Math question

[Tucker65]

I put some data into Quickload for a 270 WSM using a Berger 130 vld. Using the same bullet with one seated .156 deeper than the other Quickload came up with a 2.37gr. difference for a 100% filling/load ratio.

 

[feelinducky]

Wow. Thanks Tucker. I would say that is a considerable difference.

 

[Edd]

I put some data into Quickload for a 270 WSM using a Berger 130 vld. Using the same bullet with one seated .156 deeper than the other Quickload came up with a 2.37gr. difference for a 100% filling/load ratio.

I believe that is water weight.

The quick way to calculate that is .. bullet radius x bullet radius x 3.14 x length x 252

 

[NDF]

To quote "monty python" would this involve the use of the African or European swallow? Put desired powder chg in brass, mark new seating depth on new bullet and do the eye test after having found the coconuts to be used, sorry couldn't resist ... good luck with math problem

 

[Deleted member 107796]

An interesting value to calculate, no doubt.
Don't want to appear to second guess, but RL26?
I'm seeing RL17, 19, 22 suggested for 130gn class bullets. None of the max loads are compressed. I only use IMR4350 for 270WSM, personally but would like to try RL22.
Max OAL 2.860" for most Berger/Swift style nose angles is my starting point as I've yet to see it touch lands on my Tikka T3 Lite.

 

[Mikecr]

I think you would LOVE QuickLoad!

 

[muleystalker]

From the description of the bullets you gave it sounds like the new bullet is going to have a longer bearing surface, which is going to cause more pressure also slow the bullet down some compared a same weight built with less of a bearing surface. Keep that in mind when working up your load, its not going to be just the difference in lost powder volume.Good luck and keep us posted.

 

[Edd]

I think you would LOVE QuickLoad!

Is there a version for Mac?