How do you go about determining the max COL and what COL you actually use for a given bullet and rifle? Thanks.

Load to fit/function with the magazine length. After that see if it jams the lands when it just fits the magazine.

If it jams the lands, seat just deep enough to just touch the lands and work backwards from there to see what shoots best.

If it just fits the magazine and doesn't hit the lands, start from there and see what shoots best.

How do you know when it hits the lands? What measuring method do you use? There is plenty of room in the magazine.

I use the hornady oal gauge

You can smoke the bullet and see the contact points, you can also feel it when closing the bolt.

As I posted in the gunsmith section, I take a fired case, neck size about 2-3mm of the case neck, take a boattail bullet and place in the case mouth and then chamber the "round". The act of closing the bolt will seat the bullet into the case pushing against the lands, that is the max coal that the chamber and throat will take for that bullet. BUT unless you are going to use it as a single shot make sure the cartridges will extract w/o the bullet hitting the receiver ring and/or that they will fit the magazine. DON'T do this w/a loaded round and fire as the bullet against the lands may well push pressures above a safe level. Muddy

I have been doing something similar - I cut a slot in a sized case so the bullet can slide in and out easier and I can use that case with different bullets. I was just wondering if there was a better method. And once the max COL is determined, how far off the lands to seat the bullets. Thanks.

My method is a little simpler and cruder, but it works for me -I take a sized case and load a dummy long, then try to load it in the chamber. Bolt won't close? Don't try to force it, use a coated cleaning rod or a wooden dowell to gently tap the dummy out of the rifling (it's probably stuck there). Remove cartridge, adjust seating die to seat 5-10 thousandths deeper, repeat.

Eventually you will be able to close the bolt with some effort. Extract dummy, adjust seating die to reduce COAL in about 3-5 thousandths, should chamber easily now. Make a second dummy with a new bullet/case, leave seating die at previous setting. If you've done it correctly you can NOT feel the bullet engage the rifling (bolt closes easily), when you extract the case you will see the light "witness marks" from the rifling on the bullet - this is a light kiss and the place to start load development.

I like to make at least 3 dummies to check magazine function for any load I develop, so this is just part of the process. If you later realize that a slightly shorter COAL shoots better, its no big deal to run your dummies back through your seater to adjust to the new length.

Picture shows witness marks from the rifling on the bullets - look at the area where the pencil is pointing. Note these rounds have been run through the magazine many times for function checks, so there are a bunch of rifling marks - would only be ~4 or 5 after the first check with a previously unchambered dummy.



Now go back and check COAL on the dummies you just made - don't be surprised if COAL varies by 3-5 thousandths between dummies. The bullet length can (and will) vary. The seater seets based on the ogive, not on length and as such seating depth will be consistent w/ regards to ogive/rifling regardless of variations in bullet and/or COAL.

HTH

David

That's generally how I do it..I also use a sharpie marker to colour the bullet so I can see exactly where and how much its contacting the lands..

I then measure to the ogive using a Hornady bullet comparator and use the info to set up a dummy round just kissing the lands..Again I use sharpie to blacken the bullet so I can see whats going on..

That is with normal jacketed bullets, but be aware that for Barnes X and some other copper bullets, its recommend you load the bullet something like 60thou off the lands as a starting point..

In both cases, once you have a starting point, you then alter the bullet seating depth to see what works best for accuracy..

When checking for rifling contact, it is best to remove the striker assembly from the bolt. Then you only feel resistance if the bullet actually contacts the rifling. If you leave the striker in, you're trying to feel through all the resistance and friction caused by the spring-loaded striker. Not good.

What rifle? None of my rifles have the firing pin exposed and contacting the primer when the bolt is closed.

David

That aint what he's talking about.

Help me out then, what's he talking about?

David

Not that its an issue (to me), but the cocking piece creating resistance. Strip a bolt and run it.it'll be more clear.

As in the resistance with the cocking piece prevents you from feeling a light kiss?

I guess that's another way to do it - the witness marks are gonna be on the bullet from the rifling regardless.

Thanks for the clarification.

David

David,

Many people like to make handloading more complicated. I do it the way you do, looking for rifling marks on the bullet, rather than "feeling" for resistance when closing the bolt.

Thanks for the response. Lots of different ways of doing stuff, just trying to understand what someone else is doing.

David

Thats how i do it as well,using a sharpie. Was just tryin to explain what I "think" BRH was saying.

I use a "modified case" and a Stoney Point tool. I do it three times to make sure I get a consistent COAL with that particular bullet. A new rifle gets this performed right from the start and the data goes into the "book". I usually measure 4-7 bullets depending what I am going to load with. Can't be simpler or more accurate.

My method is pretty easy. I take a resized case with no primer in it, run the neck of the case over the expanded plug a half dozen times. Then partially seat a bullet. Then I chamber that round. BY running the neck over the expanded plug several times, the bullet is a snuff fir in the neck, but loose enough so that when it is chambered, the rifling will push the bullet back down into the case instead of the bullet becoming lodged in the lands. Then, check to see if that cartridge length will function through the action. If it will function, that is your COAL touching lands, and you can measure it, and then adjust to what ever distance you want to be off the lands. Of course, if it doesn't function through the magazine and/or eject properly, you COAL will have to be adjusted to that consideration.

I do the same, takes all the guesswork out.

I have never ever done it. No need to do it.
The shape of the group tells you where your bullet needs to be seated.
Large equilateral triangle = seat out further.
2 in and 1 out of the group = seat deeper.

I move the seating die a quarter turn at a time.

John

So your advice to a reloader that doesn't know how to determine max COAL is "screw that, you don't need to determine max COAL, just start adjusting your seating depth based on shot patterning?"

Wow!

I hope he has enough sense to ignore this stupidity.

David

Why would 2 in 1 out mean seat deeper, what's going on to cause that? If the load is inaccurate, how'it igoing to work on 2 out of 3?

I tried everything mentioned or variations and like the consistency of the StoneyPoint tool. Plus I get to buy more chitt that way.

It works. I read AussieGunWriter's advice on this some time ago and it works just fine.

I do start by finding the max OAL to touch the lands and then check that against maximum magazine restrictions. I like to start at .020" off the lands just because I like to leave some clearance. That's not a magic number, folks can start at whatever distance they care to based on their own needs and opinions.

But if you get groups of 2 and 1, or 3 and 2 if you start with 5 shot groups, seat deeper. I generally go about .020" or .030" at a time, depends on my mood that day. The groups will shrink and that lonely bullet hole will move closer to the other two. If you get a nice round group but it's bigger than you think it should be, seat shallower (closer to the lands).

I have seen this work time and time again in the last couple of years since I started trying it. Some rifles shoot best at .050" off the lands, one likes .001" - basically touching.

Now if you get scattered groups or unexplained flyers in 4 and 5 shot groups the trouble could be elsewhere - bedding, barrel needs free floating or whatever, but given that everything else is okay the group pattern gives a clear indication of which way to move the bullet.

Steely got the order correct. Check magazine bridge opening first. I didn't do that with my first Montana 84L and realized the evening before its first hunt that the overall was too long to eject an unfired round. It fit the mag and chamber, bu caught on the bridge at ejection. Not a good thing to find in the field.

I use a black marker instead of a match. covers better and shows the rifling marks just as well. I then measure that with the Stoney Point ogive tool. That is the measurement I prefer, as it appears to be much more consistent than measuring overall length at the bullet tip. I record that measurement for every load and bullet for future reference. Then, depending on the bullet, I back off 0.020"-0.050" for most bullets. Barnes certainly appear to like the deeper seating, usually -.050"-0.080" But those measurements are guidelines and will be rifle specific.

Enjoy!

Excellent post Jim. That's been my experience as well. Sans Ausiegunwriters advice: Haven't read it. Smoke the bullet and use a piece of once fired brass from that rifle. If the brass has already been resized then you'll need to split the case neck. Sounds like the OP is already doing it this way. With a smoked bullet and modified case, there is really no "guess work" involved. Pretty simple and no extra expense with unnecessary equipment like a stoney point or special hornady modified case etc. etc.. Use the money you saved to buy more bullets

It's not his adjustment advice based on grouping I think is stupid, it's the advice to skip determining MAX COAL prior to adjusting seating depth. Plenty of factory rifles that come down the pike with abnormally short throats - I've owned two of 'em. Following his advice is an invitation to a potentially dangerous over load situation.

David

+4

Shod

Not a doubter of the process, just wondering what is going on that would make 2 in 1 out happen. Anyone got an idea?

People love buying more tools, [bleep] that.

The least amount of stuff, the better off I am. Squeeze in a fired neck enough to hold a bullet firmly. Seat bullet long and measure. Insert and close bolt, remove and remeasure (bullet gets pushed into case).

Repeat a few times and you know where you are. If it fits the magazine, you're golden, if it don't, seat deeper till it do.

I don't need cleaning rods, wooden dowels, Hornady comparators, Stoney whateverthephuck. Hell, I don't even need a sharpie.

A fired case, a bullet and a micrometer.

I do like the slip case that I made using a dremmel, by cutting a slit in the neck and a wee bit into the shoulder. Easier for me to pull it back out for multiple measurements than just a squeezed neck. I make one for each cartridge that I have. miles

Plunger type ejector screw with it that way?

I like tools. I even bought the drill and tap to make my own modified cases for my HornadyStoneyPoint tool! I can find the lands without a fired case. Then use a comparator to messure and know with any other bullet without repeating. Simple enough.


Still hoping someone can 'xplain me why the 2 in 1 out happens...

Unless close is good enough,comparators are a pretty useful tool given the nature of bullet tips and even ogive variables lot to lot.

oregontripper,

"2 in 1 out" happens because 3-shot groups aren't sufficient to really reflect the accuracy of a rifle and load. The spread of ALL shots will be larger than the average of 3-shot groups, so the "flier" is simply a shot that's part of the overall picture.

Four-shot groups are superior for testing accuracy, and more shots are even better.

rosco,

Using a bullet in a fired case is "close enough" for determining proper seating depth that a bunch of winning benchrest shooters use it. In my own benchrest rifle it resulted in 5-shot groups averaging around .18" with a minimum of fuss. Which is part of why I use exactly the same "tool-free" method as Steelhead.

I learned this from Benchrest shooters decades ago, and as a writer who specialized in reviewing rifles and developing loads for the reviews, I proved hundreds of times it worked and this advice is being repeated and proved over and again by readers here and other sites where the advice has spilled over.

If you want to know a maximum dimension for OAL, consult you reloading manual.
If you want to know whether that dimension is relevant to your particular rifle, try it in your magazine box to see if it will really fit as a starting point but also confirm there is enough leade to chamber that dimension before running off to the range. Some rifles will house an OAL but not chamber it, Ruger, being an example.

So, how you you "know" I am wrong?

John

JB is perfectly correct here. I buy those 5 target sheets and add spotter bull's in between the printed targets so I have a lot more aiming points on a sheet.

I then record the sequence of targets being used and the loads so I have a series of group shapes to average out. Instead of having single groups with 5 or 10 holes, my method allows me to review each bank of 3 shots compared to the last and the next (I usually shoot 5 targets)so I have not only a range of targets to review, I can clearly see if there are sequences occurring like number 3 being thg flyer "consistently" or whatever, as the targets are cleaner and less destroyed.

The other comparison that can be made is how and when the barrel heat enters the group sequence. Barrel contours differ on each rifle so they need to be reviewed separately, so you have can learn how far you can push a barrel until you are creating erratic information cause by excessive barrel heat.

There is a lot to it but you can't learn a damn thing by starting out thinking you know all the answers. You never do, but after a time, you can start averaging out your results across the board, to see the synergies that occur from the practices you adopt.

I learn from everyone here, and that includes how to conduct myself on a public forum. After owning a bar for a few years, I know exactly how far I can go in the other direction and decency, with explained opinion, is far more constructive.

John

John,

Well said. I can only add that often barrel heat doesn't affect the barrel itself as much as the heat waves coming off the barrel affect aiming through a scope.

A properly stress-relieved and bedded barrel should shoot to the same place even when screaming hot. In fact, this is one of the characteristics common to NULA rifles. A gun-writer friend who had never shot one before finally tried a .30-06. He became so intrigued with how the bullet holes kept landing in the same place he eventually shot three dozen rounds without letting the barrel cool, ending up with a group of an inch.

Yes,best done without a micrometer/calipers too I suppose when "measuring" that way? (serious question)

It depends on the rifle. I seat a bullet in a case, with the case-mouth pinched just enough to hold a bullet firmly but not so firmly it can't be easily pushed back when chambering a round. Then I chamber the test round, and most of the time find rifling marks on the bullet.

In my benchrest rifle I then shot several loads with this "jammed" seating, and after finding the most accurate powder charge, tried a few more loads with the seating depth varied slightly, using a micrometer seating die. Turned out jammed was most accurate.

In a hunting rifle I keep seating the bullet slightly deeper until the rifling marks disappear, meaning the bullet is just off the lands. This usually requires at least .02" more seating depth, but varies with the bullet, chamber, etc.

That seating depth usually results in the accuracy level I'm seeking, but if it doesn't I try seating the bullet slightly deeper with the same powder charge. I start with the bullet close to the lands because seating it deeper results in less pressure, so there's no danger involved after finding the best powder charge with the bullet seated just off the lands. Once I find the seating depth that shoots best, a dummy round with a bullet seated to that depth goes into the die box.

Of course, sometimes that seating depth will have to be tweaked, whether due to another lot of bullets with a slightly different ogive, or throat wear, or whatever.

JB,
Going for an explanation regarding previous discussion that others have stated when getting a "2 in 1 out" trifecta, that seating deeper will bring it in. I am asking why, what could cause that to happen? Conversely, equilateral pattern will be improved with longer COAL. Guess it's no matter or maybe you explained it. A "3 in 2 out" was mentioned also...

I swear I will shoot 4- or maybe even 5-shot groups to confirm... And someday I hope to not weigh every charge. Doubt I'll give up the extraneous tools though. Little steps... I even want a RAR! Range is pretty far for me now so there's little chance to run out and try this then that, its darn inconvenient actually.


Other John, AGW
I will pay closer attention. I have a couple rifles I've been working on and seems I have some equilateral triangles and some "2 in 1 out deals". Appreciate all the input.

[quote=Mule Deer
Of course, sometimes that seating depth will have to be tweaked, whether due to another lot of bullets with a slightly different ogive, or throat wear, or whatever. [/quote]

Thanks.

The quote is the reason I suggested the comparator is a useful tool,but certainly not a requirement. Just a quick way to check a lot run change BTO using the dummy round for comparison,without starting over. Wont take throat wear into account tho, curious how often (shots) you check the wear on your more accurate rifles.

Again, if people want to buy more stuff in hopes that they can craft perfect ammo and become better shots without shooting much, march on.

I'll stick with using a fired case, a bullet and measure.

Hold the phone! My first thought after reading this was........Seating a bullet deeper with the same powder charge results in more pressure and higher velocity.

So are you saying there that a cartridge with the bullet seated to kiss the lands will make more pressure than one with the bullet off the lands? I understand that.

And .02" deeper isn't going to make much difference in pressure......Correct??

I ain't him, but here's a hint on when it's time to recheck some stuff. When accuracy changes.

Pretty weird, huh...

Your advice was reckless and you know it. The OP's question wasn't about load development, it was specific to determing COL. It was so important to you pop off about your technique for load development and tweak the thread by flying in the face of conventional wisdom that you touted skipping a basic safety rules of reloading.

If you had suggested that COAL was only useful for determining safe operating parameters, but you prefer to start you load development XXX off the lands and here's my technique...., I would have had no comment.

Now instead of admitting that you left out crtical information to an obviously less advanced reloader and trying to rectify the situation, you've doubled down on your original post and stated that there are generalities about rifles that can be applied. At least one member on this forum has RUGER American that is throated short enough to get in trouble with their reloads were they listen to your stupidity.

Save your though provoking tweaking for articles where you have the space and time to explain yourself. As a "Gunwriter" your opinions may be viewed by some as carrying more weight and they may be tempted to follow your advice without realizing the consequences. Its OK, I didn't expect you to recant or apologize when you were wrong - you've already proven your were incapable of that long before this thread started.

David

I know you shot a crown royal box one time steelhead.somehow i doubt you could teach me much..

Point is, measuring a bullet base to tip with a caliper aint repeatable, may as well throw the caliper away and run the test everytime you change up.

This is plain good stuff. I've done it a few different ways and finally tried it like this. Works great!

rosco,

I check throat wear periodically on SOME rifles with my bore-scope, mostly our of curiosity. I don't much bother if the rifle is still shooting well, having found that a lot of rifles will continue to shoot small groups even with some throat erosion.

I doubt I could. You seem to have it all figured out. Sorry about my stupid suggestion on not needing extra tools or that a fall off of accuracy was a reason to check stuff again.

I bow to your knowledge.

I've probably been doing it wrong to measure the throat and have learned something here. I typically resize a case just maybe 1/8" or so into the neck and seat a bullet long....jam it into the lands....measure.....whack it with the bullet puller.....and repeat to make sure I'm accurate with my measure.

On those rifles where I'm kissing.....I may be kissing more than I need to. It's worked for me, but I'm thinking I need to adjust my method a little........

Man, some crazy stuff on this thread. Don't recheck stuff if rifle is shooting good, recheck when rifle ain't.

I'd have never thought of that, but I ain't from Utah.

Gotta run, time to take my car into the shop to see why it's running ok.

Why would I measure a bullet, base to tip?

I know Amaxes have changed some over the years......but I don't believe bullet makers typically retool frequently just to move ogives fore and aft. Or do they?

Cartridge base to bullet tip is what I meant.

The ogive moves forward as the dies wear during produce, when the old worn dies are replaced the or give will move back, as the dies wear again during production the ogive move forward until the dies are replaced. This has always been the case.

I've had 155 scenars vary enough to cause problems. Trying to buy them in thousands helps but not always possible.

I admit it dont usually matter much, especially in hunting rifles when you keep the bullet away from the lands (I do anyway).

Was just sayin a comparator along with your micrometer is useful,and cost 20 bucks, didnt mean to make a thing out of it.

Understood. I have a comparator in a box somewhere.......LOL.

Haven't seen a need in quite a few years to be that anal....but I don't push pressures like I used to with my reloads.

I measure .004 less than bullet diameter and scribe a line around the bullet at that diameter. I can periodically check with loaded rounds compared to the dummy load with the scribe.

Sure, I'm using my eyeballs to do it, but I trust them.

When I pick a different bullet, all I do is find where .004 less than bullet diameter is and make that line up with the dummy, even though that dummy is a different bullet. It gives them the same jump.

What kind of measurement changes are we talking about here? Thousandth's? Ten-thousandths? What?

As long as my accuracy doesn't change.....I'm loading to the same COL. And like I said.....I don't push pressures like I used to. Just not worth it.

Exactly..They make a tool for that,and its pretty cheap,you already own the caliper..Just sayin

I hear you, they do.

You've obviously not spent the past 30 years moving across the country every 3 years.

Less stuff is more. I need calipers, I don't need the other.

I have fired cases, because I shoot. I have bullets, because I shoot. I have calipers because I shoot (and other things). The comparator becomes one more 'gadget' to spend money on, for a bunch of different calibers.

All I've been saying is you don't need to buy MORE STUFF to do the same job. It's not needed, but if it makes you feel better spending the money, go for it.

Fair enough..I cant go from the shop to house without losing chit..No doubt I'd be missing lots of "stuff" having to move.

David,
Article 1 was written for people like you and I respect and support your right to an opinion including an opinion that differs to mine.

My point, which you clearly did not get, was that I personally think OAL can be over emphasized, which is why I offered an alternate view. Also, my, Article 1 right, for which you are free again, to disagree with.

John

Just stating a reality, do with it as you wish. Unless I am loading for one of my long range rifles I don't care, but when I am I want my bullets to be alike as this lessens extreme spread in velocit and at 1000 yards that is important. 4 to 500 not so much.

No harm, I've always liked you.

Please don't assume because one isn't using a 'tool' that it doesn't work and work just as well.

Exactly

I'll be needing a bullet making die measuring tool now. Off to Sinclairs...

257heaven,

Thanks for repeating the common notion that pressure increases when seating bullets deeper. I'm working on a HANDLOADER article about "Handloading Myths" and it will fit right in. (Did one a dozen years ago but the editor and I agreed it's time for another.)

Like many handloading myths, this is partially true. Pressure does increase with seating depth in HANDGUNS (and here I'm not talking about hand-carbines, like Contenders chambered for rifle rounds). This is because of the way most handgun powders burn, starting out fast with the highest pressure right in front of the case mouth, and is exacerbated in revolvers, because there's more chamber for the bullet to travel before pressure's relieved somewhat by the cylinder/barrel gap.

But with progressive-burning rifle powder, pressure decreases with greater bullet-seating depth (at least until it's really deep, say 1/2" or more, and we're not talking about seating them that deep). You can even see this on an accurate chronograph, as velocity will normally decrease slightly as well. (However, a lot of cheaper chronographs aren't all that accurate, especially for only three shots, because the sensor spacing is so short.)

Well I'll be danged! There goes my 257 Rbts in a short action is just as good as a 257 Rbts in a long action argument.

But when I mess with different loads in Quickload to find the most efficient powder, I get more velocity with short (factory COL) rounds than with longer COL rounds. And more pressure when I shorten the COL. I guess I need to shoot over a chrono more!

Finding out I'm an amateur on several levels now.

It gets worse if you're in the southern hemisphere, most especially with right hand twist.

Johns point on a good chronograph is very important.
The Oehler 35P has always been a respected chronograph with writers not only for the 3rd proof screen, but because you can change-out the spacing rod that holds the screens and decrease the variance in the reading with the light screens further apart. The Oehler comes with a chart drawing that explains the accuracy improvement and provided the length spec's for the rod and spacings.

The only real pain with that is that you need 2 tripods to hold the extended screens. You can also leave the screens set up which helps a little during set up rather than packing it all away in the box.

John

257, Don't be a tool! (-:

I am convinced that nobody can explain how a "2 in 1 out" group means anything. If it does, it's a mystery. If seating deeper cures it, great, but a mystery nonetheless.

257Heaven,

QL is a computer simulation, based on certain assumptions. Which is exactly why the directions say that actual pressure-tested data is preferable--and why QL predictions often don't work out all that well.
It's probably assuming the same bullet/rifling distance for both long and short COAL, but that's not what happens when bullets are seated deeper in the same rifle.

Yes, a .257 Roberts on a long action WITH a longer throat will result in somewhat more velocity at the same pressures as the same bullet in a short action/throat Roberts. But the difference isn't near as much as many handloaders assume, because the extra powder room gained is minimal, and only results in about 1/4 as much extra velocity.

Not really. JB's explanation was I believe correct. Many an apparent flyer is actually a normal accuracy disparity in the abbreviated group of 3 rounds. If you shot 5 rounds, that flyer could still be the extremity of the 5 shot group if 4 and 5 were inside that spread.

John

John,

Just when I thought it wasn't possible to have less respect for you, you prove me wrong.

I KNOW that you know what MY point was. For the 5th time - Your first post told the OP to skip measuring MAX COAL, defelop a load then start adjusting seating depth based on target groupings. That's stupid and reckless - An inexperienced reloader with a hot batch of powder that wasn't showing serious pressure signs (or that didn't notice the pressure signs that were there) that adjusts a bullet to jam in the lands could get themselves in trouble. Plentry of rifles leave the factory with chambers much shorter than typical, short enough to have this scenario play out.

It would be very easy for you to state - "Hey, I was just making a point about load development, of course you need to know MAX COAL before you start adjusting bullets out on a pressure load." You have steadfastly refused to admit your advice AS WRITTEN in your first post was wrong and potentially dangerous. The fact that you continue to ignore my point so that you can attempt to save face and pretend it was about "your" technique makes you a giant puzzy, but I already knew that.

David

I know. I was being serious for once in my life!! haha.

I will change some of my methods going forward. But I've never had a problem loading to Quickload specs. I always make sure of my COL and H20/brass capacity before I start messing with different powders and loads in the program.

I actually did have a problem with a 22-250 with match chamber and Lapua brass. Got high pressures with that and had to do some actual range time with it to figure stuff out. And I did use a chrono with that one and a few others that aren't in Quickload (most recently a 25-204).

I should add....when I work up loads in Quickload, I back off the max pressure quite a bit. No need to push it and it compensates for different burn rates in different lots of powders.

The few times I did use a chrono, my Quickload data was spot-on.

I do it similar, just backwards. I start by finding the lands and then check to see if it fits in the magazine.

I like the Lee collet neck sizers. Its easy to put a little squeeze on a fired case neck. Sharpie up a bullet and seat looong. Close bolt on round, remove, measure. I'll do it a few times.

I also like to take a drill and drill out the primer hole on the piece of brass im using. Makes it easy to push the bullet out if its seated a little tight. Mark and keep the dummy round.

I have never been told my advice is potentially dangerous, never by editors, powder suppliers, bullet suppliers or rifle and scope manufacturers who entrusted me with their products for review. No-one has ever had the gall to call me a puzzy to my face either. I suspect you would not either.

Read my bi-line. My comments are free to accept of dismiss, as incidentally, are yours. The readers will decide what is of interest to them and I am ok with that.

Time you wrote a book perhaps?
The End.

Too phugging funny - now you're going the Big Squeeze (AKA Big Puzzy) route.

Your publishers didn't have a probem cause you didn't write the same stupid advice like you did here. Why don't you publish an article telling people to develop pressure loads at reloading manual OAL, NEVER CHECK your rifle's MAX COAL then start walking their seating depth out. Let me know if you get that published with no disclaimers.

You might be surprised what I'd be willing to tell you face to face. Feel free to shoot me a pm, we'll see what we can work out.

David

Give it a rest buddy and stop ruining another thread.

I don't believe a single group like that tells anything for various reasons noted in prior posts, but a series of them can give one some data points to indicate a trend.

E.g., if one is working up a pressure series with a new rifle or new bullet, you might fire several three shot groups with incremental powder charge increases to let you know when you're getting near max pressure - I use a good Oehler 35 to do this. If one of those groups is 2 and 1, that means nothing. If all of them are 2 and 1, that is an indication that the bullet should probably be seated deeper. If they are all round but big, the bullet might benefit from being seated deeper.

But like almost all absolutes, there is no absolute. If you're working with certain powders like Ramshot TAC, a likely result will be mediocre grouping at starting loads right up until you hit a certain pressure, when all of a sudden they land in a tiny group with no other change in seating depth.

But like Mule Deer is saying, three shot groups are really only good for internet bragging. I like 4 shot groups even when starting a pressure series, and once everything gets to where I like it, then I'll fire a 5 shot group at least and sometimes a 10 shot group just to see what the rifle/load combination is really capable of over the long run.

It's like someone explained flying to me - science vs. art. The plane flies because of pure physics, flying it correctly is art. The rifle and load will shoot the way they do due to some ungodly number of physical variables, some of which are important and some less so and most I for one am at a loss to detect or analyze in minute detail. But the art is keeping an open mind and watching what trends seem to repeat themselves and then following that trend to a successful conclusion, whether or not I totally understand it.


Not trying to lecture you personally, since after 46 years of stuffing cases I'm still very much a student of the art, just philosophizing on a rainy Saturday morning.

Likewise.

I might have lied a little too..I've picked up several things from you over the years.

GFY

David

Only reason that I measure the distance to the lands is to make sure that I don't accidentally load a hot load into the lands. Magazine restrictions keep me from loading to the lands in every rifle that I own, but I always check again when using a new to me bullet. I try not to load hot on top of that. miles

That's a good point Miles.
I was once given a project to develop a common load for 3 rifles.

The cartridge was the .300 Winchester Magnum and the bullet provided was the 180gn Winchester Failsafe Bullet.
The 3 rifles were a Sako Finbear, Ruger 77 Stanless and a Remington 700.

Although it was relatively easy to find an accurate load that shot well in all rifles, it was the Ruger that determined the OAL for each rifle, as the intention was to use common load they could share.

The range I used had a single load policy so it was a slow process but concluded to the satisfaction of all.

John

Which is it? Seems like you're saying now it is imprtant to check MAX COAL for safety?

David

John,

Over the years I've often ended up with odds and ends of handloads, worked up for rifles loaned for testing, or that I no longer own. I used to break those down and "redistribute" the components, but anymore just tend to shot them up in other rifles. Sometimes I have to seat the bullets a little deeper, but often I don't--and generally they shoot pretty darn well!

Of course, a lot of factory ammo shoots pretty well in a lot of rifles, too....

A first year manufactor AccuBond compared to one manufactured a year or so later.





b

I've found Aussie's advice to work pretty often also.

I've also found that most load "workup" is moot until one gets the pressures about maxed out with any of the new powders.

Thanks Jim!

I'll be watching group dispersion more carefully.

I have failed miserably by assuming I'd found a great load based upon single groups...
For the record, almost anytime I have bragged about a 3-shot trifecta by posting it on the innerwet, it was not some random anomaly - just the best of the best. There not a thing random about a 22-250 pasting them in the tens, a 243 in the 2s or 30 cal cloverleafs. All factory barrels and self accurized. Now if I can just get my current fleet to shoot as accurate I'll have it made. Appreciate Everyone's input, as much as or more than ever. Whenever in question about something I'll do a little Google searching and find myself dismissing other sites, not always, but hopefully finding 24hourcampfire threads, new and old, reading those with most interest. Have learned a fair deal from many, some how to be a grade A asshat (which I have freely passed along to others), and other posts by men of decency sharing a wealth of information and reason. Thanks to all.

Of it all, I only feel one apology needed be offered, that's to jwp475 for a name calling rant a few years ago, not sure why I thought that necessary, was a piss poor attempt to make a needless point. Sorry.

Oregontripper

There is a lot of good advice on this thread but something is missing.....so I'll cover it.

There are actually 2 kinds of OAL.
The first kind, which is the most commonly asked, can and will vary from rifle to rifle and again from bullet to bullet and case to case (which effects the amount of bullet exposed from that case in reaching that OAL). This is commonly called distance to lands but it can also be distance from bolt face to lands if the case is slightly undersized and even if it is close enough to headspace safely.

This is the one I ignore because some rifles can have this OAL determined and the round will not fit in the magazine box, being too long to either fit or function without hanging up during cycling.

The second OAL which is infrequently spoken of, is the one I defer to.
As MD stated, you can shoot off old un-tailored loads in any rifle and most of the time they will shoot satisfactorily.

Some un-tailored rounds have a short OAL exampled by factory rounds which are designed to chamber and go bang in every rifle so chambered.

An example of that would be my .25/06 which has a custom throated chamber again, for which I have never measured, because I simply do not care what it is. It is a match grade barrel and will shoot with just about anything I put though it including the Vortex Factory loads provided to me from Barnes, with an OAL of 3.085" compared to my tailored handloads which have an OAL of 3.270".

The barrel is as I said, match grade so they all shoot together even with that disparity. Because shortening an OAL tends to decrease pressures and again as MD stated, if the slightly undersized case designed to fit "any" chamber yet still be safe, permits the primer to back out and re-seat upon case expansion to chamber, the primer will be flat in a case that is nowhere near dangerous levels in pressure so gives a false reading if you don't understand this.

The bullet seating depth which ultimately determines that cartridge OAL can vary in the amount of exposed bullet depending how tightly the case fits the chamber when resized or sized if a new factory unfired case.

Change the bullet and the ogive changes and alters the OAL again, distance from bolt face to lands. Batch to batch variation in bullets means that too, can alter the OAL if you check it that often.

For all the above reasons, I do not check this bolt face to lands OAL as it can generate a bullet seating length that may not fit the magazine for fit and function.

Hence my suggestion that using the group shape can better in my case and for my purposes, determine where an OAL needs to be to both fit and function in the magazine and also provide the optimum accuracy from that batch of bullets in that particular chambering and in that particular rifle.

Some rifles have acceptable accuracy to some and yet the same rifle in the hands of a "bullet tuner" such as myself, will make minute alterations to seating depth based on the 1/4 turns I described earlier, based on the shape of the groups being averaged. Not let me stress that some rifle fine tune in minute setting changes and a 1/4 turn is too much. How much you turn and what is acceptable accuracy is an individual choice.

A single group means little which is where most writers lost favor with benchrest shooters decades ago, but they look pretty in articles. Everyone has a good day but that is likely not a "representation" of how that rifle performs with that load.

I will continue to offer advice based on what I know to be true by qualifying that it is true. Most writers will not post on the net when they can get paid for the same words in print. There is a reason for that as demonstrated in previous posts.

There is another thread on here talking about the best contributors that have been lost because of the internet tough guys and their insults that contribute nothing to the discussion.

John Wayne once said, "a big mouth doesn't make a big man". Imagine what he would think of the internet?

Merry Christmas to everyone.

John

No disrespect meant...but I think it's reckless to say this without any detail as this goes against everything about COL and pressure that we've (or maybe I'm alone here) learned to date.

i.e.: Somebody trying to act on this statement and not knowing details could get hurt or killed.

Mule Deer talked about that in a prior post here. In a handgun round decreasing OAL decreases the combustion chamber (powder space) significantly and does indeed increase pressure.

But in a rifle decreasing OAL allows the bullet to build up more momentum before it hits the rifling so the pressure doesn't build as high - up to a point, and I think MD mentioned something like a 1/2" decrease in OAL as a good ballpark.

The Hornady manual has a good discussion of how seating depth affects pressure, pages 24-27 in the current 9th edition but previous editions have the same discussion and pictures going back as far as I've owned one.

Not reckless at and is an absolute fact in a rifle which is what we are discussing here. The closer to lands increase pleaser. This is well documented. Chub Eastman wrote an article about thus with pressure data to back it up.

John,

It's pretty simple - advocating increaseing COAL on a pressure load w/o first determing MAX COAL is stupid, unsafe and reckless. 14+ paragraphs in one post and you address all kinds of straw men, bit not the probelem with your first post in this thread - which is the ONLY thing I took issue with.

I know you were wrong, you know you were wrong, everybody that understands reloading knows you were wrong. Please, continue to swell up and blame me for your own stupidity and the inability to climb out of the monster hole you've dug in your own credibility.

One more thing - You were the internet tough guy that was making it clear " I wouldn't have the balls to say that to your face", not me...

David

Just last week I was testing seating depth changes in mild target loads in a .308 and got these velocities - these are averages of 5 shots each over an Oehler Model 35.

Hornady 150 grain SP
40.0 IMR4895
.030" off the lands - 2401 fps
.050" off the lands - 2383 fps

41.0 IMR4895
.030" - 2518 fps
.050" - 2490 fps

Sierra 150 Spitzer
41.0 IMR4895
.030" - 2483 fps
.050" - 2483 fps

The first two show a small decrease in avg. velocity indicating a small decrease in avg. pressure. The Sierra results are interesting in that the average velocity was exactly the same which, besides being an interesting coincidence, could indicate all kinds of things - seating depth didn't make much difference with that bullet or perhaps one shot in the second string was way higher than the mean and skewed the average upwards.

That's why reloading can turn your hair grey or occupy one's interest for a lifetime - trying to figure out why these things do what they do.

Try load 3 .005 off the lands it I am sure will make a difference

Something is being missed here.
If shortening the load does not decrease pressure, then why does Weatherby artificially do this by including a free-bored section?

Also, Why is there continued discussion on handloaders having their 7mm Magnums long throated to seat longer bullet out level with the case neck?

The answer is simply to reduce pressures so more powder can be used to increase velocities over a standard OAL spec.


John

I read all of that. All I'm saying is that talk of COL not mattering with the same powder and charge should include the 1/2" - or whatever it is - disclaimer. I'm guessing that 1/2" applies to all rifle cartridges and powder burn rates....but it probably doesn't. That is all.

deleted

Deleted

Deleted.

David,
I started writing in 1985 and have long lost count of how many articles have been published after learning from Benchrest shooters and through handloading experience and testing and reviewing rifles and handloading components.

It has been an honor to be be a guest speaker at many hunting clubs and even a professional writers club, SCI events, Buckmasters, Dearstalker clubs and even as a guest of the Colorado DOW Master Instructors in Aspen where my work has been appreciated.

I have probably had more criticism from you in this one thread than everyone combined over all those years. If you don't like what I write, that's fine with me as I am absolutely done with you and won't bother responding again.

Merry Christmas to your and your family.

John

John,

If that's the case then you must have literally never received any criticism ever, because I only criticized one thing. You were wrong, you know it, and you're not man enough to correct it. Instead you would rather create a bunch of straw man arguments and lure me into a discussion of "your" method for detemining bullet seating depth.

It's really sad that you would prefer to see some inexperienced reloader damage their rifle, get a face full of hot gases or worse because your foolish pride prevents your from manning up and admitting your mistake.

You're done with me now for the second time? Will theree be a third? Still waiting on that pm.

Regards,

David

The forum is running true. Anything past the first page is worthless or a pi$$ing contest.

I deleted all of mine. Or most of it. I'm beyond caring.

I use the Stoney point tools.

Seems to work for me.

Actually, I think Aussie explained himself just fine to start with, and anyone with a brain got the idea. He has also answered any remaining ambiguities in a gentlemanly manner.

Canazes is just making an *** out of himself, trying to generate some street cred, I guess.

DD

The OP's question was on how to determine MAX COAL, not how to determine proper bullet seating depth.

John never recanted his opening statement. He said he doesn't determine MAX COAL, he never has, he has no need.

There is no ambiguity there.

I'm not sure what "street cred" you think I'm building or what exactly I would do with it if I had it, but that most certainly wasn't my point - I stated quite clearly what the issue was, over and over. John, refused to directly address it - because he knows he's wrong.

GFY

David

There is about one good post per page, sure is a lot of wading to find it though.

Stoney Point, can measure several different bullets quickly and accurately. Then, start close to the lands and work my way back until most accurate load is found. If bolt action, I load to mag length that allows smooth follow up shots. Of course, I never need a follow up shot.

Tools are good.

I won't read the entire thread, but:

seat to the lands or mag length, whichever is less.

Amazingly worthless information given to the OP in this 12 page POS.

No one tells him how he can do it with tools he already has; a cleaning rod and rod stops.

Pitiful and pathetic!

He asked how we did it.

Ya....we'll....GFY!

Oh, wait a minute....am I in the right thread?

OK....I am....GFY!

Oh, and I'd have to agree with you to that the thread turned out pathetic though I have to say I feel the cleaning rod method is more of an educated long way around from a much more practical method such as Mule Deer recommended.

Shod

Great thread with lots of good info for those who will listen and learn instead of argue. Those who provided good info know who they are and what works. Those who argue and call others names and insult others might not know who they are but the rest of the readers do.

The good is worth the BS if you do not lower yourself to the muck at the bottom of the pile.

It is indeed "the same old 'fire".

A poster that 100% knows better posts a step by step guide on how to over pressure a rifle and the person that calls him on it is branded a "meaner". Not one person will come forward and say that what John posted in his original post is safe - including John. Instead we're supposed to "know what he meant".

Please, someone, anyone, step up! Point out to me the error of my ways! Explain to me why it's safe to load pressure loads and starting walking seating depths out w/o first checking MAX COAL.

Anybody?

Somebody show me where John ever said that's not safe and recanted his original post.

Anybody?

David

Someone needs a hug

Clearly, but the question(s) still stand....

David

David,

Just an observation. Your error was simply being a dick about it.... Nothing else has mattered since. Nothing.

The error is not "Respectfully" disagreeing. Its not anything that I haven't done a time or three or many others.

The longer you're around here though you tend to learn to not get to excited and just trust that the folks learning will have to have there own responsibility to educate themselves on safe loading practices.

Its all good my friend.

Don't worry so much about it and hang out and just have fun. In the end everyone does learn a lot of very useful information here on the fire.

Shod

Wow!

Tell the truth now - you're really a woman aren't you?

David

Shod,

I'm truly not upset about any of it - I'm not the moron trying to teach people how to overpressure their rifles. That guy has quit talking to me - twice....

David

That's your deal? Being a dick? Have fun.

John actually contributes a very large amount of useful information around here.

Do I agree with him on every statement he's ever made. No!

However, resorting to calling folks degrading names simply is not a good way to express disagreement.

You have 2 choices

You can choose to disagree in a positive way.

Or you can choose to disagree in a negative way.

When ones choose to do it in a negative manner it effect everyone and it shouldn't come as any surprise when folks express disaprooval.

I know because I've done exactly what you are doing.

All I'm saying friend is there's a better way. You can either take the advice or leave it. The choice is yours

Shod

Go to wood's first post on page 2 of this longrangehunting.com thread where he details The Cleaning Rod Method

Well after all of this I have settled on the 'cleaning rod method' and the split case, seat the bullet to the lands and measure it. (Same as I have done for the last 10 years). I use them both to verify. It's been an interesting thread and thanks to those who posted useful information.