Being fine with 1/2 - 3/4 MOA, you don't need an AMP to easily do that; flame works fine.
Yes, absolutely. I can dump hundreds of cases and walk away. Spend time with my family or make dinner. The time gained is worth every penny.
Really doesn't mean shit. Do it 100 times then compare to 100 non annealed cases.
I use an Annealeez. Here's what I get over long strings:
Bro, you are missing my point. I am in no way arguing that the AMP is not better than flame. More accurate more precise, but also MORE money.
No it really doesn't because you could not flame anneal and get the same results. It's a placebo.Bro, you are missing my point. I am in no way arguing that the AMP is not better than flame. More accurate more precise, but also MORE money.
All I’m saying is, that for us poors, the flame WILL work.
The rifle that shot that group has over 800 written record rounds through it. I have used the same flame method from its new build until recently and it still shoots those same groups. SD in the single digits.
I would argue that annealing , while part of the equation for low SD is not the ONLY component to that end. It also factors in powder used,primers, bullets, etc.
I will also concede the point that small groups at 100 yds to not give a proven indication of performance of said load to 1000 and beyond (high SD will indicate long range performance at distance). I would also proffer that high SD loads generally will not produce small groups.
Bottom line is that while all you say is correct, flame annealing has a place in the total equation of reloading for some of us.
Now I will go be poor somewhere else…..
No, it really doesn't because the AMP isn't more precise or accurate. More consistent batch to batch maybe, but nobody has shown that makes much difference anywhere but in their head yet.
Its absolutely more accurate. They figured out through destructive testing, how to program the machines to return the brass to around 95-105 hardness. This was verified with testing and then creating the corresponding aztec codes that get it damn close to optimal.
Once again Hanus you have much wisdom and intelligence to contribute to the conversation.
Never go full retard...
Anyone who thinks annealing is "a placebo" is 100% lost in the sauce.
You have no idea what you are doing to your brass other than what AMPS advertising told you.
Any retard who cannot discern the difference between actual annealing and hitting it with a flame that you have no idea what its doing is a moron.
Not sure if you have reading comprehension skills or are just an easilly triggered snowflake.
Thank you for proving how stupid you are in so few words.
I thought flame annealing was a placebo? Is that out now?
I dont need to test any of that stupid shit. I test my ammo by shooting it you muppet.
Ya, their brass is right up their with Lapua, supposedly, and how does Lapua anneal...
Work hardening is a basic concept, its not a PhD thesis. Hit something brass or copper with a hammer....a lot. It gets harrder, more brittle,obviously so and it will split. Put it over a gas oven or open flame...beffore reaching that point...put it back under the hammer...see what happens.
So go ahead and tell us all how this was never done before you figure it out like 5 years ago.
thats all you got.
This shows how absolutley ignorant you are. It actually is a PHD subject with a TON of thesis written on it. You have post grads and phds who do this for a living.
(presumably a PEASANT) figured out annealing 
