Seating depth - does it even matter?

[Packmansion]

You’re condescending as hell for someone that has shown literally nothing personally produced or achieved besides listening to a couple of podcasts and watching a couple of YouTube videos.

While you’re online you should find all the precision records set by hornady bullets…. You know, since they know everything about what affects precision. The company that holds nearly every record (besides people that make their own bullets) says to test seating depths. The company that hold 0 records, say it doesn’t matter. Weird.

Sir I've done a lot more than watch YouTube and listen to a couple of podcasts. Im simply referencing data sets compiled by reputable sources.

 

[greyghostnw]

having a repeated way timing the bullets exit of barrel is the concept with the components you have and tools to do so.The target dosnt lie… Harmonic vibration in a barrel or any horizontal object caused by a disruption in its original position…a different height of frequency.. it moves up and down and the bullet releases at some point within that movement. All your doing is timing this in a area that has room for deviation in load thats repeated on target at any distance. Document the data to get there repeat, prove it at many environments…test yourself and enjoy the ride. If you cant be open minded, have tools, components, rifle systems capable well then guess stick with grandpas rifle and a box of the good stuff. Good luck

 

[willfrye027]

Still have not seen anyone, anywhere, show a statistically valid 20 shot group “in” and “out of” the node to prove that seating depth matters. It’s the same blog posts, articles, theories, pesudoscience or whatever you want to call it regurgitated over and over.

Shoot a 20 shot group at your previously determined ideal seating depth.

Shoot a 20 shot group at any other seating depth

Show that the groups are different

Pretty sure @huntnful is going to do one which I am looking forward to.

I’ve done my own tests and with that rifle/bullet combo have convinced myself not to worry about it. Should have documented it better but also figured someone else would have already done that by now

 

[Packmansion]

Still have not seen anyone, anywhere, show a statistically valid 20 shot group “in” and “out of” the node to prove that seating depth matters. It’s the same blog posts, articles, theories, pesudoscience or whatever you want to call it regurgitated over and over.

Shoot a 20 shot group at your previously determined ideal seating depth.

Shoot a 20 shot group at any other seating depth

Show that the groups are different

Pretty sure @huntnful is going to do one which I am looking forward to.

I’ve done my own tests and with that rifle/bullet combo have convinced myself not to worry about it. Should have documented it better but also figured someone else would have already done that by now

I will be documenting soon. I built a 223 wylde recently. 300 round load development piece of cake.

 

[huntnful]

Still have not seen anyone, anywhere, show a statistically valid 20 shot group “in” and “out of” the node to prove that seating depth matters. It’s the same blog posts, articles, theories, pesudoscience or whatever you want to call it regurgitated over and over.

Shoot a 20 shot group at your previously determined ideal seating depth.

Shoot a 20 shot group at any other seating depth

Show that the groups are different

Pretty sure @huntnful is going to do one which I am looking forward to.

I’ve done my own tests and with that rifle/bullet combo have convinced myself not to worry about it. Should have documented it better but also figured someone else would have already done that by now

That’s literally all it is. Test the extremes, before you say it doesn’t matter at all.

Can you genuinely just seat a bullet where the entire bearing surface is inside the case neck, and it’ll shoot exactly the same as when it’s .010 or .020 off the lands?

I’ve said it a million times, I don’t even mess with seating depth much at all. Normally being up near the lands, provides me with enough precision to do what I want to do.

I’m not sure if that can be taken as “seating depth doesn’t matter at all” though.

Also, if the groups go from .5” 5 shot groups, to 2” 5 shot groups. You don’t need to shoot a million rounds to say there’s a difference.

It’s only testing small windows and appearing to make small percentage gains, that it would take many rounds to actually prove it. The larger the apparent difference, the less rounds it takes to prove a significant change.

 

[Packmansion]

That’s literally all it is. Test the extremes, before you say it doesn’t matter at all.

Can you genuinely just seat a bullet where the entire bearing surface is inside the case neck, and it’ll shoot exactly the same as when it’s .010 or .020 off the lands?

I’ve said it a million times, I don’t even mess with seating depth much at all. Normally being up near the lands, provides me with enough precision to do what I want to do.

I’m not sure if that can be taken as “seating depth doesn’t matter at all” though.

Also, if the groups go from .5” 5 shot groups, to 2” 5 shot groups. You don’t need to shoot a million rounds to say there’s a difference.

It’s only testing small windows and appearing to make small percentage gains, that it would take many rounds to actually prove it. The larger the apparent difference, the less rounds it takes to prove a significant change.

I completely agree. It is more accurate to say "seating depth tests are a waste of time". I will always get my bullet as close to 20 thousandths off as possible unless limited by mag. The original post is about whether or not it matters as in should we be doing seating depth tests.

 

[Packmansion]

having a repeated way timing the bullets exit of barrel is the concept with the components you have and tools to do so.The target dosnt lie… Harmonic vibration in a barrel or any horizontal object caused by a disruption in its original position…a different height of frequency.. it moves up and down and the bullet releases at some point within that movement. All your doing is timing this in a area that has room for deviation in load thats repeated on target at any distance. Document the data to get there repeat, prove it at many environments…test yourself and enjoy the ride. If you cant be open minded, have tools, components, rifle systems capable well then guess stick with grandpas rifle and a box of the good stuff. Good luck

How does this concept help you get better groups? Do you measure and target a certain timing? Do you measure the frequencies and energy levels in the objects? Are you talking about barrel whip?

 

[huntnful]

I completely agree. It is more accurate to say "seating depth tests are a waste of time". I will always get my bullet as close to 20 thousandths off as possible unless limited by mag. The original post is about whether or not it matters as in should we be doing seating depth tests.

The original post says nothing about doing seating depth tests. You’re making it what you want in order to frame your opinion.



“Seating depth doesn’t matter at all”

We’ll see when I change the depth .250.



“Certain seating depth shot noticeably better than another?”

We’ll see when they are vastly different.


Broad statements require broad testing. And those statements, or questions, are broad as hell.

Nothing about fine tuning small seating depths written anywhere in there at all.

 

[JGRaider]

I could care less about Hornady bullets. I'm not a fanboy of any product. Shoot berger shoot swaged dog poop for all I care...

I do plan to do a cute little science fair experiment for rokslide one of these days just time has been tight lately.

Summary:
-3 shot groups = waste of time
-to do a true seating depth and charge test you would have to shoot far too many rounds to make it worth your while, therefore seating depth doesnt matter, charge weight doesnt matter.
-this doesnt not mean charge weight and seating depth do not matter entirely, put something together within the reasonable bounds as recommended by the manufacturer/manual/industry best practice and spend more time shooting stuff and less time developing chasing statistical noise convincing yourself that your rifle is a unicorn of the ages
-Pro shooters, navy seals, hunters etc. do not necessarily understand physics or science and they are not necessarily well suited for explaining scientific phenomena despite their experience as operators
-number of books read does not dictate intelligence, or understanding
-There is a lot of appeal to authority in the shooting community which drives me up the wall. I dont care how many competitions someone wins this does not mean they understand the science at all.

I apologize for being condescending. Thats something I should do less of.

Are you a hunter, or just some sort of scientific engineering dork? Just wondering.