Anyone tried Bergers Test for VLD seating depth?

[Winny94]

Im potentially running into issues w/ fitting 180 class 7mm bullets in my mag (a 183 smk needs about 55-60 thou jump - so if anyone has the relevant measures b/w the 183 smk and 180 vld hunter, id appreciate anyone sharing. I haven't bought the bergers yet).

Found an interesting article on bergers site and basically they say they found theres 30-40 thou range of jump the vld works in, so they recommend (2) 3-shot groups of .010, .050, .090 and .130 jump. They say 3 groups will suck, one will be pretty good, then fine tune from there.

Has anyone tried this method? Any variations/tweaks i should implement? Should this be done before or after finding the optimal weight charge? (ive always done weight testing followed by depth testing, but Berger recently suggested otherwise when i had a question about their 195 EOL).

Thanks for any help!

 

[germanlongbow]

Either jumping or jamming is the last step I take in fine tuning a load. I pick a bullet I want to shoot then build a rifle around it. I try to stay with best brass available, Lapua when able then work down the line from there. Powder choice next in 0.3 gr increments until I find a accurate load with rough velocity I want. I like Federal Match primers but have had to switch to CCI at times. When i get a load that shoots 5 shot under 1/5 MOA I then play with jamming or jumping the bullet. Works for me but it's just one opinion. Good luck.

 

[Murray Brook]

I've tried their method and I must say it worked for me. Case in point is my heavy barreled 7mm/08. With the 160 Sierra TMK and the Barnes 171 gr Match Burner I get my best accuracy at .120 off the lands. Something, I believe, that I would have never tried had it not been for the Berger method.JME

 

[Lone Hunter]

I've tried the Berger method and it does work,at least for me. I use a middle charge and then do Bergers seating depth test. Then do my charge test and then fine tune both.

 

[Ned Ludd]

Testing over that wide of a seating depth range would not typically be my first choice of approaches. However, if you have already tested a more routine/typical seating depth range and not found something that shoots to your liking, you really have nothing to lose and the additional testing may well be worth the effort. Why not give it a try?

One consideration to keep in mind when testing seating depth over that wide of a range is that you might experience pressure issues at the seating depths farthest off the lands, if the charge weight was initially optimized for seating depths much closer to the lands. This is because of the reduction in effective case volume if you seat the bullet deep enough in the case. Backing off on the charge weight a bit to compensate is probably in order.