-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Did you know about Erik Cortina's other YouTube Channel?
- Thread starter orkan
- Start date
I get repeatable results without much fuss with my caliper.
Position it so that the square of the case head is flush with the square on the caliper base, you can feel it rock if you aren’t, and then lower it. I can get the same number time after time case after case. If I don’t I get out the primer scraper because I did that poorly and then I get the right number again.
Maybe cheap calipers aren’t square? Idk. My mitys seem to work fine so far. It’s not the speediest process…
Certainly good enough to tell the difference between good brass and not and how far I’m seating primers.
Position it so that the square of the case head is flush with the square on the caliper base, you can feel it rock if you aren’t, and then lower it. I can get the same number time after time case after case. If I don’t I get out the primer scraper because I did that poorly and then I get the right number again.
Maybe cheap calipers aren’t square? Idk. My mitys seem to work fine so far. It’s not the speediest process…
Certainly good enough to tell the difference between good brass and not and how far I’m seating primers.
Last edited:
... regardless of how he was measuring it... he adjusted his seating tool in .001 increments, and got different results on target.
Suffice it to say, when our gauge and priming tool are used, the results we typically hear back from customers is better than that guy in the video. The better the tools, the better the ammo. The reason for that is obvious = uniformity of variables. The tighter variance you can hold, the less dispersion you'll see.
If you watch the rest of this guy's stuff he tries to be extremely exact in everything he does. Also all calipers are not created equally. I have a pair that you can close and sit on the bench and they will drift up and down without even touching them.
It's not saying that you can never do it with calipers, but that calipers (even good ones) are not the best tool for that job. I could paint a house with a two inch wide paint brush but just because I can doesn't mean it's the best or easiest way to do it.
Exactly. He actually tested the on target results from adjusting the seating depth of the primers. He might have spent 3 minutes per case getting the brass primed correctly but in the end he got there.
In my view he provided some very good validation of the overall concept, that being that seating depth matters. Period. In my view this is where most people start off from, as in "Does it even really matter?". The guy in the video proved that "it matters". He however did nothing to show which tool is best at accomplishing the end goal.
Which is why this thread exists and why the tools we are discussing exist.
Im not an expert but i do have access to a parts catalogue, so will make a couple comments.
It seems likely the only way to measure this properly is with class .0001 dial indicator. And one that has accuracy in line with its resolution...
IE typically an expensive specialty item $
You're mitutoyo digital pn is the high end 543-79X series, at least $250, not the standard 543-78x which is $150.
Also importantly, most non-digital dial gauges with this precision are severely travel limited ... 10x more precision with 1/10th the travel range.
This means they typically lack the range to measure a large primer pocket's depth to max spec...to check its uniformity. An accurised 1 inch form factor indicator, restricted to .10 inches cant measure .130 for example.
Most high precision dial gauges are ranging only .025 or .050
If you want an indicator to do both, try to find .5 range and .0005 accuracy, so the .001 scale actually means something.
These are uncommon units and typically cost $$$. Look for a mitutoyu like 2356s-10 or $200 or possibly 2415s for $150.
A 'generic' model 1 in travel dial indicator even in a high quality nameplate is typically only -/+ .001 accurate, not good enough.
Lastly, the measurement of the primer pocket is subject to measurement error if the tip (contact point) isn't the correct size or shape.
See mitutoyo pn 7832 for a selection of contact point shape and sizes. Probably want a 5mm flat point [edit: 2mm carbide tip #137257]
This also would mean you need fixtures capable of holding the indicator and test piece at 90 degree angles correctly, etc.
Someone please correct me if i am wrong...
Last edited:
Greg has done the work for us. Primewhere will save a lot of research and trying to figure out how to get repeatable measurements because he's been trying to come up with a solution for a while.
Exactly. A tool specifically made for a specific job.
It's not impossible to do. It just takes someone smart enough and motivated enough to do it.
At the start of this I personally had only heard bits and pieces of lore about primer depth etc. That's where I think the vast majority of people are also at in their thinking.
They (like I was) are not yet to the step of 'how do I do that job?' but rather 'is it even worth it to do the job at all?'
Once they see the results the answer to 'is it even worth it' get resolved. Then it goes to which tool is the one best suited to things? Basically I see it as a progression. At least it is for me.
I believe primer depth definitely has a effect on ES, SD and group size, look at every other aspect of reloading that has effects. Just contradictory replies in this thread, " you can't accurately measure with calipers " and than pointing to this video. So apparently you can measure with calipers and consistently seat primers with a hand priming tool. Personally I don't like hand priming tools, when I was younger and my hands were like a vise they were ok, but much prefer bench mounted priming tools.
I think you’re missing the point.
The calipers won’t get you an accurate measurement. But as long as used consistently, they will allow you to have a control measurement to test against.
The calipers essentially become a comparator tool.
So, if you want an actual measurement of the pocket, calipers ain’t the way to go. If you just want a reference to test against, they will work albeit tedious.
But if using calipers, you can’t tell people “seating XYZ works” as it’s just like other comparators, it won’t translate.
With a tool like the PrimeWhere, you should in theory be able to share measurement information with others and or will be the same or close.
Does this Primewhere have the capability to measure how thick the primer itself is? Or is the caliper somehow accurate enough for that part of the job?
It's a completely different way of measuring. Keeping the case still and level while trying to keep the bottom of the caliper flush against the case head to get repeatable measurements is very different then using the caliper jaws for what they were designed for. How do you measure CBO?
For something that small, I’d lean towards micrometers.
Especially if going into the .0001 area. Calipers are generally only good for .001 and that’s not always reliable depending on how and what.
Comparator on calipers for seated round
To find the ogive I seat dummy round until bolt falls free and compare that result to the modified case method
To find the ogive I seat dummy round until bolt falls free and compare that result to the modified case method
Comparator on calipers for seated round
To find the ogive I seat dummy round until bolt falls free and compare that result to the modified case method
I don't understand the need of some to not make any attempt ingest the information that an OP presents and then proceeds to trash the claims that they are making, especially when the information is given away for free. I think it is too easy to hide on the internet and make rash and sometimes stupid statements towards someone just because you are hidden, behind a handle that has little to no correlation to your name. Why post something that you would not say to the person's face?
I spent an hour yesterday with a couple of outstanding shooters yesterday at the shop discussing the issue of seating depth and realized the average reloader has not been able to adjust the seating until the last 5 years or so, the tools were lacking. The advent of the tools allowing us to adjust the seating depth and amount of crush provides us with another avenue to exploit on our quest for better results. It is great that there are shooters and manufactures doing the R&D to bring the great unwashed better tools. Those that are happy with their results have no need to explore further, but if not happy we have another route to try.
Like many others I have primed 1,000's of cases with Lee Loader Auto Prime, used it exclusively until I started to use Wolf primers and the seating difficulty of those pesky Russians broke two Lee Auto Primer then I went to the K&M primer (non-adjustable) and got more consistent results as measured by better scores. The results that I have seen for myself between the Lee and K&M lead me to believe that further control of the primer seating could very easily yield better results.
During the discussion yesterday I started a design for tool to measure seating depth, primer pocket depth, primer height, ... for personal use. I have access to a reasonably complete machine shop and enjoy making some of my own fixtures and tools for shooting, reloading and gunsmithing and doing my own barreling. The shop does not save me any money over purchasing tools or having someone else do my 'smithing but adds to my enjoyment.
Yes, the $600 cost initially sounds like a lot because we have been priming with tools that cost maybe $20 to say a $100 that did an adequate job, but gave us no, or limited, ability to control what seems like might be a crucial aspect of the process. Comparing the cost of the CPS to what we spend on barrels, gas, ... to support our shooting hobby/obession the $600 does not sound like much. I will save up my coin for a CPS as there is no way I could mock up anything in my shop that could acheive anywhere close to what Orkan's creation does, if I decide it does not help me out I can always sell it here for a small loss can't say that about the powder or gas I burn.
Those of us that still think there is room for improvement in our reloading process should be thankful there are folks out there like Orkan and Eric pushing the envelope, if you are completely happy with your results why disparage their work?
Too much said,
wade
I spent an hour yesterday with a couple of outstanding shooters yesterday at the shop discussing the issue of seating depth and realized the average reloader has not been able to adjust the seating until the last 5 years or so, the tools were lacking. The advent of the tools allowing us to adjust the seating depth and amount of crush provides us with another avenue to exploit on our quest for better results. It is great that there are shooters and manufactures doing the R&D to bring the great unwashed better tools. Those that are happy with their results have no need to explore further, but if not happy we have another route to try.
Like many others I have primed 1,000's of cases with Lee Loader Auto Prime, used it exclusively until I started to use Wolf primers and the seating difficulty of those pesky Russians broke two Lee Auto Primer then I went to the K&M primer (non-adjustable) and got more consistent results as measured by better scores. The results that I have seen for myself between the Lee and K&M lead me to believe that further control of the primer seating could very easily yield better results.
During the discussion yesterday I started a design for tool to measure seating depth, primer pocket depth, primer height, ... for personal use. I have access to a reasonably complete machine shop and enjoy making some of my own fixtures and tools for shooting, reloading and gunsmithing and doing my own barreling. The shop does not save me any money over purchasing tools or having someone else do my 'smithing but adds to my enjoyment.
Yes, the $600 cost initially sounds like a lot because we have been priming with tools that cost maybe $20 to say a $100 that did an adequate job, but gave us no, or limited, ability to control what seems like might be a crucial aspect of the process. Comparing the cost of the CPS to what we spend on barrels, gas, ... to support our shooting hobby/obession the $600 does not sound like much. I will save up my coin for a CPS as there is no way I could mock up anything in my shop that could acheive anywhere close to what Orkan's creation does, if I decide it does not help me out I can always sell it here for a small loss can't say that about the powder or gas I burn.
Those of us that still think there is room for improvement in our reloading process should be thankful there are folks out there like Orkan and Eric pushing the envelope, if you are completely happy with your results why disparage their work?
Too much said,
wade
Mr. Orkan,
Do you have an email that I can contact you, please?
You can send me a pm.
Thank you,
LRCampos.
I'll eventually get one. Got another video to watch now. Like stated earlier gotta work up to it I'm still just running hornady brass and do 100 round lots at a time when I can find time. That's one of the things I'll be happy about when we move later this year won't have to cram all my reloading gear in a corner I'll have a room dedicated to it. Just lose motivation when you have to dig everything out of the corner and then fight with a 1 year old, 2 year old and wife and dogs to be able to load any ammo lol.
Well it looks a rip snorter of a priming press & I reckon I'll get me one.
I'm not entirely sure that I'll see much difference with my loads but, I'm not too concerned about that at this stage.
I don't mind spending the money for a well built & designed piece of equipment &, I certainly can't see that it wouldn't make my ammo more repeatable to some degree. Not to mention that it's fast & hassle free &, at least I'll know that my primers are seated the same every time so, that's one aspect I can put to the side & not wonder about. At the moment, I see it as a kind of automatic set & forget. I'll seat using Greg's recommendations & go with that.
I don't see any negatives so, why not.
I'm not entirely sure that I'll see much difference with my loads but, I'm not too concerned about that at this stage.
I don't mind spending the money for a well built & designed piece of equipment &, I certainly can't see that it wouldn't make my ammo more repeatable to some degree. Not to mention that it's fast & hassle free &, at least I'll know that my primers are seated the same every time so, that's one aspect I can put to the side & not wonder about. At the moment, I see it as a kind of automatic set & forget. I'll seat using Greg's recommendations & go with that.
I don't see any negatives so, why not.
Hate I'm just now seeing this thread. That's what I get for not checking in often.
I'm so tired of hand priming.
I'm so tired of hand priming.
Yeah, priming is the hair-pin bend in the race track alright. There are quite a few bench primers these days &, if you don't want to spend a lot, the Lee works well with a couple small caveats but, it beats the shit outa any hand priming tools.
I have. Shot one on an instagram live stream a while back.
Erik Cortina shot just over a 1" group at 1000yds performing a primer seating depth test. Alex Wheeler has demonstrated it. Several other benchrest and F-class shooters have demonstrated it. One particular team has been employing this with great import and had an oath to keep it secret, it was so important. This tool has been on the market since 2015 and I've been talking to people about the importance of ignition timing since long before that. Don't sit here and act like the evidence and proof isn't out there just because you are out of the loop.
Why is this such a problem for people to accept? I wonder if the guys that "invented" bullet seating depth testing or charge weight testing had to deal with these closed minded people. lol
This is just another way to get more performance out of your rifle. If you don't want that, then what exactly are you in this discipline for? Have you attempted a primer seating depth test? Do you shoot well enough and have everything else worked out to see an improvement even if you did? ... because if you're not consistently 1/4 MOA to 1/3 MOA or better at the moment... then you clearly have some things to work on. This can take you from 1/4 MOA to shooting in the zeros legitimately. It can take you from half MOA to shooting in the 3's... easily.
So, vilify me for pushing the discipline further and enhancing peoples knowledge of these things that affect it greatly. Your hatred of me doesn't say anything about me, but it says everything about you.
-----------
Follow on Instagram
Subscribe on YouTube
I watched that video on Erik's site a while back That was freaking insane! Best group I have ever seen!
Similar threads
