Bullets that don't care about seating depth

[megastink]

I'm a new reloader. I am working on load development for my 270 Win using 130gr Berger VLD hunting pills. I've read, and in fact Berger states, that they can be sensitive to seating depth. I also read that some bullets, like Lapua Scenars, aren't sensitive to seating depth. I was hoping some people on here can give some real world analysis on which bullets are picky and which ones aren't. I'm not downplaying the importance of seating depth, but would rather not have to chase it at the range. I appreciate all of the input in advance.

 

[adam32+P]

Anything with a tangent ogive will be more forgiving than ones with a secant ogive...like the Bergers have.

 

[Troutslayer2]

They all are. VLDs if I remember right were more sensitive than others and I was jumping them .020". You're going to have to mess with it and find out, should take you about 15 rounds to figure it out.

 

[RegionRat]

The tangent is forgiving to jump much more so than the secant (VLD).
Also, hybrids are also forgiving because they incorporate a tangent then a secant, so best of both worlds.
But don't take my word for it. Here are words from Berger...

https://bergerbullets.com/berger-hybrid-bullets/

 

[Calvin45]

I've experienced the least sensitivity with hammer bullets, Nosler ballistic tips, and flat base hornady interlocks (and any flat base cup and core will be pretty easy to work with, they're underrated nowadays)

 

[Koda_]

I was hoping some people on here can give some real world analysis on which bullets are picky and which ones aren't.

I have handloads of 4 different calibers with Hammer bullets and none of them were sensitive to seating depth. I stopped messing with it and just start .020" off the lands or to fit the magazine and work up to velocity and done.

 

[adam32+P]

Um, hate to disagree, but you got that backwards @adam32+P

The tangent is forgiving to jump much more so than the secant (VLD).
Also, hybrids are also forgiving because they incorporate a tangent then a secant, so best of both worlds.
But don't take my word for it. Here are words from Berger...

https://bergerbullets.com/berger-hybrid-bullets/

View attachment 519044

That's what I get for replying while driving lol...I'll fix it

 

[snox801]

I've experienced the least sensitivity with hammer bullets, Nosler ballistic tips, and flat base hornady interlocks (and any flat base cup and core will be pretty easy to work with, they're underrated nowadays)

Mine mirrors this exactly. Hammers are by far the least sensitive. Cutting edge also seems to not care much.

In fact that's a big draw for me to hammers and cutting edge. Load to mag length if it doesn't jam them and do a pressure ladder. Usually five rounds I find pressure back off load a set and shoot a great group

 

[FEENIX]

I'm a new reloader. I am working on load development for my 270 Win using 130gr Berger VLD hunting pills. I've read, and in fact Berger states, that they can be sensitive to seating depth. I also read that some bullets, like Lapua Scenars, aren't sensitive to seating depth. I was hoping some people on here can give some real world analysis on which bullets are picky and which ones aren't. I'm not downplaying the importance of seating depth, but would rather not have to chase it at the range. I appreciate all of the input in advance.

Stick to the Berger 130, and you'll be fine. Scenars are good, too. Good luck!

 

[snox801]

I think it would also be good to add what you are doing with the rifle. If you target shooting I would also abscess to agree Bergers would be my choice. They take some time to get depth right but it's good to practice anyway.

Now if your hunting I would lean heavily towards the hammers. One is hard to beat for targets and does work on game for sure. The hammers is fantastic on game and will work for targets.

 

[adam32+P]

I'm a new reloader. I am working on load development for my 270 Win using 130gr Berger VLD hunting pills. I've read, and in fact Berger states, that they can be sensitive to seating depth. I also read that some bullets, like Lapua Scenars, aren't sensitive to seating depth. I was hoping some people on here can give some real world analysis on which bullets are picky and which ones aren't. I'm not downplaying the importance of seating depth, but would rather not have to chase it at the range. I appreciate all of the input in advance.

.270 Win and a new reloader so I'm assuming you won't be hunting at long range? Practical hunting range of around 300 yards I'm guessing? Load up some Nosler Partitions or Sierra GameKings and go hunting

Use the Bergers to tweak your reloading practices until you're happy with the results.

 

[YZ-80]

I've asked several different bullets the same question and they all either clam up or disrespect me. So, I said to hell with you and seat everything between .015 and .020. This has yielded .25 to .50 MOA on everything I got out to 300 yards (standard stuff like .243, 308, .25-06, crudmore). The only exception is my Tikka T3X where I almost pushed the bullet out of the comparator case trying to find the lands. Then, I go somewhere between Published COL and Mag length and figure it out in 30 rounds or so. I know seating depth is important, but it's been more fruitful for me to focus on uniformity with other parameters and using good stuff. Might be leaving something on the table, but for me and my purposes, it works.

 

[sep]

I can confirm Barnes 168 TTSXs in two 30-06s this past summer were basically unaffected by seating depth. I fired a total of 45 three shot groups with one rifle spanning .087 in .003 increments. In the other rifle, I simply seated the bullet .075 closer to the lands and the difference in average group size was negligible. The difference in average group sizes in both cases could be explained by measuring error on my part using calipers.
(I now use BallisticX to measure groups with my iPhone)

My baseline for average group sizes consists of ten 3 shot groups. So, I'm not dealing with small sample sizes which could skew the results. This conclusion surprised me and has changed the way I do load workup.

 

[Bret GRAVELINE Graveline]

heres my 2 cents worth, with over fifty years of reloading, and having loaded over a hundred different cartridges, I have found its not so much the bullets, as it is the rifle, some guns just don't seem to what care what you feed them, if you are lucky, others will make you pull you're hair out, some have bullet preferences, others primers, and some powder. If you reload long enough and often you will encounter all of them. Fortunately in today's world bullets barrels and just over all quality of components when you can get them make load development A whole lot easier