You may have to tinker with different powders and primers to get what you want...if you can.
Remington and some others provide a lot of "free bore" in their rifles so that handloaders don't "screw up" and seat bullets against the lands. As a result, most loads with good bullet seating won't fit in the magazine of the gun.
My solution to the problem was to take my barrel, set-back the chamber and rebore to .223 Ackley Improved. Now I get bullets seated where I want them. They fit in the magazine. The case necks have plenty of bullet to provide even neck tension, and I'm a happy camper.
------------------
.223 Ackley Improved Wildcat Forum:
http://www.hotboards.com/plus/plus.mirage?who=223ackleyimproved
If this is a hunting rifle (and being a 300 WM I'm betting it is), you may need to sacrifice gilt-edge accuracy for practicality. Having a rifle that will only hold one round (in the chamber), isn't the best bet for hunting. If you're gonna settle for that, you might as well get a nice Ruger #1. Start at the longest length that will fit in your magazine, take off a hair just in case you get a long bullet, and experiment back from there. You will find where it shoots best within the magazine limitations, and will have to accept that.
Of course, you can start the whole process over with a different bullet, etc.
Hello Dan,
Your method of load development is right on the money. I have designed 140 new bullets and developed optimal loads with them in even more calibres over the last 9 years and this method is the only way to go. Tuning a group by varying the load is a waste of time and components. If the col for a rifle is optimised, speed variations are of lesser importance. See the page below on our website where we recommend a very similar method.
http://gunlinks.zibycom.com/members/002245268/Site2/hvloadguide.html
Regards
Gerard
Anyway, what I'm getting at is that you're right to be looking at the OAL (distance to the lands) as a *fine tuning* of your load. I believe, like Gerard does, that adjusting powder charges in search of the best load is not the best approach.
You're probably better off not starting with a preconceived notion as to what distance from the lands your rifle likes. The truth is, it probably likes a *lot* of different distances from the lands. The OAL should be the last adjustment made. Often times we decide via one device or another that our rifle really likes .015" off the lands, and then tune powder charges to make that distance work. You can just as easily back off to .025" and adjust the charge and accomplish the same thing.
Look at it like building an engine. Powder selection and charge weight is equivalent to piston (compression ratio) selection. The OAL adjustment is like adjusting the *timing* of the completed engine. Yes, you can select a particular advance in timing, and alter compression ratio, etc, to make the engine perform with that particular timing advance, but you'd be working backwards.
There is an optimal amount of powder in a given load recipe that burns most evenly and consistently. Find that charge weight by the OCW testing method or any other such method that might work for you, then *tune* your accuracy with OAL adjustments as a final step.
Best of luck in your load development,
Dan Newberry
green 788