Question for the reloading collective

teyhan1

Well-Known Member
I was just messing about doing some loads for a bit of play this week.
I thought I'd bang up a standard Nosler round based on their website.
I have a Ruger No1 .257 Roberts.
Hornady gauge gives COAL of 2.858 with no jump
Bullet being used is Nosler silvertip 115gr.
Their load gives COAL as 2.750 with SAAMI spec as 2.800
Not that I don't think a No1 action would take it but I'm concerned about seating so much deeper

What say you
 
As always - seat bullets to give full contact inside case neck with boat tail just starting at neck/shoulder joint to give best neck tension friction area. - Measure COAL at that. Assuming it is less than your 2.858" , still fits in the magazine, feeds ok and doesn't go below SAAMI length. You will be ok to start working up the load from 10% below book max. for your mix of components. - There is no point in shortening COAL before doing the powder load work up as it simply limits case capacity & may not allow you to reach the optimum - You can always shorten COAL afterwards when you know the best performing powder load range following OCW work up.

Maybe Quickload could be used to give you some indications of likely pressure & velocities - It can offer guidance but it is only theory so mustn't be used as a shortcut.

Ian
 
You guys make me weep. :( Truly. Quick Load??? Really?? You can't reason this out?
SAAMI spec is generally the maximum over-all length a cartridge can be. Will the bullet be impinging on the powder supply to a great extent?? Are you starting at SAAMI Maximum pressures?? Or are you starting at minimum and working up as you should?? If the answers to the first two questions are no, and the last, yes, then it reasons that you should be fine. FWIW, checking several different data sources show the Max OAL to be between 2.750 and 2.775 inches. The original OAL was 2.75 inches.

You will be fine. ;) ~Muir
 
I know. It's just another case where the fixation on OAL shows itself to be more confusing than 'seating depth'. Two bullets of the same weight, but different lengths, loaded to the same OAL technically will generate differing internal ballistics.~Muir
 
If you are touching the lands at 2.858 then that's your starting point for this bullet. To be safe in hunting conditions you would not want to be touching the lands ideally, so come off 10 thou. If it still fits in the magazine and loads correctly AND there is plenty of bullet in the neck of the brass to hold securely theres nothing wrong with it.

Choose your powder and work your loads up from 10% off manufacturers max and watch for the sticky bolt/flat primers as usual. When you have found the max speed back of 0.3 grains at a time and look for your best 3 shot group. When you have your best group size fine tune by coming off 10 thou at a time on the seating depth.

This system always works for me. Never found a need for Quickload, it's theory and you still need to go through the above to be safe, but perhaps I'm just old fashioned.
 
Its a ruger No.1 FFS!
it doesnt have a mag that I am aware of
OAL should be of no consequence to loading the round

start your loads with at least a full calibre depth of shank seated and fine tune from there
I have yet to come across a rifle that requires a land kissing load in order to shoot

NO factory loads are anywhere near the lands
 
Its a ruger No.1 FFS!
it doesnt have a mag that I am aware of
OAL should be of no consequence to loading the round

start your loads with at least a full calibre depth of shank seated and fine tune from there
I have yet to come across a rifle that requires a land kissing load in order to shoot

NO factory loads are anywhere near the lands

Bewsher you are quite right of course it doesn't have a magazine. OAL therefore has no consequence with regards to rifles with no magazine.
To everybody else.
This picture may help as to why I think it just looks weird, not saying it is wrong it just LOOKS ODD.
Top round made to 2.754
Next bullet
Next bullet to max OAL
Next bullet

You see the bullet is more in the case than out of it on the first round and there is plenty of it seated on the neck even on the second round.
Is it me. Am I just having one of those :doh:moments.
View attachment 53507
 
Dohhh! - Sorry I missed the Ruger No1 bit. I must need new spex!!

That is a good photo demonstrating where you're coming from in your first post.

As previously indicated start off with the bullet set out maybe 10 thou off the lands, work up the powder load & possibly fine tune it by seating deeper.
That way your rounds will be more pleasing to your eye, (good for your confidence) and you can work safely from low to higher pressure loadings right through the process.

Ian
 
Maybe I haven't explained things correctly, I am often misunderstood.
I am absolutely not fixated by OAL.
Muir I have often read your posts on seating depth and going at least to the boat-tail.
You can see by the photo that I am WAY past that.
You can also see by the photo that if I were to follow Noslers reload data (which I was only messing about with) that the jump to the lands is nearly the length of the Ballistic Tip. Is that too much? The jump would be approx .120 .
When I was loading for my .30 cal I'd typically test depths from .020 to around .080 and would often find somewhere between .030-.065 would achieve a good result.
It just LOOKS ODD
 
I was taught to seat at least calibre diameter into the neck, not including boat tails etc. I havent chased lands or really even measured the o.a.l. for the various bullets I load. I have simply gone on load data from Norma/ Viht , measured factory rounds or seated calibre depth and experimented from there. As long as it feeds from the mag without either sticking in the lands and or being over pressure then it works for me. Pretty much all the ammo I load shoots sub inch, some even better.
As a rule seating the bullet deeper will increase pressure and can help if you are experiencing case sooting. Seating longer will generally lower pressure until you start sticking the bullet into the rifling.
But you know all this.
Nice rifles the Nr 1.
Either way it's minute of deer/fox.
 
Maybe I haven't explained things correctly, I am often misunderstood.
I am absolutely not fixated by OAL.
Muir I have often read your posts on seating depth and going at least to the boat-tail.
You can see by the photo that I am WAY past that.
You can also see by the photo that if I were to follow Noslers reload data (which I was only messing about with) that the jump to the lands is nearly the length of the Ballistic Tip. Is that too much? The jump would be approx .120 .
When I was loading for my .30 cal I'd typically test depths from .020 to around .080 and would often find somewhere between .030-.065 would achieve a good result.
It just LOOKS ODD
The jump on my 204 was over 200 thou!!

dave
 
Maybe I haven't explained things correctly, I am often misunderstood.
I am absolutely not fixated by OAL.
Muir I have often read your posts on seating depth and going at least to the boat-tail.
You can see by the photo that I am WAY past that.
You can also see by the photo that if I were to follow Noslers reload data (which I was only messing about with) that the jump to the lands is nearly the length of the Ballistic Tip. Is that too much? The jump would be approx .120 .
When I was loading for my .30 cal I'd typically test depths from .020 to around .080 and would often find somewhere between .030-.065 would achieve a good result.
It just LOOKS ODD

IT does, but so does the 6.5 Remington Magnum and 350 Remington Magnum -both of which have bullets largely in the powder supply. Nosler states they have tested that bullet at that OAL. I would go with it with a certain amount of faith.

I'm sorry. I'm not used to these long ballistic tipped boat tails and my original comment reflected that. I guess that impingement is the price you pay for the BC.~Muir
 
I'll test today (now 1pm Gmt) and post some results.
A bullet 1/2 buried in powder does seem kinda weird though
 
Sorry guys, I know very little about the Ruger #1, but not sure it makes a great deal of difference to the basic principles. Perhaps i need educating but what's wrong with finding out where the lands are and coming back 10 though off that as a starting point rather than starting with a SAAMI number which might bear no relation at all to your rifle chambers freebore? Surely seating distance to the lands is one of the first measurements you take otherwise how do you know where your datum is?
 
Sorry guys, I know very little about the Ruger #1, but not sure it makes a great deal of difference to the basic principles. Perhaps i need educating but what's wrong with finding out where the lands are and coming back 10 though off that as a starting point rather than starting with a SAAMI number which might bear no relation at all to your rifle chambers freebore? Surely seating distance to the lands is one of the first measurements you take otherwise how do you know where your datum is?

Why? Tell me when the factory shows up to measure your distance to the lands: I'd like to hear about it. Likewise, the reloading data... to whose (which?) lands were the technicians seating the bullet .010" off of when they developed the load data?? ;) Think on it: The finest match ammo in the world isn't loaded to .010" off of anybody's lands. Just to SAAMI or CIP spec. All loading data is based off of cartridge cases in SAAMI (or CIP) spec -no neck sizing or what not- having bullets seated within SAAMI or CIP spec. With that in mind, it seems curious that a person would go just the opposite direction, first. To my way of thinking, at least.~Muir
 
Last edited:
Does anyone know what SAAMI originally used to determine their COAL standards?

It is a very good idea to have a standard - but what is it based on? AND why were particular values chosen?

I suppose SAAMI may have taken data & measurements from "original" spec rounds produced by the cartridge designers & "original" rifle makers' chamber dimensions & started from there, with the aim of ensuring that rounds would fit in all rifles.

Looking at the Saami drawings there is no measurement of the bullets themselves - just the COAL, so it may be related to "original" rifle magazine lengths.

It would be interesting to know.

Ian
 
Last edited:
Back
Top