Hints on Hornady OAL tool use

[Dicko]

Stripped bolt method is so repeatable. I started with the Wheeler method, but instead of closing the bolt completely and listening/ feeling for the click on the way back out, I gradually seat deeper and deeper until the bolt drops by gravity, therefore you never fully cam over the action.

All of these methods give you a relative measurement, but the key is to find precision in repeatability.

Yes David
I too use the stripped bolt method preferred to the Wheeler cam over procedure in the same way as you in a Barnard P action and find it very repeatable. What works best for me is to have a case under sized enough that it will let the bolt handle drop under its own weight. Then with a very clean chamber and throat seat the projectile deeper until it drops under its own weight .0005" difference between the bolt handle holding up or dropping under gravity.
It may take a little longer than using the Hornady tool but I find it more precise.

 

[Mark W]

I have the Hornady tool and rarely use it because I prefer the split case method. I find my technique to be very repeatable.

To me finding the lands is like measuring powder. I don’t care if the number is exactly perfect because I’m going to test in my gun anyway. IMO, repeatability is what really matter.

 

[Shooter13]

I use the Wheeler method when determining how much bump to give with my sizing die. Very good method, but I feel the camming action of the bolt too easily jams the bullet into the rifling. The slider can be moved very gently, by feel, helping to prevent jamming the bullet.

I do this also and use the Hornady gauge, works well.

 

[Raythemanroe]

That is a great way of looking at it. As long as I’m taking the measurements for my own use, whatever is quickest and simplest, and still gives me repeatable and accurate measurements, wins.

It is not a good way of looking at it, yes as long as your measurements repeat you can get to the same results. If you want to get there faster with more barrel life left and less expenditures you use the stripped bolt method.

Ray

 

[338 dude]

I have been using the Hornady tool for years my numbers very slightly but I would measure 10 times and take an average until recently when I had a rifle re-barreled And chambered to a specific length I bought theReamer and everything and when I checked with the Hornady tool I had .073 difference when I called my gun Smith to question him about it he said he did not like that tool and suggested I try the strip bolt method by doing this the chamber was in .001 of the requested dimensions it made me look stupid and I will never use the hornady tool again

 

[338 dude]

Another thing I was told by my gunsmith a comparator tool is unique to itself everyone will give you a different measurement with the stripped bolt method his numbers and my numbers should be roughly the same And apparently they were

 

[Richard Coody]

Well first thing I will say is whatever works for you. Repeatability is the most important thing. Just remember we are just looking for a datum. Some point to start a seating depth test. For me it's really not that important to find touch within .001 of an inch. With barrel erosion that point is going.to change.

I just use the stoney point. My tecnique is a little different. I tap on the rod a few times to find what I call a hard jam. I find it very repeatable.

 

[dellet]

No one has mentioned that unless the case on the tool is formed as one you would shoot, the measurement will be off. People using the stripped bolt method are generally starting with a more accurate “bullet holder” to begin with. The comparator really is set up to give you a shoulder/datum to ogive measurement, not a base to ogive.

What works for me for any type of headspacing to lands measurement, whether pistol off the neck, rimmed like a 30-30 or shouldered, is to use something like the comparator for establishing starting length. Since I am a bit heavy handed they always come out long. This is confirmed buy inserting a dead round that measured length in the chamber using finger pressure with the barrel tilted up. 99.9% of the time it will not fall out under its own weight, it’s jammed in the lands. Seat the bullet deeper until the round drops out under its own weight.

Works in any type of action, any type of headspace.

 

[Coyotefurharvester]

Yep, COMPARATOR. Use it as a quick way to compare different bullet weights, styles and brands.

 

[KY_Windage]

All those that use the Stoney Point comparator "successfully" and use it as the go to method, I could have you use the same setup/equipment and each one would have a different result. If you pay attention, the ones recommending you try what Wheeler made a YouTube video showing is repeatable person to person when done correctly. This doesn't just give you repeatability but actual knowledge of where your bullet is at in relationship to the lands. It's kind of good to know when working up loads and taking notes. I will bet what one calls just touching with the comparator is in actuality closer to .010 in.

Ray

That does not matter to me because I don't care what reading somebody else gets with my equipment -- I only need to be consistent within my own measurements, and then do range testing in that rifle and see what works best. If .014" worked best, then I load that, which I can do very accurately with the inexpensive Hornady tools. The variability comes in getting the bullets to seat to the exact measurement I want, but that is not the Hornady Compartor's fault, it is the die's or the brass's.

 

[Hohn]

I use the Wheeler method when determining how much bump to give with my sizing die. Very good method, but I feel the camming action of the bolt too easily jams the bullet into the rifling. The slider can be moved very gently, by feel, helping to prevent jamming the bullet.

Yeah, that's the downfall of the Wheeler method. If you are running a high-end action that will simply fall closed or such, I'm sure it works great. But if you are running a Savage action or like? Not so much.

Finding your lands super accurately isn't that important anyway. If you find a load that works great at a value you think is .012 jump and it's actually 0.015 jump, does it matter? As long as it's repeatable (precision, not accuracy), that's all that matters.

 

[Richard Coody]

That does not matter to me because I don't care what reading somebody else gets with my equipment -- I only need to be consistent within my own measurements, and then do range testing in that rifle and see what works best. If .014" worked best, then I load that, which I can do very accurately with the inexpensive Hornady tools. The variability comes in getting the bullets to seat to the exact measurement I want, but that is not the Hornady Compartor's fault, it is the die's or the brass's.

Or the bullet. Without a consistent ogive curve your base to ogive measurement will be inconsistent.

Sort a box of your favorite bullets with your comparator and you will see what.i am talking about. Bergers are pretty consistent. Hornady not so much. Match bullets are.more consistent than hunting.

Annealing really helps with a consistent shoulder bump and seating force. Work hardened brass just wants to spring back like it was. If those who chase their shoulder bump would try annealing they would be pleased with the results.

 

[David Christian]

Yeah, that's the downfall of the Wheeler method. If you are running a high-end action that will simply fall closed or such, I'm sure it works great. But if you are running a Savage action or like? Not so much.

Finding your lands super accurately isn't that important anyway. If you find a load that works great at a value you think is .012 jump and it's actually 0.015 jump, does it matter? As long as it's repeatable (precision, not accuracy), that's all that matters.

IMO it is better to have a precise lands distance up front, then when you have throat erosion you only need to seat your bullets longer to match the length of erosion. Else, you would need to do your seating depth test all over again.

 

[Raythemanroe]

That does not matter to me because I don't care what reading somebody else gets with my equipment -- I only need to be consistent within my own measurements, and then do range testing in that rifle and see what works best. If .014" worked best, then I load that, which I can do very accurately with the inexpensive Hornady tools. The variability comes in getting the bullets to seat to the exact measurement I want, but that is not the Hornady Compartor's fault, it is the die's or the brass's.

That doesn't make sense to me, you can do it cheaper and get actual numbers that can be recorded with the stripped bolt method. I like to take notes and know what tends to work where. I have a Stoney Point and t-rust me like others have said, farther you get down the rabbit hole. It's advise worth it's weight.

You have so much to do to assure just that the depth gotten with the Hornady tool is going to match a formed to your chamber piece of brass. The effort to get an unknown number that you can't repeat is a waste of time. If all you care about is adjusting your die until it shoots don't even use a comparator tool. Just seat until bolt closes how you want and start test working out of the lands.. If you are going blind why pay for the tool?


Ray

 

[Raythemanroe]

IMO it is better to have a precise lands distance up front, then when you have throat erosion you only need to seat your bullets longer to match the length of erosion. Else, you would need to do your seating depth test all over again.

It does make sense to actually know what is going on.

 

[KY_Windage]

That doesn't make sense to me, you can do it cheaper and get actual numbers that can be recorded with the stripped bolt method. I like to take notes and know what tends to work where. I have a Stoney Point and t-rust me like others have said, farther you get down the rabbit hole. It's advise worth it's weight.

You have so much to do to assure just that the depth gotten with the Hornady tool is going to match a formed to your chamber piece of brass. The effort to get an unknown number that you can't repeat is a waste of time. If all you care about is adjusting your die until it shoots don't even use a comparator tool. Just seat until bolt closes how you want and start test working out of the lands.. If you are going blind why pay for the tool?


Ray

I don't know what else to tell you -- with the simple Hornady tools I can easily and quickly determine what seating depth with a particular bullet is OTL (on the lands) -- or at least what feels to me to be OTL. I can easily and quickly determine where my bullets are being seated relative to that measurement. I can put in brass with varying lengths to my shoulder and find the measurement that is right on the shoulder.

I can then experiment at the range with different bullet depths and shoulder settings to produce the most accurate recipe for that bullet in that barrel.

And when I find it I can easily duplicate it, precisely. I'm happy and getting a lot of 5-shot groups at 100 yards in the 1's to 3's. If you have some different method, great. I'm just saying the cheap Hornady tools suit me just fine.

 

[KY_Windage]

IMO it is better to have a precise lands distance up front, then when you have throat erosion you only need to seat your bullets longer to match the length of erosion. Else, you would need to do your seating depth test all over again.

I don't understand. IF I had throat erosion I could easily get the new OTL measurement with the Hornady tools in about 1 minute. I would then know exactly how much less to seat my bullets if I wanted to maintain the same jump as before.

 

[F Class John]

I'm sure I'll get hammered for saying this but in the grand scheme of things IT DOESN'T matter which tool you use UNLESS you chase your lands and then it only matters if you care about ultimate accuracy in numbers.

If you only care about an initial reading, either method will give you a starting point and testing will tell you what depth to use, so it really doesn't matter if you are -.015 or -.017 or .-019 off the lands because it's a point in time. You're good to go for the life of that barrel no matter how you got there. I know plenty of shooters who don't believe in chasing lands so in these cases it don't matter.

What does matter is if you chase lands through your barrels life. Reason being that because the StoneyPoint/Hornady can, by default gives slight variations (as evidence by people saying they average their findings or use other methods to get a number) then the further you erode your throat, the more you open yourself up to variation in your off the lands number because you can't accurately chase your seating depth. Sure it's close but there will always be a variation with the SP/Hornady to some degree that isn't there with the bolt drop. You could easily be +.002 off into the real lands the first time you measure and get a seating depth to use, and then 800 rounds in you could be -.002 off the lands when you measure. Each time you get a consistent number that you trust, but how you got that number can vary from session to session especially when those numbers could be taken months apart. In this example you second seating depth would actually be a total of .004 off of what your first one was. Will it matter to you or to every shooter, probably not and I doubt most people's groups will see the difference in the real world, but there are people for who it does matter and in those cases the bolt drop is the only reliably way to get within .001 every time. While both methods have potential points of failures for uses, the SP/Hornady is easier to get a false reading with than the bolt drop. If you don't believe this then consider the fact that you can easily force a bad reading (intentionally pushing) with the gauge but you won't be able to with the bolt drop. This isn't to say that someone can't use the gauge properly or accurately, it's simply saying that by default the gauge has a larger potential for failure built in, that's all.

Ultimately this whole thing has nothing to do with whether SP/Hornady guys are wrong for using that gauge or whether bolt drop guys shouldn't be shooting since some people are appraently scared we don't know what we're doing. It's about finding a process that works reliably and repeatably for you and delivers the results you desire. If your process works and you're happy with how you shoot, great, stick with it and if it doesn't then try another method. There's always more than one way to skin cat in this game and I would rather see someone using any method than no method because at least that means they're working to improve themselves.

 

[Richard Coody]

Yep

Anybody that is using a seating depth node less than .005 or..010 is just asking for disappointment

Now this doesn't apply to the short.range benchrest guys who are chasing a tune all day while conditions change.

 

[dgeesaman]

If you want to get there faster with more barrel life left and less expenditures you use the stripped bolt method.

Ray

Please explain this.

Does the stripped bolt method allow you to save shots in the tuning process? Do you feel it’s more accurate at chasing the lands? Or something else entirely?

David