Question about reloading

[dzander]

I have Lapua brass in 6.5 Creedmoor. I have shot it one time.
I have read that for reliable feeding etc you should Full length re-size, which I do.
I heard I guy at the range say he's fire forming his brass.
So my question is :
I take my once fired brass and full length re size it Is there any advantage to using the once fired over brand new brass?
Would there be a possible accuracy improvement new vs once fired?

If guys are saying there fire forming there brass, assuming there using brass made for the chamber there firing it in are they likely just neck sizing the brass instead of full length sizing trying to improve accuracy?

 

[Dthomas3523]

I have Lapua brass in 6.5 Creedmoor. I have shot it one time.
I have read that for reliable feeding etc you should Full length re-size, which I do.
I heard I guy at the range say he's fire forming his brass.
So my question is :
I take my once fired brass and full length re size it Is there any advantage to using the once fired over brand new brass?
Would there be a possible accuracy improvement new vs once fired?

If guys are saying there fire forming there brass, assuming there using brass made for the chamber there firing it in are they likely just neck sizing the brass instead of full length sizing trying to improve accuracy?

Depends on the chamber. For example, my current 6gt blows the shoulders out about .005 on virgin brass. I bump them back .002-.003.

So that’s .002-.003 that energy isn’t spent on pushing shoulder on fired brass. So a slight velocity increase usually happens.

I don’t see a big accuracy difference, but most will be shooting fired brass more often than virgin brass. So it makes sense to only using fired brass for load development and such.

I personally have dope for my virgin brass loads and dope for my fires brass. I also usually run a little lighter charge on virgin brass.

 

[Dthomas3523]

And no, if they are smart they are full length sizing every time.

 

[Greg Langelius *]

The feeding issue is only significant if your shooting routine is not primarily done with single feeding. For me, that separates my resizing into F/L for AR's, and differently for single feed (I have a quirky way of resizing my ammo for single feed that I'd rather not get into here).

There can be an advantage over new brass; it's fire formed to match the specific chamber profile, although that may take more than one firing. That may be overthinking, too.

Generally, your last assumption is correct.

In practice, I don't break in my new barrels, BUT, I do fireform 100 cases to the new barrel before I begin serious load development. That batch of brass will likely be used for the next 500 rounds through the barrel, and could be getting used for a lot more.

For first firing I try to load predictions of likely good loads. I believe that whatever is going on within the bore during those first 100 rounds, it is done by then, and that the bore's characteristics have stabilized; allowing me to do load development without other outside factors adding to the complexities of load development.

The key concept behind my own handloading strategy is to reduce the amount of working that the brass undergoes in its lifetime because this extends that lifetime. Every time the brass expands, contracts, and gets resized, the brass gets a little harder and becomes easier to split. That's called work hardening; and it's something I try to avoid somewhat (some is unavoidable).

Some people anneal the brass between resizings to combat hardening. I don't, because I consider brass cheap enough to replace it when it gets harder to resize. Annealing can be expensive, can have potentially serious unexpected consequences, and takes time I'd rather spend shooting.

Obviously, I'm not using extravagantly costly premium brass, like Lapua or Norma. Folks use that so they don't have to replace brass. I replace brass so I don't need to spend so much in the first place. It takes awhile before that occurs to the newer guys. Such extravagances are advantageous nearly only ever to the BR guys, who spare no expense to reduce group sizes by mere thousandths. For the rest of us, trade-offs can make more sense. My customary brass is Starline.

I avoid work hardening by setting the dies to reconform the case so that it fits as snug in the chamber as is possible without hindering chambering. Thus, there is less resizing necessary in order to restore the case to this ideal firing configuration. For AR's, this snug fit is overkill, and cases should enter and exit the AR chamber with less resistance.

IMHO, a properly resized case will fit snug enough that there is a quite small but perceptible drag on the manual bolt handle when closing it.

Greg

 

[dzander]

That's interesting. So maybe i'm kind of waisting my time trying to develop a load with new brass.
When you say you bump the shoulder .002"/.003" you must first measure the fired case then adjust your seater die to get the .002'/.003" bump back correct?

 

[Dthomas3523]

That's interesting. So maybe i'm kind of waisting my time trying to develop a load with new brass.
When you say you bump the shoulder .002"/.003" you must first measure the fired case then adjust your seater die to get the .002'/.003" bump back correct?

I use the wheeler method for sizing brass. I let the chamber tell me how much it needs to be sized.

 

[Dthomas3523]

I run new brass in club matches. I just load in the middle of the node I run (34.0 varget in this case) and just run with it. As long as it’s under an moa (most anything will shoot .5 moa nowadays), I’m good with it for Fireforming new brass.

Or I use new brass in the first 200 rounds in a barrel since I don’t mess with load development until the barrel speed has plateaued.

 

[Theunodb]

I did a test a while back and could definitely see a difference between full sizing and neck sizing only.

I loaded 50 rounds, 25 neck only, 25 full size. The neck only was more accurate. I feel that neck only also doesn’t work the brass as much making the brass last longer.

 

[Dthomas3523]

I did a test a while back and could definitely see a difference between full sizing and neck sizing only.

I loaded 50 rounds, 25 neck only, 25 full size. The neck only was more accurate. I feel that neck only also doesn’t work the brass as much making the brass last longer.

Most every high level f class and benchrest shooter disagrees with you.

 

[Theunodb]

? I know, just stating what I experienced. Will redo the test again sometime!

 

[Dthomas3523]

? I know, just stating what I experienced

Bet you didn’t mess with the seating depth though. ?

 

[clcustom1911]

There's a book out there written by Richard Lee of Lee Reloading equipment and in that book he goes into detail about neck sizing versus fill length sizing, the uses, advantages, and disadvantages to each.

Modern Reloading, 2nd Edition

There are lots of schools of thought on full length sizing versus "bumping" the shoulder back with a body die and using a neck sizing die afterwards versus neck sizing only and leaving the body alone because it's "fire formed" to the chamber.

I neck size only for several firings and only full length size in the event the casing will not chamber easily enough, or with anything more than slight resistance when closing the bolt. That's usually after the 5th or 6th firing and I'm good neck sizing for the next several firings or until the primer pocket loosens up and the brass is discarded.

 

[Theunodb]

You are correct, i left the seating depth the same for all. Back to the drawing board then

 

[Dthomas3523]

There's a book out there written by Richard Lee of Lee Reloading equipment and in that book he goes into detail about neck sizing versus fill length sizing, the uses, advantages, and disadvantages to each.

Modern Reloading, 2nd Edition

There are lots of schools of thought on full length sizing versus "bumping" the shoulder back with a body die and using a neck sizing die afterwards versus neck sizing only and leaving the body alone because it's "fire formed" to the chamber.

I neck size only for several firings and only full length size in the event the casing will not chamber easily enough, or with anything more than slight resistance when closing the bolt. That's usually after the 5th or 6th firing and I'm good neck sizing for the next several firings or until the primer pocket loosens up and the brass is discarded.

The only real “advantage” is saving time. And I won’t argue with anyone who neck sizes purely for that reason.

The rest of the reasons people usually give have been debunked time and time again.

 

[Dthomas3523]

Typical reasons for neck sizing and debunks:

Brass life: primer pockets usually gone before anything

Accuracy: you mainly control group size via seating depth. You can adjust seating and get just as good with neck vs full length

Consistency: bumping is far more consistent as you keep the brass the same size every time. Neck sizing and the brass grows with each firing until it’s too tight or won’t chamber. Therefore it’s inconsistent from firing to firing.

 

[clcustom1911]

The only real “advantage” is saving time. And I won’t argue with anyone who neck sizes purely for that reason.

The rest of the reasons people usually give have been debunked time and time again.

Typical reasons for neck sizing and debunks:

Brass life: primer pockets usually gone before anything

Accuracy: you mainly control group size via seating depth. You can adjust seating and get just as good with neck vs full length

Consistency: bumping is far more consistent as you keep the brass the same size every time. Neck sizing and the brass grows with each firing until it’s too tight or won’t chamber. Therefore it’s inconsistent from firing to firing.

I don't disagree with any of your information, and further, I know you're correct as far as thing being debunked, etc. I have my ammo process for my particular level of accuracy I am achieving and satisfied. In the event I want to take things up a notch I know I can ratchet things up with nicer dies, etc like what your process entails.

 

[dzander]

Thanks for the Help.
I have a forster Datum gage that goes on a caliper. Use it to set bullet seating depth.
There is another dial to measure the cases shoulder to the base. I measured 5 cases , there all the same length, so when i use my full length Die I'll set it so the shoulder is .002"/.003" back from the fired case, see how it chambers.
So depending on my chamber and how new brass is sized I could get a little better accuracy /speed since the case could be a lot closer to chamber dimensions vs the new brass.

 

[Dthomas3523]

Thanks for the Help.
I have a forster Datum gage that goes on a caliper. Use it to set bullet seating depth.
There is another dial to measure the cases shoulder to the base. I measured 5 cases , there all the same length, so when i use my full length Die I'll set it so the shoulder is .002"/.003" back from the fired case, see how it chambers.
So depending on my chamber and how new brass is sized I could get a little better accuracy /speed since the case could be a lot closer to chamber dimensions vs the new brass.

I use that method above, find out where my bolt drops free, and use that as my bump.

Could be .001 or .003 or anywhere in between. Then I just stick with that measurement for that barrel.

You can typically get away with a universal .002 bump. But it is such a quick process, I do it this way.

 

[dzander]

good video

 

[Greg Langelius *]

I do some things more simply; in some small way, because of my personal situation. I'm pushing 74 and don't expect another century of life, folks. Many of my choices are about handing my firearms on down to my descendants, and those young 'uns are not yet ready to dive carefree into that vortex which is precision handloading.

Because the odds favor them using factory ammo, all of my chambers are SAAMI. I won't bequeath them a firearm, or such, that has a latent hazard lurking within its innards which requires a special ammunition dimension in order to remain reliably safe.

IMHO, that's just another facet of responsible gun ownership. That's a compromise.

SAAMI chambers negate a lot of the labors toward neck clearance/concentricity. That's a compromise.

I arbitrarily load my cartridges to magazine length; partly because a lot of it will be fired from magazines, but also because of the factory ammo that it will be replacing some day when they do become accomplished handloaders. That's not a precise argument, but it's mine. It's also a compromise.

So how can I talk about precision handloading and compromise in the same breath?

Well, most of you are familiar with my obsession with the concept of the adequate. It is based on just how much accuracy is actually needed, and whether going deeper into the vortex is worth the time and cash.

For me, it really isn't. My accuracy criteria aren't slavishly based on numbers, but on concepts.

The first one is about defeating a target. If you're familiar with the term "Minute of Venison" you're on my wavelength. There are other similar goals and concepts.

Defeating the NRA 1000yd target is not so arbitrary once one recognizes that the 800, 900, and 1000yd target are one and the same. Look it up. There is no 700yd target, and the 600yd target is considered midrange, so all of that arbitrary MOA stuff seems to get kinda wishy.

It doesn't really drive my mission. For the most part, NRA targets are 2MOA for 10pts, and 1MAO for the X (unless we're shooting F Class, and that's been an actual sore point for me ever since they made that change...).

I don't shoot formal comp anymore, but I do work diligently to eke out what accuracy can be derived under the compromises I've placed upon myself. So how does one do this?

I do it by getting back to basics, doing every step with an abundance of consistency, and basing what I do on pretty extensive load development that stresses the need for a lot of data points. The millstones of justice (and precision load development/handloading) grind exceedingly slow, but they also grind exceedingly fine.

So what do I get in return? I get satisfaction. I can defeat my chosen targets. Once the load is finalized, it's also pretty simple to replicate. Each gun has a small notebook, and the process for replicating the ideal load is annotated for posterity. Along the way, everything is restructured for simplicity; like how my AR's and bolt guns all have one of the two generic ergonomic layouts.

Anything else would be irresponsible toward my offspring.

But it's also fairly practical, and can have application among you readers, too.

A lot of the process also gets archived here on these web pages for folks like you to consider.

Greg