300BlkTalk

golfindia wrote:2.204 seems pretty long for that type of bullet.

2.26 is what Nosler shows.

http://www.nosler.com/nosler-load-data/ ... -blackout/

golfindia wrote:2.204 seems pretty long for that type of bullet.

black tips are designed to be loaded to mag length.

http://www.barnesbullets.com/wp-content ... TAC-TX.pdf

removed double post

When you look at the top line, where the bullet description is there is the "tested COAL". 2.025. The 2.260 you are seeing is max length for SAAMI spec

With that said, I have loaded these very long, It would been in the 2.190 range. .110 seated depth.

This is one of those bullets that fall out of the case before it hits the lands.

Seating deeper may help keeping the bullets straight.

OK, thanks, I might also give that a try.

In researching loading I had seen frequent warnings that seating a bullet too deep (back-seating?) was more of a problem than loading towards the limit of the SAAMI spec.

dellet wrote:

When you look at the top line, where the bullet description is there is the "tested COAL". 2.025. The 2.260 you are seeing is max length for SAAMI spec

With that said, I have loaded these very long, It would been in the 2.190 range. .110 seated depth.

This is one of those bullets that fall out of the case before it hits the lands.

Seating deeper may help keeping the bullets straight.

didnt realize he was loading a nosler black tip bullet. My mistake.

voip-1 wrote:OK, thanks, I might also give that a try.

In researching loading I had seen frequent warnings that seating a bullet too deep (back-seating?) was more of a problem than loading towards the limit of the SAAMI spec.

There are two different specifications (really more). The SAAMI spec for cartridge and chamber, and then the bullet/powder combination specs and it can be very confusing. To the point of dangerous.

The bullet rjacobs mentioned is a great example, Barnes 110 grain blacktip bullet and the Nosler 110 black tipped bullet, the Varmageddon. I do not remember the length of the Barnes, I think close to 1.20 and the Nosler is .92.

Loading the Nosler to Barnes length no immediate safety problem, you have moved the bullet away from the powder and dropped chamber pressure. Unless you have moved it out so far out that it jams into the lands of the rifling, then pressure will spike.

Loading the Barnes to Nosler length specs would mean you have put .030 more bullet in the case. This will certainly raise pressure.

The overall length is a good marker for a quick reference, but is problematic when you change bullets. The two numbers you need are seating depth, how much bullet is in the case. Base to ogive, which will tell you how far the bullet will travel to hit the rifling. If you know those numbers it is much safer trading different bullets of the same weight.

If we look at your combination your brass+bullet length-col= seating depth;
1.350+.920-2.260=.010 bullet in the case. if you use SAAMI spec.
1.350+.920-2.204=.070 bullet in the case at your length.

It is tough to keep a bullet straight with that little holding it in and the force generated when chambering in a semi-auto can cause the bullet to slide in the case.

Lots of words. Does it make sense?

Yes, it makes perfect sense to me and you are right it is very confusing.

So when making a determination on seating depth, what is a good reference? Should I just aim to seat the bullet at the "tested" OAL that Nosler published for their tests?

Also, can I further seat bullets in cartridges I have already loaded or do I need to disassemble them first to be doing things the "right way"?

voip-1 wrote:Yes, it makes perfect sense to me and you are right it is very confusing.

So when making a determination on seating depth, what is a good reference? Should I just aim to seat the bullet at the "tested" OAL that Nosler published for their tests?

Also, can I further seat bullets in cartridges I have already loaded or do I need to disassemble them first to be doing things the "right way"?

AAC put a nice bit together in their user manual on this topic:

http://www.advanced-armament.com/assets ... iniBro.pdf

I would trust Nosler, too.

voip-1 wrote:Yes, it makes perfect sense to me and you are right it is very confusing.

So when making a determination on seating depth, what is a good reference? Should I just aim to seat the bullet at the "tested" OAL that Nosler published for their tests?

Also, can I further seat bullets in cartridges I have already loaded or do I need to disassemble them first to be doing things the "right way"?

If the info isn't available in a manual or online with a bullet, many times a call or email to the manufacturer will work. For now i would go with Nolsers data.

If you did not crimp, then no problem just seat them a little deeper. If you did crimp, it will depend on how tight. Try a couple and see how hard they are to seat or if the neck starts to shave copper.

The ones that were a problem. roll them on a flat surface and look for a wobble in the tip. Sometimes, like I said before you can see a bulge in one side of the neck. look at some good rounds and you will see a uniform bulge all the way around. It should be easy to spot since these are not seated all the way down the neck.

If the ones that are a problem are crooked I would pull them and start over with sizing if there are not too many.

Remember that the SAAMI specs are only there to make sure a given cartridge will fit in a matching chamber. It really does not have anything to do with if a load will be safe or function. That data comes from powder and bullet manufacturers.

Part of the reason start low and work up is such an important thing is the difference between the Nosler and Barnes bullets. You might get away with loading the Barnes to Noslers length and minimum powder charge, Starting at that length and max charge could get interesting.