seating depth ?

[rebs]

just a thought, if your seater stem is contacting the ogive the same for every bullet then when you measure BTO that number would be the same, a different number but they should all be the same, right ?

 

[JFrank]

just a thought, if your seater stem is contacting the ogive the same for every bullet then when you measure BTO that number would be the same, a different number but they should all be the same, right ?

Not if your base to seater stem number and base to ogive number had variances between them.
If I may suggest, that you sort some bullets from btss followed by bto . At that point you’ll see for yourself.
These Berger 108’s are pretty decent but they still vary a couple thou from bag to bag. The real odd balls are set aside.

 

[JMAN80]

RCBS single stage press, Hornady seater die with micrometer top and digital caliper

What are you sizing with? Bushing die or standard FL sizer? I had a lot of variations in length until I switched to bushing dies with SAC bushings to obtain the neck tension I was after. Seating was very consistent using same Hornady seater you use. I have since switched to K&M arbor press and their chamber does.

 

[Straightshooter1]

just a thought, if your seater stem is contacting the ogive the same for every bullet then when you measure BTO that number would be the same, a different number but they should all be the same, right ?

That assumes the distance between the two are always the same. They're not.

 

[JB10]

Did they like a lot of jump in your rifle?

The 108 no, wanted to be touching the lands. Ive found the 140s like 20thou jump on 2 different rifles and touching on another. Them the 73 eldm liked 10 thou jump

 

[rebs]

I think I found the problem, to much neck tension. I used my Lee neck sizing die with a larger mandrel and the bullets seat much easier and way more precise. I loaded 10 rounds and they were all within .001
Thank you guys for all the help

 

[Dave M.]

I was just asking on the average, in general

Impossible to tell what your rifle likes. Honestly, I’ve never found a single one of our rifles that shoots better jumping bullets as opposed to loading into the lands.

 

[Straightshooter1]

18.50

Impossible to tell what your rifle likes. Honestly, I’ve never found a single one of our rifles that shoots better jumping bullets as opposed to loading into the lands.

I've never been fully convinced, mostly for lack of seeing any good demonstration, that loading into the lands makes a significant difference in consistency than jumping, until . . . I viewed the video on YouTube titled Bullets Hitting Bullets in Slow Motion. Looking at the caliber of people involved and their effort to get it right, they had to make an adjustment to consistently get their bullets to collide head on, which is described at the 17:00 to 19:00 minute points in the video. While they had various issues to solve to get there, loading the bullet into the rifling seemed the biggest technical solution to get the consistent results they wanted.

I've never loaded into the lands before, and I understand what's involved and the issues for safety, but I'm really kinda excited to give it a try and what what I can get.

 

[JFrank]

For myself it depends on the bullet, I’ve had good results jumping tangent ogive bullets while VLD seem to shoot best ( for me ) in the lands

Here’s some 108 bergers that certainly liked to be jumped around .017 off and didn’t care for being close to the lands. Only testing a bit will tell the story.