After yesterday it seems that bullet seating depth has to be as if not more important in load developement than the factors of powder burn rate choice, charge weight of the powder choice, bullet brand, bullet weight, style, etc.....


I generally seat the bullet during developement at the lands or .010" off them, and then start fiddleing with powder and bullet combos....charge weights and so on. I haven't paid too close attention to changing the seating depth. I've always thought that on the lands or as close to them as you could get would give the best accuracy.

Basically here's what happened:

1. I already had a load that would shoot under 1MOA at 100 yards.

2. At 300 yards the load was about 2 MOA and I wanted to improve that by tweeking the charge.

3. I loaded a ladder test around the charge weights (above and below) that worked at 100 yards, but happened to seat the bullets a bit deeper. Why I did I'm not sure, but I noted the measurement and it was .040" off of the jam measurement on the lands

4. Shot the ladder, found a node that looked good, loaded that load BUT SEATED THE BULLETS BACK TO WHERE I ALWAYS DID... .010" OFF THE LANDS.

5. Went out and shot the new load and it totally sucked. Barely could stay on a 8.5"X 11" sheet of paper at 300 yards. I couldn't believe it.

At this point I got to thinking about the seating depth of the ladder, so I took some of the already loaded cartridges and seated 3 consecutive 3 shot groups each .010" deeper than the last. It looked like this:

2.320" = .010" off the lands
2.310"
2.300"
2.290"

Shot the first two 3 shot groups and was about ready to leave my gun there at the range in the trash can. Imacts were scattered all over a sheet of paper at 300 yards. I shot the 2.300" OAL cartridges next and couldn't believe my eyes!

The group was 1.35" at 300 yards.

I shot the last 3 shot group at 2.290" and it was all over the paper.........


How can seating depth be this critical in load developement?
I never thought it was.


It seems now it may be one of the most important factors and I think it makes sense to find the optimal seating depth FIRST for the bullet you want to use THEN try different powders and charge weights of them. How to change my method to do this, I'm not sure.

How do you develope the most accurate load for your rifles?

Maybe I'm not following a logical, step by step process that is best.

Seating depth is very important.
1. Safety

2. Magazine length considerations

3. Accuracy. This is the final step in accuracy in my opinion. I usually start testing @ .015" off of the lands and in many hunting rifles this is good enough. For match grade accuracy, I start @ .015" off and go in .005" deeper until .025" off of the lands; if accuracy doesn't improve, I then go .010" then .005" off of the lands, and then into the lands.

What you are actually doing is making the bullet exit the barrel at the sweet spot in much the same way that barrel tuners work. A bullet that exits the muzzle at either a peak or valley of the harmonics curve will be consistently more accurate than one exiting on the way up or down from the peaks. This is how it was explained to me and I beleive it. I am not a scientist and do not possess the skills or equipment to measure the frequency curve.

What kind of bullets are you usuing? Certain bullet makers will tell you that seating depth is just as important a factor as powder/primers/brass/etc. when reloading their bullets. Take Berger for instance...they highly suggest loading their VLD hunting bullets just off of, or into the lands...depending on your rifle, you may have to load .010 off of, or just into the lands. Some rifles like them seated out a bit further, I load 140gr Berger VLD's in my Tikka T3 Light in .270 WSM and it likes them seated to .030 off of the lands.

I'm loading Nosler 70 gr BT varmint bullets in my .243wssm.

After really noodling this out, I think that this is the method I will use in load development from now on to FIRST find the bullet seating depth the gun likes THEN find the optimum charge weight:

1. Pick a bullet you really want to make your gun shoot

2. Pick an appropriate powder according to data tables and the velocity you would like to attain.

3. Load 5- 3 shot groups at a charge weight somewhere in the middle of the range suggested and vary the seating depths from on the lands and then incrementally .010" deeper for each 3 shot group. Your last test cartridges will then be at .040" off the lands.

5. Shoot the groups and pick the one that is best....this is the optimal seating depth for that bullet.

6. At this point, load a 20 shot ladder test with charge weights from the max charge on down in .2 gr increments. Shoot the ladder to choose the ideal charge weight.


What do you think?

In my case, if I didn't accidentally find the correct seating depth, I would have believed that something else was wrong:

The gun didn't like the bullet
The gun didn't like the powder
The gun isn't capable of <MOA accuracy
Loose nut on the trigger (me)

If I had shot a ladder with the wrong seating depth, it would have told me nothing. Bullets would have been all over the place.

quote:

I shot the 2.300" OAL cartridges next and couldn't believe my eyes!

The group was 1.35" at 300 yards.

I always thought bullet 'jump' was a final fine tuning after the accurate load was found! Thanks for the very interesting 'enlightenment'! Ummm .... You didn't say what rifle and bullets and powder you were using? I have an observation of my own which may have nothing to do with yours - I 'accidently' (read 'negligently') seated a batch of bullets too deep and was astounded by the difference in report, umm.... recoil (22 hornet) and apparent velocity. So I tried going back to my 'correct' seating depth but with a little more powder and achieved the same results. That is now my standard load for the hornet. Thing is, I am using a very compressed load of Lil'Gun in the largest capacity cases (R-P) and 55gr bullets (which are heavy for the hornet). I seat to the base of the neck (the neck is long) and this gives me maximum COL for the magazine. I do not size or crimp - instead I seat in a paper cut which is then soaked in molten 'waxy-lube'. This particular rifle has a generous throat and a long 'free-bore'. Accuracy is superb (subjectively - haven't shot a group - it might pop my bubble!) It is also very flat shooting for a hornet and hard hitting. So, in this case, the seating depth and subsequent increase in powder charge and powder compression has done something to the ingition and combustion of the powder. The paper cup seems to guide the bullet into the rifling - I cannot say what accuracy I get with 'normal' loading because I haven't tested it at those pressure levels. I would have to start all over as sizing and crimping raises pressure with Lil'Gun a lot! (And reduces the max possible velocity).

!!!!!20 shot ladder test????? Without getting too involved in this, I have never found that changing the seating depth of a load would turn a dog into a winner.

303Guy and stillbeeman

I always thought that the final tune to a load was tweeking the seating depth as well. If you had seen how this load shot at 300 yards with the bullet seated .010 off the lands, you would have rejected it as a "dog".

This is my point exactly. If I hadn't seated the bullets deeper and noted that length and shot the ladder, I would have thought it sucked.

Do my thoughts on new methodology make sense, ie. finding the proper depth first, then altering the charge to find the most accurate load?

quote:

How can seating depth be this critical in load developement? I never thought it was.

Well, it seems you had bought into the "conventional wisdom" of seating at or near the lands is a sure fire method of achieving "best" accuracy. That's NOT true, as your accident proved! But it's so ingrained in many minds that you will never convince the true believers. Same as with "neck size" for best accuracy, weight each charge to .1 gr., trim all cases exactly the same, load to exactly the same OAL, etc. Seems conventional "wisdom" is often pretty dumb. ??

A "ladder test" of both charge and seating depth will quickly eliminate the poor ranges of each, allowing you to quickly zero on the actual best charge and seating depth. Or at least it does for me. Takes as little as 30 and never more than 60 rounds to find the best load combo for any given bullet,seating depth and powder charge for my rifles. Just have to recognise, quickly, that some rifles simply won't shoot some bullets and some powders. And, (occasionally anyway) some primers!

Jim,

How do you do this?

Do you first eliminate the factor of seating depth then run the ladder? I don't know how you do both at the same time.

Like I said, if I didn't have the correct seating depth FIRST, I'm sure the ladder would have told me nothing. After I selected the load from the ladder shot with the proper seating depth (got it right on accident) , I then loaded the chosen load to my normal depth which is .010" off the lands. It shot terribly. If I had loaded the ladder with all the bullets .010" off the lands, they would have been all over the map and it would have been impossible to choose the correct charge weight.

I probably would have thought there were problems with the powder, bullet, gun etc...........

My question is about eliminating factors that effect the ladder other than charge weight and I have found that the seating depth is a MAJOR IF NOT THE MAJOR FACTOR.

The purpose of a ladder is to quickly spot a node and charge weight that gives the most accurate load for your gun with that bullet and powder. If you have the wrong seating depth, they won't group with any charge weight and the ladder is useless. That was my case and it has caused me to rethink how I develop loads


Then again, does optimal seating depth vary with the amount of powder charge??? I don't know. If it does then I'm back to square one.

I suppose worry about closness to the lands must be an issue with all of you but with the great majority of my "hunting rifles" only two or three out of fifteen can even come close to the lands due to magazine length restriction. Most I find will get only within .10-.18 at max magazine length.

Am I the only one?

No you're not.

I've altered my magazines in my hunting guns to be able to seat to the lands. This now seems unnecessary, at least in the gun I'm talking about, with the bullet in question etc....

Hey rc

When I am looking for a load I have found it detrimental to try and seat too close to the lands. I start at .025" or .030" and find the bullet and powder weight that works best, then might experiment with seating depth. What has worked best for me is to either load at >.020" or load into the lands.

Small jumps between .005" and .020" have yielded inconsistant results for me. It is hard enough to get consistant seating depth to a variation less than .003" even with a competition seater. It seems to me the farther from the lands you are the less critical exact seating depth becomes.

Conventional wisdom says that if you are getting a large but consistant group seat closer to the lands and if you are getting flyers seat farther out.

Very informative thread!

I must tell you folks how my buddy develops his loads - he takes any and all bullets and selects the max powder charge on that bullet weight listed anywhere and then uses a heavier bullet with it because his is a 'strong' action and .... He knows his rifle is accurate because he doesn't need to adjust his scope for all these different bullets and charges and two bullets hit touching .... OK, so he doens't lose sleep over it, but I do! Actually, still do not understand how his rifle actually hits anything, but it does! It's a 22-250 varmint.

"Jim, How do you do this?...I don't know how you do both at the same time."

RCA, we can't. I first find my best charge range with the bullet seated either about .010" - .015" off the lands OR as long as the magazine will allow.

After the best charge is found, I seat further back in .005" (ladder) steps until I find the best shooting OAL. Most often I get best accuracy in the range of .015" to as much as .100" off the lands, many shoot good about .030" off. The seating tests are done exactly as the charge tests were done.

It would seem that it might help to tweak the charge a little after finding the best OAL but, so far, that hasn't done a thing for my rifles.

It's worth mentioning that the "best" charge and OAL is usually a fairly broad range, not a specific and critical spot that shoots good. I don't want loads on the ragged edge, they are too quirky. A small variation in temp, powder lot, primer change, etc. will blow groups. Find the range your rifle accepts, load in the middle of it and your loads won't be so touchy. Most otherwise unexplainable "fliers" will disapear.

(PS - I once wore a blue suit on the south side of Albuq. long ago, is that where you are?)

Hey Jim C.

I know some of the guys who where the blues suits. Yeah, I'm in Alb in the NE heights. How long ago were you here? I'm born and raised here.

Now to the topic at hand!

NO ONE SEEMS TO BE GETTING MY POINT!

The point is that if I didn't have the correct seating depth FIRST, the results of the ladder test would have been effected!

I don't know, maybe the gun I'm shooting is a lot more finicky about the bullet depth than 99.9999% of all the other rifles out there.

Here is what I'm going to do from now on:

quote:

1. Pick a bullet you really want to make your gun shoot

2. Pick an appropriate powder according to data tables and the velocity you would like to attain.

3. Load 5- 3 shot groups at a charge weight in the middle of the charge weight range for the ladder you are going to shoot and vary the seating depths from on the lands and then incrementally .010" deeper for each 3 shot group. Your last test cartridges will then be at .040" off the lands.

5. Shoot the groups and pick the one that is best....this is the optimal seating depth for that bullet.

6. At this point, load a 20 shot ladder test with charge weights from the max charge on down in .2 gr increments. Shoot the ladder to choose the ideal charge weight

I'm going to test this method as soon as I can with my .300 Win Mag with a different bullet than I usually shoot and see If I find "THE LOAD" faster than doing it the other way around (ie. .. arbitrarily picking a bullet seating depth, loading some rounds either for a ladder or 3 shot groups , shooting them, picking the best load and THEN playing with bullet seating depth)

I bet I find "THE LOAD" faster and will already have the proper seating depth without having to tweek it.

I think this thread shows how one --usually a rag writer, desperate to fill up inches-- can take a single facet of reloading for accuracy and try to make a doxology out of it.
I'm not knocking anyone nor anything!!! I gurarentee you that over the years, I've tried every blue gosling that has come along. Some of them twice. Not that seating depth doesn't have it's place in the total package. It certainly does.
I just have never found it to pay that large a dividen, especially in a hunting rifle. It's kinda like neck turning. I do it for the brass that I shoot in factory matches but not the brass I hunt with.

stillbeeman

I do take that as an insult

I'm not a rag writer or a writer at all, just a guy who thinks he found something out and was wondering if anybody else had similar experiences.

Heck, I thought I may have inadvertantly found something that would change conventional loading practices for the better and I just wanted to share it with everyone on the forum; everybody here has more knowledge and experience than me and I guessed I would get logical and constructive debate on the subject.

I'm just trying to wring every bit of accuracy I can out of my rifles. I don't care if they're a hunting rifle or a competition gun. What fun is it to shoot a rifle that isn't accurate? I'm interested accuracy, and by the name of these forums, I'm guessing that others who post here are too.

If you don't care how to achieve accuracy, you might as well shoot factory loads for your hunting guns.

Accuracy, for me, is what handloading is all about.

The Accurate Reloading Forum's Mission Statement:



"This site was started by a group of shooters, whose interests include hunting, target shooting and plain plinking. The idea was to share what we have learned from hunting, reloading, gunsmithing and any other shooting related ideas. We are not affiliated to any company involved in the shooting and hunting sports. So what you will find here are our actual experiences, good or bad. If you have any interesting ideas, or if you have come across anything you think might be of interest to other fellow shooters, please consider sharing it with us, we would love to hear from you."

You also have to keep in mind that even if you load at the same OAL, the distance to the lands is subject to change.

With new cases the firing pin will push the case forward in the chamber until it is stopped at the shoulder or belt. That amount of headspace can vary according to your chamber and brass. If you have .015" of headspace on a new case then seating .015" off the lands will be essentially the same as seating on the lands.

Once fired, twice fired and sometimes 3 times fired brass will still have a certain amount of headspace before the case has expanded enough to get a crush fit into the shoulder. Until then the distance to the lands will be moving, even though a much smaller amount than with new cases.

Throats will recede with repeated firings. How much will depend upon the type of powder and how hot your gun gets during firing sessions. If you load 100 cases all the same OAL, chances are that the last 10 you shoot will have a .005" or greater distance to the lands than the first 10 you shoot.

That wasn't a very nice thing to say stillbeeman. I for one appreciate all the good info that this thread has brought to light. I've been working on loads myself and have had these very same questios, now some of them have been answered.

Thanks woods,

I had thought of that. The cases I ran the ladder with and adjusted the OAL with were fully resized and chambered with no resistance. I resized them because with the .243 wssm I have noticed a sticky bolt on closing and opening after firing. I P-FLR'd for a couple of reloadings then noticed the sticky bolt. I thought I might need to trim or FLR. It was FLR time. The .243 wssm is notorious for the sticky bolt. I don't notice any other pressure signs (flattened primer) and my load is 1.5 grains under the max published, so I'm not worried.

Upon subsequent reloadings of the P-FLR'd cases I may need to seat a tad deeper because the case will grow?

Let me know if that is wrong.



And, Thanks cobrajet...........................

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:

Upon subsequent reloadings of the P-FLR'd cases I may need to seat a tad deeper because the case will grow?

Let me know if that is wrong.

No, actually it will mean you will not have any headspace if you are PFLR'ing since that means that you will have slight contact between the case shoulder and chamber shoulder. The case will not be able to move forward and your actual measured distance to the lands will remain constant.

IME and IMO seating depth is extremely hard to keep within a variance of less than .003". I prep the inside of the neck smooth with steel wool, use Mica dust inside the case neck, use expensive Competition Seating dies and measure every bullet after seating with a comparator. The amount of force you have to use when seating will determine the seating depth. If you don't believe me, then during seating and one feels like it was harder or easier to seat then that bullet will be seated to a different depth.

That is the reason I don't seat close to the lands, either >.02" or into the lands.

.030" is good.

I just wanted to show you guys the difference in group size I got just by seating the bullet .010 deeper. I took this picture of the actual target I saved from the day I shot the group. I, unfortunately, threw the other bad group targets away in disgust the day I shot them. If I thought I would have needed them for any reason (like now to show some of you that the seating depth change of as little as .010" would turn a terrible shooting load into the most accurate one I've ever shot in this gun) I would have saved the actual target.

Instead, I had an artist (me) do a recreation of the actual target so you could see what I am talking about. The "artist's rendition" target is absolutely NO EXAGGERATION in group size. The drawn in bullet holes are as exact as I could have made them to illustrate what the simple change in seating depth did.



First, the recreated target with the bad group that was typical of all the wrong seating depths:







This is an 8 1/2"X 11" sheet of paper. You can see that the group size is like 6 or 7". Well over 2 MOA.


Now this is the actual target with the proper seating depth found..........







If you can't read my writing, the group measured 1.35", just under 1/2 MOA


All of the shooting was done at 300 yards. The rifle is a factory Browning A-Bolt in the Varmint Stalker configuration. Like I've said, I don't know if it's just this gun that's this finicky or the caliber in general. From now on when I'm working up a load for ANY rifle, I will first find a seating depth that works for the bullet before I shoot a ladder test to avoid false readings.

Seating depth is a hard thing to work out. Any time I played with it I found changing the depth needed a complete load workup and most of the time a slight change in the load would give the same accuracy I had with another depth. I have never been able to say that .010" is better then touching because a change in the load would bring groups back.
Since pressures and velocities are changing with seating changes, I found no way to compare the same load with each depth change.
The same thing happens when you try to change a primer with a known accurate load without a powder workup again, you don't learn much, only that the primer does not work with that load.
This is like saying my rifle is deadly at 2900 fps with 4831 so if I load 4895 to exactly 2900 fps, accuracy will be the same!
Could not a change of 50 fps have changed a dog into a silk purse? What effect did a slight velocity change have on barrel harmonics?
I am not going to be the one to say that a change in seating depth alone will make a rifle more accurate without further testing to see why that is so.
A ladder test with .1 or .2 change in powder is a waste of time, go 1/2 gr. Then when the best group shows up, work .1 gr and more, increments around the best group.
I have had rifles that would not group out of 1/2" with changes in powder charges from 82 to 88 gr's. .300 Weatherby Mark V, bedded and floated using the old surplus 4831 was one of them. Long freebore rifle where rifling was WAY up there. Same as my Swede where the rifling is way up there somewhere, it is hard pressed to shoot over 1/2" with any bullet.
Not BR rifles to be sure, just hunting guns.
Working loads with my varmint rifles years ago with bullets touching the lands allowed me to make head shots on chucks at over 600 yd's. Because the loads were worked for that bullet depth.
You can't just change one thing without compensating something else.

quote:

Same as my Swede where the rifling is way up there somewhere, it is hard pressed to shoot over 1/2" with any bullet

What bullets were you using if I may ask? My thinking here (and this is pure speculation) is that with those calibers and throat design, the long bullet is well 'trued' before reaching the rifling plus the long jump eliminates a variable of distance to the lands by orders of magnitude. Both in pecentage changes of distance and percentage changes in ignition and initial bullet movement. Your Weatherby was even insensitive to powder charge changes. Does that make any kind of sense?

quote:

Posted 25 February 2009 22:07 Hide Post

quote:
Same as my Swede where the rifling is way up there somewhere, it is hard pressed to shoot over 1/2" with any bullet


What bullets were you using if I may ask? My thinking here (and this is pure speculation) is that with those calibers and throat design, the long bullet is well 'trued' before reaching the rifling plus the long jump eliminates a variable of distance to the lands by orders of magnitude. Both in pecentage changes of distance and percentage changes in ignition and initial bullet movement. Your Weatherby was even insensitive to powder charge changes. Does that make any kind of sense?


Regards

I can not explain the Weatherby, it was fantastic. I had the 26" "B" barrel.
In the Swede I shoot the Hornady 129 gr and the 140 gr to the same POI and the same size groups. Pete brought me some 100 gr Ballistic Tips to play with and they also shot to the same POI with 1/2" groups.
I have shot, worked on and owned many 30-06 rifles in my life and they are picky as the devil. A bullet change can mean a 10" difference at the target. Pete has a 1917 Enfield and brought a whole pile of loads to the range. He had all kinds of hand loads, ball, tracer and armor piercing in a pile on the bench. We shot all day at small 2" and 3" rocks at 100 yd's and every load was right on target.
No explanation at all from me. All we did was laugh all day about the accuracy and ease of hitting with anything thrown in the gun.

By the way, my Swede has a pitted bore yet is super accurate. I have not tried cast because of the bore condition.

quote:

Originally posted by bfrshooter:
By the way, my Swede has a pitted bore yet is super accurate. I have not tried cast because of the bore condition.

Thats why I m getting a new barrel on my swede!
I send before and after photos

quote:

Thats why I m getting a new barrel on my swede!

Well, a clean, shiney, mint bore is like a beautiful woman! When I look down my No4 bore, I go aarggghhh! Same with my hornet. But they shoot good. My 303-25 has some roughness near the breach but I bet it makes no difference at all. At least that roughness is very hard to see so I don't look too carefully!

I develop a load using 50 rounds.
I use the first 25, 5 groups of 5 shots, to test the powder weight. I seat the bullets right at the lands and change the powder weight by half a grain for each group. I also measure velocity. If I get velocity that's close enough to the book with no pressure signs, then I test seating depth. I use the best powder charge from the previous test and then make 5 groups of 5 loads the same, except that I alter seating depth by .005". This method usually works pretty well. I'm sure I miss some of the accurate loads that are more than .025" off the lands, though.

Hey slancey....

That's the way I used to do it. Then I learned the ladder method. Thought I could get there in fewer shots and find the load that might lay in between the big 1/2 grain increments. Believe me, I didn't realize, and I don't think anybody else who has read what I have to say here realizes that the wrong seating depth may throw off the results of either test.

I used to load the tests with the bullet seated at the lands or .010" off of the lands. With this rifle, I seated the bullets deeper for the ladder, but when I picked the load from the ladder and started loading, I went back to seating the bullet .010" off the lands. I did this because I had a preconceived notion that the closer I could seat to the lands, the more accurate my gun would be. It's not so.

So my question to myself and anybody out there who may have had some similar experiences is kinda like the "chicken or the egg" question.

To find the most accurate load with a particular bullet for your gun, is it best to first find a seating depth for that bullet that your gun likes, THEN find the powder charge, or the conventional way.........the other way around???

My hypothosis is that the best way to find the load is to find the seating depth for that bullet first.

I came to that conclusion by this experience. By seating the bullet close to the lands, it seemed the gun would not shoot accurately at all, REGARDLESS OF CHARGE WEIGHT. All of the test groups sucked and you would reject all of them because not one of them is one you would pick as the best one (with some sort of criteria like a MOA load) and continue to tune it with seating depth changes after it was chosen.

I would have spent more time and money trying different powder and bullet combinations till I got lucky.

I'm trying to elimintate luck as a factor and to do this I think you have to systematically eliminate factors that effect the accuracy of the load. I think that (drawing from this experience) seating depth may be a bigger factor than previously thought. It may be more, or at least equal to, the importance of the type and charge weight of the powder. In fact I think you could pick any powder listed in the load data for that caliber and work a load of acceptable accuracy IF YOU HAVE FOUND THE CORRECT SEATING DEPTH FOR THE BULLET FIRST! Many different powders with different manufacturers and burn rates are listed in load data. They must all work acceptably or they wouldn't be listed ........ somebody has tried them and they worked ok.

Having said all of this, I know that evey rifle is different. Some rifles may not care too much about the seating depth and shoot accurately at any one chosen. In this case, the conventional pick a depth, load 5-5 shot groups varying the powder charge will probably work just as good and you may find a great load. You will also probably have to go back, load more 5 shot groups and vary the seating depth to tune it. This would not have worked with my rifle.

quote:

If you can't read my writing, the group measured 1.35", just under 1/2 MOA

All of the shooting was done at 300 yards. The rifle is a factory Browning A-Bolt in the Varmint Stalker configuration.

Correct me if I'm assuming something I shouldn't, but your recent revelation concerning seating depth is one 3 shot group? I'd be more inclined to believe you've found a really good recipe for that rifle if you came back here after shooting 5 such groups on 5 different days. That would be a true test. Statistically speaking, one 3 shot group is equivalent to, pardon my french, shit luck.

+1

quote:

The point is that if I didn't have the correct seating depth FIRST, the results of the ladder test would have been effected!

Yeah, again. But, we have to start somewhere dom't we? If I had a bullet I had faith SHOULD shoot well and a ladder didn't give me anything at the first OAL, and that does happen, I'd likely run it again at a different depth.

NO METHOD of load development is perfect, there is ALWAYS a bit of back and forth - and luck - and we can NEVER be absolutely certain we have found the very best possible load. What we do is finally get to a point that we say this load seems to be the best I can find and use it.
-------------------------------------

I was there from the spring of '60 to mid '63. LIked it but have never been back. From what I hear the NE is no longer the vast tumble weed field it was back then. Nor was there a cable car up the west face of Sandia in those days, it took a LONG drive up the east side to get to the top!

One of the things I remember best of Kirkland was that when we radio troops entered the huge B-52 hangers we got in line to go by and kick the (real) A bombs sitting on their dollies. It made the aircraft maint. folk grit their teeth just to see us walking in! WE figgered, what the heck, if it went KABOOM! it wouldn't hurt a bit. Some said we had a warped sense of humor; seemed alright to us.

Good point onefunzr2 and I would totally agree, but here is the sequence of events that made me a believer:

1. I had a load with the same bullet charged at 47.5 gr W760

2. It shot poorly at 300 yards so I loaded a ladder around that charge weight with the bullets accidentally seated deeper and shot the ladder

3 Picked a load from the ladder test. The best range happened to be from 47.6 gr to 48 gr (3 shots that grouped on the ladder)

4. Loaded the 47.7 grain load but seated it back out to .010" off the lands. This is the depth that I also had seated the first load (47.5 gr)

5. It shot bad so I tested seating depths and found the proper one (OAL 2.30" which is .020" deeper). It shot the group you are talking about.

THIS IS WHERE THE DEPTH MADE ME A BELIEVER..........:

6. After finding the proper depth for the bullet, I went back to the existing old loads I had already and seated them down to OAL 2.30". These loads were the ones that shot poorly at 300.

7. Shot a 300 yard group with the old load seated to the depth I found and the load shot much, much better.

It shot a group that measured 2" at 300 yards...... .66MOA

All the bullet holes were in a horizontal line from left to right with no vertical dispersion. The old load before was just as terrible as the new one before I found the proper seating depth.


From that I concluded it wasn't a lucky group, but I'm going out this weekend again actually to shoot a sporting rifle match with this gun. This was the reason I was trying to tune up the load better in the first place. The match is a cool format of a 2 mile walk through course with 10 stages. At each stage there are 6 targets that could be up to 700 yards in distance.

I'll be shooting some 300 yard groups to make sure I'm sighted in. I'll be able to tell if I was just lucky then!!

But it wasn't luck, I'm sure of it from the change for the better even with the old load.

Jim C

You wouldn't believe this city now. 800, 000 with problems that all big cities have. I wish it was like it was when you were here; I was born in '63.........

Gee guys, no insults intended. I'm sorry if you felt there was but my findings are based on a whole lot of bullets sent downrange thru a whole lot of different barrels in a whole lot of different calibres.

The point I was making was that reloading is a package deal. There isn't any one "open sezme" trick to instant accuracy; but rather, attention to detail of all facets is what you need to get you where you want to go.

I do appreciate you instructions about accuracy. If you have some money, maybe we can get together and shoot sometime. Stock factory rifles.

They are not "instructions". That conjurs up the word "commands"..........Sorry If my posts sound like I'm ordering everybody to do this.


Like I said before, I found something interesting out while doing what we all do and I thought I'd post it to see if it made sense to anybody else. I think it will work and it's what I will do from now on. I don't think that reloading is magic; there has to be a step by step scientific method to do it.

Nobody seems to think it makes sense to eliminate the factor of the seating depth's effect on how the various tested loads shoot?

That's OK with me. Everybody can go about it like they always did and it won't hurt my feelings, believe me.

I can't see doing it any other way after the experience I had. If I knew the proper depth before shooting the ladder, choosing the load is a no brainer and that's what happened but UNITENTIONALLY. With the wrong seating depth effecting the bullet impacts on the ladder, I may have not have had consecutive shots impact anywhere close to each other thus the bullet/powder combo would have been abandoned.

I want to INTENTIONALLY know the seating depth before the ladder is shot.

Why does this seem illogical to most of you who have posted? I don't feel crazy but tell me if I am and give me a good reason! I know change is tough but c'mon!



Let's noodle this out:

Fact: Seating depth effects a bullet's POI

I don't think this can be disputed if part of tuning a load is to play with the seating depth.

So: If you shoot test loads without finding a seating depth that your gun likes FOR THAT PARTICULAR BULLET, you now have TWO FACTORS EFFECTING THE POI!!!

How can you possibly choose the best load based on charge weight of the powder if you don't first eliminate the controllable factor of seating depth?????



As an aside, I'm glad I made a stock factory rifle shoot like a high-dollar custom gun too. I have a custom rifle and the groups aren't much better than this factory gun. I've worked just as hard at the loading bench for each. Custom gun shoots 1" groups, the factory 1.35" groups at 300 yards. For the $ I like my factory gun.

Am I not expecting enough from a custom gun? Should it shoot better than .33MOA at 300 yards?

I can't believe this post has not received good constructive replies and am disappointed in all you guys. Maybe those who use this forum with the knowledge necessary haven't read it yet, I don't know. I thought someone here would have the answer or at least be able to start some intelligent conversation and I would have an answer to my question.

Update:

I had to do my own research. I have a buddy who owns a sporting goods store in Louisiana. We shoot competitive shotgun sports together and he is very knowledgeable about rifles and reloading. We have talked at length about this subject. He has a friend in Louisiana who is in the Bench Rest Hall of Fame named Cal. Maybe you are aware of him. Cal says that the method I am talking about and have discovered on my own is the method that is commonly used by competitive bench rest shooters.

What is commonly done to find a load for a new gun is to take a proven load from a buddy who shoots the same caliber, load it varying ONLY THE SEATING DEPTH, and shoot it. The proper seating depth is then chosen for your gun and at that point the powder charge is tweeked to fine tune the load.

Again, I'm disappointed that nobody has had really any input except for the status quo on this thread.

I'm starting to think that Allan DeGroot might be right about his fellow man.