I Failed To Prove Seating Depth Matters

Hey guys! Welcome to the fifth video in our series. Today, I talk about some things that affect the precision of a rifle system, if seating depth squeezes groups in, seating depth tests, and some very neat findings of where I failed to prove seating depth matters. What do you think the findings will show? Let us know in the comments below!
You can find our website and request the raw data from 190 rounds shot on target by sending us an email here: Reloadingallday.com
USE CODE: RELOAD10 For 10% off your Brownells order
We offer Beginner Courses on how to reload here: www.reloadingallday.com/begin...
Advance Courses can also be found: www.reloadingallday.com/1-on-1
Website: Reloadingallday.com
IG: @Reloadingallday
Barrel credit video: bryan_litz_...
Pictures of benchrest guns and benchrest rail gun results: bulletin.accurateshooter.com/... and www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...
Photo of 300 win mag: thebiggamehuntingblog.com/bes...
#reloading #reloadingbench #longrangeshooting

[@johnsimonelli9988]

After handloading for the last 40 years of my life I have learned one thing for sure, there is a lot of dogma amongst our community! I feel the same way you do, information is evolving at a rapid pace and I continue to adjust my technique and am producing better loads. Thank you for your thoughts.

[@viking9934]

Do the test from o to 0.125'' jump. I think your test window jumpwise is too short. I've had ''zone'' as big as 0.030'' where everything was stable like in your test.

[@Reloadingallday]

7:30 for those wanting to get straight to the results and explanation on how the test was conducted

[@gregorystone7674]

Thanks for sharing this with us 😊

[@In-The-Wild-Outdoors]

If seating depth doesn’t matter, how does one determine the most accurately developed round for a particular gun?

[@stefanschug5490]

Very good analysis! Would have expected though that keeping SD of velocity tight rules over seating depth. Shooting a variety of regular hunting rifles from a rail rest and eliminating most other variables, I find that seating depth variations of 3 thousands or 0.1 mm allows for finding a harmonic node, especially in long, thin barreled hunting rifles. Heavy shorter barrels react far less sensitive! For me as a hunter, who does not shoot anywhere past 500 yards even under favorable conditions, 1 MOA groups consistently shot out of every shooting position and from my shoulder are more than sufficient to guarantee clean kills. It is however fun to understand and explore the inner and outer ballistic of different barrels, projectiles and other variables on paper! Keep up the good work. I had to subscribe to your channel since your approach to the subject is good.

[@davidray5396]

Does load density percentages change with seating depth or is it measured from flash hole to bottom of the case neck ? Thanks, David.

[@Mike-xi4zt]

Quick load and other load software utilize internal case volume to determine and predict what the pressure and velocity will be. Changing the seating depth changes the internal case volume. Which changes the pressure which changes the velocity. Seating bullets further out of the case increases case volume, as a general rule lowers the pressure of the load, unless it is jammed into the lands, .All of that changes the vibration imparted on the the barrel. The way to make a barrel stiffer is to Shorten it and make it larger than diameter. That limits the vibration of the barrel. Barrel tuners can also affect the vibration of the barrel and may or may not improve the consistency of the vibration.

[@Reloadingallday]

The vibration you’re talking about, rise to peak pressure isn’t consistent. Because we aren’t shooting lasers. To that regard, you’d never be able to predict a “node” yet alone “time” muzzle whip since that is the case because all of our velocities aren’t going the same exact speed. To the other points you made about tuners, Bryan litz and jayden quinlan have both debunked the theory statistically via large testing in regard to tuners. Harmonics are not a dominant driver to precision. When ballisticians talk about seating depth they are not talking about it in a vibrational sense, they are talking about it in a mechanical sense and the way it aligns with the centerline of the bore. More common things that effect precision that have been proven since the 1890’s by Franklin Weston mann, Johan Lanhous, the reason the hybrid bullet was invented by litz, etc is due to bullet tipping in bore, unbalanced bullets, bullet shape, chamber dimension influences the relation of how the projectile is situated to centerline, etc. these are all basic problems to dispersion issues on target.

[@foxtales4809]

Would you mind putting up that test including your first 10 rounds ? I'm not a competition shooter ,but am lead to believe some clean their barrel after a number of or between details . It may be of significance , depending on the number of sighters allowed it may possibly effect their scores on paper. You clearly put a lot of work in , thankyou.

[@Reloadingallday]

Hey! Yes, check this out as I posted the photos with some more explanation here: www.reloadingallday.com/post/i-failed-to-prove-seating-depth-matters

[@trevorkolmatycki4042]

Well… time has elapsed. And now it seems the flood gates might be about to open on this matter as the question is now drawing some broader attention. More and more people are sharing experiences and data that struggles to prove strong correlation between group size and seat depth. I’ve heard this in podcasts from Bryan Litz and the Hornady ballisticians. They aren’t concluding it has no effect but their large sample size tests aren’t showing it… and the folks in bench rest and F-class who extensively use small sample size seat depth ladder testing to “tune” their rifles are getting right bent out of shape and butt hurt offended by the sheer blasphemy of it all… which is an even more interesting phenomenon than the test results if you ask me. in order to move the needle with the hard core orthodox believers somebody is going to have to execute a thorough controlled study testing group size with seat depth varied in .003” increments. Any study conducted with increments larger than this will never be accepted by the F-class and bench rest community because they believe that “harmonic nodes” exist very close together with different widths. And increments larger than .003” must be skipping between the nodes. It’s interesting… F-class and bench rest shooters achieve outlandish precision using their gear and methods… this fact is undeniable… Their methods seem to have become elevated to the status of sacred…

[@Johnny-jr2lq]

I can’t speak to the specifics of jacketed projectiles. I can speak to cast powder coated rifle projectiles. I personally have witnessed on many occasions. That jamming a cast rifle projectile into the lands will in a lot of cases produce very good accuracy. I can’t explain why it is for certain. I have heard that by jamming the projectile it creates a constant alignment. This kinda of reloading might not have anything to do with the two different shooting disciplines. Because it a very BIG NO NO to jam a jacketed projectile in the lands of a rifle. But I can help to think that there has to be some similarity’s between the two.

[@timothybarry508]

How did you determine group size? Group extreme spread is itself a random variable, problematic for linear regression. Seems to me you'd need to use an invariant measure like mean ES or mean shot radius as your dependent variable to justify linear regression.

[@timothybarry508]

can you clarify?@@Mike-xi4zt

[@kalindanley2843]

larger note pad, further behind camera. when speaking it will appear more that youre looking at camera and audience. great video! recently stumbled onto you're content. following.

[@K-bob_45]

I’m not sure how everyone else will interpret this but based on your chart I’m thinking seating depth might matter but not for me. I know the BR crowd definitely believes in seating depth but they are also shooting 2” 10 shot groups at 1000. I would have like to have seen a greater variation on the jump though too. I have heard of people like Satterlee jumping as much as 0.250 and it not hurting accuracy too.

[@Reloadingallday]

Hey! So based on the data-where would you say seating depth matters? Where is one seating depth inherently making a difference in group size? Yes-there’s other reasons other than what meets the eye that contributes to seating a bullet deep and having dependable and repeatable ammunition.

[@K-bob_45]

@@Reloadingallday correct me if I’m wrong but none of these groups would be competitive in a benchrest match, and I believe most of those guys run very light neck tension and “soft seat” the bullet in the lands of their rifles. You didn’t test jammed vs jumped. Just all minimally jumped. I’ve heard that all but guarantees alignment and that’s not related to harmonic nodes.

[@Reloadingallday]

@@K-bob_45 hey Bob! Take your rifle when you can, conduct the same exact test and see if you can see a distinguishable difference. Take into account again the difference between a Benchrest rifles that is super heavy that helps mitigate recoil, versus a rifle that weighs significantly less than shoots a larger recoiling round. The seating depth I “normally shoot” is touching. However, when looking at BR group seating depth test, the groups are all touching or almost indistinguishable for the most part-and when a “bad seating depth” is being pointed out in the test, it’s not considering the issue of the shooter behind the rifle and one typically contributes this to “bad seating depth” that may be claimed if one impact is slightly different. When it’s actually something entirely different causing the outcome. Hence, type 1 and type 2 error. Further, If seating depth really mattered, no matter what the group size is and what the shooter is capable of: you would see a massive difference in the group size itself if it really mattered. Which the explanation of group size and comparison between shooter A and B talks about. Regardless, some of the groups were in the 0’s up maybe a few outliers into the .4’s-.5’s. I’d highly look at topic of dispersion, depending upon rifle system, like a heavier BR rifle, the groups are going to be significantly smaller but measurable.

[@yd8hw]

@@K-bob_45 What your asking for is entirely different than what this video has shown.

[@K-bob_45]

@@Reloadingallday lol I don’t have the money or component availability to do this test. Also I buy bullets that aren’t supposed to be jump sensitive. I may try a seating test with some VLD’s but I shoot 169 SMK’s or 185 juggernauts at the moment and with both I just run mag length and the only fine tuning is powder charge for me. I may try the seating depth test with 195 TMK’s though

[@christopherpenney9105]

Had to shoot 200 rounds then reload another 200 and reshoot them? Ahhh poor guy. 😂 Sounds like fun to me.. Awesome vid though mang. I'll check out your vids. Already learning a few things. Thanks

[@ironeagleyt6331]

what if the seating depth is finding the load density or vise versa. so basically you could say you want to start the load .020 off the lands then slowly work up the powder charge till your group shoots the way you want it too if you say seating depth doesnt matter not if you found the perfect load density as you move the bullet forward or back you have now changed your density. which makes sense other wise every bullet would shoot good at that ..020 but it wont because your load density changes

[@masonmcneill3969]

Following this page for a while… lessons learned: Literally nothing in reloading matters at all and anything you do doesn’t mean anything 🤷‍♂️😂

[@yd8hw]

There's so many thing people waste time on and hold sacred.. Its almost like many people don't understand what's going on..

[@Reloadingallday]

There are answers to this, it’s just being over looked.

[@dougearl742]

As I watch and read comments, I can help but feel that you are playing a game of you having all the secret knowledge about reloading. Maybe a more straightforward exposition of the point and also any recommendations would be better.

[@masonmcneill3969]

@@dougearl742 I feel that way too, I mean 2 things can be true at once, he has extensive knowledge about reloading and obviously makes great loads! While that’s true it’s also true that he has a product to sell and this is a great marketing strategy! I’m satisfied with my loads but still curious about his course so obviously it’s working 😂

[@yd8hw]

@@masonmcneill3969 I will say that I have wasted more money on failed free theories of the internet, than the price of @ReloadingAllDay 's course.. easily.

[@trevorkolmatycki4042]

Excellent video! I snickered when you referred to seating depth “ideology”😂 One thing you mentioned is your seating depth you usually shoot. I’m very curious… would you be willing to share that value? .020” from jam appears to be a common starting point for seat depth. I have recently experienced achieving very acceptable loads in two very different hunting rifles/bullet types with this starting point jump from jam.

[@Reloadingallday]

What’s up Trevor! I start out touching and let it rock from there. Depending upon situation (like magazine restrictions, or the type of shooting application, this will change).

[@johnbiteme9118]

I'm not trying to be rude, but if a bullet with a hybrid ogive is advertised as being insensitive to seating depth, then the testing you've done shows this type of bullet performs as advertised - or am I missing something important?

[@Reloadingallday]

Not rude at all-you’re exactly on point.

[@misterlewgee8874]

Statistical significance. Barrel life Component cost Repeatability Recent reloading process seems to be disproving the usual ideas...velocity node...followed by seating depth. Ie ...concentricity by f class john, I guess most can't throw that much time and resource at it. Then there is stable platform to shoot from and wind..for significant results.. If consistent velocity is key...then...case capacity measurements and powder weights most important .. All very interesting..

[@dirkd8202]

question. So for load development, how many rounds would you suggest shooting per group, and how many groups per, that specific load? cause I can't do 190 rounds per group. 😂 Great video man. Love this content.

[@Reloadingallday]

Thanks! You definitely don’t need 190 rounds. We show how to completely work up a load based on objective science in internal ballistics in our 1 on 1 class with just 40 rounds.

[@greasydot]

Try that test with a 6mm PPC and watch the magic begin and make tiny dots when you get the seating depth right.

[@Johnny-jr2lq]

I noticed that you don’t mess around with cast. BUT maybe you can explain to me why. Cast rifle projectiles will give amazing results if you jam them in the lands.

[@Reloadingallday]

I don’t doubt it! Sounds great for alignment.

[@cullinsmith]

If you need more validation, it looks like the good folks at Hornady have come to an eerily similar conclusion through their own large sample size testing. Here's a link to their podcast, skipped ahead to 1:20:15 where they specifically discuss bullet jump, but the entire thing is worth a listen for understanding the benefits of sample size: kzbin.info/www/bejne/h6jYnnR9h9KtaKs

[@Reloadingallday]

Hey Cullin! Yes! Thank you. I have commented in hopes that they reach out at some point so I can send my data over as well. However, I’m sure they’re just fine without it haha.

[@rdsii64]

So did you fail at your mission, or did you prove that seating depth doesn't matter?

[@michaelhill6451]

The more I reload/shoot, the more I realize that basically all reloading “tests” are a waste of time/money. I think perhaps the only things that really matter are getting high quality components and bullet selection..

[@RHG48]

So only load density matters, right? But seating depth affects load density, right? But seating depth doesn't matter, right? Just trying to make sure I follow.

[@Reloadingallday]

The way one achieves precision due to chamber design, projectile shape, dynamic instability versus velocity consistency is being confused with timing the projectile in accordance with a muzzle whip. Highly recommend listening to Jayden quinlan, rifle accuracy facts Vaughn, or Johan labhous from Somchem, Reinmetal denel that clear this difference up and what we are explicitly showing. In other words, from all the collective testing so far, if using a hybrid or tangent with modern chamber designs, you can get any seating depth to work.

[@RHG48]

@@Reloadingallday Way too much here for a YT comment response. I watch and love to listen to JQ and many others discuss thier findings. The more data the better. But you're ignoring so much previously discovered info, methods and testing dropping all your eggs in the semi Nihlist approach to reloading that is trending right now. Put a rifle in the hands of your favorite current ballistician and then hand that same rifle to even just a competent Fclass or Benchrest shooter and compare the results. That would be a really cool series to see!

[@t.c.callawayiii3856]

Shooting for groups with a Magneto tied to the barrel.....Hmmmmmmm

[@Reloadingallday]

Hey T.C.! If you are implying it’s changing harmonics, then the magneto is a constant, as it isn’t moving on the barrel. So groups wouldn’t be affected in a negative way. Ive done extensive testing with this barrel contour and have not seen any POI shift from when the magneto was removed or added onto the barrel. We have tested this extensively on our Instagram stories that you can see: instagram.com/s/aGlnaGxpZ2h0OjE3OTU5MzM3MzQxOTI4NTY4?story_media_id=2904782162693285845&igshid=ZjA0NjI3M2I= Highly recommend reaching out to Ryan Hey about this as well.

[@dougearl742]

I think that having your bipod legs angled forward is not a good thing. If you watch the video of you shooting, the gun moves down during recoil as well as to the rear. It seems highly unlikely that you would have the same amount of pressure against the stock for each shot and therefore the rounds are exiting at different heights, thereby creating a group pattern that is incorrectly indicating accuracy performance. Conversely, a bipod with the legs at the typical vertical position along with a rear bag, would have a much more linear recoil that has almost no downward push. It would be interesting to test this all by itself. Keep up the super complicated, somewhat hard to understand work…lol. Just kidding, this is great work.

[@Reloadingallday]

@@dougearl742 Doug, thank you so much for the insight. I’m going to continue on seating deeper and testing. If you would like-if it is of interest, I can send you the testing conditions for this. It would be a great help for individuals to submit data in. My hopes are that I can have a lot of shooters conduct this test and get to the bottom of things and post the results for individuals to make their own conclusions.