Home Forums Reloading Big Game Rifles Maybe we obsess too much

Fair point and I agree, although in some cases you might have a lot of components on hand or be facing a lack of available factory ammo, so you are just trying to cobble together a decent load that will shoot and kill like factory ammo.

I'll be damned if I'll waste components/barrel life/ time/money in persuit of superfluous accuracy. Handloading bores the ever livin shyt out of me. Good enough is good enough. I just want to go kill stuff.

100% truth right there.
Obviously he didn't read what I said about 100 yards, or guns capability.[/quote]

I was typing my post while you added that part in your edit.

There's a lot of room between getting sloppy, not giving a shit and 1000 yard rmatch rifle brass prep.

I was typing my post while you added that part in your edit.[/quote]
The part that I posted about 100 yards and capabilities were in the original post very first paragraph.
The only thing I edited was about taking a 1 moa gun and making it .5 moa or you certainly can a .5moa and making it 1 moa with ammo.

I didn't think this part was in the original. Apologies if I missed it.

Every single Competitive shooter i know preps there brass 90% and reloads same way they do there 1,000 yard BR guns it does translate over whether you believe it or not.
Like I've said if you never shoot mostly past 100-300 the results don't show up very little. It will to some degree at 300 but very little at 100 some things more than others.
Why do you think 99% use Lapua, ADG brass, Berger or custom bullets? there is a reason.
Listen to some of these guys talk about how 5 years ago what they shot in the top 5 will be in the bottom 5 today, there's always room for improvement you just gotta be willing and open your mind up what you were doing 5 years ago isn't as good as you were doing.
Arguing about the use of components is an excuse like I posted above questions and seeking help is free.

I wonder if we would have books full of pet loads, and load manuals with "accuracy loads" if the old gun gurus had just said screw it, it's just a hunting load.

I come from a time and place apparently forever lost to this world where reloading your hunting ammo saved you money and let you shoot more.

That's gone, and the justification has to change. So I'll justify it with accuracy and pride in crafting good ammo for good rifles, as that's pretty much all that's left anymore.

Some things matter, and some things don't, but it's sure entertaining to watch folks argue over it all.

Well said again..

You're making my point with the highlighted section. That covers a high percentage of people's applications.

If you dont believe BR loading practices cross over to hunting rifles take your best 100 yard load set up a 700 yard target shoot it change the seating depth .003 shoot it again and post results.

One more time:

My point is what shows up at 700 (but not 100 and not very much at 300) means very little to what a lot of people are doing.

One more time it matters. It all does.
Try it at 300 you probably will see.

Buddy, I shoot a lot, so I still have to search out those good deals!!!! It is far less expensive for me to load up my ammo though, vs. buying it at the store. It always has been and always will be. Here's what I bought the other day, in regards to reloading components:


Then a couple months back:


A few months before that:


And some just to have on the shelf because they are rare:

Both of those boxes cost me $15/each, and were full boxes.

By buying cheap like that, it allows me to shoot as much as I want, and test as much as I like, and find good/great loads. I have always liked to "tinker" with my rifles, to make them shoot as well as they can. I view that as a mechanical obstacle, that needs to be crossed and that every rifle needs to be mechanically sound. Every rifle, whether hunting or precision has to be "mechanically sound". That means properly glass bedded, good scope bases, rings, scope, trigger, freefloated barrel or otherwise.

It's not just about the load, as that is probably the most simple process in the whole equation. Also, those that rely on others to tell them what pet loads work for them are fu cking ridiculous. Those that really want to find the rifles true potential need to be loading for that rifle in particular, because they are all individuals. Some here get that, and others are left scratching their azz. It's like the followers and leaders, and I know where I stand...

I don't lack components, I have a good supply, and I too buy what I can when I get the best bang for the buck.

But, the reality is, my sons and I shoot less now than we ever did because it's that much harder to replace it. I hope with all my heart I'm wrong, but I don't see good times again anywhere in the near future. I'll just stick to my conservative principles and not waste what I have.

One reason I'm going back to casting bullets again......

How many obsess over runout? I never measure it.
Quality dies set up properly will all but eliminate case run out. How many use " Competition " seating dies that costv150-200.00 or more. How many BR or F- Class guys use " Competition " seating dies, none that I know there's a reason. They all use Inline dies. Why because when you take the seating stem out and drop the bullet in it starts into the neck almost perfect as close to it as you can get. The other reason is changing seating depth at the range.
Take one of your loaded rounds seated with a " Competition " die like a Redding measure the runout now seat one with a Wilson inline die now measure runout its why I and most I know dont even bother anymore measuring it.

I've seen a test of runout with various seating dies. The Wilson did not beat the Redding, and in raw numbers actually looked a bit worse. I think it was statistically indistinguishable though.

Was it the brass prep, bullet or die.
Everytime I have measured it inline die wins everytime.
Look at the people who are successful at there discipline there is a reason they do what they do I can guarantee you they have tested many times.
There is no way you can start a bullet in a Redding, RCBS seating die into the neck as straight as a wilson by dropping the bullet down through the stem.
I every bullet set on top of a case before it is seated in a c" conventional die is crooked no matter how good your chamfer is

I shoot at 300 quite often. On the target I posted earlier I made notes to include the head to ogive length including a Sinclair nut comparator. The rifle I was shooting that day likes its bullets seated a bit shorter than some of my other 308s. I know this because I tested for it.

I'm not taking the extreme position of "nothing matters for hunting rifles".

You don't want to be removing the seating stem on your Wilson to drop a bullet in from the top. That will only result in excess wear and used to be cautioned against in their instructions.