Ask ten precision handloaders how to work up a load and you will start an argument about ladder test vs OCW. Both are proven load-development methods for finding a charge weight your rifle shoots well — but they look for different signals, need different round counts, and suit different shooters. This guide breaks down how each method works, what it actually measures, the strengths and weaknesses of each, and how to decide which one (or which combination) is right for you.
In this guide
- What is the ladder test?
- What is OCW?
- Ladder test vs OCW: the key differences
- Pros and cons
- The weakness both share
- Which should you use?
- How LoadNode helps with both
What is the ladder test?
The ladder test — often called the Audette ladder, after Creighton Audette — is a velocity-and-vertical method. You load single rounds at steadily increasing charge weights (commonly in 0.2–0.3-grain steps, taken from published data and never past max), then fire them in order at a target far enough out — often 300 yards or more — to show vertical separation, ideally over a chronograph. You then look for charges that land at a similar elevation and, with a chrono, a flat spot where velocity barely changes from one step to the next. Those clustered charges mark a velocity node. For the full process, see our guide on how to find a velocity node.
What is OCW (Optimal Charge Weight)?
OCW — Optimal Charge Weight, developed by Dan Newberry — is a point-of-impact method. Instead of single shots, you fire round-robin groups across several charge weights: one shot at each charge’s target in rotation, repeated, which averages out wind and shooter error within each charge. You are hunting for three or more consecutive charges that print to the same point of impact — a “scatter node” where the barrel’s harmonics produce a consistent POI even as the charge changes. The middle charge of that window is your OCW. Crucially, OCW doesn’t require a chronograph — it reads the target, not the velocity. A solid overview of the round-robin ladder and group methods is worth a read.
Ladder test vs OCW: the key differences
| Ladder test | OCW | |
|---|---|---|
| What it reads | Velocity & vertical POI per charge | Group point-of-impact across charges |
| Chronograph | Strongly recommended | Optional |
| Rounds needed | Fewer (1–3 per charge) | More (round-robin groups) |
| Typical distance | 300+ yards (for vertical) | 100 yards |
| Looking for | Velocity flat spot (node) | Charge window with stable POI |
| Best for | Velocity-focused, chrono users | POI-focused, no chrono |
Pros and cons
The ladder test is round-efficient and, with a chronograph, gives you velocity data (SD and ES) you can act on directly. Its weakness is sensitivity: single shots mean one bad round or a wind gust can move a step, and it usually needs distance and a chronograph to be meaningful.
OCW needs no chronograph and works at 100 yards, and its round-robin firing cancels out a lot of conditions. The trade-off is rounds and time — you burn more brass — and reading a “scatter node” by eye is more subjective than reading a velocity curve.
The weakness both share: small samples
Here is the part nobody likes to hear: both methods can be fooled by small sample sizes. With only a few shots per charge, an apparent velocity flat spot or a tidy POI cluster can simply be statistical noise — run the same test again and the “node” can move. Plenty of accomplished shooters still find both methods useful as a fast first filter, but the honest approach is the same either way: treat the result as a hypothesis, then validate it with a bigger sample — more rounds, a look at SD and ES, and confirmation on the target across more than one session.
Ladder test vs OCW: which should you use?
- Have a chronograph and chase long-range vertical? The ladder test is efficient and gives you the velocity numbers that drive elevation at distance.
- No chronograph, or shooting at 100 yards? OCW reads the target directly and finds a charge that holds its point of impact.
- Want the most confidence? Do a hybrid — a quick velocity ladder to narrow the charge range, then OCW-style round-robin groups (plus SD/ES and group size) to confirm the survivor.
Whichever you choose, the discipline that separates good load development from guesswork is validation: change one variable at a time, shoot enough rounds, and let the data — not hope — pick the load.
How LoadNode helps with both
LoadNode supports either method. For the ladder side, the charge-ladder session logs every velocity (synced from your Garmin Xero or typed in), computes live SD and ES per charge, and flags the velocity flat spots automatically. For the OCW side, you can measure each charge’s group straight from a photo — real MOA, mean radius, and point-of-impact offset — using the method in our guide on how to measure group size in MOA. Either way, every number links back to the exact load that produced it, so you can compare charges honestly. LoadNode surfaces the patterns; it never tells you what to load. Browse more reloading resources to go deeper.
Handloading is an adult activity. LoadNode is a logbook and analysis tool — it never provides load data. Always develop loads from current published data, start low, and work up safely.