Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Is it best to start on lands/load work-up!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mikecr" data-source="post: 1020805" data-attributes="member: 1521"><p>Then I would wonder why you did this. </p><p>After all, there is no reason for a seating number pulled from nowhere to be right.</p><p></p><p>My reasoning for testing and testing first;</p><p>In my experience seating testing is vital to best accuracy. Assumptions here are not prudent.</p><p>Also in my experience seating testing has a far bigger affect to results than powder testing. That is, seating testing(actual testing) is the coarse adjustment, and powder is the fine adjustment.</p><p>And with anything calibrated, you adjust coarse first, then fine.</p><p>Tweaking seating for group shaping is not seating testing(it's tweaking).</p><p></p><p>OCW helps you locate a desirable powder node. It doesn't even consider seating, and that's fine because seating has nothing to do with powder. But my thinking is that it will be easier to see best powder at good seating rather than bad to begin. Your ladder should look better too.</p><p></p><p>Keep in mind that many from 'the other school' have been accepting or outright declaring for years that VLDs needed to be jammed to shoot(as a rule). </p><p>Yet most of us actually testing did not find that to be true.</p><p>Berger's seating testing procedure has enlightened more.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mikecr, post: 1020805, member: 1521"] Then I would wonder why you did this. After all, there is no reason for a seating number pulled from nowhere to be right. My reasoning for testing and testing first; In my experience seating testing is vital to best accuracy. Assumptions here are not prudent. Also in my experience seating testing has a far bigger affect to results than powder testing. That is, seating testing(actual testing) is the coarse adjustment, and powder is the fine adjustment. And with anything calibrated, you adjust coarse first, then fine. Tweaking seating for group shaping is not seating testing(it's tweaking). OCW helps you locate a desirable powder node. It doesn't even consider seating, and that's fine because seating has nothing to do with powder. But my thinking is that it will be easier to see best powder at good seating rather than bad to begin. Your ladder should look better too. Keep in mind that many from 'the other school' have been accepting or outright declaring for years that VLDs needed to be jammed to shoot(as a rule). Yet most of us actually testing did not find that to be true. Berger's seating testing procedure has enlightened more. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Is it best to start on lands/load work-up!
Top