Berger seating depth test at 100yds or 200yds?

[ImBIllT]

I've never had any issue with VLD's grouping very well at ANY seating depth in my .308's(both chambered with the same reamer). I've been having s few issues with my new 6.5 build though, and now that I have some die and brass kinks worked out, I'm going back to the seating depth test. Running 130 VLD's at 3100+ is there any advantage of shooting them at one distance vs the other? Thanks in advance.

 

[Northridge]

I've never had any issue with VLD's grouping very well at ANY seating depth in my .308's(both chambered with the same reamer). I've been having s few issues with my new 6.5 build though, and now that I have some die and brass kinks worked out, I'm going back to the seating depth test. Running 130 VLD's at 3100+ is there any advantage of shooting them at one distance vs the other? Thanks in advance.

200 yards will help you pick a winner in the tune department easier than 100 as long as you have a optic with enough power to see at 200 yards. what is the intended use for rifle?

Shawn Williams

 

[ImBIllT]

200 yards will help you pick a winner in the tune department easier than 100 as long as you have a optic with enough power to see at 200 yards. what is the intended use for rifle?

Shawn Williams

500+ yard mule deer rifle. I'd like it shoot a half minute or less. It's got a 30" Krieger light Palma on it. I built an F-open rifle with the same reamer, but do not yet have the stock inletted. It had a Sightron SII 4-16, but due to unsatisfactory accuracy I mounted a Weaver T-6 to rule out the scope. It's the only scope I trusted that I didn't have to pull out of the rings. I should have no problem shooting close to a half minute on the 200yd HBR target with that scope. I'll take a spotter to check shot to shot.

 

[Northridge]

500+ yard mule deer rifle. I'd like it shoot a half minute or less. It's got a 30" Krieger light Palma on it. I built an F-open rifle with the same reamer, but do not yet have the stock inletted. It had a Sightron SII 4-16, but due to unsatisfactory accuracy I mounted a Weaver T-6 to rule out the scope. It's the only scope I trusted that I didn't have to pull out of the rings. I should have no problem shooting a half minute on the 200yd HBR target with that scope. I'll take a spotter to check shot to shot.

Yep good luck tuning 200 yards should get you off and running..

 

[4xforfun]

Do you have access to a longer-range? I like to test my loads at as far as distance as I can find. Any differences will certainly show up on paper at longer distances.

 

[Fotheringill]

I would seriously consider 100.
Wind, whether variable or unidirectional, will not be as much as a factor as it will at longer distances.
Also, no matter what scope you are using, you will have a more precise look at the target.

 

[ImBIllT]

100, 200, and 500 is where the berms are at our club.

 

[barefooter56]

I've never had any issue with VLD's grouping very well at ANY seating depth in my .308's(both chambered with the same reamer). I've been having s few issues with my new 6.5 build though, and now that I have some die and brass kinks worked out, I'm going back to the seating depth test. Running 130 VLD's at 3100+ is there any advantage of shooting them at one distance vs the other? Thanks in advance.

This post from one of the old SINCLAIR INTERNATIONAL reloading techs may help :https://www.sinclairintl.com/GunTec...g-Range-Shooting-Hunting/detail.htm?lid=16220
Take care,

 

[dsculley]

I second the motion for 100. In initial testing you want as little influence from environmental factors as possible. In most cases, 100 yds will provide enough dispersion with little to no influence from wind.

 

[ImBIllT]

I went with 100yds. A longtime benchrester was there and said "well 100 is easier. Less wind, and easier to see"

I didn't bother with specific measurements for my starting place. I seated till I got square marks on my bullet, decided that the bolt was a little hard to close, seated a little deeper but still had marks and called that my starting depth. Groups at slight jam were trash. Groups with bullets seated .040" deeper than that were decent. Groups with bullets seated .080" deeper than starting were trash. Groups with bullets seated .120" deeper than starting were under .5". Do I fine tune seating depth further, or ladder test and then fine tune seating depth?

 

[Fotheringill]

I would fine tune both ways from the .120 setting.

 

[ImBIllT]

I would fine tune both ways from the .120 setting.

Before or after adjusting powder charge?

 

[Clancy]

If it were me, I'd just knock them in the head with that ridiculously long barrel and save myself the bullet.

But seriously, why not test them at 500 instead? That's what you want to do with the rifle, right?

 

[ImBIllT]

If it were me, I'd just knock them in the head with that ridiculously long barrel and save myself the bullet.

But seriously, why not test them at 500 instead? That's what you want to do with the rifle, right?

Yeah. I just didn't know where people fine tuned seating depth. I have a definite starting point now.

 

[expiper]

test at 25 yds,,,less wind,,,hahaha,,,,shoot more bullets and wear out your bbl before you get a load,,,??....jam em and max loads,,,if that dont shoot ,,,take up golf,,,Roger

 

[4xforfun]

If you are fine tuning seating depth, then you are trying to tune out any vertical in your groups....that is what seating depth changes. Don't worry about the wind so much when testing seating depth OR neck tension. The wind won't affect the vertical. You need distance to give you a definitive answer.

Tod

 

[mikecr]

Full seating testing is not just vertical.. It opens grouping big and all directions.
OP, for coarse seating testing, you can very easily see best at 100yds.
Then move to powder/ladder, further out.
Then tweak seating for group shaping, even further out.

 

[ImBIllT]

I shot five shots at with the Weaver T-6 on it at 200yds to confirm seating depth and got a .732" group center to center. That's under a half MOA on two consecutive groups using identical loads, so I figured that was a good rough seating depth. Because I may be switching brass from Norma to RWS, I figured I could fine tune seating depth slightly and double check the Sightron SII 4x-16x. I loaded 5 at .105" off, 5 at .120"(the good depth), 5 at .135" off, and 3 at .120" off to get back on paper after the scope change. All three loads shot about 2" groups at 200yds with the Sightron SII 4x-16x. I feel like the scope is in question, but I've never had a scope that I knew wouldn't shoot. I don't really care to waste too much more barrel life chasing down ghosts. The barrel now has 137 rounds down it. I'd really hate to spend 20% of it's life just picking a load. I'm going to shoot 2-3 five shot groups through my F-TR gun with a T-36 on it, then put the SII on and shoot 2-3 more five shot groups. Is there any point in putting the T-6 back on the new rifle and shooting 2-3 five shot groups? If it performed, I suppose it would certainly verify that the gun is okay. I'm just tired of burning up the barrel and getting nowhere.

 

[savagedasher]

I find bullet seating depth with a chronograph . You can have a sweet spot that Velocity doesn’t change with .010 movement .
Sure is nice tuneing with a tuner . Bullet seating depth is a sure way of lowering your ES . Larry

 

[ImBIllT]

I find bullet seating depth with a chronograph . You can have a sweet spot that Velocity doesn’t change with .010 movement .
Sure is nice tuneing with a tuner . Bullet seating depth is a sure way of lowering your ES . Larry

Gonna have to get a chrony...it's time.