Hammer Hunter Seating Depth

[ButterBean]

I crimp over the depression of the groove but with the lee fcd I don't think it really matters cuz it'll crimp a smooth bullet like an accubong just the same.

X-2

 

[Rick Richard]

For those who don't see the need to perform seating depth tuning, I say you are in the minority. Or, your accuracy (group size) acceptance criteria Is greater than what could be achieved. My experience suggest that any projectile of any brand can produce tighter groups with seating depth tuning.

 

[GLTaylor]

I crimp in the groove. Usually in the first PDR band.
As far as tuning, my goal is 0.5 or better. Only had to fool with one from initial seating and it was my 6.5-06AI.

 

[ButterBean]

For those who don't see the need to perform seating depth tuning, I say you are in the minority. Or, your accuracy (group size) acceptance criteria Is greater than what could be achieved. My experience suggest that any projectile of any brand can produce tighter groups with seating depth tuning.

I'm a 3/4 Moa shooter, I've never had to adjust anything, have seen any results of seating gamers at different lengths?

 

[yorke-1]

For those who don't see the need to perform seating depth tuning, I say you are in the minority. Or, your accuracy (group size) acceptance criteria Is greater than what could be achieved. My experience suggest that any projectile of any brand can produce tighter groups with seating depth tuning.

It depends on the application. For mid range hunting a .75-.5 MOA group is fine. The Hammers are really at their best out to that mid range (600 yards +/-) zone IMO. I agree that getting below that .5 MOA mark requires some additional tuning most of the time.

 

[koonazz]

For those who don't see the need to perform seating depth tuning, I say you are in the minority. Or, your accuracy (group size) acceptance criteria Is greater than what could be achieved. My experience suggest that any projectile of any brand can produce tighter groups with seating depth tuning.

You are probably correct. If I had a rifle not shooting these far better than acceptable I would most definitely look at seating depth. I don't think anyone here is saying that seating depth tuning is'nt legitimate, what we're saying is we have'nt "had to". Seeing is believing and MY experience with hammers has been that they are the least finicky bullets I've ever seen as far as seating depth is concerned.

 

[nealm66]

I have tried a couple of types of hammers in my 6.5 creedmore and have not been successful in getting them to group under an inch. Velocity has be great and with no pressure signs at all with various powders and primers. Since my first hunt is less than 10 days away, I will hunt with what has worked best and resume the hammer experimentation again next year with more seating depth trials and powder recipies. So far, the only seating depths I've tried are .05 and .025.

I was able to bring my brothers tikka light weight 300 wsm into one hole from about 1ish moa by laddering in .01 gr ( I went up) as I didn't want to change my pressure or coal. It only took about.04 if memory serves. This is 3 @ 100. I usually shoot 200 but his scope sucks lol

 

[nealm66]

Silly thing was I was trying to reduce the recoil with a lighter bullet (160 ish) well, it doesn't work if they are going faster lol. Oh well, it's only for hunting and will be good to see less meat damage

 

[ButterBean]

It depends on the application. For mid range hunting a .75-.5 MOA group is fine. The Hammers are really at their best out to that mid range (600 yards +/-) zone IMO. I agree that getting below that .5 MOA mark requires some additional tuning most of the time.

I disagree,MOA is still the standard, it is still the standard for the military as well, 2 MOA@ 200 yards is the sniper rifle criteria as well as the criteria to pass the course, A rifle that shoots MOA is still a fine rifle, I will say there are a ton of world class shooters on this site anymore that don't have an entry in record book anywhere

 

[koonazz]

I do Bean , most curse words spoken at a rifle during load development EVER. Christensen Ridgeline you know who you are.

 

[ButterBean]

I do Bean , most curse words spoken at a rifle during load development EVER. Christensen Ridgeline you know who you are.

I understand that, if you bought a rifle that was guaranteed to shoot sub Moa I'd be upset as well but to say you need a .75 Moa rifle is probably ok to hunt with is gibberish IMO

 

[koonazz]

I feel ya brother!

 

[GLTaylor]

I disagree,MOA is still the standard, it is still the standard for the military as well, 2 MOA@ 200 yards is the sniper rifle criteria as well as the criteria to pass the course, A rifle that shoots MOA is still a fine rifle, I will say there are a ton of world class shooters on this site anymore that don't have an entry in record book anywhere

Uhhh, BBean, these are 2 different standards.
I shot competively for several years. A half moa rifle is not competitive today, nor has been for quite a while.
Now, for hunting - whether varmints, game or people, 1 moa or so is just fine. I still hold out for 1/2 moa in case I go prairie dog hunting again. I love Looong targets

 

[ButterBean]

Uhhh, BBean, these are 2 different standards.
I shot competively for several years. A half moa rifle is not competitive today, nor has been for quite a while.
Now, for hunting - whether varmints, game or people, 1 moa or so is just fine. I still hold out for 1/2 moa in case I go prairie dog hunting again. I love Looong targets

Really GL, thanks for reminding me how old am and I totally agree with you on the standards but once again to suggest that "you should be ok" out too 600 with a .75 Moa rifle ?