jo,
Thanks for keeping up with this thread.
When I first bought the rifle, I intended to start .020" off the lands. When I measured with the OAL guage, I didn't have a rat's rear end in the neck with the bullets I use (Nosler 50 grain BTips)
So my next step was to seat to fit into the magazine. When doing this, I soon realized with the seater pkug all the way down, and the die 1 turn out from shellholder (Redding recommends atleast 1 turn out to avoid crimping), the OAL was still too long to fit into the magazine. I was close, but still wouldn't fit. I slowly started turning the die in, and started crimping about 3/4 turns out from shellholder contact.
I got them to fit into the magazine after about .025" of crimp. The crimp is a slight taper, I have a hard time seeing it. In fact, if I didn't "feel" it crimping on the press, I would have never known. You have to hold it in different light angles to see the crimping I am working with.
I was a little worried at first, because I never crimped before, and trust me, I am an accuracy fanatic just like everyone here. I never in a million years wanted to crimp this at first, especially a .222. But I then soon thought, I am not shooting a BR gun. I am shooting a factory sporter. And my goal was to achieve consistent 1/2" groups. With the thought process behind crimping and consistent burn rates with powder, I thought it would be possible. Now, if I was chasing BR records, yes, I wouldn't crimp.
I am thinking, for the time being, if I can replicate these results again, I might stick with what is working. This rifle is going to be used for hunting so a slight crimp and fitting into the magazine might be a good thing, especially if I can replicate these results at the range time and time again. After seeing how it shot with 3 different powders yesterday, I don't think that will be a problem.
I am going to contact Redding in the next day or so to see what they say.
My seating stem has a "24" on top.