Long range load development at 100 yards.

[Erik Cortina]

14-17 looks good. Could re test from 12 to 19 in 1 thous increments to really fine tune seating window

Can you hold .001" tolerance on loaded rounds?

 

[Erik Cortina]

Hi Erik,

Could you please give me your analysis. It would be very much appreciated.

Thanks Rick

Venom, target is a little hard to read. However, I think somewhere around 65.5 - 66.5 would be a good place to test.

 

[Erik Cortina]

Sorry jumping in here, but on the same topic. Starting with seating depth, Is there a good starting point for testing? Where should you start testing a tangent, or secant, or hybrid bullet?

I like to stay away from jam on all bullets to eliminate the chance of sticking a bullet in the lands if you try to extract a loaded round.
I start testing at .020" jump.

 

[savageshooter86]

Yes I can. Might be too much effort for not a lot of change. I measure each round and re seat until I get exactly the measurement I want

That is why I want a tuner and also find a seating depth "window" so I can take less time to loss rounds

 

[Erik Cortina]

Yes I can. Might be too much effort for not a lot of change. I measure each round and re seat until I get exactly the measurement I want

That is why I want a tuner and also find a seating depth "window" so I can take less time to loss rounds

How do you measure your loaded rounds to ensure .001" consistency?

 

[savageshooter86]

Well for me and my reloading, I go by my calipers and ogive reading. When they are the exact measurement I am wanting I call that good. I sorry bullets by Buhay bullet sorting. That's just how I keep my rounds at 1 thous from my tools and skill

 

[Erik Cortina]

Well for me and my reloading, I go by my calipers and ogive reading. When they are the exact measurement I am wanting I call that good. I sorry bullets by Buhay bullet sorting. That's just how I keep my rounds at 1 thous from my tools and skill

That's what I figured you would say. Calipers are not as precise as you think and the ogive comparator is likely not one that measures at the point where the bullet contacts the lands. You are +-.001" at best and likely further off at the point where bullet contacts lands, which is the point that matters.

If you guys are interested I can go into detail about what I'm talking about in this thread, but I would like to not get off topic too much.

 

[savageshooter86]

Yeah keep this thread on topic. It is a good one for newbies and send like it has helped a lot of people out

 

[trailrider121]

Erik,

I'm intrigued on how you measure your loaded rounds. I too use the calipers & comparator for measurement. Can you please elaborate?

 

[Erik Cortina]

Erik,

I'm intrigued on how you measure your loaded rounds. I too use the calipers & comparator for measurement. Can you please elaborate?

PM sent.

 

[/VH]

Erik,

I'm very interested in how you measure your loaded rounds as well. Whether you explain it on this thread or not, I'd sure like to know. I have been following this thread closely and appreciate you sharing your knowledge.

Thanks,

 

[Erik Cortina]

Erik,

I'm very interested in how you measure your loaded rounds as well. Whether you explain it on this thread or not, I'd sure like to know. I have been following this thread closely and appreciate you sharing your knowledge.

Thanks,

I'm am on the process of filing a patent for a tool that I developed for measuring loaded rounds accurately and fast.
However, the proper point to measure loaded rounds is from base to the precise point where the bullet contacts the lands.

 

[/VH]

Does it just measure or also seat?

 

[Erik Cortina]

Does it just measure or also seat?

You'll find out soon.

 

[mikegaiz]

Back to the starting seating depth for load development. So you start at .020 jump when you first start your powder load testing? Then when you have your best load weight, you move in or out by how much?

 

[6BRinNZ]

Follow on from my previous posts. 44.1 was only giving me 2680 so based on my loads with new brass I started at 44.8.

Got back up to the range. This time I was using 1 x fired brass and .015 off, tuner was set back to 0.

44.8 = 2751, 2760, 2749
45.1 = 2771, 2780, 2776
45.4 = 2782, 2786, 2779
45.7 = 2776, 2785, 2783
46 = 2794, 2797, 2789

 

[Erik Cortina]

Follow on from my previous posts. 44.1 was only giving me 2680 so based on my loads with new brass I started at 44.8.

Got back up to the range. This time I was using 1 x fired brass and .015 off, tuner was set back to 0.

44.8 = 2751, 2760, 2749
45.1 = 2771, 2780, 2776
45.4 = 2782, 2786, 2779
45.7 = 2776, 2785, 2783
46 = 2794, 2797, 2789

I like 45.4

 

[gilream]

Erik...I've been following this thread and though I do not shoot long range I thought i would post this target here for feedback as to which load I should go with. Rifle; Cooper Model 21 .223 Remington, 24" barrel, Weaver T-36 at 100 yards. Lapua brass (fired 5 times), Rem 7 1/2 primer, Lee collet die, Redding body die. The H335 was driving me nuts trying to keep up with its changing group sizes in the hotter weather so I am trying Benchmark. I've approached the top with caution but have not reached it yet even though I'm .6 grains over Sierra's data and .3 grains over the (higher) Hodgdon max number. At any rate please take a look. I regret that I don't have any chronograph data. This target was shot at 84 degrees and low humidity.
Thanks...Mike

 

[6BRinNZ]

Follow on from my previous posts. 44.1 was only giving me 2680 so based on my loads with new brass I started at 44.8.

Got back up to the range. This time I was using 1 x fired brass and .015 off, tuner was set back to 0.

44.8 = 2751, 2760, 2749
45.1 = 2771, 2780, 2776
45.4 = 2782, 2786, 2779
45.7 = 2776, 2785, 2783
46 = 2794, 2797, 2789

I like 45.4

Sweet - thats what I went with

I think it is quite a good charge because that range of powder charges has shown the same fps across both Bergers and scenars and the POIs and group shapes have always been consistent even with large changes to seating depth.

A question I do have which is slightly off topic - seating depth test (which is next). Without a tuner I used seating depth to try and shape the final group size and to find what the optimal depth was to chase it over the season.

Since I have a tuner and it's purpose is to produce the final group shape am I really only using seating depth to find the seating depth tolerance, and what I want to look for is seating depths that show least vertical POI change and then use the tuner to produce the final group shape?
Then its simply a matter of staying inside this seating depth window over the season?

 

[Erik Cortina]

6BR, yes, that's the idea.