MassHntr

I would appreciate you opinions on bullet seating. Do you "customize" to allow COL to be just short of the lands? I know factory loads have to make average assumptions, but many handloaders guage the lands in their specific rifle. As I zero in on some recipes, I wonder whether I should also vary seating depth. Thanks.

johnch

First and fore most the OAL must fit in the mag well with a little to spare.
Then what bullet are you using ? Barnes X type bullet shoot best seated farther off the lands than most bullets.
I seat hunting ammo a little farther off the lands just incase a bullet moves in the mag about 20-25 /1000
varmit ammo I load at as close as 10/1000 off
IMO find a load that shoots good at recomended OAL and then you can start customizing the length longer never shorter.

handloader1

You are going to have to experment with different seating depths to find the sweet spot. Good luck.

7mmaniac

johnch was dead on....about 25/1000 off the lands for hunting loads and work out in 25/1000 intervals to find the seet spot. I have a rifle that like them touching but you have to back off the charge due to pressure. He also mnetioned magazine length. Measure your magazine and start there. Some rifle companies do a good job of giving you "access" to the lands while still fitting in the magazine. Some do not. Bullet length itself can make problems...Scirocco's for example are very long for their weight and might have to be seated deeply. On the other hand speer grand slams are very short. You just need to use a stoney point OAL gauge to find your length then pick bullets that fit your needs. Inside secret: regular bullets work just great in regular calibers. They were designed to work in them guns. 270, etc. All that bonded core bologna is just that, bologna. They gotta make money somehow. NEW bullets aren't made for deer, their made for hunters. Although they do show their strengths in small for purpose calibers and extra-fast calibers.

bigcountry

Masshuntr, its rarely been an issue for me. Almost all my guns I could not reach within 2/100" to my rifling and still fit my magizine. I want a nice margin also in my magizine. I have tested the distance to my rifling both with the split case way, burnt carbon from a candle way, and magic marker way. None were very accurate or repeatable and when you did think you found it, you were really jammed into the rifling or far from it. I use a stoney point AOL guage now. If you do it right, and use a dowl or something to press against the bullet from the bore, you have remarkable sensitivity. And also shows you how much more you can push the bullet into the rifleing. What I have showed some people, is what they were doing was a tad wrong. They have tested using a split neck technique, and thought they were far from the rifling. But they always wondered why they can't reach max load or pressure signs sometimes. They were in the rifling. Pressure built quick.

Don't get too wrapped up in this. I did and it made reloading fussy and no fun. Unless you are a bench comp shooter. There is one bullet I find to be very finicky to COL and thats Barnes bullets. Only reason I want to measure it now to make sure I have safe loads. I have guns that shoot .5MOA with bullets sitting .25 away from rifling and others sitting .01" away. Lots more important things to worry about like bullet seating.

So now, I just use the tool to make sure I am not close to the rifling and load the bullet to fit my magizine or close to SAMMI specs. Lots of exceptions. Like Short action calibers in long action guns. Or varmint calibers. So if you lots of room in your magizine, sure you can play. Just make sure you are not in the rifling.

bigcountry

So what tests have you performed for this? Surely noone would make a statement without some data of some type? What does this have to do with COL?

MassHntr

Thanks for the advice. Very helpful. My loading is pretty standard stuff, hunting and practice. Ruger 77 Mark II in .30-06 Springfield. I'll be happy with sub-MOA at 100. Loading Remington Core Lokt 165 SPs for some of the fairly heavy-bodied deer in NH. Ruger doesn't like lighter loads, and likes IMR 4064 more than IMR 4350 for this load. I'm getting 1" groups with 48.3 grains. I was going to fine-tune in the 47.8 - 48.8 range, and also consider testing some different seats. On the other hand, I may be overthinking this problem.

bigcountry

I find this not to work for me. A good load, it should not matter much. Not enough for you to even tell a difference unless you have other factors you are looking for like groups at 300 yards, or chronograph load data. A good load, you should be able to load up a box of 47.8, and box of 48.8 and average groups should be very close. If its that sensitive, might want to try a new powder. I myself would try a new bullet, but thats me. Like a 165gr gameking and 56gr or 57gr or so of IMR4350. But thats me.

7mmaniac

There are many gun writers I could quote but I don't live by their opinions. I've loaded bullets from every major producer and have killed deer with most as have many of my friends. Failures are almost nonexistent as the deer are very dead. No..there are no pretty mushrooms, usually, to show everyone but then a deer doesn't really care about that anyway. As the next line read, bonded does have its place in hypervelocity and smaller cartridges. Even then I prefer bullets that penetrate vs. expand while retaining all their weight. Nosler partition for example. I wasn't trying to step on any toes just make his choices a little easier.

bigcountry

I was trying to find out what bonded or not bonded had to do with bullet seating.

I am not talking deer here really. You can knock down deer with just about anything. There's a bunch more game out there than just deer.