Hello All,
Why is it so conflicting to get a consistent reading when a projectile is touching the lands, 223Rem.
Sierra 80GN MK's. New case, new projectile, firing pin removed and ejector removed. Insert projectile into case a short distance and insert into action, close dismantled bolt and check projectile for witness marks from rifling. Measure case to theoretical ogive,gauge made and mounted on verniers for readings), 3 assembled rounds,without powder, primer etc.) with readings within 0.07mm.
Hornady 80gn A-Max same procedure but very different readings, a variation of up to 0.29, that's close to 0.012'.
If cartridges were assembled with a variation of 0.012' in bullet seating depth you would think a lot of verticals would result, yes?
Why such a variation between projectiles? Am I doing it wrong?
The new cases were neck sized, throat opened and then run through neck bushing to get consistent neck size.
Regards
Why is it so conflicting to get a consistent reading when a projectile is touching the lands, 223Rem.
Sierra 80GN MK's. New case, new projectile, firing pin removed and ejector removed. Insert projectile into case a short distance and insert into action, close dismantled bolt and check projectile for witness marks from rifling. Measure case to theoretical ogive,gauge made and mounted on verniers for readings), 3 assembled rounds,without powder, primer etc.) with readings within 0.07mm.
Hornady 80gn A-Max same procedure but very different readings, a variation of up to 0.29, that's close to 0.012'.
If cartridges were assembled with a variation of 0.012' in bullet seating depth you would think a lot of verticals would result, yes?
Why such a variation between projectiles? Am I doing it wrong?
The new cases were neck sized, throat opened and then run through neck bushing to get consistent neck size.
Regards