Chasing the lands is stupid... What do you think?

[wildcat3d]

I don't disagree with you, but I will point out that the net conclusion of my article is that if you have 15 rounds to confirm a load, shoot 3 five shot groups, not 5 three shot groups. That's just about the entire point of the article, and perhaps I should have been more clear when writing it.

That said, when I'm doing initial load development, I start with 2-shot groups. The odds of having a good load shoot two very poor shots right out of the gates is so low, that it's very much worth saving the ammo to look elsewhere. If a gun that should shoot in the 2s prints the first two rounds in the 5s, you can go ahead and move on. This is not at odds with the article - the confidence that those two shots represent the load well is still very low. But the probability that a 2 shot group in the 5s will suddenly turn into a 5 shot group in the 2s is low indeed.

Accuracy...Three is for the firearm, 5 is for the shooter...IMO

 

[Webster]

if measuring to the lands is not important then why do you do it when you first performed a seating test? why would you care ?

the logic doesn’t hold up for me. This is just my uneducated opinion.

If you are not familiar with Erik he is one of the best long range shooters in the World.

 

[Jeff Porter]

If your contention is that the jump distance is what is making the accuracy - you will "chase the lands" to maintain that distance.

If you use initial touch as a reference point and are saying the amount if nanoseconds you are changing barrel time by adjusting seating depth is what is critical - you will keep that depth since your barrel is the same length.

In eithr case - If your freebore/throat gets too long and you start to get"butt wiggle" on you bullet as it is released from the case mouth and it does not engage the rifling concentrically you will need to repeat the steps to find that sweet spot.

 

[backlash]

BTW. I proudly seat my projectiles into the lands when load testing shows it is beneficial to accuracy, and, i also proudly neck size.

Do you also "pound your chest and let go a Tim Taylor grunt" each time you pull the press handle?

 

[WildBill3/75]

I watched his video and found it informative, but at appx the 17:20 point in the video he states that every now and then he lengthens his round by .003 and if it shoots better it becomes his new OAL. This tells me he is chasing something, might not call it the lands but something. Just my take.

He's chasing the lands.

"Chasing the lands is stupid... What do you think?"

It's just an argumentative title to get people talking.

Informative video for the new reloader none the less.

He uses similar methods to what I do. Only real difference for me is I take out the bolt plunger and expand the neck tell the bullet is seatable with mild finger force, then chamber to get that initial reading. No lube on the ogive is needed with this method.

 

[PracticalTactical]

He's chasing the lands.

"Chasing the lands is stupid... What do you think?"

It's just an argumentative title to get people talking.

This is why Cortina can be dangerous. He is intentionally misleading and guys that cant read between the lines get belly hooked into believing something that is deliberately being presented out of context.

Since he calls himself a "professional shooter" he attracts an undue amount of hero worship by newbs where they memorize something that has been misrepresented and it leads to 15 pages on this and other forums trying to find solid ground.

It's a video based on click bait like many others.

In the end, yes he is chasing the lands, just like everybody else.

 

[Straightshooter1]

I watched his video and found it informative, but at appx the 17:20 point in the video he states that every now and then he lengthens his round by .003 and if it shoots better it becomes his new OAL. This tells me he is chasing something, might not call it the lands but something. Just my take.

If one wants to call it "chasing something" it'd be chasing the seating depth, not chasing the lands.

When I started precision reloading, I would chase the lands as there seemed so much talk about being a distance from the lands, or making adjustments .003 from the lands; just a lot of emphasis being put on distance from the lands where their best accuracy was found. I would "chase the lands" always trying to keep the one distance from the lands that gave me the best results. But, as I "chased the lands" I often had to fool with my powder load to get that accuracy and maintain that certain distance from the lands.

Eventually, hearing from more than one shooter about not chasing the lands, I thought well I'll give it a try and see how long I can go without changing my COAL/seating depth before my groups open up. This little experiment was with my .308 RPR that would consistently shoot sub .5 MOA (like low .4's and high .3's). Over 2,000 rounds later and with throat erosion of ~.034", my groups started opening up and I finally had to adjust the seating depth to get back to where it was shooting before. I adjusted the seating depth with no regard to how far I was from the lands and have done that since, as this worked way better that trying to chase the lands as I had.

Now, if I were seating my cartridges to touch or jam the lands, I would indeed "chase the lands" to maintain the particular pressure curve that touching or jamming the lands produces. But, since I don't do that, my focus is on maintaining a particular seating depth until the throat erosion changes my internal ballistics to where I need to make an adjustment to the seating depth for the particular powder load. And I don't call that "chasing the lands" because I just don't care about the distance to the lands and focus on seating depths.

 

[WildBill3/75]

If one wants to call it "chasing something" it'd be chasing the seating depth, not chasing the lands.

When I started precision reloading, I would chase the lands as there seemed so much talk about being a distance from the lands, or making adjustments .003 from the lands; just a lot of emphasis being put on distance from the lands where their best accuracy was found. I would "chase the lands" always trying to keep the one distance from the lands that gave me the best results. But, as I "chased the lands" I often had to fool with my powder load to get that accuracy and maintain that certain distance from the lands.

Eventually, hearing from more than one shooter about not chasing the lands, I thought well I'll give it a try and see how long I can go without changing my COAL/seating depth before my groups open up. This little experiment was with my .308 RPR that would consistently shoot sub .5 MOA (like low .4's and high .3's). Over 2,000 rounds later and with throat erosion of ~.034", my groups started opening up and I finally had to adjust the seating depth to get back to where it was shooting before. I adjusted the seating depth with no regard to how far I was from the lands and have done that since, as this worked way better that trying to chase the lands as I had.

Now, if I were seating my cartridges to touch or jam the lands, I would indeed "chase the lands" to maintain the particular pressure curve that touching or jamming the lands produces. But, since I don't do that, my focus is on maintaining a particular seating depth until the throat erosion changes my internal ballistics to where I need to make an adjustment to the seating depth for the particular powder load. And I don't call that "chasing the lands" because I just don't care about the distance to the lands and focus on seating depths.

Your thought process reminds me of kids these days calling off roading "over landing."

I've been reloading for over 20 years and have used Hart, Rock, Brux, Lilja, lothar Walther, proof, Satern, shilen, Krieger, and bartlein just to name a few barrels I've used over the years.

The traditional terminology that describes adjusting seating depth to compensate for throat erosion has always been called chasing the lands. At least everywhere I've lived and when describing this phenomenon to other precision shooters that reload. Doesn't matter if you are Jamming or jumping.

 

[Murray Brook]

Couldn't agree more. We are all doing the same basic thing only some call it chasing the lands (traditional term) others call it chasing seating depth, tune etc. Reminds me of old fguffey's posts on shoulder bump and headspace.

 

[drop_point]

I've always thought of chasing the lands to make each round essentially the same distance from the lands. What Erik is doing is finding a node without respect to the lands. Once he falls out of that node, he readjusts. He has no care as to where the lands are nor is he trying to keep the bullet's relationship to the lands the same.

 

[Bronsin]

I chase the node, not the lands. After 350 rounds I had to seat my bullets .003 farther to stay in it. Doesn't matter if the lands .002, or .020.

 

[Dave M.]

If you are not familiar with Erik he is one of the best long range shooters in the World.

Agree…and once again, the “lands” and “JAM” are very different points.

 

[johnfred1965]

That was exactly his point. When he's talking about "chasing" the lands... There are guys who INSIST that a bullet ALWAYS has to be xx thou off the lands, and they adjust for it constantly...

His point is there's no reason to do that. Every few hundred rounds, load a few a couple thou longer... see if they shoot better. If they do, that's your new length.

Pretty simple.

Did he have to make a 20 minute video just to say what you just said? I think not.

 

[R.Morehouse]

I don't know if this has been knocked around in these many pages, but to keep the same amount of "jam" in relation to the lands have any of you guys experimented with " soft-seating " the bullet, adjusting the amount of jam with neck tension. I know this would only really work with single feed shooting, but I would think if you got it working for you the only adjustment you would be making over time would be a powder tweak......I know you would be risking a chamber full of powder if you had to remove an unfired round.....

Regards
Rick

 

[rebs]

I enjoy Eric's video and since he is a far better shooter than I am I follow his advice.

 

[Delfuego]

This is why Cortina can be dangerous.

Yeah, super dangerous. Like a Bond villain. Get a life...

 

[Idaho-Lefty]

Then there is this rabbit hole of really long jumps.Bullet Jump Research I was doubtful but last winter I decided to instead of going towards the lands I would go the other way around and I did find that around .050 to .070 of jump was a accuracy node.

Most Tikka's, have, a HUGE amount of, "FreeBore" and they shoot well with,.. a LOT of Jump

 

[davidjoe]

Since he calls himself a "professional shooter" he attracts an undue amount of hero worship

Erik’s more like a boss, of professional shooters, now. He was a mere professional shooter when Lapua started putting him in product literature, forever ago, and again when he became one of the US F-Open team wind coaches, while (EC) tuning thousands of rifles.

 

[Ned Ludd]

This is why Cortina can be dangerous. He is intentionally misleading and guys that cant read between the lines get belly hooked into believing something that is deliberately being presented out of context.

Since he calls himself a "professional shooter" he attracts an undue amount of hero worship by newbs where they memorize something that has been misrepresented and it leads to 15 pages on this and other forums trying to find solid ground.

It's a video based on click bait like many others.

In the end, yes he is chasing the lands, just like everybody else.

Dude - it's not "hero worship". It's an appreciation of Eric's accomplishments and willingness to share with others what he has learned. It would not be a bad thing if more shooters displayed such traits, rather than railing against those with whom they may disagree.

The bottom line for anyone reading this thread or others like it is quite simple. There is almost always more than just one way to accomplish almost any step in a successful load development regimen. Do some testing to determine which method works best for you, and try to understand why a particular method works best in your hands.

 

[WildBill3/75]

I've always thought of chasing the lands to make each round essentially the same distance from the lands. What Erik is doing is finding a node without respect to the lands. Once he falls out of that node, he readjusts. He has no care as to where the lands are nor is he trying to keep the bullet's relationship to the lands the same.

It can be. But I don't know many people that did it that way or do it that way.

Erik's data appears to be in respect to the "lands"

The freebore is the section in front of the chamber where the lands have been cut away to make room for the bullet.

In front of this is the leade which is an angular cut into the lands that ramps the bullet into the rifling.

What we are measuring in a new barrel is where the ogive on the bullet contacts the lands in the leade where resistance is met.

This is the start point.

Erik's data appears to be in respect to this point.

He started 2 thousands jump off this point tell he finds a seating depth that shoots well. He then takes it further and documented the length of the node and seats accordingly to stay in the node as long as possible.

As throat erosion takes place from the lands being vaporized due to combustion. He has to compensate for this and adjust seating depth and seats the bullets longer. We called this chasing the lands.

Why did he have to adjust seating depth?
His node moved.
Why did his node move?
Combustion caused the lands to "move" as a section of them were vaporized.
He adjusts seating depth to compensate.

This is Chasing the lands.

Semantics. Stupid that people are arguing over verbage. Still a good informative video.