Annealed brass opinion

[Ex E6]

Sorry - should have specified. Those were dry tumbled with corn cob.

So case polishing ,as corncob smooths brass effectively would account for more consistent release .

Have any of you ever tired BAM ?. It's coefficient of friction is less than half that of PTFE .
The “ceramic alloy” is created by combining a metal alloy of boron, aluminium and magnesium (AlMgB14) with titanium boride (TiB2). It is the hardest material after diamond and cubic boron nitride.

I've been working for several years with a couple of research and commercial companies ,trying to get a PLVD inside vacuum chamber deposition in Dies and eventually inside a barrel . Mere microns in thickness less than half the friction of PTFE ,with Diamond like hardness . SUPERIOR METALLURGY and Ledes which wouldn't fissure ,not to mention bores which could go 200K- 500K rounds ?.
Doing external coating IS and has been being done for a number of years . Getting the laser pulsed vapor evenly dispersed inside a small cylinder is proving DIFFICULT to say the least . Cutting edges ,tools, parts , firing pins , BCG piece of cake .

What’s almost as hard as diamond, slicker than Teflon and “green” enough to reduce the United States’ industrial energy consumption by trillions of BTUs a year? The answer is BAM – a ceramic alloy created by combining a mix of boron, aluminum and magnesium with titanium diboride. The world’s third hardest material, next to diamond and cubic boron nitride, BAM is as slippery as it is strong. With a 0.02 coefficient of friction, it is substantially slicker than Teflon (0.05) and lubricated steel (0.16). Discovered accidentally in 1999 by two researchers at DOE’s Ames Laboratory, BAM has now grown into the nanocoating superstar of a four-year, $3-million project designed to lower industrial energy usage by reducing machine friction.


Description of AlMgB14 Powder


Aluminum boride or Al3Mg3B56, commonly known as BAM, is a compound of aluminum, magnesium, and boron. Although its nominal formula is AlMgB14, its chemical composition is closer to Al0.75Mg0.75B14. It is a highly wear-resistant ceramic alloy with an extremely low sliding friction coefficient, reaching a record value of 0.04 in the unlubricated AlMgB14-TiB2 composite material, and a record value of 0.02 in the lubricated AlMgB14-TiB2 composite material. BAM was first reported in 1970. It has an orthogonal structure and each unit cell has four icosahedral B12 units. The thermal expansion coefficient of this super hard material is comparable to other widely used materials such as steel and concrete. TRUNNANO is a trusted global Aluminum-Magnesium Boride BAM AlMgB14 Powder supplier. Feel free to send an inquiry about the latest price of AlMgB14 at any time.

 

[Holliday]

Have you had a chance to test it yet?

I loaded those cases today and was disappointed to find that I had to keep adjusting the die to maintain cbto. Fingers crossed, the results will be better when I shoot them.

 

[straightshooter1]

I loaded those cases today and was disappointed to find that I had to keep adjusting the die to maintain cbto. Fingers crossed, the results will be better when I shoot them.

Hmmm???

It's can be hard to "maintain CBTO" when there's a variation from bullet to bullet in the distance between where the seating stem makes contact and where the comparator makes contact.

I don't pay much attention to CBTO as measured by a standard comparator because of this issue and why I sort bullets by CBTO as measured to where my seating stem makes contact. This way I know seating depth (how far the base of the bullet is into the case) is very consistent. Of course, not having too much interference in the neck helps with consistent seating.

 

[Holliday]

Hmmm???

It's can be hard to "maintain CBTO" when there's a variation from bullet to bullet in the distance between where the seating stem makes contact and where the comparator makes contact.

I don't pay much attention to CBTO as measured by a standard comparator because of this issue and why I sort bullets by CBTO as measured to where my seating stem makes contact. This way I know seating depth (how far the base of the bullet is into the case) is very consistent. Of course, not having too much interference in the neck helps with consistent seating.

I use a SAC comparator. I have grown vary accustomed to this pressure variance over the years. When I’ve gotten my annealing just right, the lube‘s working out everything‘s working out, I set the die once and I’m done. I’m generally getting within half thousands variance. I have found things such as a dirty die, dirty shell holder, rubber plug under shell holder too high, compressed load or a cracked stem etc. to cause this variance. Then of course there are variances in friction and tension.

I will see how they shoot, and this will be the corroborate my concerns or not. If I get a great SD and decent groups I’m home. Otherwise I may also consider putting some lube on the bullet ends as well.

When I decided to use this lube, I had not realized that Moly was also in his procedure. I thought the only thing he used was this neo lube. So perhaps that’s where the issue lies.

 

[Holliday]

Have you had a chance to test it yet?

As an aside, I tested powdered moly, powdered graphite, HBN, and neolube. With the exception of HBN, which I found to yield the most inconsistent seating forces (by a long shot), the rest were pretty close, but neolube won out. What I saw was that the spread in seating force was similar, but that neolube's spread was due to one or two "flyers" with the rest grouped very tightly.

I'll see if I can find some of the old plots. Honestly, though, the difference between any of them (with the exception of HBN) is so small that any would work. I find neolube, being liquid, quicker and cleaner to apply. Some people "paint" the inside of the necks - I dip the cases.

Follow up.

Interesting results.

Parameters:
Same 50 rnd box and times fired brass
Same batch that was just annealed
Same powder can H4831 (temp stable)
Same box of primers
Same box of bullets
20 loaded w/ Imperial wax on bullets: fired 5/29/25
20 loaded w/ Neo Lube #2 necks dipped: fired 6/19/25
Bench setup exactly the same and ammo temp were within 10°f

As you can see, with Neo Lube the avg fps jumped by 12 fps which I suspect pushed me out of my node, as my groups were not as good.

The ES and SD both did improve though.

 

[Rocketmandb]

Follow up.

Interesting results.

Parameters:
Same 50 rnd box and times fired brass
Same batch that was just annealed
Same powder can H4831 (temp stable)
Same box of primers
Same box of bullets
20 loaded w/ Imperial wax on bullets: fired 5/29/25
20 loaded w/ Neo Lube #2 necks dipped: fired 6/19/25
Bench setup exactly the same and ammo temp were within 10°f

As you can see, with Neo Lube the avg fps jumped by 12 fps which I suspect pushed me out of my node, as my groups were not as good.

The ES and SD both did improve though.


View attachment 8712934

Interesting results. My first guess, and it's only a guess, is that Imperial Wax is yielding a lower coefficient of friction, which is translating to a slightly lower pressure than when using NeoLube.

I wish you had an AMP Press to measure the seating forces - that would confirm this.

It would be interesting to play with your load and seating a bit while using Neolube to see if can reign in the group size change you experienced.

Also, can you post your process and all your components?

Thanks