RE: Disappointing outcome..
 

Thanks guys for your information. I don’t think it was a complete waste of $$ but at least I now know what the out come was.

Gundigest, I do have a T/C in a 350 Rem. mag and also checked it out and the result on that was that the C.O.L would have been very long. The bullet would have barely been pressed in the brass. Ah well , live and learn.

I hope this doesn't become a heated subject just because of little old me

RE: Disappointing outcome..
 

I dismiss it drift from my experience. I have worked up so many loads, I can't count them. And I have started my COL real low and work my way up and almost in every circumstance, closer the better. Guns I have that have real short chambers always shoot better. Weatherby and RUMchambers with long throats are not near as dynamic.

I mean should I believe readings, and tests from some company or what I see in real life??

RE: Disappointing outcome..
 

I'm not saying at all that you should ignore your experiences, but rather that you shouldn't completely and arbitrarilydismiss the findings of others, perticularly those based on the research of a major ballistics lab, just because their findings don't exactly correspond with your personal observations. Very likely, there is truth to both theories, under certain circumstances.

Mike

RE: Disappointing outcome..
 

True, my sako 75 7mmSTW does defy this. It has quite a bit of freebore but still shoots well. I am not totally dismissing, but have found out you need straight consistent ammo with large freebore guns to get them to shoot really well. Where my 308's 7mm08, I could just jam a bullet in the brass and let it fly with good results.

RE: Disappointing outcome..
 

I think it might, then, be more correct to say that freebore and bullet seating depth doesn't matter as long as the chamber is cut true and the bullets are seated with minimal runout. I can also see your point that, in the presense of excessive runout or an imperfectly aligned chamber (which I think is might be more common than one might expect in factory rifles), seating a bullet closer to the lands mightminimise theeffect that these imperfections would have on accuracy. TheNosler study probably utilized very goodquality handloads with minimal runout and good quality rifles and test barrels with true chambers. It doesn't completely invalidate their study if this were the case, but it does add qualifications.

Mike

RE: Disappointing outcome..
 

agreed

RE: Disappointing outcome..
 

I have a problem with this discussion, Nosler the company who did this study will knowingly admit and recomend the Partition be set aganst the lands for best accuracy, they will also explain the profile of the Partitionrequires you set theOALabove specs.

As a precision rifle shooter I've investigated this issue and tested the issue,OAL does effect accuracy. To test this buy a box of whatever is on sale at local gunshop, use kenitic bullet pullet to tap the bullets out a ways of 17 of the bulletsand reset the OAL in incriments of whatever, just make sure you have exactly 3 in each incriment. Shoot the first 3 in factory length and save target, shoot remaining groups of 3 and save targets. This will be very impartical because the ammowas loaded by whoever, you just set the OAL. Somewhere along the way you will have one group of 3 that was better than the rest, and that is the best for your gun.

RE: Disappointing outcome..
 

That is good info regarding the Nosler testing I have always questioned the bullet seating depths importance, but never heard of anyone quantifying and comparing the results. That sounds like one lessvariable to consider.

PS: Did they mention whether seating the bullets further in the case increased or decreased case presssure?

RE: Disappointing outcome..
 

I,m sure Nosler know more about it than most!!Yah Wbys are real bad about the product they have had on the market,thats why they advertize the gun will shoot a best group on the market. Apparently some peoples even bench shooters seem to kknow more than the companies that test and make these products. Benchrest shooters for the most part,go through to much dittling around to try and make there gun shoot better because,there is something always wrong with the gun!! Not trying to improve there skills,its always the gun.No need talking to a wall anyway. Why don,t you go work for these people and you tell them what to do?? I don,t have to if thats what you think,for i have worked for them,and in the know a little better then most!

RE: Disappointing outcome..
 

So I, nor anyone on here shouldn't post my/our results and experiences cause Nosler is a huge big ole company and how could I ever compare to that???? I don't understand your post. Maybe you could spell it out for me. I have wonderful results several times over. My way is working great. I thought I would share my way with trailer and I did. Its really up to him to decide to take me up on my experiences. Should I change all my loads cause somebody from Nosler says so, when I have called tech support from Nosler several times and got several different opinions on thismatter in the past several years?

Sierra is a prime example of different veiws, different people.

Now if you have a question and I have experienced something with the question, I can try to tell you my results. Or maybe you can only take advise from a big ole company only and not find out for yourself???? Who knows.