• The Shot You’ll Never Forget Giveaway - Enter To Win A Barrel From Rifle Barrel Blanks!

    Tell us about the best or most memorable shot you’ve ever taken. Contest ends June 13th and remember: subscribe for a better chance of winning!

    Join contest Subscribe

Neck sizing vs.FL sizing

keith jones

Full Member
Full Member
Minuteman
Sep 14, 2010
407
3
45
Bulls Gap,TN
Which do you all do Neck or FL? I have a buddy that only neck sizes. I have read alot of post on here and other places saying that they get better accuracy from FL sizing every load always. So I am stuck wondering which is best. I know if you are reloading brass that has been shot in one rifle you can just neck size from there on. But would it be better to just FL size them. Thanks
 
The reason you FL size is for reliability, not accuracy. That said, there's no measurable difference in accuracy between the two methods for a practical precision rifle shooting setup.
 
I will go out on a limb and say there is no reason to neck size at all. You're just asking for a case to get stuck, and there is no improvement in accuracy. Even benchresters seem to be full length sizing these days (albeit very carefully). You can also argue that full length sizing has accuracy advantages in that the case has room to center on the lands.

Neck sizing sounds like a good idea if you are overworking your brass. But the solution is not to stop bumping the shoulder, it is to bump it back the right amount (.001" or so).
 
Last edited:
Is there a sticky for this topic? If not, maybe it's needed. lol

I recommend you FL size all the time. Just make sure you bump the shoulder back around 0.002" from what your datum measurement is on your rifle's fire-formed brass. Doing this will not work the brass much more than neck sizing and you will also gain the peace of mind that your ammo will chamber every time.

Here's a couple threads:

http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...ck-sizing-vs-full-length-sizing-question.html
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/snipers-hide-reloading/193598-fl-neck-size.html
 
Keith asked me to elaborate....so, I'll post it in here so others can benefit as well.

You need a headspace gauge to get the measurement accurately. SOMETIMES raising the ram of the press and screwing the FL die down until it meets the shell holder will get you in the ballpark, but not always.

Hornady makes a nice kit...you'll also need calipers: http://www.midwayusa.com/product/479...ith-comparator

Take the fire-formed brass and measure it with the above headspace gauge. Take that measurement and subtract 0.002" from it.....that's the number you want to see AFTER you FL size your brass for a particular gun.

To achieve the above measurement, take a piece of fired brass and FL size it....then measure it with the gauge....after that, you'll know whether you need to screw your FL die further in...or further out. We're talking 1000s of an inch here, so it doesn't take much movement of the die. It takes a few tries of FL sizing, moving the die, measuring and a few pieces of brass if you mess up...but once you find the sweet spot, secure the lock ring on the die and you're set for THAT PARTICULAR RIFLE'S CHAMBER.

Of course you'll have some runout UNLESS you never, ever remove that die from your press....but you will be within the ballpark every time as long as your lock ring is secured and you torque the die in the press the same every time.
 
After considerable "back-and-forth" between full-sizing and neck-sizing, I now use a 2-stage process that includes both neck sizing (Lee collet die) and body sizing (Redding body sizing die). I use the Lee die because it uses a collet to align the neck around a mandrel instead of an expander ball, and the body sizing die to size the case body and bump the shoulder. German Salazar's research shows that this approach produces ammunition that has extremely low levels of runout. For unturned brass it is better to neck size first, then body size when using a two-step sizing method; whereas for neck turned brass, there is no particularly significant advantage to one method over the other. The runout levels I have experienced using this approach have been extremely low, and I am sold on this approach.