like a charm. Do they CARE about statistics? Are you one of them? If we go by the statistics, no one will ever try LLA again. Imagine how many people will be denied happiness and bliss.

All rules, trends, statistics, whatever are all destined to be broken. Get passed "YOUR " journey and learn to enjoy the destination once in awhile. If you hate your destination, make another journey. Don't look for statistics from others that have achieved the same standard. Pick a better standard! Look up, not down.

I know this is wasted, but I had to try.

Then thank Marshall (and the guy he got it from) for your recent results Joe.

[Bret4207]

Dang Bass, I sure missed ya!!!!

Did you mean George Marshall ( I'm not familiar with him) or Frank Marshall?

[Leftoverdj]

Ran into something that might be relevant. Bought a case of PMC Moderator when it was being closed out. Shot up over a brick in a CZ 452V. Got dead predictable 5/8" - 3/4" 50 yard groups in the fall with temperature running in the 50s, maybe low 60s.

Dug the rifle and the ammo out again with the temps running in the 80s to low 90s. No change but the temperature, and it's giving consistent sub half inch groups, mostly around 3/8". Nothing has been changed but the temperature, and the only thing I can see that changing is the viscosity of the lube.

[runfiverun]

I think viscosity was the answer to felix's question.
thee problem is the weather variations and the goals that are set by each individual.
john only looks for three shots at 2700 fps.
i want 50 shots at as much velocity as i can get within an accuracy window.
my kids want 500 shots a day and to hit that rock at 300 yds.
and the lube question is gonna be kicked to death.
set your goals and try a few things. or buy something else 4 bux aint gonna kill ya.

[44man]

I do everything the easy way because components just cost too much. I figure if I can go to my range and hit a pop can and more often then not, a beer can at 100 yards with the first shot from any of my revolvers from sandbags and not be more then 1/2" off center, any day of the year, I am good for deer.
Picking the exact holdover, a can at 200 yards is also dead. As is a steel ram at 500 meters.
I will not quibble about 1/16" difference in group size and I don't need to shoot 10,000 groups to prove a thing.
Accuracy, repeatability any day of the year, hot or cold, no bore leading or a need to clean, but above all confidence that my boolits go to the sights is all that is important to me. It has taken years of work and much thinking, rejecting stuff that just never works or only works if conditions are perfect just once. I do not need a load change from hot to cold. I do not need a lube change from hot to cold. I do not need a primer change.
Now the thing none of you get is that if any single one of you came to my range and I set my revolver, any one of them, on bags and I set you down behind it, you will also hit the can at 100 yards. You will go home shaking your head and with a new appreciation for a revolver. Heck, I might get you down to shooting 1-1/2" targets out there!
There is no voodoo or magic. I just tossed out all the old fashioned ideas that keep running around on this and all other sites. All I did was picture in my little mind what happens in the gun when the hammer falls and eliminated everything that ruins a boolit. Kind of simple, really! I have made the revolver shoot cast better then jacketed.
I have spent my life proving many things wrong about ideas with revolvers, rifles, muzzle loaders, archery, you name it.
So after over 56 years, Bass wants me to say Alox is OK!!!!!!!!!!!!! Gee whiz, have fun. I was a teenager when I found the stuff sucked.
Seasoning a bore? What is that? Accuracy before leading? What is leading? Changes in a gun as it gets old? Darn I just passed 59,000 heavy loads in that poor shooting Ruger SBH and nothing has changed from day one. Every BFR shot sub 1" at 100 yards right out of the box and continues to do so whether I ever clean them or not. Come shoot mine, if you miss it is YOUR FAULT! I don't care if it is 100* or below zero, dry, raining or so humid you can't breath, you will hit what you shoot at as long as YOU do the job.
Too many statistics, too much math, too many theorys, too much of everything. Don't any of you EVER RELAX!

[joeb33050]

Never have so many words, with so little meaning, been writ by one man. So good to have the drivel back.
joe b.

<
Joe has me in stitches again!!!

This is a very interesting discussion EACH and EVERY time it comes up. Sad thing is that we forget the lessons that are learned each and every time. Thank God I can be the one to address it because " I am not confrontational".

I have stated that a gun changes over the course of it's lifetime and that it will require different things at different times. So this doesn't surprise me at all. I have also stated (and was maligned by Joe) that the best accuracy occurs just before leading begins. Ala George Marshall. This also mirrors my experience. The smoother a bore becomes, the more critical conditioning will become. The less lube a bullet carries, the more sensitive it will become. These aren't laws, but trends that support Marshall's conclusion.

The tough part with top end cast performance of all kinds, whether that be accuracy or accuracy with velocity is translation. Take the last statement about best accuracy just before leading begins. That can also be said to be exactly the same thing as , "don't use any more lube than necessary for conditions". Or change the viscosity of your lube. Plus maybe a dozen other ways to say the same darn thing!!!

What you ARE doing is creating a scenario where the best accuracy occurs JUST BEFORE leading begins!!! Ala Marshall God rest his sole. And Joe, you hate Marshall!

Some loads require seasoning and some don't. These are invariably the PREMIER loads for long shot strings if that is what is required. Many guys here have said that it takes 100 rounds or more to see what you really have. How is this news? This is particularly noticeable with 22LR loads. Winchester used to make it's 52 barrels like a corn cob inside to beat this effect. But it remains load, bullet design, and gun dependent. Each 52 will invariably perform better with one brand of ammo.

I have seen bullets (designs) that didn't shoot for squat later become the prize mold to own. And this didn't always follow a logical pattern that we would deduce. I can develop loads that do their best work up front. This works better for hunting or high velocity. Or for the guy who cleans after every time. Warning: You can't have a load that requires conditioning that will stay stable though all climatic conditions. Just ain't gonna happen. Sorry, I don't care what velocity level you are running. So it depends on what I need from a load and how I go about achieving it.

Lubes go from winners to losers. And back if you follow it long enough. To put it in many peoples point of view, as a bore smooths, the requirement of a lube goes from one that "seals" to one that lubricates to prevent galling. This happens to EVERY gun over time unless a single load is used with lube volume that is in VAST excess of what is required. Seasoning is buildup of fouling to reproduce "a perfect" condition that is eventually replaced by smooth, dimensionally correct steel. How do we translate that? Another thread.

Well all that means that it is STILL gun, load, hardness, pressure, velocity, temperature, humidity dependent. You get the idea. The closer you work to the edge of any of these variables, the more sensitivity you are going to see regardless of cartridge or velocity level. That is right up until your gun changes conditions and changes what " IT " defines the edge to be.

So from what point do our statistics come? From the bad point or after the good takes over. Define bad and good? Because what is one to one man is the opposite to another. With a handgun I want VAST, multiple, accurate shot strings. For my rifles, I need three shots. PERIOD.

This is the big "complexity" with CAST that some never get over. PEOPLE looking for mathematical formulas and theories that have to be based upon fact. There are no facts with shooting. This is the sad part that the MOST CONCIENENCIOUS of us CAN NOT GET passed. And it dooms them accordingly. And poor Joe keeps on knocking at that door that no one can be behind. God bless him.

So what good are statistics? 1000 people use LLA and 975 say it sucks. But for 25 it works like a charm. Do they CARE about statistics? Are you one of them? If we go by the statistics, no one will ever try LLA again. Imagine how many people will be denied happiness and bliss.

All rules, trends, statistics, whatever are all destined to be broken. Get passed "YOUR " journey and learn to enjoy the destination once in awhile. If you hate your destination, make another journey. Don't look for statistics from others that have achieved the same standard. Pick a better standard! Look up, not down.

I know this is wasted, but I had to try.

Then thank Marshall (and the guy he got it from) for your recent results Joe.

[joeb33050]

...Real scientific testing requires a control group - and changing only ONE variable at a time. How do we do that in our game? Like it or not, there's always conjecture and "stands to reason" thought in the boolit game, always a lack of certainty and some amount of voodoo.
Oh well - it keeps things interesting...

Uncle R.

Seems correct. but, it ain't.
Whilst amongst the wizards, I might as well explain that this is incorrect. Scientific testing, that costs money, is frequently conducted after changing several variables or conditions, with a TEST PLAN.
Tomorrow is shooting day. Savage Striker pistol, Simmons 2-6X scope at 6X. 314299, .309", Lyman Super Alox, bottom groove lubed, WLR, 17/IMR4227, 2.790", 50 of these for practice.

Then, 314299, .312", 16/IMR4227, Rem 2 1/2, 2.790", Lyman Super Moly lube,
15 with 1 groove lubed
15 with only the groove above the gas check lubed

So the diameter, primer, powder charge and amount of lube changed.
This is my way of looking at, glancing at, several variations at the same time.

To read an explanation of how this is done scientifically, see
6.6 How to work up an accurate rifle load
and under this, down a bit
WORKING UP A CAST BULLET LOAD
By Jesse Miller OD. CBA Competitor.

under which, Jesse writes:
TIC – TAC – TOE chart
How do you decide between 3 primers, 3 powders and 3 different charges? Yeh how do you do it? Well my approach is what I call Tic-Tac-Toe.

There are many other sources, the statistics does the job.
joe b.

[Bass Ackward]

So after over 56 years, Bass wants me to say Alox is OK!!!!!!!!!!!!! Gee whiz, have fun. I was a teenager when I found the stuff sucked.
Seasoning a bore? What is that? Accuracy before leading? What is leading? Changes in a gun as it gets old? Darn I just passed 59,000 heavy loads in that poor shooting Ruger SBH and nothing has changed from day one. Every BFR shot sub 1" at 100 yards right out of the box and continues to do so whether I ever clean them or not. Come shoot mine, if you miss it is YOUR FAULT! I don't care if it is 100* or below zero, dry, raining or so humid you can't breath, you will hit what you shoot at as long as YOU do the job.
Too many statistics, too much math, too many theorys, too much of everything. Don't any of you EVER RELAX!

I think that you miss the point. I don't care whether you use LAA or what you think of it. But if what you think deters someone else from trying it, that's the shame. That person might be one of the success stories. Rest assured that if he is not, he will whine too. Did I ever tell you I hate bore ride bullets?

So you are the other end of the lube extreme. You are the anti-statistic. Why don't you get with the program. Load some softies and learn how fun problems can be. Or only lube one groove on the ordinance and experience some pain. Then you can be just like us and theorize.

Gee, if not for my needling, you must hate this site.

[44man]

I think that you miss the point. I don't care whether you use LAA or what you think of it. But if what you think deters someone else from trying it, that's the shame. That person might be one of the success stories. Rest assured that if he is not, he will whine too. Did I ever tell you I hate bore ride bullets?

So you are the other end of the lube extreme. You are the anti-statistic. Why don't you get with the program. Load some softies and learn how fun problems can be. Or only lube one groove on the ordinance and experience some pain. Then you can be just like us and theorize.

Gee, if not for my needling, you must hate this site.

Been there, done that Bass and it does not fit what I shoot. I understand and often said that some have good luck with Alox, it is that I don't.
That is why I gave up what gave me problems. I will take a new revolver, load 5 of each load with a given boolit and in an hour find what it likes. Then I load a bunch. I will move to another boolit and do it again. The only gun that gave me trouble is the BFR 45-70 because I had to test too many powders and primers. Boy, will a 10" barrel 45-70 sort out the wrong powders fast. Only ONE powder works and it works for every weight and style boolit, SR4759. My revolver will outshoot every 45-70 rifle I have ever seen!
Now, where I differ is I never wrote down or recorded anything until the groups were what I wanted. I saved a few bad targets with notations but scrapped most. I never mess with a chrono when working loads, it is worthless until I want to see what velocity my best loads shoot. I don't have note books full of useless information because I will never visit the wrong loads again.
I have a little notebook and a page has my load for each boolit in that gun, another page for the next gun. No more is needed and no change is ever needed, only the addition of another boolit.
I did the same with rifles and single shot pistols.
I have three hunting bows and there is a page for each listing different arrow sizes and broadhead weights and how to adjust the bow for any combination. I do not need to test shoot anything and can adjust the bow in the basement and go kill deer with perfect arrow flight.
Only accuracy is interesting, nothing else matters.
You can needle me all you want, just never mention my hat!
I am glad to have you back.

[Larry Gibson]

Joe

Continue your tests and the reporting of the results. Many of us do understand and appreciate the results, the "wizards" not withstanding.

Larry Gibson

[357maximum]

This whole lube discussion thing is like N.A.S.C.A.R , it goes around and around in circles for a long time but does not really go anywhere.....

it is unlike N.A.S.C.A.R, as that game has a winner, usually decided by simply being in the right place at the right time for one of many different reasons...the only reason there is a winner is in one simple difference...it has an end point.

BTW...I love N.A.S.C.A.R also. It is basically pointless yet for some reason it satisfies some primal urge deep down inside. GO #14

I am making the decision at this point to bow out of the lube makes a difference threads..they always go to the same point (dead end)...and I am simply bored with it.

I know it makes a difference, so why kick a dead horse.


I would be willing to bet that if someone posted the recipe for the lube to rule all lubes....maybe 10 people out of the 10,000 here would actually make it, and then 5 of them would not like it...........I have reached the 'WHATEVER POINT"

[calkar]

I have always liked the KISS theory. So 50/50 olive oil and local beeswax has been just fine for me. I have many other things that I like to do also like fish so I do not have time to overcomplicate. That 50/50 mix work fine in my 30-30 which chronys 1800.

[calkar]

Wow! chrony results worthless, in my experience chrony readings have given me many clues as to why certain loads were not as good as others.

[Bass Ackward]

All you have to do with any of these subjects is read deeper and answers from what people have seen are all over the gambit. Are they lying? I doubt it. Just look at how they defend their positions. Just stick with the subject of lube.

Some believe that it makes a difference and others do not.
Some swear that soft is the only way lube should be made and others like hard.
Some swear for for bees wax lubes while others prefer paraffin.
Some want over lubrication and some want under.
Some lubes are better in hot weather and some are better in cold. Some folks have one that works under all conditions.
And no one can agree even on a basic formula.

There is probably more here that hasn't been listed, but these are enough to make my point. If you shoot long enough, you will find yourself on different sides of the same argument that you yourself made awhile back. How do I know? Because I am no different. The biggest reason is that we forget what we saw years back in preference to the "NEW" data.

Joe goes out and has very good success that I congratulate him on and immediately he thinks that he has discovered the greatest thing since sliced bread. And he asks for statistics. Not only does he want statistics but he will want the data a certain way. Because ONLY in this way CAN results be validated on something that can't be. I can't tell you about how many articles I have read in my lifetime about seasoning that someone who discovered it felt compelled to write about their discovery. Then their life went on. Nothing new under the sun.

I brought up the Marshall point because I told Joe about this about 2 years back and he dismissed it with a snide remark about the man I mentioned. It's not about the man, but the message. And we forget that we aren't inventing the wheel here. Everything has been done and forgotten and done again and forgotten long before our time when most people had to shoot cast to be able to shoot. Are we smarter than them? Is our way the better way? Do we keep better statistics? Just go back through these posts over the years and see for yourself as the subjects are revisited.

Our arrogance, and I will include myself in this, is often laughable. And after having stepped away from this for awhile, I can see it plain as day. Just as soon as we think that we have that or any other subject figured out (or justified away) along comes someone that does it and wants statistics to be able to justify their position, our position, or why THAT person can't possibly be doing something that we couldn't.

The more I see of this, cast bullets are like life. Everyone walks the same road, has different experiences, reacts differently to those experiences, and takes away what they feel is important. Now you can help that fella out if he gets stuck or in trouble because at that point, he will be open to assistance. But he WILL NOT accept you telling him how to live his life. You can give him all the statistics about drinking or jail or aids or whatever and he is still going to walk the road as he chooses.

It's the same with cast bullets. We can help people who are stuck or want to learn more, but we can't tell them the best way or the only way. Because there isn't one. There are no rules (or facts) to shooting cast. In the end, there will be some things that people can not do. Or .... can not do as well as others. Fact of life.

So enjoy the successes. Don't ruin them. Good Job Joe!

[44man]

You said it right Bass. I enjoy reading about all the tests too and all are interesting, I am not complaining about them and want them to continue. I was just telling how I have had to do things the easy way for most of my shooting life. I just could not and still can not afford to do all of that testing. Just one of the tests listed here and on other posts would break the bank!
With things today I even have a fear of running out of lead and had to make a trap to catch as much as I can.
I hate the feeling that we can scare off a new fellow by telling him he needs to shoot 10,000 rounds to prove anything, that there IS an easy way for him. Every one can glean knowledge from those that do test and I appreciate what is done. The new guy should be shown both sides of the page because most who start casting are on a tight budget, looking for a way to shoot more without spending more. If I can tell him a shortcut and save him a dime, I feel good about it.
Some of you read the wrong things into what I do and say.
I am the same with lube, out of necessity I find what does what I want as fast as I can. The best lube for all applications will never be found and those that swear by one will have others cussing with it.
If you spend a fortune and a year testing for a 30-06, the guy with a Hornet can't get much out of it, neither can a revolver shooter or the guy with an ACP.
To make a lube test valid you need to start with the smallest caliber and work through to the largest caliber and test every lube on earth with every single cast boolit made for each rifle and handgun. Of course you need to test the amount of each lube that is needed on each and every boolit too. Now don't forget the powders that also effect results so we must include every powder listed for use in each caliber. Now add in the different alloys that you can make for every boolit. Then the changes in neck tension needed for each alloy and seating depths for each gun. Oh, don't forget all the different velocities that every gun can shoot.
You will exceed Obama's budget by a long shot and will die of old age long before you are finished with a usable list. By then the bees will have all died and you will need to start over. Worst of all, lead will cost $50,000 an ounce and the law will tell you that you can't shoot lead. ----------air powered steel bullets!
Gee, this is FUN!

[44man]

Wow! chrony results worthless, in my experience chrony readings have given me many clues as to why certain loads were not as good as others.

It's true, it will never make a load more accurate! If you are going to spend months looking for the smallest SD's only to find the load with the largest is the most accurate, what has it told you? 99% of the time a higher one is the most accurate. If you try a powder that gives good chrono results but the gun shoots for crap, what will you have?
If you work up a super load that puts all bullets in the same hole every time, every day of the year and run it over a chrono to find it is horrible, will you throw out that load? If you depend on the chrono, you would have never found the one hole load.
Leave the thing home until you find a load, then check the velocity and ignore all the other figures.
Been there, done that, it is a waste of time and components.

[45 2.1]

It's true, it will never make a load more accurate! If you are going to spend months looking for the smallest SD's only to find the load with the largest is the most accurate, what has it told you? 99% of the time a higher one is the most accurate. If you try a powder that gives good chrono results but the gun shoots for crap, what will you have?
If you work up a super load that puts all bullets in the same hole every time, every day of the year and run it over a chrono to find it is horrible, will you throw out that load? If you depend on the chrono, you would have never found the one hole load.
Leave the thing home until you find a load, then check the velocity and ignore all the other figures.
Been there, done that, it is a waste of time and components.

Funny, i've used a chrongraph at times and have never ran into the what you have, but I don't shoot balls to the walls loads either. Anytime I tested one of those "one hole loads" I found an extremely small (single digit) velocity spread. The poorer shooting stuff was up in the mid double digits. There are a lot of "ways" to load things............................aren't there.

[44man]

Funny, i've used a chrongraph at times and have never ran into the what you have, but I don't shoot balls to the walls loads either. Anytime I tested one of those "one hole loads" I found an extremely small (single digit) velocity spread. The poorer shooting stuff was up in the mid double digits. There are a lot of "ways" to load things............................aren't there.

Well of course but I never said it was not fun to use one at any time. But even with BP where a very small ES is always looked for, most times it does not pan out to be the best load. Yes, I get an SD of 3 with some loads and you are welcome to come and try to hit ANYTHING with that load!
I still find it is best to find the perfect load first and not depend on numbers.
You should be the first to admit that with the wrong powder, an SD of 1, that the load is not a sure bet for the best accuracy.
Then what about the wrong boolit with an SD of zero and an ES of zero, is it going to be accurate?
To just search for accuracy by reading the chrono when a lot of other stuff is still wrong will not correct anything. All it will do is make you look for smaller numbers. I never wrote down the SD, ES or anything else for my best 45-70 load that shoots sub 1" groups at 100 yards. I only kept the velocity. Because it does not matter. I remember The SD was a little high and I won't let you tell me it is too high for accuracy!