The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

**Unclenick** · February 25, 2013, 05:43 PM

Hdtramp,

Welcome to the forum.

While the information you've been given is generally true, in this case I suspect a typo and that Hodgdon meant 2.180", but call them to double-check. The problem I have with the data is not only that it violates SAAMI's maximum for a magazine, but that with that short, light weight bullet, 2.280" COL would only put the bearing surface of the bullet an eighth of an inch into the case neck. For a load to feed from a magazine without tipping the bullet on the way in, that isn't much to hang onto. At 2.180" it is about a full caliber into the neck, which is more normal.

But, again, call or email Hodgdon and ask them to explain it, just to be sure.

Nick

February 25, 2013, 05:43 PM	#5
Unclenick Staff Join Date: March 4, 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 21,061	Hdtramp, Welcome to the forum. While the information you've been given is generally true, in this case I suspect a typo and that Hodgdon meant 2.180", but call them to double-check. The problem I have with the data is not only that it violates SAAMI's maximum for a magazine, but that with that short, light weight bullet, 2.280" COL would only put the bearing surface of the bullet an eighth of an inch into the case neck. For a load to feed from a magazine without tipping the bullet on the way in, that isn't much to hang onto. At 2.180" it is about a full caliber into the neck, which is more normal. But, again, call or email Hodgdon and ask them to explain it, just to be sure. Nick __________________ Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor NRA Certified Rifle Instructor NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle