Seating Depth
- Thread starter snowcreekkennels
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
For those who can't understand starting with the worst powder charge have to try it. It didn't compute in my brain either. But I tried it and I'll be **** if it doesn't work perfectly. But I'm a learn from doing or seeing is believing kind of guy too.
Steve
Steve
Culpeper
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 217
.I figure it is as simple as a 30% reduction on a 3" circle is a lot more noticeable than 30% reduction on a 1" circle.
I haven't tried it yet but it sure sounds like a good way to isolate 1 variable.
Sounds like a guy would need a portable reloading bench to take to the range!
Culpeper
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 217
When I was in the military an old jump master just stuffed his static line chute into the pack to show it would work. It worked. What I don't remember was the purpose of the lesson. He would also climb up to my second story barrack window in the dead of the night just to talk ****. I mean, he could have just climbed the stairs and knocked on the door.
Over my 50 years of handloading… seating depth was the single adjustment to dial in extreme accuracy.
Benchresters of the day(80s90s) claimed this…I ran my own tests to confirm.
From bullet jam to .020 off the lands showed clearly which seating depth a particular bullet prefered.
In my youth I followed gun writers advice trying every which powder and bullet and technique….burning powder and barrels…wasted energy…
The Nosler loading manuals always gave a "best load tested" indication and a most accurate powder tested…
In the calibers I loaded Nosler was never wrong and using the correct seating depth gave me phenomenal accuracy with the minimum amount of component expended….and their recommendations worked over multiple barrels and guns in a given caliber.
my 8 cents worth
Benchresters of the day(80s90s) claimed this…I ran my own tests to confirm.
From bullet jam to .020 off the lands showed clearly which seating depth a particular bullet prefered.
In my youth I followed gun writers advice trying every which powder and bullet and technique….burning powder and barrels…wasted energy…
The Nosler loading manuals always gave a "best load tested" indication and a most accurate powder tested…
In the calibers I loaded Nosler was never wrong and using the correct seating depth gave me phenomenal accuracy with the minimum amount of component expended….and their recommendations worked over multiple barrels and guns in a given caliber.
my 8 cents worth
Last edited:
Rick Richard
Well-Known Member
Well, I am old too. Lol.
Mikecr
Well-Known Member
I'm old as well, but I learned a long time ago that human intelligence divides with numbers.
That mobs hold least intelligence, which usually leads to terrible judgment.
If you consider this, you will see for sure that it passes tests.
I see neither reloading nor ballistics as solved by consensus. There are always local matters.
And every real advancement I'm aware of in these endeavors, was brought on by individuals -who thought for themselves.
Given this, I trust my individual thinking, my logic, over popular vote.
If you think I'm wrong, bassackwards, that could be. But I'm not wrong because of what a mob has done for 100yrs.
That mobs hold least intelligence, which usually leads to terrible judgment.
If you consider this, you will see for sure that it passes tests.
I see neither reloading nor ballistics as solved by consensus. There are always local matters.
And every real advancement I'm aware of in these endeavors, was brought on by individuals -who thought for themselves.
Given this, I trust my individual thinking, my logic, over popular vote.
If you think I'm wrong, bassackwards, that could be. But I'm not wrong because of what a mob has done for 100yrs.
I am always open to new ways. I ate a lot of crow in my younger days!
My dad passed in a tractor accident in 1993. He was an avid RC flyer and electronics genius.
The things an RC plane or helicopter can do today were not physically even possible back in the early 90's.
My dad passed in a tractor accident in 1993. He was an avid RC flyer and electronics genius.
The things an RC plane or helicopter can do today were not physically even possible back in the early 90's.
Equalizer
Well-Known Member
Mikecr … I've always used the OCW method and have been looking into the satterlee ladder… I think 
I'll try this. I usually load to Mag length but I'm about to work up a load for my #1B so I was already thinking about playing with the seating depth.
I'll try this. I usually load to Mag length but I'm about to work up a load for my #1B so I was already thinking about playing with the seating depth.
Culpeper
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 217
There is nothing inherently flawed with your reloading approach as you described and subsequently replied to others. To collaborate with you I would look at your use of optimizing and tuning as I believe you have them "backwards."
"While optimization applies general transformations designed to improve the performance of any application in any supported environment, tuning offers you opportunities to adjust specific characteristics or target execution environments of your application to improve its performance. Even at low optimization levels, tuning for your application and target architecture can have a positive impact on performance". --- IBM
Basically, though IBM is referring to something else, I believe this is your personal choice approach. I may stand corrected but you only appear to be rearranging some fundamental steps that require tuning to correct, which adds more processes.
Most people optimize reloading for most environments. A Tier 1 pro would take it a step further and tune for a specific application. So, it's not a mob per se. Just people that reload for different objectives.
Last edited:
