Concentricity-What is "Good Enough" for Safari Ammo

[mdwest]

I refuse to run down the reloading rabbit hole of attempting to develop the "perfect" round...

Once I figure out how to get a bullet to the desired speed that will result in the best terminal performance on intended game and then tweak the load so that I can reliably obtain MOA or better accuracy out of the rifle it will be shot out of.. I am done..

I go out of my way to make sure fired brass is cleaned really well (to include cleaning out primer pockets, flash holes, etc).. and I make sure each powder charge is +/- .01 gr.. and make sure all bullets are seated to the same depth as prior loads... but beyond that I see no reason to put more effort into ammo that 95% of the time will be shot at distances of 0-150 yards.. and maybe 5% of the time will be shot at distances of 150-250 yards (Ive never in my life taken a shot on game at a distance greater than that)..

Maybe if I lived further out west and was worried about shooting 300-400 across a valley somewhere in Utah as a matter of routine I'd take a little more interest in building the "perfect" round for consistent "match" grade accuracy... but based on my circumstances, anything more than what I am currently doing would honestly be a waste of time and energy..

 

[fourfive8]

Out of curiosity, I randomly checked one of my reloads and a factory round for neck runout. I had a hard time finding any factory rifle ammo! I haven't shot any factory rifle ammo in years. The 416 Rem Mag is 3x reloaded I had prepped for DG. It has R-P brass and a 400 gr North Fork FP solid. The 30-30 is a W-W factory 170 gr. I don't feel like doing a time consuming, statistically valid sampling of all my ammo. So take the results as you like

The 3x reloaded 416 RM had .003" neck runout.
The factory 30-30 had .008" neck runout.

 

[SFRanger7GP]

I have loaded sub-MOA ammo on a Lee Loader using the highly calibrated plastic scoop and military ID card for the perfect powder throw, and my calibrated hand and hammer to beat the bullet into the brass.

Safe shooting

 

[Velo Dog]

It’s just my 2 Pennie’s worth so, take it for only that low price.
But, if a hunter can, from standing over shooting sticks, consistently hit a coffee cup at 100 paces, a grapefruit at 200 paces and a gallon paint bucket at 300, they will do extremely well in Africa.
If however, one is hunting ground squirrels and such here in N. America, they should strive for the iconic 3 shots into a maximum of 1” at 100 yards / meters.

 

[ZG47]

I've been a hand loader for 25+ years and the one detail of the finished ammo that seems to take on a life of its own is concentricity. I fully realize that when shooting at extreme ranges 500+, it becomes a pretty important detail,....BUT, I'm interested in hearing other Hand Loaders opinions. When using a 375 and up in bore diameter and hunting at ranges of 200 yards and less, sometimes much less, how important is concentricity really?? I've measured run out out lots of factory ammo and have seen everything out to 10 thou, sometimes even more. I really struggle to get below 3, and usually end up between 3-5. Interested to hear what others are getting on average.

It seems to me that concentricity is more of an issue with boat-tail bullets, especially the short shank versions because it is more of a challenge to get them properly centred as they enter the leade and therefore you try to get bullets as concentric to the chamber as possible. Experienced target shooters (bench-resters excepted) do not even bother with boat-tail bullets at ranges below 300 yards, unless they have bulk-bought at a very cheap rate through their NRA club.

 

[fourfive8]

The slightest variation in the brass, thickness and/or temper of the neck and shoulder during sizing will create a mis-alignment between the neck and the body of the case. Then, as is necessary for good neck tension for hunting or hard use ammo, where the ID of the neck is sized from a couple to a few thousandths less than bullet diameter, there is a second opportunity for inducing runout during the bullet seating process. Target/benchrest type loading calls for neck turning to produce consistntent neck wall thickness along with minimal resizing of the neck and entire case so it maintains alignment with the chamber in which it was fired. The final loaded round then has minimal clearance for a slip fit into chamber and just enough neck clearance for clean bullet release during firing. Such loads usually also have minimal but very consistent bullet neck tension. The bullets are seated with a specialized bullet seating die that helps hold the bullet in alignment during seating.

I don't use many Lee dies or tools but their FCD die is a real jewel that allows for loading better hunting ammo without having to use excessive neck resizing to guess at enough bullet neck tension. The FCD die also eliminates the need to even try to use a roll crimp during bullet seating on hunting ammo that may or may not work in the first place and can even decrease neck tension or cause inconsistent neck tension. Another Lee die that is genius in design is their collet neck sizing die. It is not really suitable for some hunting ammo especially DG ammo but it is excellent for maintaining minimal sizing for slip fit of cartridge to chamber along with minimal neck runout. It is an excellent die for loading budget target type precision ammo.

 

[CBH Australia]

I refuse to run down the reloading rabbit hole of attempting to develop the "perfect" round...

Once I figure out how to get a bullet to the desired speed that will result in the best terminal performance on intended game and then tweak the load so that I can reliably obtain MOA or better accuracy out of the rifle it will be shot out of.. I am done..

I go out of my way to make sure fired brass is cleaned really well (to include cleaning out primer pockets, flash holes, etc).. and I make sure each powder charge is +/- .01 gr.. and make sure all bullets are seated to the same depth as prior loads... but beyond that I see no reason to put more effort into ammo that 95% of the time will be shot at distances of 0-150 yards.. and maybe 5% of the time will be shot at distances of 150-250 yards (Ive never in my life taken a shot on game at a distance greater than that)..

Maybe if I lived further out west and was worried about shooting 300-400 across a valley somewhere in Utah as a matter of routine I'd take a little more interest in building the "perfect" round for consistent "match" grade accuracy... but based on my circumstances, anything more than what I am currently doing would honestly be a waste of time and energy..

They are all valid points and I don't want to go to far down the proverbial rabbit hole either.

I do think though for some of us the reloading is part of the process and for me part of my general interest in shooting.

I try for the best accuracy because it gives me confidence in the field and it's just satisfying to develop a good load using whatever components are selected after trial and error or the conversations we have with our shooting friends.

 

[steve white]

They are all valid points and I don't want to go to far down the proverbial rabbit hole either.

I do think though for some of us the reloading is part of the process and for me part of my general interest in shooting.

I try for the best accuracy because it gives me confidence in the field and it's just satisfying to develop a good load using whatever components are selected after trial and error or the conversations we have with our shooting friends.

besides, improvement in the sport is incremental and due to the vanguard pushing the limits--we owe accurate factory ammo to the influence of bandleaders--the bar keeps getting raised, old "good enough" are no longer good enough.

 

[Doug3006]

I applaud hunters for taking pains to develop accurate ammunition. There‘s nothing wrong, and a whole lot right, with using a cartridge/rifle combination that far exceeds the need for accuracy for any given hunt. UNLESS in doing so, we compromise dependability. Some of the methods of improving accuracy can lead to disaster in the field. Neck sized rounds that work fine at the range can, fired in the heat of a Kalahari afternoon, get stuck and fail to extract. Seating a bullet to a length that “kisses” the lands often yields better accuracy. But, have you ever chambered a cartridge at the range and needed to reverse course and eject the round, only to have the bullet remain stuck and separate from the case? Powder raining down into the magazine? In the field, this is decidedly no es bueno.

 

[steve white]

That's HAND LOADERS, not bandleaders--spell check strikes again...

 

[Shootist43]

I thought I’d take a second bite at this apple. To answer the OP’s original question the obvious answer is that “concentricity” isn’t crucial for hunting ammo at “normal” ranges. When I’m working up a load for a new or new to me rifle, l’ll go through the effort to make each round as uniform / standard as possible. Once established I seldom change components. I don’t go through the additional effort for range / practice ammo. I’m pushing 80 and enjoy the time spent at my reloading bench almost as much as shooting tight little groups.

 

[joelpend]

I would forget runout. I chased that some years ago for 1000 yard benchrest rounds and I could not shoot the difference between my best and my worst. I never liked the idea of trying to straighten the round as I figured it would effect neck tension and have unintended consequences. If your reloading practices are good and you are using good components it is a non issue IMO.