Seating depth - does it even matter?

[Packmansion]

To simplify an approach….low es, big groups = adjust seating depth, small groups, big es = adjust powder charge. 3 key parts are combustion, harmonics and consistent bc’s.

I'm sure you mean well but to new reloaders people like you just add confusion. Even worse you spread misinformation that results in wasted time and components.

 

[greyghostnw]

I'm sure you mean well but to new reloaders people like you just add confusion. Even worse you spread misinformation that results in wasted time and components.

Ohh boy. Sticking with factory ammo may be your best option…If the few things ive said are confused or too much or dont make sense the concept and or end goal are out of reach.

 

[Packmansion]

Ohh boy. Sticking with factory ammo may be your best option…If the few things ive said are confused or too much or dont make sense the concept and or end goal are out of reach.

You have no clue what you are talking about man just keep it to yourself. Youre doing more harm than good.

 

[greyghostnw]

You have no clue what you are talking about man just keep it to yourself. Youre doing more harm

Obviously your not worth anyones time with this topic. Good luck.

 

[Castle Rock]

Obviously your not worth anyones time with this topic. Good luck.

You are correct, don’t waste time arguing with zealots, they offer nothing but invective.

 

[Packmansion]

You guys dont know what you are talking about. You are regurgitating fuddlore.

Have any of you performed modal analysis? What is your experience with structural dynamics? How are you testing the effects of harmonics on your accuracy? Do you have an FEM model that proves your claims? Can you provide your test results for analysis?

You are convoluting a simple process. you dont know what you are talking bout. Any challenges to the dogma are often met with aggression by "zealots" like you. Present some data and evidence and I will happily change my mind.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

It’s pretty clear that no one here is going to change his mind.

Suggesting that one party should stick to factory ammo if he doesn’t believe minor changes in seating depth have a measurable effect when using statistically significant sample sizes is not addressing the actual argument.

And throwing out terms like “fuddlore” just isn’t persuasive.

It’s probably best of both parties stop responding.

 

[Packmansion]

I will be following up eventually with a demonstration with data to show how traditional load development is setup to select noise that is perceived as improvements in accuracy. Its going to be super simple. Then we can have a real discussion. The Hornady podcast is too long for most people to sit through this will be super concise.

 

[JGRaider]

I will be following up eventually with a demonstration with data to show how traditional load development is setup to select noise that is perceived as improvements in accuracy. Its going to be super simple. Then we can have a real discussion. The Hornady podcast is too long for most people to sit through this will be super concise.

Do you actually hunt, or just more of a data/engineering nerd?

 

[AZ_Hunter]

Where seating depth matters is not to shove a mono into the lands or else a major pressure spike can result. Gives monos some jump. Monos aren’t as compressible as lead core bullets.

I just load to mag length, making sure whatever bullet I’m using isn’t hitting the lands, and carry on never messing with seating depth again.

The 3 shot group camp is completely wrong; 3 shot groups are statistical noise and basing any decision on a 3 shot group is pissing in the wind.

 

[Harvey_NW]

Damn! I'm gone for a couple days on my first hunt of the year and this one got spicy. Something I'll note, is we're now at 17 pages with one interesting contribution from a wildcat, otherwise there still haven't been any credible examples that seating depth matters, or can improve the precision of a load. Interesting.

I plan to do a test of my own this winter and will happily post my results here to keep this going. Thanks for all the contributions.

 

[Harvey_NW]

To simplify an approach….low es, big groups = adjust seating depth, small groups, big es = adjust powder charge. 3 key parts are combustion, harmonics and consistent bc’s.

I used to believe this as well, until I started repeating my tests, or upping my sample sizes. When you shoot bigger samples, the groups generally stabilize. What you're observing is random distribution from volatile small sample groups. There's just too much variability in small samples to extrapolate any valid conclusions. This is essentially the crux of this thread.

 

[huntnful]

I used to believe this as well, until I started repeating my tests, or upping my sample sizes. When you shoot bigger samples, the groups generally stabilize. What you're observing is random distribution from volatile small sample groups. There's just too much variability in small samples to extrapolate any valid conclusions. This is essentially the crux of this thread.

I absolutely believe this as well. The powder and bullet in general dictate the ES. There’s no special charge that lowers ES.

Also being below pressure and putting a hybrid bullet up near the lands is probably getting you 90% of the accuracy your system is capable of right out of the gate. Normally so much so, that I hardly even mess with either thing because proving the added 10% change by “tuning” is futile.

With that said, I’m still going to do an extreme test because I’m not a fan of absolutes being throw around without at least attempting to see the results at extreme ends of the spectrum.

They may shoot exactly the same for all I know.

 

[Packmansion]

I will come back with data as well just need time. This will be fun.

 

[pathnz]

I consistently get great results that meet my requirements by taking the approach of "seat 0.50" off and forget about it" so that's what I do.

This approach works so who gives a **** about the theory?


E.g. - first 10 rounds of aeromatch I've ever fired.

 

[huntnful]

I consistently get great results that meet my requirements by taking the approach of "seat 0.50" off and forget about it" so that's what I do.

This approach works so who gives a **** about the theory?


E.g. - first 10 rounds of aeromatch I've ever fired.

Convert those numbers to bald eagle units of measurement?

 

[khuber84]

Convert those numbers to bald eagle units of measurement?

Think that's like 0.7 moa? My commi math isn't great tho. Prob smaller is my meter stick doesn't work like my yard stick.

 

[pathnz]

0.6MOA

 

[huntnful]

0.6MOA

10 shot .6 is excellent

 

[pathnz]

Thanks. I think it's about the limit of my ability to shoot consistently with an 8lb rifle prone off a bipod & rear bag.

I routinely achieve this level of precision following the approach of:
1. Seat 0.050 off
2. Powder charge estimated to get the velocity level I want
3. Done

with a well-built rifle & good barrel. And good components.