Primer crush…does it matter?

I'd already decided I wasn't gonna measure primer seating depth with anything more than my finger to feel they're set below the case head face.

No matter what this guy determined. Fortunately, his single test concluded primer seating depth is not terribly critical, provided the primers were seated below the face of the case head.

Goody for me and my methods. Reloading rules of the road are already tedious enough to take the fun out of my hobby. I don't need, or want, another tedious procedure.
 
I'd already decided I wasn't gonna measure primer seating depth with anything more than my finger to feel they're set below the case head face.

No matter what this guy determined. Fortunately, his single test concluded primer seating depth is not terribly critical, provided the primers were seated below the face of the case head.

Goody for me and my methods. Reloading rules of the road are already tedious enough to take the fun out of my hobby. I don't need, or want, another tedious procedure.
There's a whole thread on primer seating depth test on the Hide, very educational from experts, hence my cynical comment on another thread about it. No it doesn't matter. Worth the read
 
There's a whole thread on primer seating depth test on the Hide, very educational from experts, hence my cynical comment on another thread about it. No it doesn't matter. Worth the read
Can you provide the link. I don't do much surfing on that site. Looking forward to it. Thank you
 
I'd already decided I wasn't gonna measure primer seating depth with anything more than my finger to feel they're set below the case head face.

No matter what this guy determined. Fortunately, his single test concluded primer seating depth is not terribly critical, provided the primers were seated below the face of the case head.

Goody for me and my methods. Reloading rules of the road are already tedious enough to take the fun out of my hobby. I don't need, or want, another tedious procedure.
There's anal and there's really anal in reloading. I'm anal in some areas, but not as anal as this video. It was interesting, but like most youtube videos the presenters talk too much for me.

I'll keep doing what I do.
 
Can you provide the link. I don't do much surfing on that site. Looking forward to it. Thank you
Here's my disclaimer... The Hide is for thick skinned individuals, this isn't your mom and pop type forum you go asking stupid questions. Be prepared to get a good lashing via the internet.... Not to hurt anyone's feelings, but here she is, you asked. I have had good interactions with some named individuals you may or may not recognize on here.

 
Oh look here's a video that says it does matter:
Who to believe, who to believe? I'll believe my targets. Y'all can believe your targets, the targets you talk about on the internet, or the targets you dream about at night for all I care.

Bryan Litz does believe in barrel tuners, not sure where the Hide is getting that rumor from. But in his games of Palma (1 MOA x-ring) and F-TR (1/2 MOA x-ring) wind beats vertical once group size hits a certain point. So an adjustable tuner might be beneficial on a 300 yard rifle shooting for group size where wind is less impactful than it is on a 1000 yard rifle shooting for hits. It doesn't hold that shrinking a group from 1/2 MOA to 1/4 MOA is beneficial in every single case, especially if the shrinkage comes in non-beneficial vertical reduction. The entire concept of load tune vs muzzle velocity stats gives lie to thought process that smaller is always better when it comes to measuring one part of output and not weighing it against the goal set.

I'm glad you brought this up. The load development I described using is what I've found success with in F-TR where we shoot 308 Winchesters at targets having a 1/2 MOA X-ring and a 1 MOA 10-ring. We shoot 20-shot strings in 30 minutes with targets marked between every shot. In this application, wind reading and wind strategy are paramount and dwarf the importance of grouping under 1/2 MOA.

For other applications such as contests of pure precision/groups (100 to 1000 yards), I think that you may benefit from exploring the subtleties of harmonics and tune of your barrel and load to get groups as small as possible.

Bryan Litz said:
I do think tuners may provide a benefit for CF rifles, but it's not the intended benefit. In the same way the raw mass of a heavy barrel dampens harmonics, I think having a muzzle weight acts to further dampen harmonics regardless of it's exact position. In other words, I see the benefit of a tuner as additional vibration dampening, regardless of it's adjust-ability. So I could say that there's an advantage to 'muzzle weights' for their general dampening effects, not necessarily tuners for their adjustability effects.


Basically this is all nuance, and the Hide' doesn't do nuance real well. But hey not just anyone can be an internet-super-sniper shooting a 308 Win through an enemy sniper's scope at 11,835 yards in the dark, so they have their playground and low-speed old farts have other forums.
 
Oh look here's a video that says it does matter:
Who to believe, who to believe? I'll believe my targets. Y'all can believe your targets, the targets you talk about on the internet, or the targets you dream about at night for all I care.

Bryan Litz does believe in barrel tuners, not sure where the Hide is getting that rumor from. But in his games of Palma (1 MOA x-ring) and F-TR (1/2 MOA x-ring) wind beats vertical once group size hits a certain point. So an adjustable tuner might be beneficial on a 300 yard rifle shooting for group size where wind is less impactful than it is on a 1000 yard rifle shooting for hits. It doesn't hold that shrinking a group from 1/2 MOA to 1/4 MOA is beneficial in every single case, especially if the shrinkage comes in non-beneficial vertical reduction. The entire concept of load tune vs muzzle velocity stats gives lie to thought process that smaller is always better when it comes to measuring one part of output and not weighing it against the goal set.






Basically this is all nuance, and the Hide' doesn't do nuance real well. But hey not just anyone can be an internet-super-sniper shooting a 308 Win through an enemy sniper's scope at 11,835 yards in the dark, so they have their playground and low-speed old farts have other forums.
I find the opposite to be true on other forums, but that's why we are all entitled to opinions 🤣
 
I have been using the CPS Tool from Primal Rights to seat our primers. Some shooters can say what difference does it make? Well consistent primer depth along with a seating tool that is easy to use along with ergonomics.
Why do I use

CPS - Competition Primer Seater

From Primal Rights?
For the same reason I have a AMP, V-4 System, Henderson Trimmer, Whidden Dies, NECO Concentricity, Redding Instant Indicator, JGS Reamers, Mitutoyo Measuring, ect. I want to be able to get CONSISTANT results for each and every cartridge I reload and rifle I shoot. I don't just reload to push a bullet through a rifled barrel. I reload to try to make the best accurate cartridge that I can shoot and reloading with the BEST equipment is more than satisfying it's just plain FUN!
 
Top