new to reloading

[jippy1]

howdy,
new to reloading, inching forward on my first batch.
have watched Elfster's vids, read TresMon's articles, and doc 76251's article
been watching Sam Millard's vids at panhandle precision, on YouTube as well.

for 1xfired brass, Sam takes various measurements of 1) factory new, 2) once fired, and then 3)resized brass
I've got a few questions

for context, my goal is to get into prs, and reloading with this, . . . before jumping into the 6.0 to 6.5 pool
I am shooting a used, rem 700 in .308, 20" barrel, 1:10 twist
with probably 900 rounds downrange from me, and who knows (less, I am sure) from prior owner(s)

on my 1x fired brass, neck O.D.'s were pretty consistent at 0.343" to 0.345",

SHOULDER GROWTH is what surprised me, both by its lack, and its variation
1.6280, 1.6255, 1.6285
1.6260, 1.6260, 1.6275
1.6275, 1.6270, 1.6285
measured with Hornaday digital calipers, and headspace comparator insert, (DEPRIMED) case base, to shoulder datum

so, 0.0030" variation in shoulder expansion, more than I' d have thought; since all cases were Hornaday Superformance, and were fire formed in my rifle, so I would have thought they'd be closer to one another.
thoughts?


2nd observation:
I took readings on five boxes of new ammo
hornaday match : all four measured 1.6255 and precision hunter : all four measured 1.6250 )case base to shoulder datum)
three boxes of new Berger ammo had similar measurements : 1.6270, 1.625, and 1.623 depending on the projectile
four Bergers from each box were consistent with each other, but case varied from 155.5's to 185's, to 200.5's

kinda surprised that factory new cases weren't more homogeneous
thoughts?

got 100 cases, deprived, and cleaned, fixing to anneal.
had planned on full length sizing for 0.002" shoulder bump-but now I'm not sure what sized case goal to "SHOOT FOR"

my once fired brass chambers easily, which also surprised me.
is my chamber too loose?
headspace too great?
thoughts?

thanks
jippy

 

[kingaling]

On the 1x fired brass I think I would just set my .002" bump on the longest one. So the 1.6285". Set your bump to 1.626". I'd do it this way because it may take your brass more than 1 firing to fully expand. I'm a bit new to the FL/shoulder bump scene myself so if anyone knows better, feel free to school me.

 

[straightshooter1]

on my 1x fired brass, neck O.D.'s were pretty consistent at 0.343" to 0.345",

That .002 variance seems like a lot to me. But that could be due to an issue with the variance in neck wall thickness and spring back due to harness of the neck. In my guns chamber, I get a pretty consistent .343 with an occasional .0005 difference and I anneal after every firing and I turn my necks to a consistent thickness.

SHOULDER GROWTH is what surprised me, both by its lack, and its variation
1.6280, 1.6255, 1.6285
1.6260, 1.6260, 1.6275
1.6275, 1.6270, 1.6285
measured with Hornaday digital calipers, and headspace comparator insert, (DEPRIMED) case base, to shoulder datum

so, 0.0030" variation in shoulder expansion, more than I' d have thought; since all cases were Hornaday Superformance, and were fire formed in my rifle, so I would have thought they'd be closer to one another.
thoughts?

For the 1st fireing, that kind of variance can be seen in any brass, even with the high end brass such as Lapua. It takes about 2 firings for the shoulders to settle in. And again. . .there's spring back going on and keep in mind that every time you fire the brass it gets a little more work hardened resulting in a little more spring back. You'll also find that some cases will have more spring back than others and will keep doing so, especially if their wall thickness is substantially more that the others.

2nd observation:
I took readings on five boxes of new ammo
hornaday match : all four measured 1.6255 and precision hunter : all four measured 1.6250 )case base to shoulder datum)
three boxes of new Berger ammo had similar measurements : 1.6270, 1.625, and 1.623 depending on the projectile
four Bergers from each box were consistent with each other, but case varied from 155.5's to 185's, to 200.5's

kinda surprised that factory new cases weren't more homogeneous
thoughts?

That's very normal for factory loads. This is why your own hand loads can be so much better.

got 100 cases, deprived, and cleaned, fixing to anneal.
had planned on full length sizing for 0.002" shoulder bump-but now I'm not sure what sized case goal to "SHOOT FOR"

my once fired brass chambers easily, which also surprised me.
is my chamber too loose?
headspace too great?
thoughts?

Your chamber is fine. The more you fire the brass, the less likely it is that it'll chamber. Some brass may take 4 firings before this problem, some less than that. Once you get a 2nd firing, just bump those shoulder .002 and if you're annealing, you should find pretty consistent measurements.

But, keep in mind that case wall thickness is a factor in all your measurements and the variations in measurements happen as you turn the case in a caliper or measure neck thickness at different points with a micrometer.

 

[jippy1]

thanks for the thorough response

That .002 variance seems like a lot to me. But that could be due to an issue with the variance in neck wall thickness and spring back due to harness of the neck. In my guns chamber, I get a pretty consistent .343 with an occasional .0005 difference and I anneal after every firing and I turn my necks to a consistent thickness.

on some necks with the .345's, they were a little bit out of round, and probably averaged .344, since I also got .3425 on the same shells
I guess they must have dented from hitting concrete

 

[jippy1]

on another note,
I would greatly welcome any input into my workflow: all once fired brass through my gun

1 de-prime in lee universal de-capping die
2 ream and uniform primer pocket
3 tumble (may do stainless media here instead???)
4 bronze brush inside neck, and superfine steel wool outside neck
5 anneal (salt bath)
6 trim necks? here? or after full length sizing???
7 weigh brass / volume-sort with water volume. here? or after sizing and trimming???
8 wash brass again to get any last bit of salt out, then dry thoroughly
9 full length size of .001 shoulder bump (no expander ball)
10 neck size with 21st century mandrel set up

 

[bax]

My workflow:

• tumble to clean
• inspect and discard damaged cases (neck splits and head separations)
• anneal - I'm old school, I use the kind with torches. I can just see a glow as they leave the flame. My sizing and seating force is consistent.
• lube and size - Redding button dies. I squeeze necks to .332. I use shims to set shoulder to just about exactly chamber length, validate using the gun (remove firing pin and ejector to test). I can run the bolt pretty fast even if the case is half-a-thou too long. I measure with RCBS precision gauge.
• tumble to remove lube,
• expand necks, I use graphite to smooth the way. Expand to .333 - .334
• trim to length, see comment below about Giraud. I also shoot 308. I will usually use some value between 2.010 and 2.015, the number doesn't matter much. I just want this batch all the same plus or minus .001
• clean primer pockets
• prime, I use a Sinclair tool and have been for about 25 years. Its just a habit.
• charge
• seat bullets

I use a Giraud trimmer. It uses the shoulder as reference. In my case, I have to size before I trim.

YMMV.

 

[straightshooter1]

on another note,
I would greatly welcome any input into my workflow: all once fired brass through my gun

1 de-prime in lee universal de-capping die
2 ream and uniform primer pocket
3 tumble (may do stainless media here instead???)
4 bronze brush inside neck, and superfine steel wool outside neck
5 anneal (salt bath)
6 trim necks? here? or after full length sizing???
7 weigh brass / volume-sort with water volume. here? or after sizing and trimming???
8 wash brass again to get any last bit of salt out, then dry thoroughly
9 full length size of .001 shoulder bump (no expander ball)
10 neck size with 21st century mandrel set up

On #2, I'm not sure I understand what your actually referring to when you say "ream" primer pocket??? I like to uniform my primer pockets, but many people don't feel it worth bothering with. And that may be ok depending on the type and level of shooting one does.

I don't see the point of tumbling and brushing the inside of the neck BEFORE annealing (especially for Salt Bath Annealing). That should be done AFTER annealing to clean it all up from the salt bath. And because you're doing salt bath annealing, wet tumbling with pins would be a good idea so that the pins do a good job on the interior. With other types of annealing (flame or induction), one really doesn't need pins to clean the inside and the outside will get clean just fine.

As far as Salt Bath Annealing, there's a good analysis article about it you might want to read here:

Salt Bath Annealing - Does It Work? | Learn More | 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

If your going to weight sort your brass, that should be your last operation before charging and trimming just before that.

Here's what I'd suggest:

1 de-prime in lee universal de-capping die
2 uniform primer pocket
5 anneal
3 tumble with HOT water and little soap and Lemi Shine (stainless steel pins only if annealing by salt bath)
4 full length size with .002 shoulder bump (no expander ball)
5 expand neck for desired neck tension with 21st century mandrel set up
6 trim necks to desired length (don't forget to chamfer the inside and deburr the outside)
7 weigh brass / volume-sort with water volume

 

[bax]

If your going to weight sort your brass, that should be your last operation before charging and trimming just before that.

How many people sort brass like this? I tried it about 10 years ago with 308 Lake City brass; weight-sorted cases did not shoot enough better to justify the time. Volume sorting took even longer. Unlike annealing, most of the time I couldn't tell the difference.

If you are going to sort by weight, seems to me that you want the cases to be uniform size and shape so uniform primer pockets, size, and trim before you sort. Was I doing it wrong?

I did find one rationale to sort. I was shooting 300 win mag. I had a bunch of Winchester and about 100 Lapua and about a hundred RWS. The Winchester cases grouped around some average weight. The Lapua cases grouped around another average weight close but not the same. The RWS cases were maybe 30% heavier than the others. Turns out that they are much thicker than the others and had less internal volume. If I used the same powder charge, I got a lot more pressure with the RWS cases. Once I figured out what was happening, I just sorted by headstamp and problem solved. When I weighed a 50-round sample of each headstamp, I noticed that there were always a few extreme cases - weights distant from the mean. If I pulled the worse 5 cases out of each sample, my standard deviation improved AND by the way, those cases shot "funny" so it was worth it to know the acceptable weight range for Winchester brass. When I bought new cases, I could weigh each new case and discard the flyers without having to shoot them.

 

[straightshooter1]

How many people sort brass like this? I tried it about 10 years ago with 308 Lake City brass; weight-sorted cases did not shoot enough better to justify the time. Volume sorting took even longer. Unlike annealing, most of the time I couldn't tell the difference.

I don't really know how many, but it seems from what I've read and heard that many who shoot long distance or ELR do it. In my own experience, I did find it makes a difference and more so with some brass than others as not all brass manufacturers produce brass with particularly good quality control. And typically any sorting procedure is not done as a regular part of the reloading process, but as an initial process (kinda like fire forming is) to identify outliers and have a set of brass that are a reasonably uniform set.

Addendum: Here a pic and it source that shows 12% of the top 100 shooters sort their brass. . .

Reloading Like A Pro – Tips From Top Precision Rifle Shooters

I’ve surveyed the top 100 shooters in the Precision Rifle Series (PRS) for the past 4 years, and pub...

precisionrifleblog.com

If you are going to sort by weight, seems to me that you want the cases to be uniform size and shape so uniform primer pockets, size, and trim before you sort. Was I doing it wrong?

Sounds to me like you got it right.

I did find one rationale to sort. I was shooting 300 win mag. I had a bunch of Winchester and about 100 Lapua and about a hundred RWS. The Winchester cases grouped around some average weight. The Lapua cases grouped around another average weight close but not the same. The RWS cases were maybe 30% heavier than the others. Turns out that they are much thicker than the others and had less internal volume.

I guess it's not universally understood that cases from different manufacturers tend to have different case wall thicknesses, as one can easily determine when comparing the weight of thin walled Winchester cases to that of Lake City brass that is quite a bit thicker.

And it probably not a good idea to mix head stamps even if the weight of some of them happens to be the same as a different head stamp. Brass from different manufacturers typically have a little different alloy composition, which can cause issues with getting consistent reloading results. In fact, it's a good idea to not mix different lots from the same manufacturer as their can be some significant differences there too.

If I used the same powder charge, I got a lot more pressure with the RWS cases. Once I figured out what was happening, I just sorted by headstamp and problem solved. When I weighed a 50-round sample of each headstamp, I noticed that there were always a few extreme cases - weights distant from the mean. If I pulled the worse 5 cases out of each sample, my standard deviation improved AND by the way, those cases shot "funny" so it was worth it to know the acceptable weight range for Winchester brass. When I bought new cases, I could weigh each new case and discard the flyers without having to shoot them.

Yeah, when I do my weight sorting, I look for those outliers and make sure they're not used, if at all, with the set of that's more uniform.

Sorting by case volume would certainly work better than sorting by weight, but for me, I find that's just more work that just doesn't benefit enough for me. If I were competing at a high level, then . . .???

 

[TheOfficeT-Rex]

Either Brian or Emil mentioned on the last NoBS BC podcast that most of the weight variation in brass was from the extractor groove turning operation, and not from internal capacity differences.

 

[straightshooter1]

Either Brian or Emil mentioned on the last NoBS BC podcast that most of the weight variation in brass was from the extractor groove turning operation, and not from internal capacity differences.

Yes . . . even so, an analysis of some various cases shows evidence that a portion of the case weight variation is in just the annealing target zone. If you haven't read it already, take a look at Annealing Made Perfect's part 3 of their Annealing Under The Microscope report here:

Induction Case Annealer | Learn About Case Weight | 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

 

[TheOfficeT-Rex]

Yes . . . even so, an analysis of some various cases shows evidence that a portion of the case weight variation is in just the annealing target zone. If you haven't read it already, take a look at Annealing Made Perfect's part 3 of their Annealing Under The Microscope report here:

Induction Case Annealer | Learn About Case Weight | 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

Their own tables show brass with equal weights giving difference AZTEC codes, even after neck turning. I feel like that debunks the need to weight sort.

I think there is more validity in volumetric sorting. However, being able to produce an accurate, repeatable measurement is the limfac. Also, I don't think, within the same lot, it will make much- if any- difference, but if you want to try it, or it gives you confidence, knock yourself out. You lose nothing but time by doing the work.