Mark Jones Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 When Lapua produces Match ammunition they measure no ones lands. They load quality ammunition to their SAAMI/CIP specs. It is no doubt good ammunition. There are a number of aspects of reloading that can be tuned to greater effect than worrying about the distance to the lands -especially for someone just learning to "roll their Owen" (sic) ~Andrew Couldnt agree more , which is why it will shoot well in some rifles and rubbish in others, hence the reason I reload Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Jones Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 Mark-OK,I can see where you are coming from-but seating depth is pretty fine tuning-you have the Hornady gizmo,and you honeymoon is near over....so get into CBTO and not COAL (Except for magazine length):read,twice- Litz,Bryan Berger Bullets "Effects of COAL and CBTO" Pt1 10-20 thou off lands is usually good-individual rifles though are exactly that. RE 'handloading-agreed,the economy gains really can only come from the reused brass case (components being equivalent-offset some manufacturers profit by volume sales.....but the case is close to half the cost in new ammo,so there is potential saving there...of course,allow for all the equipment costs-to get multiple case reloadings you'll need to anneal-if you spend £250 on annealing kit,thats about 400 Lapua 308 new brass-maybe OK..but if you get really keen/fun/ocd a £1200 induction system will take a lot of clawbaclk, Ditto all the rest-(tuned) beam scale reading to a consistent .1g is nice....it's a VERY moot point whether much finer powder weighing will be noticeable in actual shooting (unless you are a top1000y competitor)-if its moa gongs or varmints to 400y,doubtful if you would even notice....not saying it isn't fun/has feel good factors etc....but 100/200 BR shooters typically don'r weigh at all-volume throw from Harrel class measure-and that man Litzhas WEZ analyses shwing very small % hit improvement on gongs....and that assumes perfection in every other component,including the shooter...!! "Cost effective" has to be subjective,but kernel uniforming is OTT (see G Salazar Accurate Shooter) for most of us. SAme applies to almost all equipment-and there is some substance to 'weakest link in the chain'-so good luck in accurate bullet retension measurement,then pressure measurement....to the kernel equivalent :-) ..and let me repeat,it does no harm -but it's not for everyone,even after a couple of months (actually,you'll need quite a few months income to indulge....to a first approximation,I'd estimate serious upgrades of reloading equipment have improved precision about .2 moa-and serious improvements in rifles/scopes at least as much-it isn't fully additive especially under field conditions,and in most instances beyond what is actually quite satisfactory performance.( .5 moa rather than .2 -the latter up to about £3k more..a lot of better kit of course is good over several rifles). But I have just bought an annealer-hell,it's a hobby...not a survivalist minimalist challenge now- (done that-as a student for eight years).Enjoy,by all means upgrade but be realistic,not 'driven' by some probably elusive and false holy grail...not every rifle can get there,either. :-) gbal Gbal, as the Op was asking for the most accurate way to measure then yes CBTO, i am already doing this as I found a 6 thou difference in my 39 Grn BK bullet heads. kind of surprised know one mentioned this earlier? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbal Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 Gbal, as the Op was asking for the most accurate way to measure then yes CBTO, i am already doing this as I found a 6 thou difference in my 39 Grn BK bullet heads. kind of surprised know one mentioned this earlier?Mark,agreed-bullets from the same box are often considerably different in length-the forming dies wear,meplet pointing isn perfect,etc etc and QC isn't set to 99.999 % precision.....some makes/batches are better than others- hence the limitations of COAL-though thee is usually eenough tolerance in magazine for a fit-commercial manufacturers use SAAMI to 'ensure' aloaded round will chamber/fire safely in any corresponding SAAMI chamber from any manufacturer. I'm not sure that many rifles shoot Lapua or Norma Match quality loaded ammo like 'rubbish',but it cannot all be optimum for each rifle (European 300m CISM shooters often use (Norma) Black Diamond ammo-pricey indeed,but they would not if it was suspect. Anyhow, bullet differences are quite well known-but you will find lots of refernces to "my COAL" -which is ,of course, unreliable for anyone else-bullets,chambers,indeeed measuring technique/feel could all bee involved-"comparators" are for the user to 'compare' -not measure absolutely,for the same rat of variables. Ogives are (please gods) more uniform ,and of course that is the critical bit-where contact with lands is made-or rather,the distance fro the lands the bullet ogive is set... I suppose people just assume it's well known-but it clearly isn't as COAL usage rather substantiates.....and some reloaders seem to use others values....how tailor made,precision oriented is that? :-) While we're at it,another method is to load a bullet in a primerless/powderless case,candlesmoke thebullet,and chamber-if it touches the lands you will see quite clear scratch marks...increase seating depth til marks just gone-that's the CBTO datum for that bullet/chamber.Keep it.Then seating/jump is just so many though less than the datum cartridge.I used that for years,no cost/no tools... - a fibre pen marker is probably even safer....and about as good as the stoney point .... It is worth thinking a tad too-to take on board some of Andrews point-is fine tuning essential-well,no for much hunting,gong hitting and general fun shooting. Yes for serious very long range competitors-with top precision rifles and scopes and maybe even wind reading skill....does everyone have to mimic...no,especially if their rifle simply does not have the precision potential. How would you know that....ah,you'd have to do it all and see...but there are no guarantees...can be overlooked too-you don't need a better gizmo-you need an intrinsically bettter precision rifle (for starters).... g gbal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Jones Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 "Anyhow, bullet differences are quite well known-but you will find lots of refernces to "my COAL" -which is ,of course, unreliable for anyone else-bullets,chambers,indeeed measuring technique/feel could all bee involved" Which is why Munkjack was asking how to measure to the lands in "his rifle" with "his equipment" to give himself a datum point to start from, or did I miss the somthing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbal Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 OK,though by no means everyone knows why,or takes it on board fully-it was meant more to expand your point. And yes,which is why I included the simplest method ( smoked dumy cartridge) which needs almost nothing by way of equipment,though again that dismissive ''rubbish' word doesn't help clarity....just what the OP's difficulty was....or if the 'kit' included some depth measure ideas. gbal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snakeman Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 First reflect on why you want to find the lands. If you seat to recommended OAL as a starting point I can almost guarantee you won't stray far from that mark -provided your ammunition was assembled well. It will feed through your magazine and cause you no grief. JMHO.~Andrew + 1 True to the point from my experience.... Whilst I do experiment with depths, invariably I return to the manual recommended OAL, or as Andrew says above, "won't stray far from that mark" Of the very few occasions where I've noticed a significant improvement in accuracy, it was usually seating the bullet deeper (further from lands)..not closer, than the recommended OAL Keep it Simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eldon Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 Gbal, as the Op was asking for the most accurate way to measure then yes CBTO, i am already doing this as I found a 6 thou difference in my 39 Grn BK bullet heads. kind of surprised know one mentioned this earlier? Doesn't my post #5 cover this Mark? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha1 Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 What does CBTO mean. I use the shooting sheds over all length gauge its far superior to the Hornady offering with the horrible plastic push rod. I also use there shoulder bump gauges and the comparator. I my opinion they are the best you can buy if you are serous about your reloading. http://shootingshed.co.uk/oscom/index.php?cPath=38&osCsid=34d8b911828728069b0c5f283ddd6c1d http://shootingshed.co.uk/oscom/index.php?cPath=22 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha1 Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 What does OCW mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
furrybean Posted January 13, 2017 Report Share Posted January 13, 2017 What does CBTO mean. I use the shooting sheds over all length gauge its far superior to the Hornady offering with the horrible plastic push rod. I also use there shoulder bump gauges and the comparator. I my opinion they are the best you can buy if you are serous about your reloading. http://shootingshed.co.uk/oscom/index.php?cPath=38&osCsid=34d8b911828728069b0c5f283ddd6c1d http://shootingshed.co.uk/oscom/index.php?cPath=22 Cartridge base to ogive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
furrybean Posted January 13, 2017 Report Share Posted January 13, 2017 What does OCW mean. Optimal charge weight http://optimalchargeweight.embarqspace.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Jones Posted January 13, 2017 Report Share Posted January 13, 2017 Doesn't my post #5 cover this Mark? Eldon yes it mentions it, not entirely sure it really explains to a novice why measuring from the Ogive is so much more accurate, just says "your wasting your time" if you dont, however i think it has been quite clearly explained elsewhere within the thread by now. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbal Posted January 13, 2017 Report Share Posted January 13, 2017 Eldon yes it mentions it, not entirely sure it really explains to a novice why measuring from the Ogive is so much more accurate, just says "your wasting your time" if you dont, however i think it has been quite clearly explained elsewhere within the thread by now. Mark I would have hoped so,despite some comments....see posts *28,29,30 etc . Alpha 1 ,if you want to know about COAL limitations and why CBTO is so much superior (apart from magazine fit),PDQ,(pretty damn quickly) the definitive easy read reference is (as given before in post *24): LITZ,B of Berger Bullets "Effects of COAL and CBTO" Pt 1 (and Pt 2 is well worth following up,of course.) SIA (says it all) QED (quad erat demonsrtrandum-that which was to be demonstrated and explained-end of...please!!) :-) :-) GBAL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Jones Posted January 13, 2017 Report Share Posted January 13, 2017 As Gbal says, Berger bullets book will give you all the terms you could want, and explain them, and in the back half of the the book is lots of load data and information on various calibres including loading dimensions, enjoy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(200x135).jpg.0fd0a94f065c6cb243fdff1b40e0819a.jpg)
.jpg.0972b4e2bdf0b5a4109eb96f2b1b62ad.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.