Okay. I wonder if AMP's findings were straight out of the annealer (no cleaning to change the brass surface).I clean, anneal, body size, collet neck size, graphite lube, mandrel neck expand.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Okay. I wonder if AMP's findings were straight out of the annealer (no cleaning to change the brass surface).I clean, anneal, body size, collet neck size, graphite lube, mandrel neck expand.
Check your concentricity.SO things were going well, my rifle loved my recipe (43.4 grains of varget with a 178 ELD-M, lapua brass, BR2 primers getting me 2667 FPS) and was typically in the half to 3/4 MOA range at 100 yards. To be honest, when I was working up my initial recipe, the rifle shot all loads under 1.2 MOA. I decided to start annealing to bring down the SD and prolong brass life. Since introducing the AMP annealer in to the mix, the SD has dropped from 18 to 6, MV has stayed within 5 FPS but groups have opened up to 1 MOA being "good" and 1.5 being more the norm. The rifle is still performing with old/reference loads continue to shoot half MOA. Any assistance/confirmation of where you'd go next would be appreciated
I'm using a 2nd gen Amp annealer, in AZTEC mode, when I ran the test it spat out code 170 (so that's what I've been using in aztec mode to anneal)
My old process
20 min SS tumble w/soap
lube
decap/resize
trim
chamfer
debur
mandrel die
45 min SS tumble w/soap
prime
load
New process
20 min SS tumble w/soap
anneal
lube
decap/resize
trim
chamfer
debur
mandrel die
45 min SS tumble w/soap
prime
load
I've read that some people are using graphite to lube the inside of the necks before they load, I haven't gone down this road yet, it's the last thing I can think to try, but I'd appreciate some opinions if you guys are willing to share them.
Since I turn necks, I particularly like to us a collet die to neck size (rather than FL size) after I've bumped the shoulder back by .002. The collet die squeezes imperfection out of the neck (like any doughnut that might be forming).
When I FL size, I do it without a bushing or expander ball, so I then use a mandrel to get to the expected diameter.
If one is using a collet die after FL sizing, I don't see the point . . . unless the mandrel in the collet die isn't the proper size. It seems to me by doing both, it simply increases the propensity for getting more run out than desired . . . ???
Who's using a collet die after FL sizing?
I clean, anneal, body size, collet neck size, graphite lube, mandrel neck expand.
That's what this sounds like ("body size = FL sizing???) :
Body sizing is not FL sizing. FL dies size the whole case. Body dies size only the body. They leave the neck alone.
OK. Understood. My bad for thinking something else.
Why run an mandrel through the neck after sizing the neck with a collet die? Can't get a collet die mandrel of the right size?
OK. Understood. My bad for thinking something else.
Why run an mandrel through the neck after sizing the neck with a collet die? Can't get a collet die mandrel of the right size?
The mandrel that came with the die was .3057” which produced .001” of neck tension with a direction of brass spring back AWAY from the bullet.
I then obtained .303”, .304”, and .305” mandrels to control neck tension. I found that if I used an undersized sizing mandrel with a .3065” expander mandrel I could get the desired neck tension with the direction of brass spring back TOWARD the bullet. Plus, the expander mandrel smears the graphite into the neck.
And I’m still sizing less than with a FL die.
no you can get mandrels for the collet die in any size from lee...
the idea behind the mandrels for final neck size is that they supposedly straighten out the necks and reduce run out,push any inconsistencies to the outside of the neck and all of this is supposed to reduce ESs..
i just got the imperial dry lube and a full set of mandrels from 21st century yesterday so i can see for myself if all this is true...i hate to add a step to my process but if they do all of what ive read and heard then its worth it to me.
all that said im skeptical because ive full length sized for years with an expander ball and have never had ESs over 25ish with samples in the 50 plus range unless there was something else causing it....doughnuts..varying powder charges..bad primers ECT.
im shooting a 6BRX and was shooting a 6BR and recently started annealing every time and like the OP everything went south...i normally anneal every 4-5 firing and my ESs in both those guns was never much over 20FPS with 40plus round samples.
?IMHO the collet die is a great tool as long as you turn your necks...i ran a body die and a collet die for a few years when i turned necks...i got tired of spending so much time at the bench doing prep work and started looking for ways to cut time and one of the ways was to stop neck turning.
I thought so. I know lee had a mandrel that's supposed to be .306 (about .001 larger than their standard .305). I had gotten one, but it just didn't work out for me and so it just sit with a collection of other tried tools that I don't use.![]()
Hmmm??? I still a strong skeptic with regards to it "straightening out the necks" . . . if I understand how these mandrels are used where there's no support of the body. It seems to me to be more about not inducing any more run out than what's already there.
AND, am quite skeptical about any movement of "inconsistencies" to the outside of the neck. This issue is what I like about a collet die in that it's squeezes the "inconsistencies" away (not so much from one side to another) and why we see changes in the size (length) of the neck where the material expanded to. After using a collet die, I not only see an increase in the COAL, but also a slight decrease in head space, which is evidence of what I'm saying.
I hope you'll post a detailed update on what you find.![]()
Expander balls weren't working for me (too much run out induced, like .006 or more . . . often). Am annealing after every firing as I'm convinced it's the thing to do given the expensive test results that Amp Annealing did:
![]()
Induction Annealing Brass | Our Research | AMP
View the latest articles from AMP Annealing. Get tips and tricks from our R&D. Here we upload articles to provide your the best possible information on innovations in the annealing process.www.ampannealing.com
These days, am getting single digit SD's and ES's under 20 with a surprisingly good amount of ES's that are single digits. Was really blow away a couple months ago with a 5 round ES of 3 and SD of 1.1.Sure'd be nice if I could do that consistently.
![]()
I too feel the collet die is a great tool . . . and very underrated if you ask me. I only wish the Lee collet die didn't leave little marks on the outside of my throats (apparently from the squeezing the throat takes). Hmmm??? Maybe I'll have to experiment and see if there's a way to exert less pressure to minimize this. Or . . . see if some kind of customization by Lee can be done.
if your leaving marks in your brass its because youve got the die screwed down to far and need a smaller mandrel...contact lee and they will make you what ever size mandrels you want.
It's not quite the mandrel that's the problem. It's the fingers of the collet that apparently don't come completely together leaving enough space for a slight ridge from some of the brass squeezing up into that space. This doesn't effect the interior surface against the mandrel.
So, I expect a smaller mandrel to allow the collet fingers to come almost completely closed leaving virtually no gap for the brass to move into, or . . . a better fitted collet to mandrel to get the right dimensions with no gaps that the brass can move into.
These ridges are really small and can be seen visually and even measured to some extent with a concentricity tool. Though, when you measure them, they've really small and don't seem to effect concentricity or the effectiveness of the loads.
yep I used a LCD for a long time I’m very familiar with them and how they work...are you or were you camming over when you used the die?
Yup . . . camming over, just a little.
Back off on the collet die a bit. If you are seeing ridges ironed into the necks and a shortened headspace after using the collet die, you are going down too far. Back up just a tad. There should be no headspace movement associated with the collet die....snip...
After using a collet die, I not only see an increase in the COAL, but also a slight decrease in head space, which is evidence of what I'm saying.
...snip....
Maybe I'll have to experiment and see if there's a way to exert less pressure to minimize this. Or . . . see if some kind of customization by Lee can be done.
Also make sure you are not over annealing the necks. The settings are for specific lots of brass. Sometimes lots vary in neck thickness. If you over anneal the accuracy will go away too.
i stopped using the LCD because i stopped turning necks and if not turning necks i found the LCD does not work so well
i to am skeptical but if you think about it the mandrel should produce the most consistent neck tension.
im lazy and dont like typing LOL...ill post up want i find but its not going to be a super detailed documentary.
i like to anneal every time because everything is just more consistent and now ive got the high ES issue figured out i will continue to anneal every time.
if your leaving marks in your brass its because youve got the die screwed down to far and need a smaller mandrel...contact lee and they will make you what ever size mandrels you want.
I did some unscientific testing of brass yesterday with the induction annealer I made. I don't have access to a metallurgy lab so I decided to take a few fully prepped cases and used a small vise to witness the impact of various annealing temperatures. I used identically prepped cases to ensure consistency. The approach was to slowly close the vise until contact was made with the case neck. I then rotated the vice handle a bit more to the same exact spot each time. Pre-annealing tension would be applied to the case neck and upon release off the handle you would visually see the neck spring back and retain its shape. Post annealing it was evident that as I started to cross into over-temp territory the spring back was greatly reduced. Going to glowing red led to a case neck that lost all springback and would stay permanently deformed. The point here is that case neck tension is going to change as you get closer to a full anneal of the case neck. When using a more manual process (ie. NOT AMP with Aztec) you really have to stay consistent on temp and time for each lot. Getting to any sort of glow is getting too hot.
Back off on the collet die a bit. If you are seeing ridges ironed into the necks and a shortened headspace after using the collet die, you are going down too far. Back up just a tad. There should be no headspace movement associated with the collet die.
If you haven't read this yet and like real quantitative testing to compare your observations to, take a look:
![]()
Induction Annealing Brass | Our Research | AMP
View the latest articles from AMP Annealing. Get tips and tricks from our R&D. Here we upload articles to provide your the best possible information on innovations in the annealing process.www.ampannealing.com
I’ve read that. I am definitely not opposed to sending some samples to a lab to see where things are falling from a metallurgy perspective if the costs are within reason. There is a lot of data out there but applying it to the hobby level isn’t a direct path.
For instance... in a general sense is the AMP unit getting to a higher than expected temp but because it does it so quickly the negatives are negated as they pertain to over annealing or extending too far down the body? If so mimicking that is trivial.
For their Aztec method to work they need feedback. I’m guessing they are monitoring temperature ramp rates to properly profile the brass. Their unit very likely also has power output limit control in real time. I think their unit is awesome but not practical for the average joe price wise.
I’ve read that. I am definitely not opposed to sending some samples to a lab to see where things are falling from a metallurgy perspective if the costs are within reason. There is a lot of data out there but applying it to the hobby level isn’t a direct path.
For instance... in a general sense is the AMP unit getting to a higher than expected temp but because it does it so quickly the negatives are negated as they pertain to over annealing or extending too far down the body? If so mimicking that is trivial.
For their Aztec method to work they need feedback. I’m guessing they are monitoring temperature ramp rates to properly profile the brass. Their unit very likely also has power output limit control in real time. I think their unit is awesome but not practical for the average joe price wise.
you guys using a mandrel and dry lube are you brushing your necks after mandrel sizing with dry lube?
I don’t.
Thanks guys.
so I’ve tried everything I can think of with annealing every time and it’s just not working so I’m going to go back to annealing when I see issues down range or spring back gets to bad.
Just out of curiosity, what setting are you using on your AMP? is it using AZTEC?
I have a batch of brass I loaded up for a match. Normally it takes about 30-35lbs of force to seat a bullet. I changed the annealing to “0142 +1” (6.5cm Peterson) on AZTEC and my brass hated that. Now it’s all over the place. 70-120lbs of force. I’m trying to figure out why such a thing would happen when nothing has changed in the prep process except the “+1” in Aztec.
I have a batch of brass I loaded up for a match. Normally it takes about 30-35lbs of force to seat a bullet. I changed the annealing to “0142 +1” (6.5cm Peterson) on AZTEC and my brass hated that. Now it’s all over the place. 70-120lbs of force. I’m trying to figure out why such a thing would happen when nothing has changed in the prep process except the “+1” in Aztec.
like @Dthomas3523 said more scaling...more heat equals more scaling in the necks...im just wondering why you changed things if everything was working especially without running a small test sample.
I have reasons. I don’t feel like writing a novel nor sharing my research and testing at this time. I have a few more test to prove or disprove somethings.