Load Development Methods: Ladder Test, OCW, and Satterlee Compared

Published: August 2026

Every handloader eventually asks the same question: how do you actually find the “best” charge weight for a given rifle, bullet, and powder combination? Pull up any reloading forum and you will find three names repeated constantly – the Ladder Test, OCW, and the Satterlee Method – often used interchangeably, which is a mistake. They are related in spirit but different in execution, and mixing them up leads to wasted components, confusing results, and sometimes unsafe pressure work-ups. This guide breaks down each method on its own terms, shows where they overlap, and lays out a practical workflow for combining them without wasting a full season of barrel life chasing “nodes” that may not exist.

Why Load Development Methodology Matters

A charge weight pulled straight from a loading manual will almost always shoot – but “will shoot” and “shoots to this rifle’s full potential” are different things. Every barrel has its own harmonic signature, every chamber has its own leade, and every lot of powder and brass introduces small variations that a printed load table cannot account for. Structured load development exists to find the charge weight, seating depth, and component combination that produces the most consistent point of impact and the tightest groups in your specific rifle, not just “a” rifle.

This only works if the underlying process is sound. Before diving into methodology, it is worth being blunt about the single non-negotiable rule that applies to every method described below: always start well below the published maximum and work up in small, deliberate steps, watching for pressure signs at every stage. For a full breakdown of what those signs look like and how to build a safe pressure work-up protocol, see our guide on overpressure in reloading.

The Ladder Test (Audette Method)

The Ladder Test – also called the Incremental Load Development Method (ILDM) or the 20-Round String Method – was developed by Creighton Audette, a machinist and gunsmith who shot on the US Palma Team and won multiple National Matches at Camp Perry. Audette spent much of his career at Frankford Arsenal and published his method in American Rifleman and Precision Shooting magazine, where it became one of the most influential load development frameworks in American precision shooting.

How It Works

1. Load a series of single rounds with powder charges increasing in small, consistent increments (commonly 0.3 to 0.5 grains for a mid-size rifle cartridge, less for small overbore-sensitive cases).
2. Fire the entire series at a single point of aim on one target, at 300 yards (274 meters) or more if possible. Distance matters here – vertical dispersion that is invisible at 100 yards (91 meters) becomes obvious at 300 yards and beyond.
3. Mark each shot’s charge weight next to its impact on the target as you shoot, either with a spotter or by using a chronograph to correlate velocity with each hole.
4. Look for a cluster of two or more consecutive charges that land close together vertically – this cluster is the “node,” interpreted as a charge range where the rifle is temporarily less sensitive to small variations in powder charge.

Strengths and Limitations

The Ladder Test is efficient with components – a useful node can sometimes be identified in as few as 12 to 20 rounds – and it does not require a chronograph, though using one adds useful correlating data. Its biggest weakness is that every single shot counts toward the result. In a rifle with any bedding inconsistency, a stiff barrel channel, or optics with tracking issues, normal shot-to-shot dispersion can be mistaken for a meaningful pressure or harmonic effect. Audette himself developed the method around benchrest-grade rifles, where it performs best. In a factory sporter with 1 to 1.5 MOA of inherent dispersion, results are far less reliable.

OCW (Optimal Charge Weight – Newberry Method)

OCW is a distinct and separately developed method, created by handloader Dan Newberry. It is frequently confused with the Satterlee Method because both use a “round robin” firing sequence, but the target setup and interpretation are different.

How It Works

1. Select a charge range using the average of several published maximums from reputable manuals (Hodgdon, Hornady, Sierra, or similar).
2. Load three rounds each at five charge weights, typically in increments of 0.3 to 0.5 grains.
3. Set up five separate targets, one per charge weight, all at 100 yards (91 meters).
4. Fire in round-robin fashion: one shot from charge 1 at target 1, one shot from charge 2 at target 2, and so on through all five, then repeat the sequence two more times so each target ends with a 3-shot group.
5. Compare the five groups. The OCW is the charge weight where point of impact stays consistent across two or three adjacent charges – meaning small variances above or below that charge will not meaningfully shift the group. Group size at this stage is treated as secondary information; point-of-impact stability is the primary signal.

Strengths and Limitations

OCW’s stated goal is a “resilient” load – one that stays accurate even with modest lot-to-lot powder variation, seasonal temperature swings, or a slightly worn scale. This makes it popular with hunters and long-range shooters who load in bulk and cannot re-tune before every outing. The tradeoff is component and time cost: a full five-charge OCW test with a fouler and confirmation groups can run 20 to 30+ rounds before you even move to seating depth testing. Critics also point out that the round-robin format, shot at the same point of aim repeatedly across a session, can resemble a “dot drill” exercise, meaning shooter-induced dispersion can be mistaken for load-induced dispersion if fundamentals are not rock solid.

The Satterlee Method

This is where a lot of online discussion goes wrong. The Satterlee Method, developed by competitive shooter Scott Satterlee of Precision Tactical Solutions, is not a variant of OCW – it is a separate protocol built around chronograph data and standard deviation (SD) rather than primarily around point of impact on paper.

How It Works

1. Load rounds across a charge range in small, consistent increments, typically starting around 15 percent below and working toward roughly 10 percent above your target charge, capped by safe pressure limits.
2. Fire test rounds over a chronograph, but critically, do not shoot round robin. Fire complete 3 to 5-shot strings at a single charge weight into one target, then fully break down and rebuild your shooting position before moving to the next charge, and randomize the firing order rather than moving straight up the ladder.
3. Record the average velocity and standard deviation for each charge weight.
4. Identify the charge (or narrow range of charges) that produces the lowest standard deviation in velocity – this is treated as the most likely candidate for a stable, repeatable “node,” since low SD generally correlates with reduced vertical dispersion at distance.
5. Confirm the candidate charge with a larger group before locking it in, and follow with seating depth testing if further refinement is needed.

Strengths and Limitations

The Satterlee Method can identify a strong candidate load in as few as 10 rounds for the initial screening pass, which is why it is popular among PRS and NRL competitors who need to iterate quickly across multiple rifles. Its reliance on chronograph SD as the primary metric means a quality chronograph (a magnetospeed or similar unit) is effectively mandatory, and any drift or mounting inconsistency in the chronograph itself can produce misleading results. Because it deliberately avoids round-robin shooting, it also takes longer at the range per string than OCW does, even though it can use fewer total rounds.

What the Research Actually Says About “Nodes”

It is worth being honest with readers here rather than repeating internet folklore uncritically. Applied Ballistics founder Bryan Litz has published large-sample statistical testing of the “flat spot” and “node” theories that underpin both the Ladder Test and OCW. His conclusion, based on running many ladders with larger sample sizes than a typical single-shot or 3-shot test allows, is that apparent velocity flat spots and point-of-impact clustering are frequently explainable by normal shot-to-shot and chronograph measurement variation rather than a genuine, repeatable physical phenomenon tied to barrel harmonics. That does not mean these methods are worthless – they still force you to test across a meaningful charge range, use a chronograph, and pay attention to pressure signs, all of which are good practice. It does mean you should treat any single-pass “node” as a hypothesis to confirm with a larger group at your working charge, not as settled fact after one test.

Comparing the Three Methods

Method	Typical Round Count (Initial Pass)	Test Distance	Chronograph Required	Firing Pattern	Primary Signal
Ladder Test (Audette)	12-20	300+ yards (274+ m)	Optional, recommended	Single shots up the ladder	Point-of-impact clustering
OCW (Newberry)	15 (3 shots x 5 charges)	100 yards (91 m)	Optional	Round robin, same POA per target	Point-of-impact stability across adjacent charges
Satterlee	10-25 (3-5 shots per charge)	100 yards (91 m), confirm farther	Required	Randomized order, full strings per target	Lowest standard deviation (SD)

Choose Ladder Test If…

You have a benchrest-quality or otherwise well-bedded rifle, access to 300 yards or more, and want to conserve components during an initial screening pass before committing to a full OCW or Satterlee work-up.

Choose OCW If…

You are developing a hunting or all-around load that needs to stay accurate across temperature swings and modest lot-to-lot powder variation, and you are comfortable investing 20-30+ rounds up front for a “resilient” result.

Choose Satterlee If…

You have a quality chronograph, need to screen a load quickly across multiple rifles or cartridges (common in PRS and NRL prep), and want a data-driven starting point built around standard deviation before committing more components to group confirmation.

A Practical Combined Workflow

Most experienced handloaders do not pick one method and stop – they layer them.

1. Start with a short ladder or Satterlee screening pass to identify a promising charge range and confirm you are within safe pressure limits. This is also where you rule out any lot of components producing erratic pressure behavior.
2. Refine within that range using OCW or a Satterlee confirmation string to find the charge that gives the most consistent point of impact and lowest SD, not just the smallest single group.
3. Move to seating depth testing once the charge weight is set. Test in 0.005- to 0.010-inch increments off the lands, looking for the same kind of point-of-impact stability you sought in the charge weight test. Our guides on tuning a bullet seating die and tuning a sizing die cover the mechanical side of this step.
4. Confirm at your intended working distance. A load that looks perfect at 100 yards can still open up at 600 or 1,000 yards (549 or 914 meters) due to velocity spread you could not see up close. This final confirmation pass is where SD and ES (extreme spread) data from a chronograph earn their keep.

Powder, Case Prep, and Equipment Considerations

Load development is only as good as the consistency of the ammunition you are testing with. A few practical points that apply across all three methods:

• Weigh every charge individually during testing, even if you normally throw charges from a powder measure for practice ammunition. A quality digital scale, such as the RCBS ChargeMaster Supreme, Hornady Auto Charge Pro, or Lyman Gen 6, removes charge weight as a variable so any dispersion you see reflects the rifle and components, not your measuring equipment.
• Uniform your brass before testing. Mixed headstamp brass, inconsistent primer pocket depth, or unsorted case volume will muddy your results no matter which method you use. See our case prep essentials guide for a full checklist.
• Match the powder to the cartridge’s burn rate window. Extruded powders like Hodgdon H4350, IMR 4350, and Hodgdon Varget are common choices for mid-size cartridges like 6.5 Creedmoor and 308 Winchester, while slower-burning options such as Hodgdon H1000, Alliant Reloder 26, or Accurate MagPro suit magnum and overbore cases. If you are unsure whether your powder is a single-base or double-base propellant and how that affects burn behavior, our single-base vs double-base powder guide covers the distinction.
• A worked example for illustration only: Hodgdon’s published data for a 140-grain bullet in 6.5 Creedmoor with H4350 has historically run in the approximate 38.0 to 41.5-grain range, though exact figures vary by manual edition, bullet, and brass. A Ladder Test built around this cartridge might start at roughly 39.0 grains and step up in 0.3-grain increments toward the published maximum, always verified against current Hodgdon or Hornady data before loading – never against a forum post or an older printed manual. This is illustrative only; always pull current load data for your specific bullet, brass, and primer combination before starting your own work-up.
• PRS and competition shooters developing loads for cartridges like the 6mm Dasher often favor Satterlee-style screening precisely because it is fast enough to re-run between barrel changes. Our best powders for 6mm Dasher and Dasher barrel life guide go into more depth on that specific application.

Safety Notes That Apply to Every Method

• Never start a load development session at or near a published maximum charge. Begin at least 10 percent below max and work up.
• Watch for classic pressure signs at every stage: flattened or cratered primers, sticky or heavy bolt lift, ejector marks on the case head, and loose primer pockets after firing. Any one of these is a signal to stop increasing charge weight immediately, regardless of what the target or chronograph is showing.
• Recognize that a load that shows a promising “node” at an unsafe pressure level is not a usable load. Accuracy never overrides a pressure sign.
• Component lot changes (new bag of powder, new brass, different primer) can shift your results meaningfully. Treat a change in any single component as a reason to re-verify your load, not necessarily a full retest from scratch.

Frequently Asked Questions

Conclusion

None of these three methods is universally superior. The Ladder Test rewards patience and a stable rifle platform, OCW rewards shooters who want a charge weight that tolerates real-world variation, and the Satterlee Method rewards shooters who need fast, chronograph-verified screening across multiple loads. What matters more than the label you put on your process is following it consistently, respecting pressure signs at every step, and treating any single test session’s result as a starting point to confirm, not a final answer. The most reliable handloads on the range are rarely the product of one perfect test – they come from combining a sound initial screening method with careful seating depth work and honest confirmation at your actual working distance.

---