Valid method for finding jam, Or just stupid?

[Yondering]

Too many variables, unless you are happy with close enough . . Stripped bolt does not lie .

I'd ask what you think those variables are, but I already know from experience that you don't have the technical acumen for a reasonable discussion.

It's a clear demonstration that you don't understand this when you claim that your method of repeatedly checking in increments is more accurate than a direct measurement. But typical for you, it's about defending the one thing you know rather than whether one thing is actually better than another.

 

[MarkyMark007]

If I measure carefully 3 different styles of bullets should all give the same dimension to the lands.

you realy dont understand.



with which comparator? hornady? sinclair? they are all different.

even different angle of freebore end will stops bullet at different ogive.

 

[MarkyMark007]

just push the bullet firmly into the lands and call it 0.010' jamm. with your comparator !

 

[bradworley]

just push the bullet firmly into the lands and call it 0.010' jamm. with your comparator !

Ya... After reading the half dozen different methods I think I'll just stick with "as long as the bullets not stuck" method. And then back off from there .002 at time untill I find a good grouping node

 

[Haney]

just push the bullet firmly into the lands and call it 0.010' jamm. with your comparator !

Damn man, you really need to quit giving bad advice . That shit you just wrote is stupid .

 

[Haney]

you realy dont understand.



with which comparator? hornady? sinclair? they are all different.

even different angle of freebore end will stops bullet at different ogive.

Haha...."Freebore end" ? What language are you trying to use ?

 

[supercorndogs]

I just don't get that.

The ogive is what hits the lands and what measurements are taken from.

To me it doesn't matter what bullet or style is used the ogive is a zero place, aka a datum.

Everything else moves, the nose and bullet base, the case base (bto) and the lands erode.

But to me the ogive is the datum zero point, it's always zero.

If I measure carefully 3 different styles of bullets should all give the same dimension to the lands.

They wont, and if you carefully measure three of the same bullet, they likely wont have the same measurement to the lands either. A small difference in the shape of the ogive will cause the bullet to engage the lands in different place.

I have never found two different kinds bullets that touch the lands with the same BTO measurement. Have you? Anyone?

 

[338dude]

I just don't get that.

The ogive is what hits the lands and what measurements are taken from.

To me it doesn't matter what bullet or style is used the ogive is a zero place, aka a datum.

Everything else moves, the nose and bullet base, the case base (bto) and the lands erode.

But to me the ogive is the datum zero point, it's always zero.

If I measure carefully 3 different styles of bullets should all give the same dimension to the lands.

If all three bullets are measured from the ogive when the round is created well of course they would all measure the same ,but if you measure the tip of those three different bullets for cartridge overall length you would likely get three different measurements.

 

[918v]

If all three bullets are measured from the ogive when the round is created well of course they would all measure the same

Nope.

You would have to have comparator inserts specific to each bullet. SMK , VLD, hybrid, etc will all measure different. Whatever number you arrive at is only good for that particular bullet/lot.

 

[spife7980]

If all three bullets are measured from the ogive when the round is created well of course they would all measure the same ,but if you measure the tip of those three different bullets for cartridge overall length you would likely get three different measurements.

Only if all three have the same ogive curve and the same leade angle on the comparator vs what your chamber has.
Otherwise your measurements will end up different.
An eld won’t have the same resultant measurement as an rdf or smk. It’ll be close but not the same.

 

[338dude]

Only if all three have the same ogive curve and the same leade angle on the comparator vs what your chamber has.
Otherwise your measurements will end up different.
An eld won’t have the same resultant measurement as an rdf or smk. It’ll be close but not the same.

If all three bullets are measured with the same comparator, and the round is created with the ogive (to the same measurement), the cartridge overall length will surely be different.

 

[spife7980]

If all three bullets are measured with the same comparator, and the round is created with the ogive (to the same measurement), this is key the cartridge overall length will surely be different.

Ok, but we are discussing different bullets that don’t have the ogive in the same place. Because they are different bullets…

 

[338dude]

No matter the angle of the ogive the comparator will stop when it reaches that diameter period.

 

[338dude]

Ok, but we are discussing different bullets that don’t have the ogive in the same place. Because they are different bullets…

Exactly

 

[spife7980]

@reubenski
Post your board with all the different resultant measurements from the different bullets in your chambers. I dont have anything prepared like that.

 

[338dude]

@reubenski
Post your board with all the different resultant measurements from the different bullets in your chambers. I dont have anything prepared like

Here’s a quick comparison of two different rounds for my six arc? both measure the same to the ogive, but two different Bullets of course give two different cartridge overall lengths.

 

[supercorndogs]

The polymer tipped bullets are closer measured from the tip. Yes, most bullets are going to have a range of OAL after seating measuring to the tip. You can tip them to cut down on that some. BTO should be pretty close round to round.

 

[918v]

No matter the angle of the ogive the comparator will stop when it reaches that diameter period.

But that diameter is not what stops on the rifling. That’s the whole point.

 

[spife7980]

This?

Bullet Length, Bullet Base to Ogive, Case Base to Ogive View attachment 8026531

Exactly that, the CBTO shows how varied the results can be.

 

[918v]

And if you change lots of bullets the ogive will be in a different spot and with a crude jam swag you'll have to shoot seating depth tests to figure out where to seat that new lot, since you don't have hard measurements to go off of.

I have a different take on this. When I change lots I don’t change the die adjustment. Yes, the cbto may be different but the bullets seat to the same coal pretty much. I might have to change the micrometer setting on the die plus/minus .005” to get the accuracy back if at all.

 

[338dude]

But that diameter is not what stops on the rifling. That’s the whole point.

That is exactly the point when the full diameter of that bullet whatever it may be .243 .264 etc. when it reaches that full diameter and contacts the rifling don’t worry that’s my last reply I’m out!

 

[Snuby642]

I don't care if you have a short fat round nose bullet or needle nose projectile. The ogive runs into the lands in the same place.

Tangent, Secant or Hybrid the ogive measurement is the point where bullet reaches full diameter starting from the tip.

Everything else is just bullshit.

There are difficulties in consistant measurements but starting with spent brass from your chamber goes a long way to get rid of slop.

Might also try cleaning your chamber. People are not calibrated and your feel for jam and mine may be different. That's fine that's like the commonly used tools are called comparitors and not gauges.

As long as you use the tools available cosistantly the job gets done.

 

[918v]

I don't care if you have a short fat round nose bullet or needle nose projectile. The ogive runs into the lands in the same place.

Then your comparator isn’t touching the ogjive. If you find the lands using a SMK and measure that cbto using your comparator the measurement will be different than if you found the lands using an ELD.

 

[longrange772]

Measuring Cartridge Overall Length (COAL) and Cartridge Base to Bullet Ogive (CBTO)

This article covers the importance of knowing your Cartridge Overall Length (COAL) and Cartridge Base to Bullet Ogive (CBTO) when reloading.

bergerbullets.com

 

[just browsing]

Finding the exact location of the lands is really somewhat meaningless anyway. There are obviously a lot of ways to take a measurement, but tool tolerance, projectile variation, concentricity, etc. make it an imperfect science by nature. “Close enough” really is good enough in this instance.

Ultimately you need a baseline number to measure against and nothing more. It doesn’t matter if that measurement is taken at the lands or 10 thou off. As long as you have a consistent point to measure from, the actual value is irrelevant.

 

[Haney]

And then I realize....these guys are just making up excuses, they don't actually have the skills to find the lands and make it repeatable so everything has to jump...and that Jump is just another random number .

 

[supercorndogs]

I would say most of us figured out running super close to the lands isnt worth the time and touble.

 

[Yondering]

And then I realize....these guys are just making up excuses, they don't actually have the skills to find the lands and make it repeatable so everything has to jump...and that Jump is just another random number .

You’re truly a half-wit if you think you’re smarter about this than most of the better reloaders here. Your method is no better than any other shared here, and not as good as several of them.

Here’s a better realization for you:
We’ve all got room to learn stuff here, and the “I’m smarter than the rest of you” crap does nothing for anyone and makes you look like a tard. Give it a rest.

 

[Snuby642]

View attachment 8027182

Measuring Cartridge Overall Length (COAL) and Cartridge Base to Bullet Ogive (CBTO)

This article covers the importance of knowing your Cartridge Overall Length (COAL) and Cartridge Base to Bullet Ogive (CBTO) when reloading.

bergerbullets.com

Thanks for finding that, a picture is worth a thousand words and from an industry leader.

Some secant style bullets like to lick the lands, but to me finicky to get right.

Tangent and hybrid types are easier to get flying right and some prefer more jump.
Highest bc bullet may not be the most accurate in your gun and preferences,
mathematically yes but on target no.

I used to shop for bc but beat that dog to death, no more.

 

[bradworley]

They wont, and if you carefully measure three of the same bullet, they likely wont have the same measurement to the lands either. A small difference in the shape of the ogive will cause the bullet to engage the lands in different place.

I have never found two different kinds bullets that touch the lands with the same BTO measurement. Have you? Anyone?

This is exactly what I found. I have 3 different "jam points".
130gr = .287, 140gr = .275 , 147gr = .292
I then back off .005 for each to account for sloop and the odd shaped bullet. Although the ELDs ogive are usually within .002

 

[hkguns]

I can NEVER get consistent results when using the Hornady thingy. This is the best method I have seen, but it requires a barrel removal.

 

[Yondering]

I can NEVER get consistent results when using the Hornady thingy. This is the best method I have seen, but it requires a barrel removal.

No method that requires incremental guessing (meaning repeated check-seat deaper-check again) is as accurate as simply measuring directly.

You guys who think the cleaning rod method is innacurate or difficult are either doing something wrong (in a very simple process) or making it more complicated than it needs to be.

Measure to the bolt face, then measure to the tip of a bullet touching the lands. It's that simple.

 

[Yondering]

Same basic concept as the Sinclair tool. But simpler.

View attachment 8027939

Pretty much, yes. In fact you can use that same tool pictured, just without one of the collars. Or use both collars and measure between them.

Regardless, the concept around it is both simpler and more accurate than any of the guess and check methods being promoted here.

 

[Yondering]

The issue with pushing the bullet in with a tool is knowing how much you're pushing it into the lands. This is why I like the split neck or barrel off Speedy/ Not Mark Gordon technique better. Plus, you just stick a cartridge in and measure it. It's simpler to me

Pushing the bullet in with what tool?
I think you’ve misunderstood the method. The measurement tool is on the muzzle end, and does nothing to push the bullet into the lands.

The bullet/round does need to be held against the lands by some method, but it’s completely up to you how that’s done and how hard. And as long as it’s a fairly small force and consistent, you can get very consistent and useful results.

In contrast, think about the size of the guess and check increments you’re using for some other method. That’s your resolution. You can either spend a LOT of time trying to really dial it in with small increments, or seat in coarser increments and give up accuracy. The first way is a lot slower than what I described, and no more accurate; the second way is a little slower and much less accurate. What exactly is better about that, again?

 

[Yondering]

Nope. I understand. This part in red . Using your fingers to feel the lands with a loaded cartridge on a pulled barrel gives a more accurate measurement, IMO. Having done both this is my preference.

Sure, if you’re seating in increments of 1/2 thou or less (you’re not). Otherwise it’s not more accurate.

Your preferred method is also subjected to whatever headspace you have the brass sized to; another unnecessary source of error.

What you prefer is a lot more work for no gain. Fine with me, but it doesn’t reflect an accurate evaluation of both methods.

I’ve noticed that’s a common trend though; a lot of you guys gravitate towards things that require more time and effort, regardless whether they offer any real gain. A lot of work input does not equate to a quality output; efficiency is an important consideration.

 

[MarkyMark007]

The issue with pushing the bullet in with a tool is knowing how much you're pushing it into the lands. This is why I like the split neck or barrel off Speedy/ Not Mark Gordon technique better. Plus, you just stick a cartridge in and measure it. It's simpler to me

that's why you should measure it when you got loose freebore in two ways:
a) bullet very lightly pushed or just touched to the lands;
b) bullet pushed firmly to the lands.
and I came across in numbers like ~0.010' jamm in 7mm bullets and ~0.005' in 5,56mm bullets.

but when you have tight freebore, you are quite limited. so I just push bullet firmly into the lands and I call this 0.010 jamm.

 

[Aftermath]

Fuck.
2 pages of discussion of how to find where the mythical point of where and when a bullet touches or does not touch the lands.
This is almost as good as a MIL vs MOA thread.
Or one of those how to use a MIL scope after a lifetime of using an MOA scope.
Same sort of stupid shit, over and over and over and over and over and over.

 

[Yondering]

It's seems more simple and less work to me than running cleaning rods down my barrel while holding another implement with another hand. Remember, I've tried both methods independently. I've used your method. I'm just telling you what seems easier and more accurate.

If pulling a barrel and incremental guesswork on cartridge length is easier and simpler to you, then you’re doing something drastically wrong. Whatever claim you tried must have been way over complicated.

The method I described takes 3-5 minutes at most. All that is needed here is a simple way of measuring and tracking where a load is seated in reference to the lands, not this silly bs about pulling barrels or stripping bolts. You guys could over complicate slicing an apple. SMH

I think this is a case of blind stubbornness about whatever you’ve promoted being best, rather than a genuine look at reality. I’ve said all that I need to say about this, and Aftermath is right about this getting stupid; I’m out.

 

[MarkyMark007]

Fuck.
2 pages of discussion of how to find where the mythical point of where and when a bullet touches or does not touch the lands.
This is almost as good as a MIL vs MOA thread.
Or one of those how to use a MIL scope after a lifetime of using an MOA scope.
Same sort of stupid shit, over and over and over and over and over and over.

yes. a lot of stupid retards, which doesnt know shit.

 

[Haney]

yes. a lot of stupid retards, which doesnt know shit.

You fit right in .

 

[Haney]

that's why you should measure it when you got loose freebore in two ways:
a) bullet very lightly pushed or just touched to the lands;
b) bullet pushed firmly to the lands.
and I came across in numbers like ~0.010' jamm in 7mm bullets and ~0.005' in 5,56mm bullets.

but when you have tight freebore, you are quite limited. so I just push bullet firmly into the lands and I call this 0.010 jamm.

That shit is laughable . You don't have a fucking clue where your lands are. Wow

 

[Haney]

If pulling a barrel and incremental guesswork on cartridge length is easier and simpler to you, then you’re doing something drastically wrong. Whatever claim you tried must have been way over complicated.

The method I described takes 3-5 minutes at most. All that is needed here is a simple way of measuring and tracking where a load is seated in reference to the lands, not this silly bs about pulling barrels or stripping bolts. You guys could over complicate slicing an apple. SMH

I think this is a case of blind stubbornness about whatever you’ve promoted being best, rather than a genuine look at reality. I’ve said all that I need to say about this, and Aftermath is right about this getting stupid; I’m out.

I bet you come back . If not, thanks for doing us all a favor.

 

[Haney]

Fuck.
2 pages of discussion of how to find where the mythical point of where and when a bullet touches or does not touch the lands.
This is almost as good as a MIL vs MOA thread.
Or one of those how to use a MIL scope after a lifetime of using an MOA scope.
Same sort of stupid shit, over and over and over and over and over and over.

Are those tears ?

 

[hkguns]

I think this is a case of blind stubbornness about whatever you’ve promoted being best, rather than a genuine look at reality. I’ve said all that I need to say about this, and Aftermath is right about this getting stupid; I’m out.

Blind stubborness? Promoting? I could give a sh!t which method you use. Use what works for you, I'll use what works for me.

This is supposed to be a discussion to share ideas, not blindly following the method YOU think works best while relegating everyone else into the stuipid bin.

Most of my reloading is done to mag length so guess what, I don't bother.

 

[Pharmseller]

Ya... After reading the half dozen different methods I think I'll just stick with "as long as the bullets not stuck" method. And then back off from there .002 at time untill I find a good grouping node

I‘m nowhere near as sophisticated as almost all of you, and I don’t shoot as well or as much, either, but the Sharpie method works for my fumble fingered application.




P

 

[Snuby642]

This is exactly what I found. I have 3 different "jam points".
130gr = .287, 140gr = .275 , 147gr = .292
I then back off .005 for each to account for sloop and the odd shaped bullet. Although the ELDs ogive are usually within .002

What the hell you measuring to, the base of the bullet?
The base and tip measurement vary and that's why use BTO, the ogive is a constant.

Your barrel doesn't give one tiny little shit where the base of the bullet is.
It effects the amount of case capacity you can use.

You're magazine cares where the tip of the bullet is, and if it feeds nothing else.

You have a couple thousands of play in headspace but lets just call the case base a constant.

So the thing is barrel harmonics, it swings 4 directions once you have found a powder charge
that works for you it's time to adjust your BTO till you get the best results.

A 0.003 thousands adjustment will change your group size.
It's fairly strait forward, the bench rest guys do things a little different.

 

[Yondering]

Blind stubborness? Promoting? I could give a sh!t which method you use. Use what works for you, I'll use what works for me.

This is supposed to be a discussion to share ideas, not blindly following the method YOU think works best while relegating everyone else into the stuipid bin.

Most of my reloading is done to mag length so guess what, I don't bother.

Hold up fella. My comment wasn't a response to you, so why are you taking offense at it?
I'm not going to debate methods any more, I said I was done with that, but when a guy tells me that removing a barrel to do a measurement (then reinstalling that barrel and rezeroing the rifle) is easier than sliding a cleaning rod down the barrel, I smell BS. I don't care if he says it's easier "for him"; it's the equivalent of saying 100 lb feels lighter "for him" than 5 lb. That's obviously blind stubbornness.

If you'd like to wear that same shoe so you can feel offended, that's your issue, but if not, calm down and think about who my comment was directed to and why. And yeah, use whatever method you want and I'll do the same, I don't care. Like you said, it's supposed to be a discussion to share ideas, so I do care when someone keeps throwing out BS reasons to claim his method is superior. Keep it real and let's dispense with the dick measuring

 

[hkguns]

Hold up fella. My comment wasn't a response to you, so why are you taking offense at it?
I'm not going to debate methods any more, I said I was done with that, but when a guy tells me that removing a barrel to do a measurement (then reinstalling that barrel and rezeroing the rifle) is easier than sliding a cleaning rod down the barrel, I smell BS. I don't care if he says it's easier "for him"; it's the equivalent of saying 100 lb feels lighter "for him" than 5 lb. That's obviously blind stubbornness.

When you quote somone, it typically means you're replying to them fella.

 

[bradworley]

What the hell you measuring to, the base of the bullet?
The base and tip measurement vary and that's why use BTO, the ogive is a constant.

Your barrel doesn't give one tiny little shit where the base of the bullet is.
It effects the amount of case capacity you can use.

You're magazine cares where the tip of the bullet is, and if it feeds nothing else.

You have a couple thousands of play in headspace but lets just call the case base a constant.

So the thing is barrel harmonics, it swings 4 directions once you have found a powder charge
that works for you it's time to adjust your BTO till you get the best results.

A 0.003 thousands adjustment will change your group size.
It's fairly strait forward, the bench rest guys do things a little different.

The measurements are BTO.
2.287 etc etc.
I then back off to 2.283 to start. Next I will try seating to 2.280, then 2.277 and so on untill I find my node.

 

[918v]

What the hell you measuring to, the base of the bullet?
The base and tip measurement vary and that's why use BTO, the ogive is a constant.

Your barrel doesn't give one tiny little shit where the base of the bullet is.
It effects the amount of case capacity you can use.

You're magazine cares where the tip of the bullet is, and if it feeds nothing else.

You have a couple thousands of play in headspace but lets just call the case base a constant.

So the thing is barrel harmonics, it swings 4 directions once you have found a powder charge
that works for you it's time to adjust your BTO till you get the best results.

A 0.003 thousands adjustment will change your group size.
It's fairly strait forward, the bench rest guys do things a little different.

First, base to tip is more accurate because it’s easier to measure and you’re using one bullet to measure your distance to lands and then the same bullet to set your die. And you’re keeping that very same bullet to check for erosion later.

Second, your barrel does in fact care about the location of the bullet base because it is the last thing that touches the barrel as the bullet exits. It is critical for bullet timing.

Third, a .003” change in coal can change your group size. CAN. Not WILL. Depending on the bullet and how forgiving the load is you can have a situation where groups stay tight for a lot more than .003”, like .010-.015”. There was a guy here not too long ago who posted a pic of from his 6.5x47L that would fill anyone with envy.

There are some bullet/powder/primer combinations that are more forgiving than others. They have wider windows of plus/minus on the charge weight and coal, nodes if you will. People who use a combination of components where the coal window is .003” (plus/minus .0015”) and the powder charge window is .1gr (plus/minus .05gr) should try something else.