salt bath annealing does not work

[Winny94]

This should be fun

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

 

[DarinC]

Good read! I was looking at picking one of those up. Not planning on it anymore unless others can change my mind!

 

[Cascade Hemi]

Why do so many people using salt bath annealing successfully reduce the neck hardness of their brass and have positive results if it does not work? Why does my own experience show that brass with five firings is less hard after salt bath annealing if it does not work?

 

[Winny94]

Why do so many people using salt bath annealing successfully reduce the neck hardness of their brass and have positive results if it does not work? Why does my own experience show that brass with five firings is less hard after salt bath annealing if it does not work?

based on what testing?

 

[CaptNemo]

The first question is always: Who paid for the testing ?

 

[Cascade Hemi]

based on what testing?

I don't think my post was word salad. You can feel the difference between hard brass and soft brass in the press handle, chrono results are fairly obvious as well. If salt bath annealing doesn't work why does brass come out less hard?

 

[AIAW]

This should be fun

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

I personally haven't experienced anything negative with a good old fashioned, well adjusted, MAP-fueled flame. To each his own!

 

[Milo 2.5]

The first question is always: Who paid for the testing ?

LMFAO, first, doubt I'll ever salt bath anneal, just musing to myself on how are lives would be simpler if we quit reading shit. Or asking for advice.

 

[spife7980]

The first question is always: Who paid for the testing ?

Sure, there is a degree of suspicion being that the manufacture their own product but I feel AMP was very thorough and transparent in their testing and procedures.

What factors are there out there that people think went undiscussed and are questioning?
Sure they didnt test the results on paper but thats even more ambiguous and overly onerous with less direct measures to boot. They would have to develop an infinite amount of loads to test ultimately, and to which people would be even more skeptical.

They gave us numbers and results and unless they are just outright lying I dont see what there is to really question here?

 

[Sheldon N]

I thought it was written in a straightforward factual manner. Makes sense that they would test competitive products, and if it produced awesome results they would have just remained quiet about it.

The way that they concluded the article was pretty non biased as well.

There are several ways to achieve correct annealing. Molten salt bath "annealing” isn’t one of them. For those reloaders considering getting started on annealing, and who are on a budget, we would recommend a gas flame-based option.

 

[Winny94]

I don't think my post was word salad. You can feel the difference between hard brass and soft brass in the press handle, chrono results are fairly obvious as well. If salt bath annealing doesn't work why does brass come out less hard?

So anecdotal evidence at best.
I dont even necessarily agree with the test's conclusion, as I would conclude SBA to be the least effective of the 3 main methods. "annealed" can be viewed on a spectrum, but this test quantifiably illustrates the shortcomings of SBA, and unless they are outright fabricating numbers, that point is irrefutable.

 

[One1Bravo]

I thought it was written in a straightforward factual manner. Makes sense that they would test competitive products, and if it produced awesome results they would have just remained quiet about it.

The way that they concluded the article was pretty non biased as well.

There are several ways to achieve correct annealing. Molten salt bath "annealing” isn’t one of them. For those reloaders considering getting started on annealing, and who are on a budget, we would recommend a gas flame-based option.

I agree. Looks like I'll be shopping around for a new annealing setup.

 

[Cascade Hemi]

You didn't answer the question. Are you suggesting the fairly large body of knowledge surrounding salt bath annealing is fabricated? It's strange that a single publication by an economically invested source is suddenly irrefutable evidence that everyone else is wrong. I'll wait while you answer the original two questions.

 

[Winny94]

You didn't answer the question. Are you suggesting the fairly large body of knowledge surrounding salt bath annealing is fabricated? It's strange that a single publication by an economically invested source is suddenly irrefutable evidence that everyone else is wrong. I'll wait while you answer the original two questions.

I cant answer your question without you answering mine first. You said it comes out less hard, I said based on what test, you replied w/ "feel". That is not a quantifiable answer, that is, literally, a feeling. I have test data that says SBA does not satisfactorily soften brass, you have nothing to counter that other than a feeling.
And i wouldnt say the collective knowledge on SBA is fabricated, but i would say its limited at best, and these test results prove out just how potentially ineffective it is when compared to flame and induction annealing.

And if you are questioning the potential bias in this test, why would they offer a budget alternative to induction being flame? they have as much vested interest in flame annealing as they do SBA...

 

[mcfred]

The first question is always: Who paid for the testing ?

Bryan Litz is full of shit too. He championed real BC testing, honesty and transparency in commercial bullet BCs, but all the while he was working for Berger! Corporate shill. These AMP guys are pushing an agenda too. Manipulators. Boo! Hiss! haha.

I'll stick to my torches (pitch forks) and a DIY induction prototype:

 

[Steel head]

View attachment 7079083


I personally haven't experienced anything negative with a good old fashioned, well adjusted, MAP-fueled flame. To each his own!

I’m still a torch and socket caveman.

 

[Bradu]

Sure, there is a degree of suspicion being that the manufacture their own product but I feel AMP was very thorough and transparent in their testing and procedures.

What factors are there out there that people think went undiscussed and are questioning?
Sure they didnt test the results on paper but thats even more ambiguous and overly onerous with less direct measures to boot. They would have to develop an infinite amount of loads to test ultimately, and to which people would be even more skeptical.

They gave us numbers and results and unless they are just outright lying I dont see what there is to really question here?

My feelings on it is they don't have much to lose because the people interested I'm salt bath annealing probably aren't going to spend the money on the AMP machine anyways. There are a few flame annealers that are more budget friendly that people will most likely go with anyways. I have a benchsource and can't bring myself to buy an AMP.

Testing done by shooting was mentioned but if you give any credibility to the testing done by Applied Ballistics, their tests didn't show much difference between annealed and not annealing. I always see people say there is a difference but how many have truly tested this out? I don't anneal as often because of that section in the book. I'm more apt to believe them since there testing was done with an amp annealer vs your average home using a flame to anneal. Who says they are even doing it correctly yet will be the first to say their method has perfect temps every time and their results don't lie.

 

[Cascade Hemi]

I cant answer your question without you answering mine first. You said it comes out less hard, I said based on what test, you replied w/ "feel". That is not a quantifiable answer, that is, literally, a feeling. I have test data that says SBA does not satisfactorily soften brass, you have nothing to counter that other than a feeling.
And i wouldnt say the collective knowledge on SBA is fabricated, but i would say its limited at best, and these test results prove out just how potentially ineffective it is when compared to flame and induction annealing.

And if you are questioning the potential bias in this test, why would they offer a budget alternative to induction being flame? they have as much vested interest in flame annealing as they do SBA...

You don't have test data, you have an incomplete write up from the seller of a competing product.

 

[Milo 2.5]

You don't have test data, you have an incomplete write up from the seller of a competing product.

Ok, other than the brass feels softer, where is your test data?

 

[Winny94]

You don't have test data, you have an incomplete write up from the seller of a competing product.

Believe whatever you want. I have numbers, you have non-quantifiable anecdotal experiences. Doesn't matter to me if you choose to ignore logic and reason, but again, just ask yourself, if the numbers weren't true, why would they recommend flame over SBA? Theyre both technically competing processes. In fact a guy who does SBA is not likely to buy an AMP because of cost, but the flame guy may since they are potentially already spending several hundred.

 

[whatsupdoc]

I dont think AMP was biased, they just posted their findings.
It seems that the salt bath annealing does reduce the brass hardness it just does not reduce it to a completely annealed state.

Annealing "brass" using molten salt is a proven method so there seems to be some discrepancy in the process we are using.
It could be that the time required to fully anneal the neck of the case would render the case base too soft to be safe.

Some of AMP's findings are odd where they annealed at 550c for 20 seconds where the neck would not go below 120HV but the shoulder went down to 95HV.

Did AMP test flame based annealing setups and provide data?

 

[Fig]

This is pathetic! Nobody is even trying. Let's make this thread go epic.

Molten Salt Annealing is bullshit snake-oil. The people who do it are poverty stricken rubes who've been taken by a huckster.
It makes the cases LOOK annealed, but they're really just discolored from sodium.

 

[Cascade Hemi]

Believe whatever you want. I have numbers, you have non-quantifiable anecdotal experiences. Doesn't matter to me if you choose to ignore logic and reason, but again, just ask yourself, if the numbers weren't true, why would they recommend flame over SBA? Theyre both technically competing processes. In fact a guy who does SBA is not likely to buy an AMP because of cost, but the flame guy may since they are potentially already spending several hundred.

I just want to see more findings is all. I'm not willing to do an about face based on a single article from a biased source when my experience is, at a minimum, different. With that said, I have less than $80 in the SBA setup so I'm not exactly invested in it. Perhaps this will be the catalyst that motivates someone to do a publicity available study on each method. I'm not to proud to admit when I'm wrong.

 

[sabrecross]

This thread is a bad as the guy who trolled my SBA thread and told me that I ruined all my brass...

 

[918v]

If what they say is true, salt bath people will eventually experience cracked necks.

Necks typically crack after about 12 reload cycles. As you approach the crack point hardness you’ll see the case mouth curl inward in relation to the rest of the neck.

I disagree with AMP on their opinion of what the optimal hardness is. I get best accuracy and ES from 2-3x fired brass. Their settings anneal too much. I use my own settings established with a 650deg Tempilstik. Necks remain semi-hard but never split.

 

[thaflash_la]

There are a couple interesting factors.

First, why aren’t they showing a comparison with their own annealing? They show one version of annealing doesn’t work... ok. But they’re not showing that expensive induction annealing is any better either.

So I found their previous tests with their own annealing. The testing methods and measurements are so incredibly different.

The best part, in their previous tests they didn’t polish the neck and shoulder because they found it increases surface hardness by about 15. So they measured inside the cross section.

This time, they polish the neck and brass of the salt annealed brass.

I haven’t invested in salt yet either. I use a torch when I have time to kill, and I’ve been playing with the idea of making my own annealing machine. But if I was mulling salt bath vs annealing this test tells me nothing.

 

[918v]

Induction annealing is better because you can control the heat and time precisely.

 

[ShtrRdy]

Is hardness the best indicator of what we are looking for in cartridge brass necks. It seems to me that elasticity and hysteresis are more important.

 

[mcfred]

It seems to me that elasticity and hysteresis are more important.

To each their own I suppose, but I think the results on target are more important.

 

[918v]

Maybe it depends on how you load. I load to mag length so I want the neck hard so it can guide the bullet to the lands before expanding to seal the chamber. People who jam and chase lands may want their neck soft.

 

[Bradu]

I know David tubb said in an interview that he doesn't anneal because he jams the bullet into the lands. I think he said with that method neck tension isn't as critical. Kind of hard to argue with his results because it obviously works. First time I've heard that reasoning.

 

[918v]

I have found that soft necks will group poorly. But as they harden through repeated firings the groups will tighten.

 

[Milo 2.5]

I know David tubb said in an interview that he doesn't anneal because he jams the bullet into the lands. I think he said with that method neck tension isn't as critical. Kind of hard to argue with his results because it obviously works. First time I've heard that reasoning.

I guess if he outright said neck tension not as critical in that method, we maybe got the whole story. I've found with top competitors, when discussing a single topic issue, you may get, "I do or don't do it", but rarely get the whole story to their end results.

 

[Jayhawkhuntclub]

I’m still a torch and socket caveman.

Um, that doesn't work. And if you do it you will over anneal your brass and very likely be killed if you were foolish enough to shoot any of it.
Trust me, I have this on good authority.

 

[SPAK]

I have found that soft necks will group poorly. But as they harden through repeated firings the groups will tighten.

Same here, 2nd and 3rd firing after annealing gives me better results. It’’s more evident in some of my cartridges than others. FWIW, I’m using torch flame with a pressure gauges to try and keep things as consistent as possible.

If I had the cash to drop on an amp I probably would.

 

[Milo 2.5]

Same here, 2nd and 3rd firing after annealing gives me better results. It’’s more evident in some of my cartridges than others. FWIW, I’m using torch flame with a pressure gauges to try and keep things as consistent as possible.

If I had the cash to drop on an amp I probably would.

It has been a common theme that the 2nd firing is the best after an anneal. But I need to ask, have you ever tried to alter your neck tension on the first firing, with say a smaller bushing, or a smaller dia mandrel if that is your poison? If you are not changing things up, it is not a fair comparison.
You may read that a number of guys anneal each firing, so that is your baseline, then you actually control your desired results through experimentation. And really, if annealed the same each time, results will be too.

 

[SPAK]

It has been a common theme that the 2nd firing is the best after an anneal. But I need to ask, have you ever tried to alter your neck tension on the first firing, with say a smaller bushing, or a smaller dia mandrel if that is your poison? If you are not changing things up, it is not a fair comparison.
You may read that a number of guys anneal each firing, so that is your baseline, then you actually control your desired results through experimentation. And really, if annealed the same each time, results will be too.

I have actually. What I ended up doing was running a mandrel in through the necks and then resizing. That “seemed” to duplicate or at least appeared to duplicate 2nd firing results.

That being said all of that was done with brass cleaned with SS media tumbling.

I’ve recently gone back to using rice in a vibratory tumbler which leaves some carbon in the necks. I haven’t yet tested what the results are of annealing before/after cleaning and whether or not the carbon makes a difference in regards to annealing end results.

When I get home and settled that’s on the todo list.

 

[Steel head]

Um, that doesn't work. And if you do it you will over anneal your brass and very likely be killed if you were foolish enough to shoot any of it.
Trust me, I have this on good authority.

Um, I have brass with 30+ shots on it that gets excellent accuracy and really good vertical when I shoot past 1000 yards that gets annealed with a torch and socket every fourth resizing.
So your good authority can eat shit.

 

[Milo 2.5]

I have actually. What I ended up doing was running a mandrel in through the necks and then resizing. That “seemed” to duplicate or at least appeared to duplicate 2nd firing results.

That being said all of that was done with brass cleaned with SS media tumbling.

I’ve recently gone back to using rice in a vibratory tumbler which leaves some carbon in the necks. I haven’t yet tested what the results are of annealing before/after cleaning and whether or not the carbon makes a difference in regards to annealing end results.

When I get home and settled that’s on the todo list.

Ok, good. It is our jobs to ensure repeatability. I never process brass till it is all fired for one rifle, and today I only process 10-15 after an anneal, load and fire them, determine if it is where I want to be before knocking the rest out.

 

[SPAK]

Ok, good. It is our jobs to ensure repeatability. I never process brass till it is all fired for one rifle, and today I only process 10-15 after an anneal, load and fire them, determine if it is where I want to be before knocking the rest out.

That is a concept I have never thought of outside load development...... testing the batch with 10-15 before getting the rest done. I may try that. I can think of a few occasions that would have saved me some ass pain.

 

[Jayhawkhuntclub]

Um, I have brass with 30+ shots on it that gets excellent accuracy and really good vertical when I shoot past 1000 yards that gets annealed with a torch and socket every fourth resizing.
So your good authority can eat shit.

Um, bless your heart! That went right over your head, didn't it?

 

[Steel head]

Um, bless your heart! That went right over your head, didn't it?

Guess so.

 

[Jayhawkhuntclub]

I'm a torch and socket guy myself.
But 30 firings?! Wow! What cartridge? I'm surprised you wouldn't have loose primer pockets before then.

 

[whatsupdoc]

The link below is the armys hardness testing of M855 case base. Figure 1 shows the minimum and
maximum allowable Vickers hardness at various case locations.

https://www.arl.army.mil/arlreports/2009/ARL-TR-4781.pdf

 

[Steel head]

I'm a torch and socket guy myself.
But 30 firings?! Wow! What cartridge? I'm surprised you wouldn't have loose primer pockets before then.

Winchester 243 necked up to 260.
They’re roomy cases loaded long so a bit more powder without running pressures up. and I always run a good bit of jump.

 

[Dthomas3523]

You didn't answer the question. Are you suggesting the fairly large body of knowledge surrounding salt bath annealing is fabricated? It's strange that a single publication by an economically invested source is suddenly irrefutable evidence that everyone else is wrong. I'll wait while you answer the original two questions.

The “large body of knowledge” currently out there consists of “it works for me.”

Unless you can point to actual studies that are similar to AMP.

The article does not delve into whether or not the results they saw would work good enough for the field. Just that it doesn’t meet their standards of annealing.

They also said that it achieves partial annealing, so that would account for your non scientific observation of the brass being softer than before you annealed.

And when they even suggest using flame annealers, that implies they feel like other products besides their own can either fully anneal or at least get very close to their standard.

Other than ballistics (and even then) there is very little real research done in the precision rifle world. When there is, and it goes against the “but that’s the way I do it and never had a problem” crowd, they lose their shit.

 

[Cascade Hemi]

The “large body of knowledge” currently out there consists of “it works for me.”

Unless you can point to actual studies that are similar to AMP.

The article does not delve into whether or not the results they saw would work good enough for the field. Just that it doesn’t meet their standards of annealing.

They also said that it achieves partial annealing, so that would account for your non scientific observation of the brass being softer than before you annealed.

And when they even suggest using flame annealers, that implies they feel like other products besides their own can either fully anneal or at least get very close to their standard.

Other than ballistics (and even then) there is very little real research done in the precision rifle world. When there is, and it goes against the “but that’s the way I do it and never had a problem” crowd, they lose their shit.

Finally, someone gets it. Why do so many people using salt bath annealing have successful results making ammunition? Like others, I prefer twice or three times fired brass over brand new brass. It seems like salt bath annealing, at least, lowers the hardness to those hardness levels. And, as you pointed out, AMP's findings say that as well. The question is is salt bath annealing good enough to make good ammunition? I have brass I have resized 10 times that produces SD's below 10 in loaded ammunition across 50 shot samples. My anecdotal results fly directly in the face of AMP's opinion of what ideal neck hardness should be.

My "shit" certainly isn't lost. It was funny watching AMP box owners take a victory lap because ego is obviously intertwined in this discussion. I paid less for my salt bath annealing set up than breakfast on mother's day for the family and if it turns out I'm wasting my time I can kick the whole thing into the trash without thinking twice. Heaven forbid, however, if I ask for more information than what AMP's website posting provides.

 

[Winny94]

Finally, someone gets it. Why do so many people using salt bath annealing have successful results making ammunition? Like others, I prefer twice or three times fired brass over brand new brass. It seems like salt bath annealing, at least, lowers the hardness to those hardness levels. And, as you pointed out, AMP's findings say that as well. The question is is salt bath annealing good enough to make good ammunition? I have brass I have resized 10 times that produces SD's below 10 in loaded ammunition across 50 shot samples. My anecdotal results fly directly in the face of AMP's opinion of what ideal neck hardness should be.

My "shit" certainly isn't lost. It was funny watching AMP box owners take a victory lap because ego is obviously intertwined in this discussion. I paid less for my salt bath annealing set up than breakfast on mother's day for the family and if it turns out I'm wasting my time I can kick the whole thing into the trash without thinking twice. Heaven forbid, however, if I ask for more information than what AMP's website posting provides.

Success is reletive and way too many variables to pin down "success" to a single step. Who's to say you won't have more "success" with better annealing? For the 3rd time I'll ask; why did AMP suggest flame annealing over SBA???

 

[biffj]

Heat is heat. Doesn't matter if its applied through electric fields, torch flames, hot salt, hot lead or hot sand. The whole point is to reform the crystalline structure of the metal to insure it is in the desired state for the job intended. I find it amusing to hear all the shooters comparing methods and procedures when the metallurgists are just laughing. Of course your salt bath works great and so do the torches and even the overpriced overmarketed induction machines. They all apply heat.
Use whichever gets the results you want and quit giving too much credit to those who don't really know.....

Just my opinion of course.

Frank

 

[clcustom1911]

SBA setup: $100; somewhat effective to the Gucci annealing standard.

AMP: $1400; fully effective to the Gucci annealing standard.

As what has already been asked: Is the Gucci annealing standard the correct standard needed for a specific purpose?




I'll go be poor with my SBA setup which has been the one thing I added into my reloading setup which seemed to drop my SD's into the low single digits which is fine for my purpose.