Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I would've expected it to be the other way around....with the Stoney Point being longer than the stripped bolt method, if anything. Are you sure you're pushing it all the way in? (That's what she said)Stony point versus Wheeler method. I studied the Wheeler method via their video today and this afternoon puled my 6BR out and went to work. Looking at my notes from the last loading session and todays work I found that my CBTO for a 107SMK was 1.830/1,832 (stony point) and 1.840/1.842 (wheeler). I sort of dont know what that means yet, since after any measurement you still test For optimum seating depth
I don't use the stripped bolt method for basically the same reason as you. I only see benefit from either method if it is standardized, so that everyone is using the same method, for conversation purposes. The way I see it, whatever method you can get consistent results with is fine. It's not intended to be a conversation piece but rather a comparative measurement that is used to establish seating depth references. I personally don't care if one is better than the other or not, so long as I can get repeatable numbers within a thou or so. In fact, I normally start load work at the very opposite end of seating depth, by seating at full jam. I consider that number to be whatever depth into the lands a given amount of neck tension will allow with a given bullet, before it pushes the bullet back into the case. I just seat them long and close the bolt, basically. This leaves only one direction to work from. You ain't going deeper into the lands and that only leaves one option. To me, this is the simplest approach but YMMV.To Guns and gunsmithing. That the Wheeler method was longer surprised me also. But I have worked on this chamber with a stony point a number of times and have gotten similar and consistent results. So I still don't know what this result means. I am not changing my seating depth. I was getting rifling marks on the bullet while doing the Wheeler Method but I was not shoving or forcing the bolt.
Even with those, I start at full jam. So I really don't see much advantage there either. They are a handy tool though, for establishing where the lands USE to begin as well as checking shoulder bump and as a go/no go neck clearance guage.For a new rifle, the easiest way bar none is to have a barrel stub made by running the reamer part way into a piece of barrel scrap. That will give you a reference for initial load development. Once the barrel starts to wear adjustments are small, and you’ll be making those off your initial seating depth anyhow.
To Guns and gunsmithing. That the Wheeler method was longer surprised me also. But I have worked on this chamber with a stony point a number of times and have gotten similar and consistent results. So I still don't know what this result means. I am not changing my seating depth. I was getting rifling marks on the bullet while doing the Wheeler Method but I was not shoving or forcing the bolt.
The comparator isn't making contact in the same location, your lands haven't moved only the tools are different.Stony point versus Wheeler method. I studied the Wheeler method via their video today and this afternoon puled my 6BR out and went to work. Looking at my notes from the last loading session and todays work I found that my CBTO for a 107SMK was 1.830/1,832 (stony point) and 1.840/1.842 (wheeler). I sort of dont know what that means yet, since after any measurement you still test For optimum seating depth
Assuming a brand new rifle, what is y’all favorite method for measuring the distance to the lands?
I have the Hornady equipment to do this, but no fired brass to compare base to shoulder length difference between the fired case and the modified case.
I’m always looking for new ways to shave extra consumables out of the load workup process.
Anybody tried this method? I would have to figure out how to disasssemble the TL3 bolt:
Stony point versus Wheeler method. I studied the Wheeler method via their video today and this afternoon puled my 6BR out and went to work. Looking at my notes from the last loading session and todays work I found that my CBTO for a 107SMK was 1.830/1,832 (stony point) and 1.840/1.842 (wheeler). I sort of dont know what that means yet, since after any measurement you still test For optimum seating depth
????How many shots does your rifle advance the bullet contact to the throat .001" down the barrel?
That's what I use
I have used two methods, a Stoney Point/Hornady tool and a home made loose fit necked case.
For the home made version I will also take a sized case and run a inside neck reamer through it so the bullet slips in and out easily......Try the test bullet to see if it can be slipped into the case easily but needs enough force so that it will not slip. This is a judgement call, too loose and the bullet may stick in the lands and pull out of the case, too tight and you might indent the copper jacket when you close the bolt. Keep increasing the amount of neck you are sizing until you feel comfortable that it is tight but not too tight