Seating bullets into the rifling

[marchx]

I came across the following post by @BartsBullets
"I usually start at touch and go in. Somewhere from touch to .012 in you should should get it to shoot. Currently I am .006 into the rifling. Test your 6Br around 2800 to 2820 and also around 2850. You should find a node around there!
Good Luck!
Bart"
Could you (I mean Bart or other forum member) explain to me the procedure of measuring the seating depth in the above case?
I use hornady LNL OAL Gauge. As stated below by using LNL Gauge you get the "touch the rifling" measurement

I guess in order to go 0.006 into the rifling you just screw up LE Wilson seating die 6 thau and that's it. Am I right? Is my uderstanding correct that you need more neck tension in order to do that?

 

[dgeesaman]

I have the Hornady gage and it’s not repeatable to find the touch point. It works really well for finding a hard jam. My tests repeat a hard jam value within .001”.

I personally would take Barts advice and start at my Hornady hard jam measurement, subtract .015, and test up to the hard jam number.

To find a true touch measurement, you’ll need to test fit a dummy in the chamber with a stripped bolt and seat the bullet slightly shorter (deeper into the case) until it touches. Alex Wheeler did a nice video showing this process. One advantage to the stripped bolt method is just about anyone can do it on their own rifle and get the same result.

I don’t use the stripped bolt method because it’s tedious and I don’t need to compare to anyone else’s numbers. I know my Hornady gage number is a hard jam and I develop my load knowing that.

 

[BoydAllen]

There is a communication issue here. Touch is not any sort of jam, hard or otherwise. The original definition of jam is the measurement of a round, (either from the bullets tip if a single bullet is used to set the seater, or measured off the ogive) when the bullet is seated long enough so that it is pushed back when chambered. For that rifle, neck tension, and condition of neck ID surface, that measurement, the length that results from the bullet being pushed back as the round is chambered, is jam. It is an application specific dimension. Short range benchrest shooters would use that as a reference point for seating depth, much as we use touch. I might have said that I was seating so much over jam if I was intentionally setting up for the bullet to be pushed back as the round was chambered, but typically I would say something like "I am sating .007 off jam" meaning shorter than jam. Then came the internet and people who had read the term but did not know the original meaning started using it for other meanings, that often varied with the shooter, which made their posts less clear. My question for the previous poster is, what do you mean by hard jam? What Bart is doing is to accurately determine touch and then seat his bullets a given amount longer than that. As far as the question by the OP about how that is done goes, yes that would be the way.

 

[Bill Norris]

marchx said​

I guess in order to go 0.006 into the rifling you just screw up LE Wilson seating die 6 thau and that's it. Am I right? Is my uderstanding correct that you need more neck tension in order to do that?

The more neck tension you have the further you will be able to jam in the lands. Yes screw the adjustment plug out .006 and you should be @ .012 jam providing your neck tension will allow. These numbers are relative and only apply to your rifle/handloads. Once the numbers are established with a given bullet the only thing changes is throat erosion in your barrel if you are working from "touch" .

 

[BoydAllen]

I find it useful to know both touch and jam for a particular barrel and neck tension. That tells me the range that I have to work with, seating into the rifling.

 

[dgeesaman]

There is a communication issue here. Touch is not any sort of jam, hard or otherwise. The original definition of jam is the measurement of a round, (either from the bullets tip if a single bullet is used to set the seater, or measured off the ogive) when the bullet is seated long enough so that it is pushed back when chambered. For that rifle, neck tension, and condition of neck ID surface, that measurement, the length that results from the bullet being pushed back as the round is chambered, is jam. It is an application specific dimension. Short range benchrest shooters would use that as a reference point for seating depth, much as we use touch. I might have said that I was seating so much over jam if I was intentionally setting up for the bullet to be pushed back as the round was chambered, but typically I would say something like "I am sating .007 off jam" meaning shorter than jam. Then came the internet and people who had read the term but did not know the original meaning started using it for other meanings, that often varied with the shooter, which made their posts less clear. My question for the previous poster is, what do you mean by hard jam? What Bart is doing is to accurately determine touch and then seat his bullets a given amount longer than that. As far as the question by the OP about how that is done goes, yes that would be the way.

Using a Hornady tool, I press the bullet firmly into the lands with the pads of my thumbs on the plunger. My fingers are keeping the case in firm contact with the chamber shoulder. Then I set the set screw, remove the tool, and the bullet stays stuck in the lands until I tap it free with a brass rod. Then I replace the bullet in the Hornady tool for the measurement. I have not had success using the Hornady tool to only “touch” the lands. If I had to I would measure it at least five times and average the longest two or three.

Terminology wise, a bullet can be seated with jump, at touch, or jam. Of those, only touch is a singular point or measurement. Based on a couple of trials I did using a stripped bolt, and a couple thou for headspace, I get between .010 and .015 longer than touch when I use my Hornady tool. .015 longer than the touch point, in my experience, is a lot of jam, aka a hard jam.

Pushing the bullet deeper into the case with a fully sized piece of brass is another way to do it. I found it to be finicky and slow. There is of course the “square mark” reference point too. I agree, if we aren’t clearly defining the method each and every time, this all becomes unintelligible.

 

[BoydAllen]

Using a Hornady tool, I press the bullet firmly into the lands with the pads of my thumbs on the plunger. Then I set the set screw, remove the tool, and the bullet stays stuck in the lands until I tap it free with a brass rod. Then I replace the bullet in the Hornady tool for the measurement. I have not had success using the Hornady tool to only “touch” the lands. If I had to I would measure it at least five times and average the longest two or three.

Terminology wise, a bullet can be seated with jump, at touch, or jam. Of those, only touch is a singular point or measurement. Based on a couple of trials I did using a stripped bolt, and a couple thou for headspace, I get between .010 and .015 longer than touch when I use my Hornady tool. .015 longer than the touch point, in my experience, is a lot of jam, aka a hard jam.

Pushing the bullet deeper into the case with a fully sized piece of brass is another way to do it. I found it to be finicky and slow. There is of course the “square mark” reference point too. I agree, if we aren’t clearly defining the method each and every time, this all becomes unintelligible.

Thanks for the clarification. For finding touch I tend to favor the Wheeler method. https://www.wheeleraccuracy.com/videos
A friend has used that and then, using that measurement as a reference, played with his Hornady tool technique until he could reliably duplicate it. On the Modified cases, they are usually shorter, head to shoulder, than a fired and properly sized case. I always measure both and add the difference to what I get from the factory modified case.

 

[Bill Norris]

Thanks for the clarification. For finding touch I tend to favor the Wheeler method. https://www.wheeleraccuracy.com/videos
A friend has used that and then, using that measurement as a reference, played with his Hornady tool technique until he could reliably duplicate it. On the Modified cases, they are usually shorter, head to shoulder, than a fired and properly sized case. I always measure both and add the difference to what I get from the factory modified case.

I find a more precise measurement by using a fired and re-sized modified case exactly like I will be re-sizing the cases used in a particular rifle. A F/L bushing die with the bushing removed works well.

 

[RegionRat]

I would state that it is good to keep a "reference round" or "Dummy Round" and use it to establish an arbitrary "touch baseline". Make sure it has good neck tension, and a shoulder datum length that you like with a good representative bullet.

In my experience, there is nothing wrong with the Hornady (Stoney Point) Tool, but I have found that once I teach a student to strip their bolt and reassemble it, that the stripped bolt method gives very reliable results.

From there, once you do your load development seating depth will always be compared to your reference round length.

Later on, when you start a relationship with a given gunsmith and standardize on a reamer, you can use a reference round to establish the chamber and also as a loading reference tool.

 

[dgeesaman]

Thanks for the clarification. For finding touch I tend to favor the Wheeler method. https://www.wheeleraccuracy.com/videos
A friend has used that and then, using that measurement as a reference, played with his Hornady tool technique until he could reliably duplicate it. On the Modified cases, they are usually shorter, head to shoulder, than a fired and properly sized case. I always measure both and add the difference to what I get from the factory modified case.

I have a few Hornady cases that were tapped using fully-formed brass and a few that were bought from Hornady with unfired brass. If I had one of each type in the same cartridge, the difference should be the difference in shoulder-to-base.

Again, I don't share my exact results with anyone so those variances don't matter. The tools I use are highly repeatable on my bench and quick. If I have a new box of bullets or new chamber, I can find my hard jam point in five minutes.

Alex has stated that he does seating depth with his customers and needs a way they can all reliably repeat, and cannot afford such shortcuts and differences. I tip my hat to the bolt strippers because I've never gotten good at it and I probably won't for fear of sending my ejector pin parts all over creation.

 

[RegionRat]

I tip my hat to the bolt strippers because I've never gotten good at it and I probably won't for fear of sending my ejector pin parts all over creation.

In some other thread... the idea of bolt maintenance and the tooling and skills for it can be a whole thread.

In my opinion, once someone starts down the road of shooting, be it low performance or high performance with a bolt gun.... the maintenance of the bolt and it's parts is a necessity.

I can't tell you how many hunts were ruined when a guest showed up with a polluted bolt, bad extractor, or worn out spring.

Then at the club, more than a few SWAT members find their bolts are the cause of failures, which was because nobody did the maintenance.

Aside from the opinion that it makes the seating depth topic easy, I am surprised by the idea that it isn't taken as a necessary thing to evaluate and maintain the ignition, extraction, and ejection as part of being a rifleman. It may come from spending a career dealing with two way target ranges?

I will grant you a person can learn to clean, inspect, lube, and change the spring, without ever learning to deal with ejectors and extractors, but I would be able to teach the average shooter those things in short order if they have any dexterity at all.

When evaluating the contact stress and bullet-land friction of the difference between touch and jam, there is more skill and "feel" required with an assembled bolt than with a stripped bolt. In my opinion, there are less skills required to learn to disassemble and reassemble, than to judge those variations. YMMV

 

[dgeesaman]

In some other thread... the idea of bolt maintenance and the tooling and skills for it can be a whole thread.

In my opinion, once someone starts down the road of shooting, be it low performance or high performance with a bolt gun.... the maintenance of the bolt and it's parts is a necessity.

I can't tell you how many hunts were ruined when a guest showed up with a polluted bolt, bad extractor, or worn out spring.

Then at the club, more than a few SWAT members find their bolts are the cause of failures, which was because nobody did the maintenance.

Aside from the opinion that it makes the seating depth topic easy, I am surprised by the idea that it isn't taken as a necessary thing to evaluate and maintain the ignition, extraction, and ejection as part of being a rifleman. It may come from spending a career dealing with two way target ranges?

I will grant you a person can learn to clean, inspect, lube, and change the spring, without ever learning to deal with ejectors and extractors, but I would be able to teach the average shooter those things in short order if they have any dexterity at all.

When evaluating the contact stress and bullet-land friction of the difference between touch and jam, there is more skill and "feel" required with an assembled bolt than with a stripped bolt. In my opinion, there are less skills required to learn to disassemble and reassemble, than to judge those variations. YMMV

All good points.

I do strip my bolts for cleaning on occasion, but I don't like to do it more than necessary. If I could be blunt, every time I do I've not found anything to clean. I wipe things down and re-lube but I don't think I've ever stripped a bolt and found the cleaning made much improvement. It's probably because I'm not a hunter and I don't spend much time on dusty, windy ranges.

David

 

[Murray Brook]

All good points.

I do strip my bolts for cleaning on occasion, but I don't like to do it more than necessary. If I could be blunt, every time I do I've not found anything to clean. I wipe things down and re-lube but I don't think I've ever stripped a bolt and found the cleaning made much improvement. It's probably because I'm not a hunter and I don't spend much time on dusty, windy ranges.

David

I find the same thing. Too much oil (IMO) is bad for picking up all kinds of dust and dirt. I use just a light dab of light grease applied with a Q-tip to keep the rust away. Works for me.

 

[762plinker]

I have the Hornady gage and it’s not repeatable to find the touch point. It works really well for finding a hard jam. My tests repeat a hard jam value within .001”.

I personally would take Barts advice and start at my Hornady hard jam measurement, subtract .015, and test up to the hard jam number.

To find a true touch measurement, you’ll need to test fit a dummy in the chamber with a stripped bolt and seat the bullet slightly shorter (deeper into the case) until it touches. Alex Wheeler did a nice video showing this process. One advantage to the stripped bolt method is just about anyone can do it on their own rifle and get the same result.

I don’t use the stripped bolt method because it’s tedious and I don’t need to compare to anyone else’s numbers. I know my Hornady gage number is a hard jam and I develop my load knowing that.

ahhh a tool and only as good as the user..ii have no problem repeating mesurements

 

[ebb]

Touch for me is when you chamber a cartridge with the bullet sharpie covered and the rifling leaves marks that are as wide as the lands but less and 1 1/16 long.

 

[ShtrRdy]

Does this suggestion of stepping in toward the lands from touch, apply to a certain type of bullet?

 

[BoydAllen]

I have a few Hornady cases that were tapped using fully-formed brass and a few that were bought from Hornady with unfired brass. If I had one of each type in the same cartridge, the difference should be the difference in shoulder-to-base.

Again, I don't share my exact results with anyone so those variances don't matter. The tools I use are highly repeatable on my bench and quick. If I have a new box of bullets or new chamber, I can find my hard jam point in five minutes.

Alex has stated that he does seating depth with his customers and needs a way they can all reliably repeat, and cannot afford such shortcuts and differences. I tip my hat to the bolt strippers because I've never gotten good at it and I probably won't for fear of sending my ejector pin parts all over creation.

The trick is to use a long punch that fits through the entire hole through the bolt. With that in place, wrap the front of the bolt in a heavy zip loc bag and pull the punch. The bag traps the parts. You can also bag is as you punch it, for belt and suspenders.

 

[JFrank]

The only way I’ve been able to get a consistent number from the L&L tool is to insert the bullet to a firm stop, which just happens to be within a .001 or so of the stripped bolt method. I don’t share information per sa’ so it doesn’t really matter where I start only where I end up.

 

[Ralph Littlefield]

ahhh a tool and only as good as the user..ii have no problem repeating mesurements

I get mixed results. For example, on my 243 the bullet always come out with the tool and the results are consistent, on some other rifles, the bullets must be pushed out and results vary enough that I have to average several readings.

 

[JEFFPPC]

Better than a Charlie Brown comic strip.