Primer seating depth and primer seating force

[257ack]

With the advent of the $1500.00 seating press, the $1500.00 annealer, the $1200.00 resizing press, the $1800.00 brass turner, I think we need a decent $1500.00 priming tool.

me too

 

[LGKLAS]

Give the 21st century adjustable uniformer a shot. Its the only way to get consistent primer seating if you use a set length priming tool rather than feel

Uniforming primer pockets has been a step on my mind for a while. Is uniforming a primer pocket on a piece of brass a 'once and done' thing, or, is it something you need to do again after a number of firings on that piece of brass?

 

[savageshooter86]

Wow someone uniforms the pockets that is a name everyone knows. I thought no one did that

 

[J.d. Popkes]

Bright Idea: Wouldn't it be fun if someone called up all of the current long range benchrest record holders and asked them how they seated the primers for their record breaking match? Then you could contact all of the most recent nationals winners.

Then what? All tests and experiments are to stop right there? No moving forward. Using that line of thinking would have left us with what, smooth bore muskets? Are you saying you strictly do exactly what the latest match winners do to the letter? That’s up to you for sure. Like Cortina said in the video, how do ya know that these champions are telling ya everything, all the tricks and what they’re experimenting with? I for one am not bound by what other people do, that’s boring. I enjoy the advancements in technology in our hobby. Look how far it’s coming. Every time you turn around there’s cool stuff coming out. Exciting times.

 

[Dusty Stevens]

Uniforming primer pockets has been a step on my mind for a while. Is uniforming a primer pocket on a piece of brass a 'once and done' thing, or, is it something you need to do again after a number of firings on that piece of brass?

Once you get them all uniformed you use the same cutter to clean the pockets

Wow someone uniforms the pockets that is a name everyone knows. I thought no one did that

you never know what you dont know. Its only common sense that if you’re seating primers to a set depth, say with a primal rights seater or 21st century click adjustable, then your pockets need to be the exact same depth to get the exact same crush right? You take a box of brass and start cutting pockets and youll quickly see how much they vary in depth. If your pockets vary by say .003 then your crush varies by .003 and that can be disastrous on target. Of course your mileage may vary, and this can all be disregarded if you seat primers by feel. Im just giving you something to test that you can damn sure see on target. If you dont believe it intentionally seat a few .005 deeper and see how they shoot

 

[BoydAllen]

Then what? All tests and experiments are to stop right there? No moving forward. Using that line of thinking would have left us with what, smooth bore muskets? Are you saying you strictly do exactly what the latest match winners do to the letter? That’s up to you for sure. Like Cortina said in the video, how do ya know that these champions are telling ya everything, all the tricks and what they’re experimenting with? I for one am not bound by what other people do, that’s boring. I enjoy the advancements in technology in our hobby. Look how far it’s coming. Every time you turn around there’s cool stuff coming out. Exciting times.

I suggest that you reread what you wrote when you calm down and consider that I did not say any of those things. There is an old trick in argument that works like this. You misstate what someone has said and then vilify that. I am perfectly happy to stand on what I wrote, and suggest that as many others as possible read your response, so that they may better understand you.

 

[BoydAllen]

How about a Macallan 18?

The key to understanding this article is that he quotes SD based on a three shot sample and that his "primer seating test" consisted of three shots each. If that does not raise serious questions in your mind about the validity of his results then you need to do a review of your statistics class with special attention to sample size.

 

[J.d. Popkes]

I suggest that you reread what you wrote when you calm down and consider that I did not say any of those things. There is an old trick in argument that works like this. You misstate what someone has said and then vilify that. I am perfectly happy to stand on what I wrote, and suggest that as many others as possible read your response, so that they may better understand you.

What are you saying then? You said bright idea. Enlighten me. Call all the champions, then……..

 

[BoydAllen]

What are you saying then? You said bright idea. Enlighten me. Call all the champions, then……..

Reread my post. I think that it is perfectly clear. My larger point is that IMO people do not understand that the thing that they have chosen to obsess over, may not be what is holding them back as far as accuracy is concerned, and that I believe this because the people who shoot the smallest groups, to my knowledge, tend to seat by feel. Short version, unless you are at championship level, you have much bigger fish to fry.

 

[J.d. Popkes]

Reread my post. I think that it is perfectly clear. My larger point is that IMO people do not understand that the thing that they have chosen to obsess over, may not be what is holding them back as far as accuracy is concerned, and that I believe this because the people who shoot the smallest groups, to my knowledge, tend to seat by feel. Short version, unless you are at championship level, you have much bigger fish to fry.

I think that’s a valid point, probably not the biggest fish to fry. The size of that fish, to me personally is unknown but some pretty accomplished shooters say it’s worth a look. And me, I enjoy catching little pan fish as much as anything. Little creek with brookies for me. Sometimes it’s not the size Boyd, (of the fish).

 

[BoydAllen]

I think that’s a valid point, probably not the biggest fish to fry. The size of that fish, to me personally is unknown but some pretty accomplished shooters say it’s worth a look. And me, I enjoy catching little pan fish as much as anything. Little creek with brookies for me. Sometimes it’s not the size Boyd, (of the fish).

Suggest you pay particular attention to what shooting sport they are accomplished in.

 

[J.d. Popkes]

Suggest you pay particular attention to what shooting sport they are accomplished in.

F open I think.

 

[Mulligan]

In long range BR primer seating depth is being tested. Early tests show a direct correlation to POI and vertical stringing at 600 and 1000 yards.

Not sure if the folks (myself included) currently testing this will ever share their finding because of the lack of respect shown to folks spending their own time and money testing.
Regards
CW

 

[jelenko]

I suggest that you reread what you wrote when you calm down and consider that I did not say any of those things. There is an old trick in argument that works like this. You misstate what someone has said and then vilify that. I am perfectly happy to stand on what I wrote, and suggest that as many others as possible read your response, so that they may better understand you.

You are a patient person. I hit the ignore button after their first post.

 

[jimmymac]

And here I am thinking my old Lee Autoprime is still the cats ass. Lol

 

[BoydAllen]

And here I am thinking my old Lee Autoprime is still the cats ass. Lol

Has someone definitively proven that it isn't?

 

[Mulligan]

And here I am thinking my old Lee Autoprime is still the cats ass. Lol

On a thread similar to this (now removed), one of the long-range guys from the frozen north reported a normal good firm seat is most always really good. But....... most every time something within a couple of thou was better.
Not sure how better was defined, I think smaller group at a grand?
Maybe someone with a better memory or the original poster will help us out here.
CW

 

[savageshooter86]

Once you get them all uniformed you use the same cutter to clean the pockets

you never know what you dont know. Its only common sense that if you’re seating primers to a set depth, say with a primal rights seater or 21st century click adjustable, then your pockets need to be the exact same depth to get the exact same crush right? You take a box of brass and start cutting pockets and youll quickly see how much they vary in depth. If your pockets vary by say .003 then your crush varies by .003 and that can be disastrous on target. Of course your mileage may vary, and this can all be disregarded if you seat primers by feel. Im just giving you something to test that you can damn sure see on target. If you dont believe it intentionally seat a few .005 deeper and see how they shoot

I agree. I did this for years on my Lapua Palma and std brass when I shot FTR. Never saw an issue or negative effect from doing so but sure did get a lot of shavings out of the brass. Was kind surprised. But when I switched to Fopen I have not touched them. Maybe I will look at it again

 

[savageshooter86]

Bright Idea: Wouldn't it be fun if someone called up all of the current long range benchrest record holders and asked them how they seated the primers for their record breaking match? Then you could contact all of the most recent nationals winners.

A lot of people would get feelings hurt and be shocked. Because a lot of top guys do these things but no one believes it matters so they jump on the "it's a waste of time" wagon and the "no one does this" wagon

 

[BoydAllen]

A lot of people would get feelings hurt and be shocked. Because a lot of top guys do these things but no one believes it matters so they jump on the "it's a waste of time" wagon and the "no one does this" wagon

You post with no name, no specifics, offering pure conjecture. I'm not on a wagon, I'm not against if it works or good testing. I don't know if it has an effect. Pretty sure at short range it doesn't. What you count on is my calling three shot tests as not totally conclusive, and three shot SDs as evidence of statistical ignorance.