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
What’s up with Hornady’s reloading podcast?
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="T3ninja" data-source="post: 3078927" data-attributes="member: 95079"><p>I have been loading for roughly 20 years and although I have come up with some absolute awesome loads, doing the "traditional" methods, it did cost a lot more time and money. </p><p></p><p></p><p>With that said, I now use a similar method to what they speak of. I pick a bullet, and usually stick with powders I have on hand in bulk, but load till I find pressure or have signs, back of a bit, then move back to 5-6-700 etc,( whatever I intend to use the rifle for) and I'll put down a 10 round group. If it's acceptable for my intended purpose, I'll put down another 10 round group and confirm. Done.</p><p></p><p>If said group is unacceptable then I move on and try a different bullet/powder/etc. This costs me about 25 rounds of ammo, vs hundreds of I tried 3-5 round groups. I've got much more consistent results this way than I have trying to chase that .2-.3 gr "node". </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Also, MY opinion - Most of the people that say it's hogwash, stupid, should be banned etc, Had their mind made up before they even listened to why they were saying. If you notice they mention a BUNCH that what they are saying was from THEIR testing and experience and I vividly recall hearing them say something along the lines of "we're not saying seating depth doesn't work, but in our testing it doesn't show a meaningful effect" and they mention other bullets/manufacturers they might benefit from seating test. </p><p></p><p>I'm an accuracy nut, but since I have changed my reloading technique a little, I'm shooting more and having more fun, than I did when I was constantly "testing".</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="T3ninja, post: 3078927, member: 95079"] I have been loading for roughly 20 years and although I have come up with some absolute awesome loads, doing the “traditional” methods, it did cost a lot more time and money. With that said, I now use a similar method to what they speak of. I pick a bullet, and usually stick with powders I have on hand in bulk, but load till I find pressure or have signs, back of a bit, then move back to 5-6-700 etc,( whatever I intend to use the rifle for) and I’ll put down a 10 round group. If it’s acceptable for my intended purpose, I’ll put down another 10 round group and confirm. Done. If said group is unacceptable then I move on and try a different bullet/powder/etc. This costs me about 25 rounds of ammo, vs hundreds of I tried 3-5 round groups. I’ve got much more consistent results this way than I have trying to chase that .2-.3 gr “node”. Also, MY opinion - Most of the people that say it’s hogwash, stupid, should be banned etc, Had their mind made up before they even listened to why they were saying. If you notice they mention a BUNCH that what they are saying was from THEIR testing and experience and I vividly recall hearing them say something along the lines of “we’re not saying seating depth doesn’t work, but in our testing it doesn’t show a meaningful effect” and they mention other bullets/manufacturers they might benefit from seating test. I’m an accuracy nut, but since I have changed my reloading technique a little, I’m shooting more and having more fun, than I did when I was constantly “testing”. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
What’s up with Hornady’s reloading podcast?
Top