Seating depth question

[Planenut]

I've got my seating depth narrowed down to .050 with Berger 168 VLD Classic Hunters in a 7 Rem Mag. Currently using IMR7828 but want to try H4831 and H1000.

My question is once I've settled on the depth but want to switch to a different powder, will the seating depth stay the same or will I have to fine tune it as well?

Thanks

 

[Mikecr]

Best seating is where you found it(if you did) regardless of powder or load.

 

[Planenut]

I didn't think that different powders, pressure or velocity should effect seating depth but wanted to defer to loaders with more experience...

Thanks

 

[elkaholic]

Best seating is where you found it(if you did) regardless of powder or load.

Agree with Mike. My process with my wildcats is this. Determine max load. Back off three or four grains and try several seating depths, depending on bullet style, I seat from approx. .010" into lands to as much as .120" off of lands (this would apply mostly to VLD's) tangent ogives usually work well approx. .020" off of lands, give or take. Shoot groups to determine best seating depth for that bullet and then start adjusting powder loads up to find your best accuracy/velocity combo. At that point, you should be able to try different powders using the same method only forgetting about seating depth. It should remain the same with the same bullet.....rich

 

[Mikecr]

My process is similar in that I test seating while 1st-fireforming of brass and at mid loads.

While seating can be tested for pretty much anytime, if you don't find it early then much of your efforts to that point might be invalid. That is, if you merely choose seating without a real basis and did a bunch of incremental load development with that abstract seating, you might end with a good load -while missing a better load. If you then decide to test seating, you might as well decide to redo all powder testing, as there is no way you'll know it's right without retesting.

IMO a reason reloaders generalize that seating matters less, or that the seating they happened to choose was best, is that seating adjustments from tune will immediately APPEAR to wreck a tune. This clouding their judgment about seating affects.
If they would stay disciplined in testing with an objective perspective, they would learn more.
But it's hard to be objective when right off the bat seating adjustments change what they've been working on... So they get scared of the really ugly groups and quit with the testing.

If a random choice is to be made, it should not be in seating.
Seating can represent the very largest affect to final results, both good and bad.
Powder pulls you in/out of tune, but rarely wrecks performance like mis-seating can.
This why I put powder charge as the random setting, while dialing in seating, then go to powder as a fine tune.
I like ladders here. If you're shooting ladders with random/chosen seating, well, good luck with that. But ladders can be impossible to evaluate while shot from a mis-seated load.

 

[elkaholic]

My process is similar in that I test seating while 1st-fireforming of brass and at mid loads.

While seating can be tested for pretty much anytime, if you don't find it early then much of your efforts to that point might be invalid. That is, if you merely choose seating without a real basis and did a bunch of incremental load development with that abstract seating, you might end with a good load -while missing a better load. If you then decide to test seating, you might as well decide to redo all powder testing, as there is no way you'll know it's right without retesting.

IMO a reason reloaders generalize that seating matters less, or that the seating they happened to choose was best, is that seating adjustments from tune will immediately APPEAR to wreck a tune. This clouding their judgment about seating affects.
If they would stay disciplined in testing with an objective perspective, they would learn more.
But it's hard to be objective when right off the bat seating adjustments change what they've been working on... So they get scared of the really ugly groups and quit with the testing.

If a random choice is to be made, it should not be in seating.
Seating can represent the very largest affect to final results, both good and bad.
Powder pulls you in/out of tune, but rarely wrecks performance like mis-seating can.
This why I put powder charge as the random setting, while dialing in seating, then go to powder as a fine tune.
I like ladders here. If you're shooting ladders with random/chosen seating, well, good luck with that. But ladders can be impossible to evaluate while shot from a mis-seated load.

Right on!.....Rich

 

[Planenut]

I'm not at home but if memory Serves me correctly, I tested at 10, 50, and 90 thousandths of jump.

I was also breaking in the barrel on my new sendero. I used two lower powder settings at 61 and 63 just to break n the barrel. Then I shot 3 groups at 64.5 with the each of the setting depths. Now I want to fine tune the .050 group maybe .025 to each side but then work on velocity and accuracy. I also want to try H4831 instead of IMR7828. Wish I had some H1000.

IMR 7828 was only giving me 2830fps but I may be able to go up some more in powder. This was the best on my SPS 7 Mag and near max but my Sendero may be totally different.

Btw, that was with Berger 168 VLD Classic Hunters, Hornady brass and wlmr primers.

 

[Mikecr]

Be sure to read http://www.longrangehunting.com/for...accuracy-berger-vld-bullets-your-rifle-40204/

 

[PowellSixO]

Wish I had some H1000.

You can pick up 1lb tubs on gunbroker, but be prepared to pay out the @$$. $55 bucks with $15 for shipping if you use the buy it now option!!!! Only $35 plus $15 for shipping if you win an auction. But still, YIKES. I was lucky recently and stumbled across an 8lb tub from a shop for $197. There's a lot of people out there taking advantage of people right now. It's sad really.