Hornady Bullet Comparator and OAL Tool Measures over .050" too short

[yo-yo]

I went through a process of trying to find my lands, building some dummy cartridges the other night, by turning up the bullet seating die micrometer tool, and testing each one in the gun (locking down the bolt). I tested the overall length of the cartridge before and after inserting into the chamber and locking down the bolt. I did this until I reached the point at which a cartridge became shorter by locking down the bolt, signifying it had jammed into the lands and locking down the bolt forced the bullet deeper into the case. I created a model cartridge that I felt best represented the OAL that would insert into the barrel and just touch the lands.

There were a few cartridges that did not repeat the overall length, after seating the bullet into the case with the micrometer die, and the overall length was as much as .015" short, when measuring the OAL. I figured this method could not account for the variation in the tips of the bullets or something, and I wanted to do better, so I bought the Hornady OAL Gauge Tool and the Bullet Comparator with a modified case for my 6.5CM.

I set everything up and inserted the modified case/OAL tool into the barrel and locked it down, and then pulled the cartridge out and measure it (to the 0give this time) with the Bullet Comparator tool. I then compared that cartridge to my model cartridge, and the Hornady modified case cartridge was .053" shorter than my model case. Whether I measure the OAL of the cartridge (head to tip) or I use Bullet Comparator Tool in my calipers, I still end up .050" shorter with the Hornady tools than I do with my model cartridge I created to just touch the lands.

What could be happening here?

 

[hafejd30]

Your method is probably grabbing the lands or seating into them a bit. My experience is the OAL tool works excellent and is very repeatable vs other methods I’ve tried in the past

 

[JerkyFreak]

Using the bolt to jam the the bullet into the lands will always result in a longer COAL than using the hornady tool. You are basically partially engraving the bullet when jamming.

Secondly, the Hornady tool is probably at standard SAAMI headspace (base to shoulder dimension). That probably does not agree to your own cartridge case dimensions.

 

[Baron23]

View attachment 8559468I went through a process of trying to find my lands, building some dummy cartridges the other night, by turning up the bullet seating die micrometer tool, and testing each one in the gun (locking down the bolt). I tested the overall length of the cartridge before and after inserting into the chamber and locking down the bolt. I did this until I reached the point at which a cartridge became shorter by locking down the bolt, signifying it had jammed into the lands and locking down the bolt forced the bullet deeper into the case. I created a model cartridge that I felt best represented the OAL that would insert into the barrel and just touch the lands.

There were a few cartridges that did not repeat the overall length, after seating the bullet into the case with the micrometer die, and the overall length was as much as .015" short, when measuring the OAL. I figured this method could not account for the variation in the tips of the bullets or something, and I wanted to do better, so I bought the Hornady OAL Gauge Tool and the Bullet Comparator with a modified case for my 6.5CM.

I set everything up and inserted the modified case/OAL tool into the barrel and locked it down, and then pulled the cartridge out and measure it (to the 0give this time) with the Bullet Comparator tool. I then compared that cartridge to my model cartridge, and the Hornady modified case cartridge was .053" shorter than my model case. Whether I measure the OAL of the cartridge (head to tip) or I use Bullet Comparator Tool in my calipers, I still end up .050" shorter with the Hornady tools than I do with my model cartridge I created to just touch the lands.

What could be happening here?

Did you pull the ejector off when doing your testing by closing the bolt on a round?

 

[patriotnation]

When I use that tool with a modified case, I can never get the calipers to line up perfectly straight in line because it is on an angle. Maybe your measurement if off because of that I don’t know but that could explain the discrepancy. Or like others have said, forcing into landscaping has gone past just touching lands.

I tried the method of finding the lands by seating a bullet in a previously fired prepped case long, the without the ejector in the bolt, keep seating it further until the bolt just drops finally on its own. Then I can get a straight measurement with the calipers.

 

[JSW2000]

When I use that tool with a modified case, I can never get the calipers to line up perfectly straight in line because it is on an angle. Maybe your measurement if off because of that I don’t know but that could explain the discrepancy. Or like others have said, forcing into landscaping has gone past just touching lands.

I tried the method of finding the lands by seating a bullet in a previously fired prepped case long, the without the ejector in the bolt, keep seating it further until the bolt just drops finally on its own. Then I can get a straight measurement with the calipers.

Rotate the Bullet comparator holder 180° and it will not be on a angle.

 

[yo-yo]

Your method is probably grabbing the lands or seating into them a bit. My experience is the OAL tool works excellent and is very repeatable vs other methods I’ve tried in the past

Ok. Thanks. I'll investigate further. Must be something silly I'm doing wrong.

 

[yo-yo]

Using the bolt to jam the the bullet into the lands will always result in a longer COAL than using the hornady tool. You are basically partially engraving the bullet when jamming.

Secondly, the Hornady tool is probably at standard SAAMI headspace (base to shoulder dimension). That probably does not agree to your own cartridge case dimensions.

Ok. Thanks. I was pretty careful to set the neck very loose. so the bullet would slip into the case, rather than push through into the lands. I would have thought it would have changed length (shortened) before it would force the bullet into the lands.

In regard to the headspace...yeah, I wondered about that. If that was the case, would the modified case be sitting further into the chamber? Is there a way to determine where that limit is in the chamber? I imagine there is a headspace measurement tool available as well.

 

[yo-yo]

Did you pull the ejector off when doing your testing by closing the bolt on a round?

No, I didn't. What influence does that have on the cartridge fitment in the chanber?

 

[yo-yo]

When I use that tool with a modified case, I can never get the calipers to line up perfectly straight in line because it is on an angle. Maybe your measurement if off because of that I don’t know but that could explain the discrepancy. Or like others have said, forcing into landscaping has gone past just touching lands.

I tried the method of finding the lands by seating a bullet in a previously fired prepped case long, the without the ejector in the bolt, keep seating it further until the bolt just drops finally on its own. Then I can get a straight measurement with the calipers.

I hear ya. The tool is actually pretty cheesy if you ask me. Not to mention the plastic rod inside the OAL tool. . I did read about how some of those comparator bases were NOT cut square, and people had to return them. I also found my caliber specific inserts to that tool were NOT sitting flat into the base, with that set screw. I had to money with it.

 

[memilanuk]

Did you pull the ejector off when doing your testing by closing the bolt on a round?

More than that... strip the bolt entirely. Nothing but the extractor. Pull the firing pin assembly, etc.

All that spring tension masks a lot more than you think. If you're trying to seat to the lands by 'feel', you need to be able to actually 'feel' things.

Go here: https://www.wheeleraccuracy.com/videos and scroll down to 'Finding the lands'

Even so, a lot of people *do* find that the Hornady tool tends to 'under report' the distance to the lands... unless you put a fair bit of pressure on the rod. Like way more than you realize. That's how I always did it anyway, to get a consistent reading with it, so for me it's pretty close (with in a few thou). Mine is also old enough that it says 'Stoney Point' on it (Hornady bought out the whole COAL thing from them decades ago) - and has an aluminum rod.

 

[morganlamprecht]

skimmed and didnt see it mentioned, but the lands/throat need to be CLEAN for really consistent measurements if youre not doing this on brand new barrels (for real clean if you want good numbers, not just pushed a few patches if the barrel has had a significant number of rounds on it)

using the tool on brand new barrels, its very consistent, the more rounds/dirtier/more wear/etc the more difficult that can get get

 

[yo-yo]

More than that... strip the bolt entirely. Nothing but the extractor. Pull the firing pin assembly, etc.

All that spring tension masks a lot more than you think. If you're trying to seat to the lands by 'feel', you need to be able to actually 'feel' things.

Go here: https://www.wheeleraccuracy.com/videos and scroll down to 'Finding the lands'

Even so, a lot of people *do* find that the Hornady tool tends to 'under report' the distance to the lands... unless you put a fair bit of pressure on the rod. Like way more than you realize. That's how I always did it anyway, to get a consistent reading with it, so for me it's pretty close (with in a few thou). Mine is also old enough that it says 'Stoney Point' on it (Hornady bought out the whole COAL thing from them decades ago) - and has an aluminum rod.

Ah, interesting. Ok. I'll have to remove all that and retry it, and compare to the Hornady tool. I haven't taken apart the bolt assembly yet, so I will do some research and figure out how all that comes apart.
Thanks!

 

[yo-yo]

skimmed and didnt see it mentioned, but the lands/throat need to be CLEAN for really consistent measurements if youre not doing this on brand new barrels (for real clean if you want good numbers, not just pushed a few patches if the barrel has had a significant number of rounds on it)

using the tool on brand new barrels, its very consistent, the more rounds/dirtier/more wear/etc the more difficult that can get get

Good point. The rifle is new to me, but estimated to have a few hundred rounds through it. I will clean it and see how that affects the numbers too.
Thanks for the good idea.

 

[memilanuk]

Ah, interesting. Ok. I'll have to remove all that and retry it, and compare to the Hornady tool. I haven't taken apart the bolt assembly yet, so I will do some research and figure out how all that comes apart.
Thanks!

Most of the newer 'boutique' 700 clones are pretty simple - the whole firing pin assembly comes out on a quarter turn bayonet lock. Then a 1/16" punch to push out the retaining pin for the ejector plunger.

Other setups are just variations on the same process. Except Savage... for those the concept is the same, but the 'how' is a bit different.

 

[yo-yo]

Most of the newer 'boutique' 700 clones are pretty simple - the whole firing pin assembly comes out on a quarter turn bayonet lock. Then a 1/16" punch to push out the retaining pin for the ejector plunger.

Other setups are just variations on the same process. Except Savage... for those the concept is the same, but the 'how' is a bit different.

Thanks. Ok. Yeah, this is a Savage Elite Precision 6.5 Creedmoor. I'll look further into the disassembly of that.
Thanks for the info!

 

[John Glidewell]

Lots of info on here too. This has been covered many times. I use a cleaning rod and work the bullet back and forth. Takes some practice as you have to hold the tool in place at the same time. But you can feel the bullet engage the lands, I can feel it "tap" and get very consistent measurements that way. Also make sure the tool and modified case is straight and you can feel it bottom on the shoulder. Sometimes they are bent or the tool is bent and does not function properly.

 

[memilanuk]

Thanks. Ok. Yeah, this is a Savage Elite Precision 6.5 Creedmoor. I'll look further into the disassembly of that.
Thanks for the info!

The short version is this: pull the ejector plunger and spring as with any other action (that uses a spring-loaded ejector). The trick with the Savage setup is that if you pull the entire firing pin assembly out, along with the rear baffle and put the BAS back to hold the handle on, and then take off the bolt head to remove the wave washer and put the head back on... there's nothing left to hold the toggle cross dowel in place. When you insert the bolt in the action, it's initially horizontal. When you close the bolt and lower the handle, that pin is pointing straight *down*, with basically no tension on it. It can - and will - fall out part ways, locking things up. You may 'expand your vocabulary' a bit getting it back *out*. DAMHIKT.

One way to deal with that is to put a strip of clear scotch tape - the thinner the better) over the pin on the side where it would rotate down and fall out. Sometimes the tape itself will get hung up and/or scraped off, depending on clearances. A better way to circumvent the problem is to take the BAS off, and simply remove the cocking *sleeve*, not the whole firing pint assembly. That way the pin stays in the bolt, and keeps the cross-dowel in place naturally. With the cocking sleeve removed, the rear baffle off, and the wave washer behind the head removed there shouldn't be any tension or interference from the cocking system of the bolt. In fact the stripped bolt should fall closed on an empty chamber with a 'thunk'.

Then you need a case that has been sized to where *it* doesn't give you any interference or resistance either. Again, refer to the video list mentioned above for a method to do that also, while you have the bolt stripped down like this. Once you have that, *then* you're ready to find the actual 'touch' point of the bullet to the lands. If you have a couple different bullets you think you'd like to use, I'd suggest testing them all now, while everything is already apart. None of this is exactly 'hard', but if you don't have to take things apart and put them back together again multiple times for the exact same purpose, it's a little more efficient.

Be sure to lay out a clean blue shop towel to give you a clean, uncluttered place to put all the small parts so you don't lose any of them!

 

[Baron23]

More than that... strip the bolt entirely. Nothing but the extractor. Pull the firing pin assembly, etc.

All that spring tension masks a lot more than you think. If you're trying to seat to the lands by 'feel', you need to be able to actually 'feel' things.

Go here: https://www.wheeleraccuracy.com/videos and scroll down to 'Finding the lands'

Even so, a lot of people *do* find that the Hornady tool tends to 'under report' the distance to the lands... unless you put a fair bit of pressure on the rod. Like way more than you realize. That's how I always did it anyway, to get a consistent reading with it, so for me it's pretty close (with in a few thou). Mine is also old enough that it says 'Stoney Point' on it (Hornady bought out the whole COAL thing from them decades ago) - and has an aluminum rod.

And @yo-yo - this is the answer to the question you asks me.

I find with the Hornady OAL Gauge that if I take 5 or 10 measurements I will most of them the same or very close and the few outliers from improper technique are and be discarded.

 

[yo-yo]

Lots of info on here too. This has been covered many times. I use a cleaning rod and work the bullet back and forth. Takes some practice as you have to hold the tool in place at the same time. But you can feel the bullet engage the lands, I can feel it "tap" and get very consistent measurements that way. Also make sure the tool and modified case is straight and you can feel it bottom on the shoulder. Sometimes they are bent or the tool is bent and does not function properly.

Thanks. Yeah, I cleaned the barrel tonight and I already have a .004" difference there. I wonder though...how close the measurement from the Hornady tool would compare to the measurement obtained by removing the necessary components from the bolt and find the lands with a dummy round that way, like in the video referenced earlier?

 

[John Glidewell]

Thanks. Yeah, I cleaned the barrel tonight and I already have a .004" difference there. I wonder though...how close the measurement from the Hornady tool would compare to the measurement obtained by removing the necessary components from the bolt and find the lands with a dummy round that way, like in the video referenced earlier?

Done this multiple times on multiple barrels. Doing it my way with the cleaning rod vs bolt lift feeling for click and all measurements were within .005. I do it with the cleaning rod. Taking apart all these guns becomes a pain and time wise using the cleaning rod is faster. Just takes practice using both hands at same time with pinky on plastic plunger and feeling the bullet touch metal.

 

[yo-yo]

The short version is this: pull the ejector plunger and spring as with any other action (that uses a spring-loaded ejector). The trick with the Savage setup is that if you pull the entire firing pin assembly out, along with the rear baffle and put the BAS back to hold the handle on, and then take off the bolt head to remove the wave washer and put the head back on... there's nothing left to hold the toggle cross dowel in place. When you insert the bolt in the action, it's initially horizontal. When you close the bolt and lower the handle, that pin is pointing straight *down*, with basically no tension on it. It can - and will - fall out part ways, locking things up. You may 'expand your vocabulary' a bit getting it back *out*. DAMHIKT.

Be sure to lay out a clean blue shop towel to give you a clean, uncluttered place to put all the small parts so you don't lose any of them!

Wow! Thanks. I just started into the bolt disassembly tonight. I appreciate all this, as I was following a video reference that does not break the bolt down for the same reason (and he doesn't reassemble it either). I will read over this carefully as I keep going. I'm certainly learning a lot about the various acronyms and specific vocabulary for these little parts.
I'm almost wondering if I should invest in another "bolt" to perform all this. I was planning to build another bolt for converting this Creedmore to a PRC next year, and it might save me some time now.
I did however, run into an issue tonight, where I took the pressure off the spring at the back of the bolt (near the handle) and it looks like the spring is actually broken. Does this look broken, or is there two springs in there?

 

[hafejd30]

Why don’t you just use the hornady tool as it’s meant to be used. Just apply firm but consistent pressure on the bullet into the lands.

It’s a super simple and easy to use tool. I don’t understand the need for disassembling the bolt and all the extra messing around

That tool works very well if you have half a brain and was developed to avoid what you’re currently doing

Makes zero sense to me as a guy who used to measure with sharpies/cut necks and minimal neck tension vs using the OAL tool from hornady which is what I use now

 

[Holliday]

I did this last night. I have gone back and forth between the Wheeler method and the Hornady tool. I have decided that all the fussing about where the lands exactly are, is a waste of time.

There are a lot of factors changing these dimensions i.e.

• fouling
• temperature
• Bullet tolerances
• Lands wearing

I have settled back with the Hornady tool:

• Clean the rifle
• A smidge of lube on the ogive of the bullet
• Around 3lbs pressure each time.
• Save bullet for future reference in marked baggie with tool

I feel that is more than close enough.
From there do

1. Do load work
2. CBTO testing using lands measure as starting reference point

 

[memilanuk]

I was planning to build another bolt for converting this Creedmore to a PRC next year, and it might save me some time now.

Not sure that's necessary... you should be able to just swap the bolt head, rather than build a whole 'nother bolt. I mean, it'll work, it's just not quite the normal way most people go about it.

I did however, run into an issue tonight, where I took the pressure off the spring at the back of the bolt (near the handle) and it looks like the spring is actually broken. Does this look broken, or is there two springs in there?

Unless they changed some things (Savage has been known over the years to change $hit that didn't need fixin') there should be only one spring in there.

Actually removing the BAS and pulling the cocking sleeve, cam pin and firing pin assembly out will give you a much better view of what you have going on there.

 

[memilanuk]

There are a lot of factors changing these dimensions i.e.

• fouling

Great reason to actually clean the freakin' barrel... especially before trying to take a reference measurement

• Lands wearing

And yet *another* good reason to actually take accurate measurements, rather than just 'fuck it, close enough'.

Around 30 lbs pressure each time.

FTFY

Way more consistent that way, if you're going to insist on doing it all cave-man style

And just for reference... I do still keep my OAL comparator tool around. Turns out, .224 cal 'match' chambers tend to have *stupidly* tight freebore diameter - like to the point where going by 'feel' actually doesn't work that well. But for my 6.5 and bigger stuff...

 

[Holliday]

Great reason to actually clean the freakin' barrel... especially before trying to take a reference measurement


And yet *another* good reason to actually take accurate measurements, rather than just 'fuck it, close enough'.


FTFY

Way more consistent that way, if you're going to insist on doing it all cave-man style

Yeah chuckles, then after a couple of rounds the barrel fouls right back up again.

BUT to your point, I actually do clean the barrel. So what was your point again……..?

It is clear “cave boy” that my procedure is detailed, repeatable…..and what I feel is precise.

 

[JerkyFreak]

If you really want to be finicky...

 

[yo-yo]

Why don’t you just use the hornady tool as it’s meant to be used. Just apply firm but consistent pressure on the bullet into the lands.

It’s a super simple and easy to use tool. I don’t understand the need for disassembling the bolt and all the extra messing around

That tool works very well if you have half a brain and was developed to avoid what you’re currently doing

Makes zero sense to me as a guy who used to measure with sharpies/cut necks and minimal neck tension vs using the OAL tool from hornady which is what I use now

I did use the Hornady tool, to check my other work, and it was so far off it made me question the results of both methods.
I had also read the Hornady tool may not be as accurate as other methods, so I simply wanted to check both.
I've never broken down any of the components of a gun either, so I figured this would be a good opportunity to learn.

 

[yo-yo]

I did this last night. I have gone back and forth between the Wheeler method and the Hornady tool. I have decided that all the fussing about where the lands exactly are, is a waste of time.

I have settled back with the Hornady tool:

• Clean the rifle
• A smidge of lube on the ogive of the bullet
• Around 3lbs pressure each time.
• Save bullet for future reference in marked baggie with tool

I feel that is more than close enough.

Did you record results from both methods? What was the result of each method?

 

[yo-yo]

If you really want to be finicky...

Thanks. Yeah, another good representation of the process. I found it interesting you can actually see the barrel wear by rechecking the touch point after several hundred rounds. He saw nearly .010" after 575 rounds through the barrel.

 

[yo-yo]

Not sure that's necessary... you should be able to just swap the bolt head, rather than build a whole 'nother bolt. I mean, it'll work, it's just not quite the normal way most people go about it.

Unless they changed some things (Savage has been known over the years to change $hit that didn't need fixin') there should be only one spring in there.

Actually removing the BAS and pulling the cocking sleeve, cam pin and firing pin assembly out will give you a much better view of what you have going on there.

Ok. Yeah, I was just thinking it looks like removing the required components from the Savage bolt is a bit more complicated than typical bolts.

According to the Gun Shack, there appears to be two springs in the (I think), but I don't think they are stacked, so I may have a broken spring. Not sure how mine is still working so well. I would never have seen it if I hadn't released the spring pressure in order to gain access to the BAS.

Yeah, I was going to remove the BAS last night, but it sounds like the BAS is in there VERY VERY tight from the factory. An impact gun with a socketed hex key is required to remove it. I have metric versions of that tool, but I'm not sure yet if Savage is metric or standard. I don't want to strip it out. . I'll look further into it today.

EDIT: I found the standard size tool. I'll see how hard this is to get apart!

 

[straightshooter1]

Did you record results from both methods? What was the result of each method?

Here's some of my thoughts and experience:

I use the Hornady tool often to measure distance to the lands as I do it after every cleaning . . . because I track and record throat erosion. Doing this, I use the same bullet (for the particular rifle caliber) that I've set aside to avoid the variations there are from one bullet to another.

I will use the Hornady tool every time I use a different design bullet bullet (e.g. Berger 185 Juggernaut vs 169 SMK) to measure and find the distance where the particular design I'm about to use touches the lands. And I should point out, that it's best to do this when things are clean.

It's a developed skill to get consistent measurements with the Hornady tool and it took me a while to develop a touch and technique that worked well. I'll set the bullet into the tool well below where I expect it to touch, then lock down the plunger so it wouldn't move when I can jam the shoulder of the case firmly into the chamber. Holding the case firmly in the chamber, I then loosen the plunger and tap it to move the bullet against the lands. When tapping, I make sure the bullet it no longer moving and then I'll keep my finger pressing the plunger with light pressure while locking the plunger down with the screw. This method tends to give me pretty consistent measurements (like right on or occasionally <.002 variance. . . often about ~.001). Until I figured out the method and feel using the Hornady tool, I'd get .004 or .005 variation.

Since I don't shoot ELR, I don't pay any attention COAL, where that can make a difference in an individual bullet's BC. But I do look for consistent CBTO's, most importantly to me the "seating depth" consistency . . . not distance to the lands, as that distance changes as the throat erodes. Cartridge performance can remain consistent with substantial changes in distance to the lands as the throat erodes. I get very consistent seating depths where 90% or better are right on with some ~.001 off and I attribute a lot of that to sorting my bullets by BTO's with a comparator that touches the ogive at the same place as where the seating stem touches it.

Some of the details we/I do to get good results on target don't really matter for most shooters as the benefit just can't be seen for them, due to things like shooting skills and/or the equipment their using (like typical retail factory guns). For me, it's just a matter of taking care of the things I can control in the long chain of things that add up. When it comes to reloading, yes . . . I'm a bit OCD about it. This is a hobby for me and I have lots of time to do things during retirement that those supporting a family don't have.

Well. . . hope this gives you a little insight. My wife always tells me I'm too long winded.

 

[yo-yo]

Here's some of my thoughts and experience:

I use the Hornady tool often to measure distance to the lands as I do it after every cleaning . . . because I track and record throat erosion. Doing this, I use the same bullet (for the particular rifle caliber) that I've set aside to avoid the variations there are from one bullet to another.

I will use the Hornady tool every time I use a different design bullet bullet (e.g. Berger 185 Juggernaut vs 169 SMK) to measure and find the distance where the particular design I'm about to use touches the lands. And I should point out, that it's best to do this when things are clean.

It's a developed skill to get consistent measurements with the Hornady tool and it took me a while to develop a touch and technique that worked well. I'll set the bullet into the tool well below where I expect it to touch, then lock down the plunger so it would move when I can jam the shoulder of the case firmly into the chamber. Holding the case firmly in the chamber, I then loosen the plunger and tap it to move the bullet against the lands. When tapping, I make sure the bullet it no longer moving and then I'll keep my finger pressing the plunger with light pressure while locking the plunger down with the screw. This method tends to give me pretty consistent measurements (like right on or occasionally <.002 variance. . . often about ~.001). Until I figured out the method and feel using the Hornady tool, I'd get .004 or .005 variation.

Since I don't shoot ELR, I don't pay any attention COAL, where that can make a difference in an individual bullet's BC. But I do look for consistent CBTO's, most importantly to me the "seating depth" consistency . . . not distance to the lands, as that distance changes as the throat erodes. Cartridge performance can remain consistent with substantial changes in distance to the lands as the throat erodes. I get very consistent seating depths where 90% or better are right on with some ~.001 off and I attribute a lot of that to sorting my bullets by BTO's with a comparator that touches the ogive at the same place as where the seating stem touches it.

Some of the details we/I do to get good results on target don't really matter for most shooters as the benefit just can be seen for them, due to things like shooting skills and/or the equipment their using (like typical retail factory guns). For me, it's just a matter of taking care of the things I can control in the long chain of things that add up. When I comes to reloading, yes . . . I a bit OCD about it. This is a hobby for me and I have lots of time to do things during retirement that those supporting a family don't have.

Well. . . hope this gives you a little insight. My wife always tells me I'm too long winded.

Hey, thanks for the detailed description! This helps a lot. I will try some of your method and see how I do. I imagine I will get a good feel for the process, the more I do it. I've developed a good feel for using dial bore gauges over the years, as I build engines, and the process to becoming good at these reloading tools is really no different.

I hadn't yet thought about sorting the bullets by BTO. Makes sense. That is what started me wanting to use the Hornady tool in the first place. I was getting different COAL, when measuring from the base to the tip, without modifying the micrometer setting on the seating die.

How did you get a seating stem that touches the ogive in the same place as your comparator? Did you have one or both custom made? I hadn't thought about that yet either, but I was thinking that I doubt the insert for the comparator tool is touching the ogive at the same place as my barrel is touching it. I don't think I can measure the diameter of the throat/lands in the barrel, but I did measure the center hole in the insert for the comparator tool. My 5-26 insert is supposed to be for my .264" caliber (I think this is the right insert, sadly Hornady is so lazy they don't even print which insert is for which caliber in the instructions) measures .2510". I suppose is doesn't really matter, since I'm simply "comparing" that dummy round to another round that is also measured in the same insert for the tool.

Did you ever go as far as comparing the Hornady tool measurement to the process of closing the bolt (with ejector and firing pin removed) on a round in the chamber? I'd be curious how close you found them to be?

 

[straightshooter1]

Hey, thanks for the detailed description! This helps a lot. I will try some of your method and see how I do. I imagine I will get a good feel for the process, the more I do it. I've developed a good feel for using dial bore gauges over the years, as I build engines, and the process to becoming good at these reloading tools is really no different.

Yeah, sounds like a similar skill that has to be practiced and learned.

I hadn't yet thought about sorting the bullets by BTO. Makes sense. That is what started me wanting to use the Hornady tool in the first place. I was getting different COAL, when measuring from the base to the tip, without modifying the micrometer setting on the seating die.

Within any particular lot, there can be substantial differences in bullet's OAL. There tends to be less variance in bullet's BTO's within a lot. But from lot to lot, there can be substantial BTO variance, even with quality bullets like Burger puts out.

How did you get a seating stem that touches the ogive in the same place as your comparator? Did you have one or both custom made? I hadn't thought about that yet either, but I was thinking that I doubt the insert for the comparator tool is touching the ogive at the same place as my barrel is touching it. I don't think I can measure the diameter of the throat/lands in the barrel, but I did measure the center hole in the insert for the comparator tool. My 5-26 insert is supposed to be for my .264" caliber (I think this is the right insert, sadly Hornady is so lazy they don't even print which insert is for which caliber in the instructions) measures .2510". I suppose is doesn't really matter, since I'm simply "comparing" that dummy round to another round that is also measured in the same insert for the tool.

Rather than get custom made comparator inserts, I chose inserts for much smaller calibers. I use the L.E. Wilson inline seating dies for my .308 and 6.5 PRC. To match the seating stem contact point for the .308 I use Hornady 2.22 insert and for the .264 I use the Sinclair 17 caliber insert. Neither are exact, but they come so close that any difference between the two contact points is far too small to be of any concern. (Note: Hornady and Sinclair inserts have very different diameters, like for standard .308 insert there's a .063" different BTO reading on the same .308 bullet between the two inserts.)

To find which insert would work, I took a bullet and made an engraving on the ogive by twisting the seating stem on it with pressure. Then I did the same with some inserts to see which might match the seating stem engraving.

Here's a pic of how I label my boxes with the measurement from sorting, and you might looks at the number and note the difference from one box to the next:

 

[yo-yo]

Yeah, sounds like a similar skill that has to be practiced and learned.


Within any particular lot, there can be substantial differences in bullet's OAL. There tends to be less variance in bullet's BTO's within a lot. But from lot to lot, there can be substantial BTO variance, even with quality bullets like Burger puts out.


Rather than get custom made comparator inserts, I chose inserts for much smaller calibers. I use the L.E. Wilson inline seating dies for my .308 and 6.5 PRC. To match the seating stem contact point for the .308 I use Hornady 2.22 insert and for the .264 I use the Sinclair 17 caliber insert. Neither are exact, but they come so close that any difference between the two contact points is far too small to be of any concern. (Note: Hornady and Sinclair inserts have very different diameters, like for standard .308 insert there's a .063" different BTO reading on the same .308 bullet between the two inserts.)

To find which insert would work, I took a bullet and made an engraving on the ogive by twisting the seating stem on it with pressure. Then I did the same with some inserts to see which might match the seating stem engraving.

Here's a pic of how I label my boxes with the measurement from sorting, and you might looks at the number and note the difference from one box to the next:

View attachment 8560672

Ah, interesting. Good idea. I'll have to check my seating stem contact point on the bullets. I'm actually having Forster make me a custom one right now, since there is a new issue occurring with soft Hornady jackets and super stiff Lapua brass, such that I'm damaging the bullets upon seating. They are making one to sit down on the bullet a bit further, and having a higher degree of polishing.

The image was a bit blurry, but I get the idea. Interesting. I'll have to check a bunch of mine and see how they vary.
I've got my bolt apart, except for the ejector (can't get the little roll pin out yet), so I will be able to test the distance to the lands with the bolt and with the Hornady tool and see how close measurements are from each process and compare them.

 

[yo-yo]

The short version is this: pull the ejector plunger and spring as with any other action (that uses a spring-loaded ejector). The trick with the Savage setup is that if you pull the entire firing pin assembly out, along with the rear baffle and put the BAS back to hold the handle on, and then take off the bolt head to remove the wave washer and put the head back on... there's nothing left to hold the toggle cross dowel in place. When you insert the bolt in the action, it's initially horizontal. When you close the bolt and lower the handle, that pin is pointing straight *down*, with basically no tension on it. It can - and will - fall out part ways, locking things up. You may 'expand your vocabulary' a bit getting it back *out*. DAMHIKT.

One way to deal with that is to put a strip of clear scotch tape - the thinner the better) over the pin on the side where it would rotate down and fall out. Sometimes the tape itself will get hung up and/or scraped off, depending on clearances. A better way to circumvent the problem is to take the BAS off, and simply remove the cocking *sleeve*, not the whole firing pint assembly. That way the pin stays in the bolt, and keeps the cross-dowel in place naturally. With the cocking sleeve removed, the rear baffle off, and the wave washer behind the head removed there shouldn't be any tension or interference from the cocking system of the bolt. In fact the stripped bolt should fall closed on an empty chamber with a 'thunk'.

Then you need a case that has been sized to where *it* doesn't give you any interference or resistance either. Again, refer to the video list mentioned above for a method to do that also, while you have the bolt stripped down like this. Once you have that, *then* you're ready to find the actual 'touch' point of the bullet to the lands. If you have a couple different bullets you think you'd like to use, I'd suggest testing them all now, while everything is already apart. None of this is exactly 'hard', but if you don't have to take things apart and put them back together again multiple times for the exact same purpose, it's a little more efficient.

Be sure to lay out a clean blue shop towel to give you a clean, uncluttered place to put all the small parts so you don't lose any of them!

Hey, thanks again for the comments on this. I was finally able to do this last night, and it appears the Hornady OAL Gauge tool produced a CBTO length *VERY* close to same length as the method to disassemble to the bolt and test the cartridge that way. It appears to be within .001" (even though my vernier calipers are sensitive to .0005", I don't think I can use it well enough to delineate better than .001"). I will repeat the procedure today again, just to be certain. I was running into issues where my resized cases would not allow the bolt to "fall" without interference. I had to use some brand new Lapua brass to accomplish this.

That brought up another question though...is the need for the cases to fit without interference only necessary when performing this test, or should my die be resizing ALL cases that way, when resizing for reloading?

 

[John Glidewell]

Videos | wheeleraccuracy

www.wheeleraccuracy.com

 

[memilanuk]

Videos | wheeleraccuracy

www.wheeleraccuracy.com

Already pointed him at that way earlier in the thread. I think he's at that colt-ish new-reloader stage where he's asking questions faster than he can absorb the knowledge

 

[John Glidewell]

Already pointed him at that way earlier in the thread. I think he's at that colt-ish new-reloader stage where he's asking questions faster than he can absorb the knowledge

Yeah. I think I post that link 3 or 4 times a week now as those ?s come up all the time in multiple groups lol.

 

[JerkyFreak]

If you use the Hornady tool, the modified case must be sized the same as your resized cases.

If you use the bolt drop method, your actual jump is your result minus the headspace you normally size your cases to.