• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

Bullet jump

With all due respect, a .30-06 and a 6PPC are worlds apart when it comes to absolute accuracy. A .30-06 doesn't have the inherent accuracy to be able to see the benefit of seating bullets into the rifling. That's all.
Paul
I agree with this, although I have found certain 30-06 loads that like the bullets in the rifling. When I first started this trek down better rifle accuracy (when I first found this site), the only halfway accurate rifle I owned was the 30-06. I was eager to learn and having nothing else to use, I tried many of the methods found on this site to tune loads.

I found that some bullets with my 30-06 did the best when seated into the lands. It seemed specific to the type of bullet. Standard flatbase soft points did not seem to care one way or the other. I suspect there is an accuracy/precision ceiling that one reaches with these kinds of bullets. On the flip side, some sierra match kings and Nosler bullets I tried did better in the lands.

However, circling back around to your main point. Loading an 06 into the lands is just not worth testing. Any load into the lands is not practical for hunting purposes, and the 06 is not even the 2nd, 3rd, 4th choice of anyone doing any kind of competition format.
 
I've found in multiple cartridges like Alex mentioned in stuff from 17-6mm that with boatail and flatbase bullets .005 in to .005 off has been the sweet spot.
My LR Hunting rifles 30- 28 Nos with the 215 is .030 off and my 6.5x300wsm with 140 Bergers are .027 off
 
With all due respect, a .30-06 and a 6PPC are worlds apart when it comes to absolute accuracy. A .30-06 doesn't have the inherent accuracy to be able to see the benefit of seating bullets into the rifling. That's all.
Pa
Like Dimner said you just won't know until you try and see what works in your rifle. Maybe into the lands is not the best option. That's all I'm pointing out. I would like to know when shooters started jamming bullets into the lands. Is it from the black powder days? Really, when did competition shooters start? Or have they always.
 
Last edited:
I think in general there is a lack of consensus when talking about this. I think of it as jam means opening the bolt the powder dumps all over and the bullet is stuck. That is partially determined by neck tension. Then when you back up off of jam .010-.020 the lands may still be engraving the bullet but it will never get stuck. Thats a window of like 0.015 that some may say that is jumping and others might think of that as no jump at all. Remember that this forum is almost all very serious hobby shooters to the best shooters and gunsmiths in the world. Many less serious reloaders may not even know the term jam. I sure don't remember anything about it in my reloading manual....
 
I think Erik Cortina described the positioning of the bullet best when he said there are three different areas the bullet can be located. These measurements will be different for each rifle/chamber

1- Jump @ not touching lands
2 - In The Lands @ touching lands for a given space depending on the chamber and bullet - not considered Jam
3 - Jam @ bullet is as far into the lands as it will go without being pushed deeper into the case by the lands depending on neck tension
 
Yes, semantics gets in the way when discussing this.

Early in my rifle tinkering....after becoming totally befuddled trying to understand what people were describing when discussing seating depth....I decided to find the T.P. (Touch Point) for each bullet and use that method. That method is now known as the 'stripped bolt' aka 'Wheeler method'.

The late Dick Wright did an excellent article in Precision Shooting about using the T.P. method. Alex Wheeler's video on doing it is a good one.

As far as jumping the bullet or seating them past the T.P., your barrel will tell you what it wants. Like neck bushings, it's just something you have to try. In the age of instant results, many want to hit the Easy Button and they get twitterpated when the thinking gets past the "Do you want fries with that?" level. Just go test it.

In my hunting stuff, I do all the load work with the bullets seated .010 longer than the T.P. and when I decide on a load, the bullet simply gets backed up to work through the magazine. Done.

Good shootin' :) -Al
 
Like Dimner said you just won't know until you try and see what works in your rifle. Maybe into the lands is not the best option. That's all I'm pointing out. I would like to know when shooters started jamming bullets into the lands. Is it from the black powder days? Really, when did competition shooters start? Or have they always.
Technically speaking, jamming the bullet started with the first firearm, the ball was pushed down the barrel onto the powder. Into the lands started later, when rifling became popular vs smooth bore. Jumping, from powder charge to barrel started with the first non cartridge revolver.

There is whole lot of loading styles that have come and gone and then revisited with time and refinement. Competition started after about 3 people in the same area owned firearms.

Early cartridge rifles were more like 22LR, the bullets seated into the rifling, more just engraving vs “jammed”. More than a touch.
Many of the early cartridge competition and hunting rifles certainly used a hard jam. To the point that special tools were used lever the cartridge into the chamber. The action closing did not have enough mechanical advantage to be able to force the bullet down the bore. The other thing the seating tools did was insure the cartridge and bullet were seated straight into the bore.

Then there is breech seating. The bullet started down the bore, then the charged cartridge inserted behind. The bullet generally seated so that around half the base band was into the rifling, 1/6” ahead of the case. This insured the bullet was placed in the same spot in the bore ahead of the case each time. Considered one of the more accurate methods of the day.

Then there is what many thought was the ultimate method. Muzzle loading. The rifles seating tool was indexed to the muzzle. The bullet started down the bore, then pushed home with a ramrod to a specific depth. The charged case inserted from the breech end. What this does is eliminate the fins created on the base of the bullet when the rifling creates the grooves. You have a custom swaged bullet to fit your bore.

It’s really only since the adoption of jacketed bullets that jump became popular.

You mentioned 300 BLK. The absolute poster child for accuracy challenged cartridges. The chamber was designed to use any old scrap brass you might want to cut down and form, then also to accommodate a .309” cast bullet. So if you use nice brass like Lapua, with a .010” neck in a .336” chamber, the cartridge flops around like a fish due to .008”+ clearance even if you neck size only. Add in a .300” jump for some short or VLD type bullets and it’s tough to get sub 1/2 MOA groups for good reason. But it can be done.

Different methods can be more or less time consuming to tune. Some consistently have better results. It as you said, it’s a choice. Squeezing the most accuracy/precision out of different cartridges will vary.
 
Technically speaking, jamming the bullet started with the first firearm, the ball was pushed down the barrel onto the powder. Into the lands started later, when rifling became popular vs smooth bore. Jumping, from powder charge to barrel started with the first non cartridge revolver.

There is whole lot of loading styles that have come and gone and then revisited with time and refinement. Competition started after about 3 people in the same area owned firearms.

Early cartridge rifles were more like 22LR, the bullets seated into the rifling, more just engraving vs “jammed”. More than a touch.
Many of the early cartridge competition and hunting rifles certainly used a hard jam. To the point that special tools were used lever the cartridge into the chamber. The action closing did not have enough mechanical advantage to be able to force the bullet down the bore. The other thing the seating tools did was insure the cartridge and bullet were seated straight into the bore.

Then there is breech seating. The bullet started down the bore, then the charged cartridge inserted behind. The bullet generally seated so that around half the base band was into the rifling, 1/6” ahead of the case. This insured the bullet was placed in the same spot in the bore ahead of the case each time. Considered one of the more accurate methods of the day.

Then there is what many thought was the ultimate method. Muzzle loading. The rifles seating tool was indexed to the muzzle. The bullet started down the bore, then pushed home with a ramrod to a specific depth. The charged case inserted from the breech end. What this does is eliminate the fins created on the base of the bullet when the rifling creates the grooves. You have a custom swaged bullet to fit your bore.

It’s really only since the adoption of jacketed bullets that jump became popular.

You mentioned 300 BLK. The absolute poster child for accuracy challenged cartridges. The chamber was designed to use any old scrap brass you might want to cut down and form, then also to accommodate a .309” cast bullet. So if you use nice brass like Lapua, with a .010” neck in a .336” chamber, the cartridge flops around like a fish due to .008”+ clearance even if you neck size only. Add in a .300” jump for some short or VLD type bullets and it’s tough to get sub 1/2 MOA groups for good reason. But it can be done.

Different methods can be more or less time consuming to tune. Some consistently have better results. It as you said, it’s a choice. Squeezing the most accuracy/precision out of different cartridges will vary.
Thank you, Great information. I understand why the people that shoot cartridges like the 6 PPC Jam their bullets. Not for everyone. That's very interesting about the 300 BLK. I feel good about the accuracy I get from my DDM4 Hunter with Sierra 125 gr. MK bullets.
 
Thank you, Great information. I understand why the people that shoot cartridges like the 6 PPC Jam their bullets. Not for everyone. That's very interesting about the 300 BLK. I feel good about the accuracy I get from my DDM4 Hunter with Sierra 125 gr. MK bullets.
It doesn’t hurt that the 125 SMK was specifically designed for the cartridge.

When you consider that the 300 BLK was designed to meet a 2 MOA standard in battle conditions, reliability over ultimate accuracy, it makes sense. It’s not that it can’t be reasonably accurate, it will just take more work.
 
It doesn’t hurt that the 125 SMK was specifically designed for the cartridge.

When you consider that the 300 BLK was designed to meet a 2 MOA standard in battle conditions, reliability over ultimate accuracy, it makes sense. It’s not that it can’t be reasonably accurate, it will just take more work.
You really got me thinking. I did not understand the 6PPC until this jamming debate came up. I love to shoot as accurate as I can but the results of what the bullet can achieve are just as important to me as accuracy. Where the 6PPC is all about accuracy and nothing more. I get hung up on the whole package.
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
165,838
Messages
2,204,661
Members
79,160
Latest member
Zardek
Back
Top