Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
I believe that the condition and consistency of the inside of the neck of the case is FAR more important than seating depth personally. I haven't seen anything super drastic (and proven repeatable) from seating depth, but I've absolutely seen it from inconsistent necks and neck tension.
I have read these articles and agree with what they found. Also different bullet styles have different responses to seating depth. Like flat base respond much differently to seating depth than say hammers do. I have found very little variation in precision shooting them. I can get better precision with say a cup and core flat base at close range but can't run the same velocity. If they are basically saying that every bullet style is different and hybrid bullets were designed to be very forgiving over a wider range of seating depths. Then I say of course they were designed that way!
I am new (since 2019) to the long range shooting community and admittedly my experience is limited. I have been frustrated with all the voices claiming their methods are "how it should be done". I am not inferring that their methods don't work, what I am saying is that if so many different methods all produce the same results, accurate loads, then logically not all of the processes in the various methods are as significant as believed. In other words, the methods may work, but not for the reasons we believe. My goal is, through applying the scientific method, to sort out what actually makes a difference in the reloading process and what is just the deeply held dogma of the community.
I deeply appreciate and respect the experience and knowledge of those in this community, and their willingness to share it. I know that their methods work and produce accurate results, all I am trying to do is figure out why. After recently stumbling across the following information, I have radically changed my thoughts on how I approach reloading. I thought the community might benefit from the information they proffer.
I am looking to have an honest discussion about the information linked below and to hear your opinions, many with infinitely more experience and knowledge than I. If you take the time to review either of them, I would welcome your insight, obviously your have been doing this a lot longer than I.
Rifle Nodes: How You’ve Been Wasting Your Time and Money on Load Development
Everything you know about rifle nodes and load development might be wrong. Click here to see the results for yourself.www.outdoorlife.com
I absolutely agree the rifle system harmonics relative to exit timing of the projectile are what effect the accuracy (cone of dispersion) of the system. But I am also starting to believe that a few thousands of an inch change in the starting position of the projectile has a minimal effect on that timing relative to the massive effect of the conversion of chemical potential energy to kinetic energy inside the case. IF you could make that energy conversion 100% consistent, then yes, by changing the starting position of the bullet you could change the timing of its exit. But given the relatively huge variation of that energy conversion compared to the relatively minute changes in starting position, I am no longer convinced it matters as much as I once believed.
Agreed, every detail matters. So...my previous method for working up a load for seating depth was a ladder starting at -0.020" (to stay out of the lands and possible carbon build up in the throat as the barrel fouls) and moving in -0.006" increments to -0.074". Shooting 3 shot groups and evaluating for group size. I know now that those 3 shot groups were nothing more than RANDOM points on the bell curve and not representative of any changes in seating depth. Shooting ten 3 shot groups at each seating depth to find the real effects of the seating depth changes is not practical from a cost/time/barrel life standpoint. How then are you quantifying the effects of your seating depth changes on accuracy?
I dont follow. Are you saying you did not see any change in your groups from starting point to end point when you did this?
I did see changes. I detailed my results in post #102 on the previous page. I then took the best seating depth based on the 3 shot ladder and loaded 30 of them and posted the findings in #102. My ten 3 shot groups at -0.035" produced a combined group statistically identical to the combined 30 shots from the ladder test with three shots at ten different seating depths (-0.020" to -0.076"). I am shooting 147 ELDMs.
If you hang out at accurate shooter there are a lot of well known long range competitors there. From what I can tell they all tune at 600 as a minimum. Was listening to Alex Wheeler on Cortinas podcast. He tunes his hunting rifles at 600 his target guns at 1000. Vertical is the big thing for distance. Your not going to see anything at 100 yds. You might have a nice 100 yd group that the vertical goes to hell at 600 plus. For us mortals that might mean once you settle on an initial load tune at the max distance you plan to shoot.
