-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
AMP Annealing Made Perfect is a load of horse manure?
- Thread starter secondofangle2
- Start date
Might be worth gas flame annealing half a batch and AMP annealing the other half, tumble them each separately for 5-6 hours, and them compare group size. Busy running the same experiment, and at least confirmed that effective neck tension (actual bullet grip) is way higher post AMP annealing UNLESS you tumble for a long time. Will shoot these in a week or so and report back.
I guess you could also chuck a bronze wire brush with fine steel wool wound around the brush in a drill and polish the insides of the necks until that oxide layer is polished out, but that will also strip out all the carbon left inside the neck... might contribute to bullet weld... Then again, maybe tumbling for that long has almost the same effect... Maybe i will try this tonight.
My experience is that the AMP machine is good for speed and consistency, but it has one negative side effect.
Not meaning to throw rocks, just trying to figure out how to resolve the oxide issue. Ideas are most welcome!
Nah, been around long enough to not give a rats ass about my post count. Long past being a teenybopper.
@ZY100: Just curious, what SD and ES (preferably large sample, so 40-50 rounds) did you get while using the AMP machine before you started with the 5 hour post-anneal tumbling, and after... So how significant is the effect of this sticky oxide layer?
I grew increasingly tired of the art involved with using the Annealeez (only took a couple weeks) and bought a Bench Source.
The Bench Source was better, but changing cartridges added a variable that made all my stored data moot.
I get Aztec numbers with ES's of 3 with simply weight sorting Brassman Brass .223 Rem once fired range pick up.
What in the fuck are you broke dicks complaining about again?
The Bench Source was better, but changing cartridges added a variable that made all my stored data moot.
I get Aztec numbers with ES's of 3 with simply weight sorting Brassman Brass .223 Rem once fired range pick up.
What in the fuck are you broke dicks complaining about again?
I found that after extensive research into an AMP annealer, my SDs and groups shrunk instead with the addition of a Bartlein Barrel.
Not meaning to stir the pot, so please don’t jump on me.
FL sized 18 cases of Hornady factory Match 6.5 CM once fired brass, case length between 1.918” to 1.921”, and fairly consistent average neck thickness (13.5 thou). Did not trim them. Then melted them all via Aztec mode to get the code. Results for Hornady show more variability than i have seen before for Lapua:
0139
0138
0138
0139
0139
0138
0139 (so far so good....)
0136 (low)
0140 (high)
0141 (high)
0139
0138
0139
0139
0137 (low)
So a delta (or ES) of 5 units. Not really sure what this means, and if this is significant or not.
FWIIW: Lapua brass neck turned down to 0.0122” (12.2 thou +- 0.2) has a setting of 0155, while factory Berger/Lapua ammo (unturned, average 13.3 thou +- 0.6 thou) got a code of 0156. So one thou neck thickness difference (but also different batches of Lapua brass) made the AMP setting climb 1 unit. Can anybody else confirm if they see the same/similar?
Checked 5 cases with a ball micrometer, and the Hornady necks varied between 13.0 and 14.1 thou as measured around the circumference of one particular case (measured at the same depth), but all cases seem to have this variation, for an average of about 13.5 thou. Did not really see major differences in average neck thickness between the cases.
Trimmed another set of 10 Hornady cases to the same length (1.910”), and checked them too. Got a delta of 3 units. So length trimming helped a bit, as expected. Seems to indicate that trimming every time will help achieve more consistent annealing.
Neck turned Lapua gave an ES of 2, which was the best result.
It seems to me that the big difference in the two settings (0139 vs 0155) has to be mainly due to the Hornady brass composition being very different from Lapua, and not neck thickness, so metallurgy differences? [I think it is well accepted that Hornady brass is softer, but should softer brass cause a lower nr?]
FL sized 18 cases of Hornady factory Match 6.5 CM once fired brass, case length between 1.918” to 1.921”, and fairly consistent average neck thickness (13.5 thou). Did not trim them. Then melted them all via Aztec mode to get the code. Results for Hornady show more variability than i have seen before for Lapua:
0139
0138
0138
0139
0139
0138
0139 (so far so good....)
0136 (low)
0140 (high)
0141 (high)
0139
0138
0139
0139
0137 (low)
So a delta (or ES) of 5 units. Not really sure what this means, and if this is significant or not.
FWIIW: Lapua brass neck turned down to 0.0122” (12.2 thou +- 0.2) has a setting of 0155, while factory Berger/Lapua ammo (unturned, average 13.3 thou +- 0.6 thou) got a code of 0156. So one thou neck thickness difference (but also different batches of Lapua brass) made the AMP setting climb 1 unit. Can anybody else confirm if they see the same/similar?
Checked 5 cases with a ball micrometer, and the Hornady necks varied between 13.0 and 14.1 thou as measured around the circumference of one particular case (measured at the same depth), but all cases seem to have this variation, for an average of about 13.5 thou. Did not really see major differences in average neck thickness between the cases.
Trimmed another set of 10 Hornady cases to the same length (1.910”), and checked them too. Got a delta of 3 units. So length trimming helped a bit, as expected. Seems to indicate that trimming every time will help achieve more consistent annealing.
Neck turned Lapua gave an ES of 2, which was the best result.
It seems to me that the big difference in the two settings (0139 vs 0155) has to be mainly due to the Hornady brass composition being very different from Lapua, and not neck thickness, so metallurgy differences? [I think it is well accepted that Hornady brass is softer, but should softer brass cause a lower nr?]
Last edited:
lapua 6BR 1x fired before anything done to it 0158...same batch 3x fired 0158
lapua 6BR fire formed 1x to 6BRX 0147...3x fired 0146
peterson 6BR 1x fired 0138...3x fired 0138
peterson 6BR fire formed to 6BRX 0130...3x fired 0131
peterson 6BR fire formed to 6BRA 0135...3x fired 0135
@NamibHunter im guessing its slight variations in materials within the same brand/lot or different numbers with different lots...lapua has higher numbers to anneal but the peterson brass can take way more abuse even though the numbers are quite a bit lower.
lapua 6BR fire formed 1x to 6BRX 0147...3x fired 0146
peterson 6BR 1x fired 0138...3x fired 0138
peterson 6BR fire formed to 6BRX 0130...3x fired 0131
peterson 6BR fire formed to 6BRA 0135...3x fired 0135
@NamibHunter im guessing its slight variations in materials within the same brand/lot or different numbers with different lots...lapua has higher numbers to anneal but the peterson brass can take way more abuse even though the numbers are quite a bit lower.
Y’all are doing way too much.
take your lot of brass. Weigh each one of them and stack them by weights. Find one in the middle and cook it in the amp. Use code for all brass and stop fucking with it.
take your lot of brass. Weigh each one of them and stack them by weights. Find one in the middle and cook it in the amp. Use code for all brass and stop fucking with it.
the funny thing is youve done or would do more than i would to get your amp setting...i open a box pull out a piece of brass and get my setting and im done.
now if you want to talk about weighing brass for an AMP setting then that would be a waste of time IMO because the extra .2 .5g weight difference is in the head not the neck/shoulder...also the dry weight of a case does not matter much if any...its the internal volume that is more important.
OK, let’s get back on topic.
Repeated the test that previously gave exceptionally high (and variable) seating force post AMP annealing, this time with a different bushing that reduced “neck tension” to 1.5 to 2 thou. Instead of tumbling the brass a second time after annealing, which took a long time, i simply brushed the inside neck for about 10 seconds with a nylon brush (mounted in the Lyman case prep center, but hand brushing will probably work equally well). That removed the red oxide layer on the inside of the neck quite effectively, as confirmed by visual inspection under a bright light. I then applied dry lube to the bullet only. Seating force (as measured with an instrumented arbor press) reduced from about 200 lbs (with 50 lbs variability) to 20-25 lbs and relatively low variability. Loud thunk (when the pressure ring on the bullet slid past the false shoulder left by the bushing) disappeared completely, and bullet seated smooth as butter. Problem solved!
My conclusions based on about four hours of testing different combos of brass type, bushings, neck turned brass vs not, different cleaning regimes, lube or no lube are:
1) No, the AMP machine will not half your ES or your group size, but it will make your neck tension more consistent from one reload to the next, and as the brass ages and work hardens, accurate annealing will reduce batch to batch inconsistencies. That makes it easier to stay inside the node you identified during load development as the brass ages. Yes, getting a premium barrel will do more for your group size than just about any piece of reloading equipment.
2) AMP code has very high resolution, perhaps more than truly needed, and that is not a bad thing, better too much than than too little resolution. Just don’t let that confuse you. Simply follow their instructions and pick an average case (weight and neck thickness) and sacrifice that one to get the code. Agree: No need to obsess about this!
3) Yes neck turning might perhaps theoretically improve annealing consistency, but my testing showed that the effect is very small if you open up the necks with either a good non-bushing die like the Whidden or a Sinclair mandrel. Don’t worry about that. [Neck turn if you really have to for other legitimate reasons (tight neck chamber, exceptionally thick brass like Alpha), but annealing consistency in the AMP machine is not a reason to do it.]
4) Does case weight differences cause inconsistent annealing and variable seating force? a) If you buy premium brass, with a narrow weight range out of the box, then my test results showed that weight sorting the brass showed no benefit in terms of annealing and seating force consistency. [My Lapua neck turned test batch had less than 3 grains of weight variation.] b) Brass with a large weight range: The Hornady batch of 40 (not neck turned, not weight sorted) Match brass had double the seating force variation of the Lapua brass, so at least consider weight sorting, even if it is just to get more consistent case volume (or just upgrade to better brass). [This particular result might have been caused by either annealing differences, or different springback and grip from cases that were thicker/thinner than average, or less than perfectly round inside necks. Hard to know without a lot of additional testing.]
5) Dry lube on the bullet helps a lot to achieve better consistency in bullet seating force. No surprise there. Putting dry lube on both the case neck and on the bullet did not show any advantage in my testing, but do your own test, YMMV.
6) In my situation, i would avoid using high neck tension in combination with AMP annealing. If you really have to use very high neck tension, because that is what your rifle likes, then consider tumbling the brass for 5-6 hours post annealing. You will need to do your own testing.
Summary: AMP machine works as advertised. As long as you deal correctly with the red oxide layer on the inside of the necks, you will be happy with it. [Alex, you may want to explain the reason for the oxide layer in your product documentation, and tell users to remove it.]
People who buy the AMP machine will appreciate the fast processing time, near-zero and mostly “idiot proof” setup procedure, and it’s good consistency.
We all have to figure out what our free time is worth. If you are time constrained and value your spare time, and you don’t mind spending the money, then go ahead and get one. Personally, I would like to shoot more and get better at that, and spend less time on reloading. So i am keeping mine! Not for sale.
[So why did i spend 4 hours running this experiment? Well, got a cold and this was a far better option than watching brain dead tv or reading a book!]
Hope this clears up most of the confusion.
Repeated the test that previously gave exceptionally high (and variable) seating force post AMP annealing, this time with a different bushing that reduced “neck tension” to 1.5 to 2 thou. Instead of tumbling the brass a second time after annealing, which took a long time, i simply brushed the inside neck for about 10 seconds with a nylon brush (mounted in the Lyman case prep center, but hand brushing will probably work equally well). That removed the red oxide layer on the inside of the neck quite effectively, as confirmed by visual inspection under a bright light. I then applied dry lube to the bullet only. Seating force (as measured with an instrumented arbor press) reduced from about 200 lbs (with 50 lbs variability) to 20-25 lbs and relatively low variability. Loud thunk (when the pressure ring on the bullet slid past the false shoulder left by the bushing) disappeared completely, and bullet seated smooth as butter. Problem solved!
My conclusions based on about four hours of testing different combos of brass type, bushings, neck turned brass vs not, different cleaning regimes, lube or no lube are:
1) No, the AMP machine will not half your ES or your group size, but it will make your neck tension more consistent from one reload to the next, and as the brass ages and work hardens, accurate annealing will reduce batch to batch inconsistencies. That makes it easier to stay inside the node you identified during load development as the brass ages. Yes, getting a premium barrel will do more for your group size than just about any piece of reloading equipment.
2) AMP code has very high resolution, perhaps more than truly needed, and that is not a bad thing, better too much than than too little resolution. Just don’t let that confuse you. Simply follow their instructions and pick an average case (weight and neck thickness) and sacrifice that one to get the code. Agree: No need to obsess about this!
3) Yes neck turning might perhaps theoretically improve annealing consistency, but my testing showed that the effect is very small if you open up the necks with either a good non-bushing die like the Whidden or a Sinclair mandrel. Don’t worry about that. [Neck turn if you really have to for other legitimate reasons (tight neck chamber, exceptionally thick brass like Alpha), but annealing consistency in the AMP machine is not a reason to do it.]
4) Does case weight differences cause inconsistent annealing and variable seating force? a) If you buy premium brass, with a narrow weight range out of the box, then my test results showed that weight sorting the brass showed no benefit in terms of annealing and seating force consistency. [My Lapua neck turned test batch had less than 3 grains of weight variation.] b) Brass with a large weight range: The Hornady batch of 40 (not neck turned, not weight sorted) Match brass had double the seating force variation of the Lapua brass, so at least consider weight sorting, even if it is just to get more consistent case volume (or just upgrade to better brass). [This particular result might have been caused by either annealing differences, or different springback and grip from cases that were thicker/thinner than average, or less than perfectly round inside necks. Hard to know without a lot of additional testing.]
5) Dry lube on the bullet helps a lot to achieve better consistency in bullet seating force. No surprise there. Putting dry lube on both the case neck and on the bullet did not show any advantage in my testing, but do your own test, YMMV.
6) In my situation, i would avoid using high neck tension in combination with AMP annealing. If you really have to use very high neck tension, because that is what your rifle likes, then consider tumbling the brass for 5-6 hours post annealing. You will need to do your own testing.
Summary: AMP machine works as advertised. As long as you deal correctly with the red oxide layer on the inside of the necks, you will be happy with it. [Alex, you may want to explain the reason for the oxide layer in your product documentation, and tell users to remove it.]
People who buy the AMP machine will appreciate the fast processing time, near-zero and mostly “idiot proof” setup procedure, and it’s good consistency.
We all have to figure out what our free time is worth. If you are time constrained and value your spare time, and you don’t mind spending the money, then go ahead and get one. Personally, I would like to shoot more and get better at that, and spend less time on reloading. So i am keeping mine! Not for sale.
[So why did i spend 4 hours running this experiment? Well, got a cold and this was a far better option than watching brain dead tv or reading a book!]
Hope this clears up most of the confusion.
Last edited:
