Would this be fair to say?

[SheepShapeAK]

I run a ladder test over the chrono to look for nodes then do a seating depth test.

Load Development Methods - LoadDevelopment.com

Load development is one of the most important aspects when it comes to precision rifle shooting, there are three main load development methods.

www.loaddevelopment.com

Load Development: Ladder Test Method - LoadDevelopment.com

The ladder test method for development of a load for your rifle is proven by reloaders and expert shooters accross the world to work. Here's how.

www.loaddevelopment.com

 

[MagnumManiac]

Well, many ideas here. I have always run a seating depth test first using a known load. If the rifle is new, then I pick a middle load with a middle powder and run from touching all the way out in .005" increments to .050" off. Rarely do I find this not to work and have to seat further than this, but the Berger seating test has worked for me too.
You will often find seating will be the same with a bullet regardless of load and powder. I also do not chase the lands, if it gets to being .040"-.050" from initial land origin, I setback and re-chamber, although this isn't necessary in a hunting rifle.

Cheers.

 

[Mikecr]

I run a ladder test over the chrono to look for nodes then do a seating depth test.

If you are anywhere close to the right powder for cartridge/bullet, then seating depth is bigger to results.

So when you calibrate anything, you first make your coarse adjustments, before moving onward to finer adjustments. Right?
With an old radio you press the coarse radio buttons to get near a station, and then you use the tuning dial to lock in a station.

Seating represents the coarse setting buttons, The fine dial is powder (right to the kernel).
Let's say you're looking for THE strongest station.

Your method has you randomly press any button once, and then dial around it until locking in a nearest station. When you find it, you think that's it, my node. And then with a bazaar thinking, you again press that random seating button, about half way, thinking you might find an even stronger station with that. Of course most of the time it just muddles up reception, and you come to the conclusion that you have to go back where you found a node earlier and stay there.
But is that really your strongest station? It just happened to be near a point you pulled out of your butt like that?

With seating first, you press every button on the radio first, and hopefully get near a couple strong stations.
From a coarse setting that seems strongest, you then fine dial in a lock on one.
You can horse around with the settings all you like, but chances are you've directly found the strongest station already.

Now you might be confident in some foreknowledge. At a bar, you heard "I always start with the 4th button from the right".
But just ask yourself: why would that be correct? For YOU?

 

[SheepShapeAK]

If you are anywhere close to the right powder for cartridge/bullet, then seating depth is bigger to results.

So when you calibrate anything, you first make your coarse adjustments, before moving onward to finer adjustments. Right?
With an old radio you press the coarse radio buttons to get near a station, and then you use the tuning dial to lock in a station.
View attachment 448682
Seating represents the coarse setting buttons, The fine dial is powder (right to the kernel).
Let's say you're looking for THE strongest station.

Your method has you randomly press any button once, and then dial around it until locking in a nearest station. When you find it, you think that's it, my node. And then with a bazaar thinking, you again press that random seating button, about half way, thinking you might find an even stronger station with that. Of course most of the time it just muddles up reception, and you come to the conclusion that you have to go back where you found a node earlier and stay there.
But is that really your strongest station? It just happened to be near a point you pulled out of your butt like that?

With seating first, you press every button on the radio first, and hopefully get near a couple strong stations.
From a coarse setting that seems strongest, you then fine dial in a lock on one.
You can horse around with the settings all you like, but chances are you've directly found the strongest station already.

Now you might be confident in some foreknowledge. At a bar, you heard "I always start with the 4th button from the right".
But just ask yourself: why would that be correct? For YOU?

I mean, to each their own. Whatever works for you. This works for me and makes sense.

Erik Cortina just won southwest nationals, and has a great video out about chasing the lands, and why you shouldn't waste your time.

 

[Mr. Magoo]

Well, many ideas here. I have always run a seating depth test first using a known load. If the rifle is new, then I pick a middle load with a middle powder and run from touching all the way out in .005" increments to .050" off. Rarely do I find this not to work and have to seat further than this, but the Berger seating test has worked for me too.
You will often find seating will be the same with a bullet regardless of load and powder. I also do not chase the lands, if it gets to being .040"-.050" from initial land origin, I setback and re-chamber, although this isn't necessary in a hunting rifle.

Cheers.

Hmm. Interesting line of thought.

If your first middle of the road load that you do your seating depth tests just happens to settle near or at the peak past a node, when you do the seating test, the varying pressure (from backed off the lands, to touching) will be all over the place, moreso than if you are in the middle of the sweet spot.

Is this good or bad for finding how much the bullet likes to jump? Which magnifies which?

Gotta give this some thought.

 

[Pdyson]

I've read and heard top bench rest shooters say that the longer and pointer the bullet the closer to the lands it likes to be. Top bench rest shooters like Speedy put those Berger VLDs deep into the lands, touching, or even hard jammed into them. Not a good idea for hunters.
Only the Berger manual recommends trying long jumps. So even when I'm told a bullet likes to jump, I seat them as long as I can, to avoid the donut If I possible. I always powder test first and I start with my bullets seated as far out as the magazine or rifling will allow. if I get the velocity without pressure, single digit SD, and promising groups that maintain the same POI through 3 ladder steps. I lock down the powder and adjust my seating depth In small amounts but I never jump them the great distances listed in the Berger manual. I stopped doing that 10 years ago when after several attempts, i Never found a node back there that was any better than the ones I found at longer CBTOs.

 

[Mr. Magoo]

.

 

[just_jon]

While starting with seating depth has worked well for me, I recognize that I may have come to the same result via other methods. Also interesting that the end result is usually very close to 20 thou off jam.

 

[SheepShapeAK]

Watch this video. The target doesn't lie.

 

[Mikecr]

I've read and heard top bench rest shooters say that the longer and pointer the bullet the closer to the lands it likes to be. Top bench rest shooters like Speedy put those Berger VLDs deep into the lands, touching, or even hard jammed into them.

Yeah I watched em declaring this nonsense for decades. That's all it ever was..

It is interesting also that competitors are just now coming around to understanding that lands do not have to be chased where not relying on high starting pressure (as load developed). This is coming around with a big lag, as they are now commonly finding best seating far from lands, through FULL/actual seating testing.

 

[Pdyson]

Yeah I watched em declaring this nonsense for decades. That's all it ever was..

It is interesting also that competitors are just now coming around to understanding that lands do not have to be chased where not relying on high starting pressure (as load developed). This is coming around with a big lag, as they are now commonly finding best seating far from lands, through FULL/actual seating testing.

They say they don't chase them but when their groups open up they seat their bullets longer to see if it tightens back up. If it does that's their new seating depth.

I wouldn't say its nonsense especially after Virgil King's work at the Houston Warehouse back in the 70s and 80s. All those world record groups, dozens and dozens of groups that Virgil King shot in there 'in the zeroes'… he NEVER fired a single official screamer group when he was 'jumping' bullets. All his best groups were always seated into the lands, or at the very least… touching the lands.

 

[Mikecr]

I wouldn't say its nonsense especially after Virgil King's work at the Houston Warehouse back in the 70s and 80s. All those world record groups, dozens and dozens of groups that Virgil King shot in there 'in the zeroes'… he NEVER fired a single official screamer group when he was 'jumping' bullets. All his best groups were always seated into the lands, or at the very least… touching the lands.

If you're only shooting a 6PPC some of that should be interesting..
For the rest of us, there are no correlations.

You know for a while it was expected by competitors that necks be turned and their neck clearances tighter.
Today, this same mob would scold you for implying something along that line.
These are cycles that come & go & come back & go again -from tail chasers.

They say they don't chase them but when their groups open up they seat their bullets longer to see if it tightens back up. If it does that's their new seating depth.

Tail chasers..
They've setup a load (through load development) that required the high starting pressure provided by bullets seated very close or into lands initially. Now, they're a slave to that choice.
Or, they don't understand or accept the passing of accurate barrel life, and they'll try to squeeze out another ~100 dubious shots, over & over.

 

[Mr. Magoo]

Yeah I watched em declaring this nonsense for decades. That's all it ever was..

It is interesting also that competitors are just now coming around to understanding that lands do not have to be chased where not relying on high starting pressure (as load developed). This is coming around with a big lag, as they are now commonly finding best seating far from lands, through FULL/actual seating testing.

Years ago, I found a way to make almost any rifle shoot much better with very little work. Never got a chance to capitalize on it one bit- life happens- but I've kept it under my hat for over 20 years and I'll be damned if I'm giving that secret out until I've exhausted every means to get it patented and do something with it.

Top competitive shooters aren't giving away all of thier hardest learned secrets. That would be stupid.

They also aren't here talking about it. They're over on youtube making money on views by stirring up heated debates, controversy and confusion.

Eric Cortina isn't winning matches using ammo he loaded while doing a live youtube video like he wants you to believe. I've seen him distrectedly fumbling bullets while stuffing them in the necks, drop a loaded round, and put it in with the rest.

That said, We've got some pretty **** good shooters here that do freely talk about what works for them, and its easy to see the patterns when you get enough of a sample size.

Some bullets like jump, some don't and it has to do with the shape of the bullet ogive where it meets the bearing surface. But its not as simple as it sounds- Several things to consider at once- bullet ogive shape and jump distance influences pressure curve shape influences node characteristics influences accuracy.

The other is accuracy of bullet placement in the bore axis (both dimensional and center of mass of bullet to consider). Bullet shape and forcing cone shape have a definite influence on this- tangents go into the cone straight easier than secant, so they don't have to be jammed as close. Throw all these things into the mix in one violent explosion and its easy to see how people get confused about what's influencing what.

So like I said, look for patterns, and try to keep separate things separate so you're not chasing your tail

 

[RidgeTop]

Some guys dream about groups like that. I would not change a thing, go on to the next rifle that needs help.