Hello! 120 grain Barnes Match Burners seated to 3.34 OAL (industry standards) are making enough contact with the throat of the barrel that they are lightly sticking. 4350 IMR @55 grains leaves plenty of case capacity, without compressing the powder, for deeper seating. I know the bullet should not touch the landings, but any suggestions on how many thousandths to back it off shorter than OAL specs? Or other wisdom? Thanks.
.264 Win Mag bullet seating
- Thread starter coyotehunter
- Start date
.002-.003" off the lands? might want to load a few with different seating depths all the way out to touching the lands. chronograph is your friend.
I have some barrels that love bullets jammed in the lands a little. work up and be safe.
Thanks! I knew it didn't need backing off much, but wasn't sure how much. This barrel has some wear (throat erosion). These are the first Barnes Match Burners I have experienced. I had problems with the old, original Barnes "X" 250 grain bullets (.338) in a .340 Weatherby back in the early 90-s, and gave up on them for Swift "A" Frames, but loved the round nose Barnes solids. Again, thank you.
Your cases pass the case gauge correct?
At a quick glance, Barnes is showing
120gr TSX BT OAL @ 3.170
120gr TTSX BT OAL @ 3.225
I don’t see any data for the 120gr Match Burner advertised but I’m sure a quick call to them tomorrow would be profitable in your quest.
https://www.barnesbullets.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/264WinchesterMagnum.pdf
120gr TSX BT OAL @ 3.170
120gr TTSX BT OAL @ 3.225
I don’t see any data for the 120gr Match Burner advertised but I’m sure a quick call to them tomorrow would be profitable in your quest.
https://www.barnesbullets.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/264WinchesterMagnum.pdf
Split the case neck, put bullet in case, slowly chamber the case, carefully remove from chamber and measure, do this .5 times to make sure the measurements are consistent.
Back the bullet the recommended distance from the lands that you find is common with your caliber.
Back the bullet the recommended distance from the lands that you find is common with your caliber.
Reason to load into the lands:
1. resistance at the time of ignition offered by the lands replaces the need for a crimp.
2. Accuracy may be improved by minimizing the bullet jump as the bullet is more likely to be aligned with the bore. This is more likely a benefit on rifles that are not custom blueprinted and trued.
Reason not to load a long COL:
1.The cartridge may not feed from, or fit into a magazine.
2. Some rifles have such a long throats that you cannot reach the lands and seat the bullet sufficiently deep into the cases—my 243 is like this with light bullets, or VLD type bullets.
3. If you jam it too tightly into the lands, the bullet may pull apart if you try to eject a live round-makes a mess; don’t forget to retrieve the bullet before ramming another behind it.
You just have to test a few to see what works best.
1. resistance at the time of ignition offered by the lands replaces the need for a crimp.
2. Accuracy may be improved by minimizing the bullet jump as the bullet is more likely to be aligned with the bore. This is more likely a benefit on rifles that are not custom blueprinted and trued.
Reason not to load a long COL:
1.The cartridge may not feed from, or fit into a magazine.
2. Some rifles have such a long throats that you cannot reach the lands and seat the bullet sufficiently deep into the cases—my 243 is like this with light bullets, or VLD type bullets.
3. If you jam it too tightly into the lands, the bullet may pull apart if you try to eject a live round-makes a mess; don’t forget to retrieve the bullet before ramming another behind it.
You just have to test a few to see what works best.
This info might be beneficial, you may already have it. I could not find data for the 120 grain Match Burner, but they do have some data for other 120’s.
https://www.barnesbullets.com/load-data/
Looking at the Hodgdon reloading data from their website, it looks like you started out with less than the recommended powder weight. This may or may not be correct for your bullets, and may not pose any problems. Generally, when looking at the Hodgdon data, I find that if I start in the middle and go from there, better accuracy is attained on an initial load.
https://www.barnesbullets.com/load-data/
Looking at the Hodgdon reloading data from their website, it looks like you started out with less than the recommended powder weight. This may or may not be correct for your bullets, and may not pose any problems. Generally, when looking at the Hodgdon data, I find that if I start in the middle and go from there, better accuracy is attained on an initial load.
Yes, thank you. Most are even new cases.
