Thread: 6.5's

Originally Posted by Tentman

Quickload would give you the answer to that one Wildman but I don't have it loaded on this computer yet. I'll get onto it as the case taper etc might throw up an interesting answer. If you "improved" a 260 there could be no doubt, but as it stands the Creedmore is already an "improved" style of cartridge . . . .

Yeah pretty sure I've looked at it but can remember the numbers. And my quick load is buried in the shed...

I think I looked at seating depth at the time and the cartridge I looked at, comparing two extreme seating depths, there was less gain than adding an inch of barrel.

I think the act of seating projectiles way out as a way to improve performance has been confused these days. I think the real advantage is seen through getting the projectile close to the lands and thus accuracy. Not significant improvement in speed gained....



Sent from my F5321 using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Wildman

Yeah pretty sure I've looked at it but can remember the numbers. And my quick load is buried in the shed...

I think I looked at seating depth at the time and the cartridge I looked at, comparing two extreme seating depths, there was less gain than adding an inch of barrel.

I think the act of seating projectiles way out as a way to improve performance has been confused these days. I think the real advantage is seen through getting the projectile close to the lands and thus accuracy. Not significant improvement in speed gained....



Sent from my F5321 using Tapatalk

I can vouch for seating out adding no extra gains in performance as such. I long throated my 260 Imp after work up loads with original ream, just so I could seat those bullets out further and take advantage of the long mag length, plus they looked sexier End result was I had to add 0.5gr more powder to reach the same performance I had before increasing throat length. All this was with the one powder / bullet combo.