Have reloaded one of the first Lapua 6.5 Creedmoor batches and got 24x reloads so far. Primer pockets are still tight. SRP brass. Cut two open cases with a Dremel tool. No sign of head separation. Brass was neck turned and of course as per the K&M instructions i intentionally cut a little into the shoulder to avoid future donuts. That “negative” (inverted) ring eventually moves to just beyond the neck shoulder junction, so on the neck, making the brass thinner where the neck connects with the shoulder. Is this a problem? Enough reason to retire the brass? It was mostly neck sized via an LE Wilson hand die. Used a Redding Type S for FL sizing every 4 shots.
When do you know it is time to retire brass?
- Thread starter NamibHunter
- Start date
I've got 20+ firings many times. Usually pitch the lot when one has a head separation or neck split.
Either when I see just one leaked primer (I hate bolt face pitting so I have a 0 tolerance policy for loose primer pockets), or the ring of death starts to get deep around the web.
I do exactly what you did and cross section a case if my modified dental pick isnt sure how deep the stretching is getting.
I do exactly what you did and cross section a case if my modified dental pick isnt sure how deep the stretching is getting.
Until the pockets get loose or I split a neck... but let's be honest, I'll lose them before that happens.
Last edited:
Thanks guys!
Btw: Amazed the Lapua brass lasted that long! Never got more than 5 reloads out of Hornady (seems like very soft brass, primer pockets would open up), then moved to Nosler comp brass which lasted 12 firings before the primer pockets also got too loose.
Lapua is very good value for money, even though it initially costs more, around 4 or 5 cents per reload in terms of brass costs. Effectively nil. Bullet is the main cost.
Brass only got trimmed once, and only 20% of them. Started off at 1.907” (a little too short) and initially showed almost no changes in case length. Eventually (at maybe 15 reloads) had a few at 1.912” and then trimmed them all back to 1.907”. It seems some of them never grew by more than 1 or 2 thou. Is this typical?
So i wonder what is the record for Lapua 6.5CM reloads... i guess eventually the neck will get too thin, because the primer pockets sure do not show any signs of changing diameter, if you believe my calipers. Not shooting hot loads. Very careful with fire forming: Load a soft lead bullet long (into the lands, hard to close the bolt) and also crimped the neck to ensure very hard neck tension, lowered the powder charge by 2 grain. Seems to work well. Then mostly neck size.
Pretty impressed with the quality of Lapua!
Btw: Amazed the Lapua brass lasted that long! Never got more than 5 reloads out of Hornady (seems like very soft brass, primer pockets would open up), then moved to Nosler comp brass which lasted 12 firings before the primer pockets also got too loose.
Lapua is very good value for money, even though it initially costs more, around 4 or 5 cents per reload in terms of brass costs. Effectively nil. Bullet is the main cost.
Brass only got trimmed once, and only 20% of them. Started off at 1.907” (a little too short) and initially showed almost no changes in case length. Eventually (at maybe 15 reloads) had a few at 1.912” and then trimmed them all back to 1.907”. It seems some of them never grew by more than 1 or 2 thou. Is this typical?
So i wonder what is the record for Lapua 6.5CM reloads... i guess eventually the neck will get too thin, because the primer pockets sure do not show any signs of changing diameter, if you believe my calipers. Not shooting hot loads. Very careful with fire forming: Load a soft lead bullet long (into the lands, hard to close the bolt) and also crimped the neck to ensure very hard neck tension, lowered the powder charge by 2 grain. Seems to work well. Then mostly neck size.
Pretty impressed with the quality of Lapua!
Last edited:
I run them till they won’t hold a primer properly.
Haven’t split a neck since I started annealing.
Haven’t split a neck since I started annealing.
Way cheaper than Hornady when you can get that many uses out of them. The primer pocket won’t let go. You’ll split the neck if anything.
The old 1000 yd BR record was held by a 300 Hulk. Kinda like a 300 Norma but steeper shoulder and blown out shoulder diameter, made from Lapua brand 339 Lm cases. Shooter fired the record with brass that had been fired 60+ times. I’m sure there are some benchrest guys that long ago forgot how many they had on their PPC brass. It’s all about how you treat it.
The old 1000 yd BR record was held by a 300 Hulk. Kinda like a 300 Norma but steeper shoulder and blown out shoulder diameter, made from Lapua brand 339 Lm cases. Shooter fired the record with brass that had been fired 60+ times. I’m sure there are some benchrest guys that long ago forgot how many they had on their PPC brass. It’s all about how you treat it.
Last edited:
60+ reloads would be deeply impressive.
Presume it was a tight neck BR chamber with neck turned and properly “tuned” brass, so almost no case expansion during firing.
Anybody reading this who got their Lapua 6.5 CM Lapua brass beyond 35 reloads? What was the failure mode (neck split, primer pocket, head separation, other, fear factor)?
I’m currently running Winchester 243 brass necked up to 260 with 30+ loads on it.
I think it’s 36 but I’ll have to check my notes.
It’s just now started to not hold primers.
I always set my headspace tight, neck size a lot and anneal before running it through a body die.
Good to know. Don’t overwork the brass and you get a lot more life out of it.
Do you run a light load, curious what speed do you get (plus bullet weight and barrel length)? Trying to figure out if the second highest node of my barrel (about a 100 fps slower, for my rifle) would double my brass life... or not! Slow is better?
Namibian
I had some Remington .260 brass that got 24-26 firings with a .002" headspace bump. Case head separation was the failure mode.
The next .260 barrel I ran Lapua and retired the barrel at somewhere in the neighborhood of 2600-2800 rounds. Used the same 100 cases throughout. I tossed the brass because the following barrel was a 6.5 Creedmoor. Was still running fine at that point.
I may do a test sometime soon because I'm curious now. I'm running 6.5 Creedmoor Hornady brass. I'll get the AMP and Giraud set up for it and run a book max load with a .001" shoulder bump and see what happens. I shoot enough factory ammo anymore that I doubt I'll ever get 20+ loads on cases 'naturally'.
The next .260 barrel I ran Lapua and retired the barrel at somewhere in the neighborhood of 2600-2800 rounds. Used the same 100 cases throughout. I tossed the brass because the following barrel was a 6.5 Creedmoor. Was still running fine at that point.
I may do a test sometime soon because I'm curious now. I'm running 6.5 Creedmoor Hornady brass. I'll get the AMP and Giraud set up for it and run a book max load with a .001" shoulder bump and see what happens. I shoot enough factory ammo anymore that I doubt I'll ever get 20+ loads on cases 'naturally'.
I’m almost always loading to the second highest load. That 50-100 FPS loss rarely is the difference between a hit and a miss. Not only do I get longer brass life, but my barrel life is higher than typical too.
It’s all about what matters to you. Each to their own.
It’s all about what matters to you. Each to their own.
Thanks guys, this is very helpful.
Not sure if you can see that in the photo, but there is a carbon deposit on the first 0.4” of the case (above the head). I wonder if this affects internal case volume? Scraped it off in two places and if i have to guess, i would say 1 to 2 thou in thickness. Rest of the case has minimal carbon deposits. Sharp boundary between the two. The thick part is soft and flaky. Mostly used H4350.
I have stopped ultrasonic cleaning over a year ago due to high SD causing accuracy problems probably due to ‘bullet weld’, if that is indeed the correct term. Result was highly variable neck tension if i seat long, wait 3 weeks and then reseat. So now i use a tumbler. Media is a mix of corn cob and walnut. Bought it untreated, but i added a teaspoon of mineral spirits to suppress the white dust (which also seems to dissolve carbon, so outside if now very shiny, inside still has carbon in the neck - which i believe is desirable). And a small amount of Nushine car wax.
Should i worry about this? Did not notice a speed difference. But ambient temperature here in Texas varies a lot, so i probably would have blamed that. Pretty sure 30 minutes in the ultrasonic cleaner (i realize that is very long!) will surely take care of that, but then i have to worry about neck tension again.
Not sure if you can see that in the photo, but there is a carbon deposit on the first 0.4” of the case (above the head). I wonder if this affects internal case volume? Scraped it off in two places and if i have to guess, i would say 1 to 2 thou in thickness. Rest of the case has minimal carbon deposits. Sharp boundary between the two. The thick part is soft and flaky. Mostly used H4350.
I have stopped ultrasonic cleaning over a year ago due to high SD causing accuracy problems probably due to ‘bullet weld’, if that is indeed the correct term. Result was highly variable neck tension if i seat long, wait 3 weeks and then reseat. So now i use a tumbler. Media is a mix of corn cob and walnut. Bought it untreated, but i added a teaspoon of mineral spirits to suppress the white dust (which also seems to dissolve carbon, so outside if now very shiny, inside still has carbon in the neck - which i believe is desirable). And a small amount of Nushine car wax.
Should i worry about this? Did not notice a speed difference. But ambient temperature here in Texas varies a lot, so i probably would have blamed that. Pretty sure 30 minutes in the ultrasonic cleaner (i realize that is very long!) will surely take care of that, but then i have to worry about neck tension again.
OK, came up with a plan: Weigh the dirty-on-the-inside case on the FX120 down to 0.02 grain, clean the heck out of it in the ultrasonic cleaner, for an hour if need be, dry it and then weigh it again. Since the outside is already shiny clean, i can assume that all the weight loss is from removing carbon from the inside of the case. Will wipe the outside with alcohol to make sure there is no mineral spirits clinging to it. Take an average diameter of the case halfway up, and do the calc to determine average thickness of carbon layer.... Get density of powdered carbon from a materials table. Should work! If less than 0.5 thou, i am not going to worry about it...
Could possibly clean the inside of the case and get all that flaky carbon out with a bigger nylon brush installed in the Lyman case prep tool.... or maybe my OCD is kicking in!
Last edited:
I think this may be a case of no problem in search of a solution...
Last edited:
Mostly loaded 140 and 147’s at 2800 in a 26”barrel.
About 30% of the loads were 140’s at 2700.
Low node loads won’t double life but certainly won’t hurt.
The only reason I pushed my 260 hard is because i shot it a lot at 1200 to a mile.
I now have a magnum barrel inbound and my next 260 barrels will probably live on a milder diet.
My 260 barrel is a 28" L-W (SAAMI chambered), and I've been shooting 140's/142's out of it since about 2003. Not a lot, because it's a lot of barrel to have to contemplate replacing. Farthest I've shot it was 1000yd, and that only in F Open, for two or three seasons, it was well over a decade ago.
Chrono said it was doing 2850, but IMHO, chrono's lie a lot.
Greg
Chrono said it was doing 2850, but IMHO, chrono's lie a lot.
Greg
What I do is clean the inside of the case use whatver system you like . Then visually inspect inside the case with a Doctors Otoscope you can buy real cheap ones that work fine . If you see any thing that looks like a hollowing line on the inside and it also shows some marking around the case on the outside it's starting to thin at the web. If I can't feel that groove with a bent feeler wire I will run them again . This way I am visually and physically tracking the progression of the thinning each reload . After a while you will be able to predict that they are showing signs of getting too thin . Now this might only show that bad on a few cases in a batch . Some people I know just dump the bad cases and continue on but I prefer to dump the whole batch once a few start to look and feel bad . If you have already got a good number of reloads from a batch then there is no point in pushing the others further when a few have already shown up bad .
I visual inspect and check the pocket with this
I really don’t go to this much trouble, but agree that once you experience more than one or two case failures in a lot of brass, that it’s time to move on. In most cases (pun intended), you’ve gotten your moneys’ worth from that brass anyway.
When it doesn’t hold a primer anymore or the neck split, till then I keep annealing and shooting.
Cheer
Cheer
Primers, necks, case head separation.
I have some 6x47L that's over 20 loads there still doing awesome.
Some Federal GMM case heads were the first.
I'm able to check with ultrasonic measurement, the 6x47L is showing little brass flow and thinning in the case head.
The Federal GMM is showing nearly 50% thinning at 10 reloads. I have had one separation with this brass at 10 loads, and that is a hot load with 155g Berger hybrids and as much VARGET as I could cram in there.
I have some 6x47L that's over 20 loads there still doing awesome.
Some Federal GMM case heads were the first.
I'm able to check with ultrasonic measurement, the 6x47L is showing little brass flow and thinning in the case head.
The Federal GMM is showing nearly 50% thinning at 10 reloads. I have had one separation with this brass at 10 loads, and that is a hot load with 155g Berger hybrids and as much VARGET as I could cram in there.
OK, ordered one just now. $12.
Who would have imagined they actually make a go and no-go gauge for a primer pocket... but they do. One more piece of kit for the (ever growing) collection! Pretty sure it will work well. Calipers are not very accurate in this application.
Have ordered a cheap otoscope as well (the device a doctor uses to look into your ear canal), it is around $30, so not going to break the bank (yet). Bore scope does not see the section close to the web area, so unusable in this application.
Thanks guys, you all have a wealth of knowledge, and you are willing to share it. Thanks for the generosity.
Last edited:
Yep, you are likely right sir.
FWIIW: Just now measured case weight on the FX120 before and after extended (30 minute) ultrasonic cleaning: Trying to determine how much carbon remains in the case after tumbling. One case showed a delta of 0.25 grains, the next one about one third of that, around 0.08 grains. So there are small differences in the amount of carbon left over in the cases, but the difference is really tiny. The equivalent of the volume taken up by about 6 kernels of powder.
Mmmmm..... Not going to worry about it!
Yep, you are likely right sir.
FWIIW: Just now measured case weight on the FX120 before and after extended (30 minute) ultrasonic cleaning: Trying to determine how much carbon remains in the case after tumbling. One case showed a delta of 0.25 grains, the next one about one third of that, around 0.08 grains. So there are small differences in the amount of carbon left over in the cases, but the difference is really tiny. The equivalent of the volume taken up by about 6 kernels of powder. Mmmmm..... Not going to worry about it!
I would not bother with a primer pocket gauge just buy a Sinclair tungsten primer pocket uniformer and it will clean , uniform and gauge all at the same time . If you want longer case life then using collet neck die and body die reduces brass working dramatically . I don't get split case necks ever .
Last edited:
Are you using a caustic solution in your Ultrasonic cleaner because if you use anything like that it will harden the brass anything like ammonia also . Use an organic acid solution . like orange juice .
Carbon inside the necks is not good and contributes to neck weld because it is slightly corrosive and gritty ,
After some time loaded the neck starts to shrink due to the stress corrosion of brass . This higher neck tension in some cases will fuse parts of the bullet jacket to the case neck . The effects are higly variable and only a few in batch might do that over years . However variations in neck tension start from day 1 in any loaded ammo and get worse as time goes on . I did a 10 year trial of different ammo loaded and stored for 10 years . The one single most obvious finding was that moly coating fights neck weld and every mollied bullet fired and pulled fine . Bare inside necks suffered a few fused necks in parts of the bullet usually right at the base edge and varying neck tension , dirty necks were not welding as much but neck tension was very high . I also deduced that air and moisture in the air enters into the case neck down beside the bullet increasing electrolytic action and the ultimate negative changes . You can see the shrunk necks and the pressure is pushing the bullets out of the case . These are reloads so better sealed military ammo would last better and factory ammo with sealer in the necks would also . The Military fire off or sell their ammo at about 7 years . That's a 10 year old moly bullet that with a bit of a wipe looks like it's brand new . Accuracy could not be properly tested because I was just plain scared to fire some . However I did take 20 moly rounds to the range and they shot normally but doubled the normal group size and had a few spit necks . After that I did not want to fire anymore .
Attachments
Last edited:
Fascinating photos and write-up. Thanks for sharing, this is valuable information.
Have run a few small scale experiments over 3 months and i am 100% convinced that bullet weld is real.
I am using a mixture of Dawn dish soap (a mild base) and Lemishine (citric acid i believe), and a tiny amount of table salt (sodium chloride). No ammonia. I am aware that brass does not responding well to ammonia, including ammonia vapors. [Initially used Hornady OneShot but that is just so overpriced.]
There seems to be a widespread belief that a little carbon in the neck helps to slow down or even prevent bullet weld. Is graphite powder (Imperial Dry Lube) any better? I have also tried powdered mica, which is a chemically inert material.
The bulge in your cases look scary, must have been very high neck tension. If i understood you correctly, they were not looking like that at the time you loaded them? So the necks actually shrunk in size over many years?
What is the ideal way to avoid bullet weld? Apply a bitumen liquid to the bullet, like the military ammo?
The ammo was normal neck shape when loaded . This is an extreme case over 10 years but it does show that this kind of thing is going on to some degree in all brass . A proper moly coating showed quite clearly that it fought neck weld and high neck tensions . This test was mainly done to test Moly coating performance for my Moly coating process . Most shooters are not going to leave their precision loaded ammo in a box for 10 years . A few things that make the problem worse . Old harder brass to start with . Projectile not sealed so air can penetrate over time . No coating on the bullet . If you use new brass with nice soft necks , moly coat the bullet and seal around the mouth edge of the case and bullet with a thin edge of some kind of lacqer then the effects would not be as dramatic .
However the fact that the case neck is under stress ( tension ) from the seated bullet means that stress corrosion will start to some degree at some point and that hardens and shrinks the brass mainly in a radial direction . Carbon inside the neck does seem to fight actual electrolytic adhesion of the two metals , bullet and case neck . but it holds on harder because of it's gritty nature giving higher neck tension than moly coated bullets so it's a yes and no answer .
However the fact that the case neck is under stress ( tension ) from the seated bullet means that stress corrosion will start to some degree at some point and that hardens and shrinks the brass mainly in a radial direction . Carbon inside the neck does seem to fight actual electrolytic adhesion of the two metals , bullet and case neck . but it holds on harder because of it's gritty nature giving higher neck tension than moly coated bullets so it's a yes and no answer .
Last edited:
Thank you sir for the detail.
I have not tried moly coating, have considered HBN, presume that is a viable alternative.
I am tempted to use red Locktite on a few bullets and primers, and let them stand for a few months and then check MV. Also noticed Hornady sells a primer sealant on Amazon. Might try that.
Over years I had developed a particular regimen for case cleaning.
I tried Lemishine once, then switched to Wal-Mart Great Value Unsweetened Lemonade Mix. Same stuff, I reckon.
Then I stopped altogether because I figured that anything Non-PH-Neutral was caustic, and contributed to the welding problem. I tumble with Walnut. That's it.
I just acquired Imperial neck Lube (Graphite) and have begun using it; too early to tell what effect it might have on welding.
I looked at Moly, and did some research.
I concluded that Moly is a dry lube, and that when added, it's actually the second dry lube being applied (after graphite, which has been present in powder kernel deterrent coatings since before the dawn of the 20th century); is actually complicating the dry lube process, and also the bore cleaning process. Since I already need to remove carbon during the cleaning process, I'm thinking it's good enough to leave it go at that.
I once tried pretreating clean bores with an alcohol/graphite suspension; hoping to improve first rounds dispersion. Results were inconsistent/inconclusive.
When I wanted to try primer/neck sealing, I mixed clear and red nail polish, thinned it with remover, and applied it lightly to the case neck and primer exteriors. I never found any evidence that it was doing anything; good or bad.
When I was doing things with the neck interiors (not anymore), I took care to ensure that nothing petroleum based could contaminate the powder charge.
These experiments are only a small part of the ones I've tried in order to get a handle on accuracy, as related to handloading.
After a couple of decades trying all of those things, I came to a pair of conclusions. Just about every trick and toy works, to some extent. Taken together, they are time and patience consuming; and are a series of sacrifices that I really don't have all that much need for.
So I tried a "Final Experiment", leaving out anything that wasn't part of the most basic of ammunition assembly strategies. I also applied as much diligence as I could to getting those basics as consistent as possible. The end result was a small, and for me, acceptable reduction in accuracy. The time/stress savings were significant.
Some of them were unavoidable, since I stick religiously to a SAAMI chamber spec only policy, and many strategies, like those involving concentricity, can only render a very limited benefit with such chambers.
I found a happy medium.
IMHO, handloading is a chore, and I have kept that chore to the minimum. Many will disagree, and believe me, I've heard many, many of those disagreement over the nearly two decades I've been on The 'Hide.
I have my way, some have others.
Greg
I tried Lemishine once, then switched to Wal-Mart Great Value Unsweetened Lemonade Mix. Same stuff, I reckon.
Then I stopped altogether because I figured that anything Non-PH-Neutral was caustic, and contributed to the welding problem. I tumble with Walnut. That's it.
I just acquired Imperial neck Lube (Graphite) and have begun using it; too early to tell what effect it might have on welding.
I looked at Moly, and did some research.
I concluded that Moly is a dry lube, and that when added, it's actually the second dry lube being applied (after graphite, which has been present in powder kernel deterrent coatings since before the dawn of the 20th century); is actually complicating the dry lube process, and also the bore cleaning process. Since I already need to remove carbon during the cleaning process, I'm thinking it's good enough to leave it go at that.
I once tried pretreating clean bores with an alcohol/graphite suspension; hoping to improve first rounds dispersion. Results were inconsistent/inconclusive.
When I wanted to try primer/neck sealing, I mixed clear and red nail polish, thinned it with remover, and applied it lightly to the case neck and primer exteriors. I never found any evidence that it was doing anything; good or bad.
When I was doing things with the neck interiors (not anymore), I took care to ensure that nothing petroleum based could contaminate the powder charge.
These experiments are only a small part of the ones I've tried in order to get a handle on accuracy, as related to handloading.
After a couple of decades trying all of those things, I came to a pair of conclusions. Just about every trick and toy works, to some extent. Taken together, they are time and patience consuming; and are a series of sacrifices that I really don't have all that much need for.
So I tried a "Final Experiment", leaving out anything that wasn't part of the most basic of ammunition assembly strategies. I also applied as much diligence as I could to getting those basics as consistent as possible. The end result was a small, and for me, acceptable reduction in accuracy. The time/stress savings were significant.
Some of them were unavoidable, since I stick religiously to a SAAMI chamber spec only policy, and many strategies, like those involving concentricity, can only render a very limited benefit with such chambers.
I found a happy medium.
IMHO, handloading is a chore, and I have kept that chore to the minimum. Many will disagree, and believe me, I've heard many, many of those disagreement over the nearly two decades I've been on The 'Hide.
I have my way, some have others.
Greg
Greg, i am seriously interested in reducing the number of reloading steps i follow, as it just takes up too much of my time. Would rather be out shooting more, than reloading. If i can load 2x faster, and groups open up 15% or even 20%, i would go for it. I would still load one box of “match grade” ammo per month to prove to myself that the gun (and the owner of the gun) can still shoot the five shot groups that i get today. So i will know when to order a new barrel. But 80% of my ammo is used on steel targets.
I know some people will throw rocks, but if you care to write it down, i am all ears. Posting it might benefit many, but PM works too. I know how to design a valid experiment to test the basic hypothesis and test for statistical significance: That groups open up a finite (but small) amount if the reloader reduces his procedure to the following minimal list of n steps.
Maybe start a new thread on minimalist reloading?
And yes i do realize that what works in one rifle might not work in another. If that is the case, i will try it in a different rifle.
Last edited:
{quote} I concluded that Moly is a dry lube, and that when added, it's actually the second dry lube being applied (after graphite, which has been present in powder kernel deterrent coatings since before the dawn of the 20th century); is actually complicating the dry lube process, and also the bore cleaning process. Since I already need to remove carbon during the cleaning process, I'm thinking it's good enough to leave it go at that. {quote/}
You did research from the wrong people , that is all wrong . I did my research through National laboratory Los Alamos and NASA . NASA did lots of experiments with MoS2 and proved it's capabilities in space program .
Moly is not a lubricant it is a friction modifier . It has high coefficient of friction on steel but low coefficient against it's self , The molecular bonds in moly have sulphur in them which is weak compared to the other molecules and the slip is on the sulphur . A coating gets on the bore and sticks , a coating is stuck to the bullet as the two moly surfaces engage , the sulfur it dislodges , crushes and slides between the two stuck layers of moly .
It's not complicating any dry lube that makes no sense .
In my 223 I fire about 250 to 300 rounds before cleaning so that is reducing cleaning dramatically .
Moly cleans out down to the steel surface fairly easy with normal brushing and solvents . You just can't get it all out 100% as it's in the fine structure of the steel which is good as its the basis for a new coating to lay down . MoS2 has a higher load bearing ability than HBN . HBN is just a cleaner option for those who don't know what they are doing . It's NOT superior to Moly , only easier to coat and cleaner . HBN has little benefit but it's easy to sell . Barrel manufacturers had to try an kill moly coating as quickly as possible enter HBN .
You did research from the wrong people , that is all wrong . I did my research through National laboratory Los Alamos and NASA . NASA did lots of experiments with MoS2 and proved it's capabilities in space program .
Moly is not a lubricant it is a friction modifier . It has high coefficient of friction on steel but low coefficient against it's self , The molecular bonds in moly have sulphur in them which is weak compared to the other molecules and the slip is on the sulphur . A coating gets on the bore and sticks , a coating is stuck to the bullet as the two moly surfaces engage , the sulfur it dislodges , crushes and slides between the two stuck layers of moly .
It's not complicating any dry lube that makes no sense .
In my 223 I fire about 250 to 300 rounds before cleaning so that is reducing cleaning dramatically .
Moly cleans out down to the steel surface fairly easy with normal brushing and solvents . You just can't get it all out 100% as it's in the fine structure of the steel which is good as its the basis for a new coating to lay down . MoS2 has a higher load bearing ability than HBN . HBN is just a cleaner option for those who don't know what they are doing . It's NOT superior to Moly , only easier to coat and cleaner . HBN has little benefit but it's easy to sell . Barrel manufacturers had to try an kill moly coating as quickly as possible enter HBN .
Last edited:
HBN is easy to coat and cleaner and that's about it . It does very little to protect the bore because it can't build on it's self and has no slip layer . Those that love HBN are only focused on ease of use . It wont do much harm but I prefer someting that actually does some good even if it is a bit more work .
Last edited:
So, clear up for me just what this has to do with when one should retire brass. I fire just about, hell I don’t know, but at least 500+ rounds before my barrel needs cleaning and get somewhere about 1-1/2 to 2 times the barrel life than some do in my .260, by just loading down a node or so and no additives or snake oil needed.
Plus, my brass life is longer. All in all, I’d say that my method is not only easier than either moly or HBN, but also less expensive.
I must be doing something wrong.
My main research was Cartridges of the World, maybe 20 years ago. I am always eager to learn more, and I did so today. Thank you for your helpful info.
The reason stated for inclusion of graphite was as an ESD deterrent (electrostatic discharge), permitting transport of Propellants for long distances over uneven roads, preventing ESD triggered detonation of black powder. As I believe, it remains an important safety additive.
It also happens to be a dry lubricant, and constitutes a large segment of what is termed Carbon Fouling.
In any case, both Moly and Graphite accomplish a similar outcome, which is to reduce bore friction.
Were I to include moly in my handloading regimen (I choose not to), I would add it as a very small percentage of the powder, in the container, gently agitated to mix thoroughly, and metered as part of the charge. I have often wondered whether Moly may or may not be a part of modern powder kernel coatings.
When I tried plating it on bullets in the recommended manner, it was an incredible mess, and at the time was also discussed on this site as probably more likely to cause a pressure ring, or exacerbate a pressure ring, than the propellant and any additives by themselves. IMHO, the plating method is probably overkill.
It was for these reasons that I now exclude it from my handloading process. I'm also interested in how the information you've kindly supplied impinges upon brass life.
FWIW, I was also employed on NASA projects by a NASA Optical Contractor, Razdow Laboratories; on contracts for items like the Apollo Command Module Docking Windows, and the Solar Optical Tracking Network.
At 20 Y/O, I wasn't into the research end; I worked on production and delivery.
As I recall, Teflon was also employed to defeat vacuum welding on exposed moving parts.
Greg
The reason stated for inclusion of graphite was as an ESD deterrent (electrostatic discharge), permitting transport of Propellants for long distances over uneven roads, preventing ESD triggered detonation of black powder. As I believe, it remains an important safety additive.
It also happens to be a dry lubricant, and constitutes a large segment of what is termed Carbon Fouling.
In any case, both Moly and Graphite accomplish a similar outcome, which is to reduce bore friction.
Were I to include moly in my handloading regimen (I choose not to), I would add it as a very small percentage of the powder, in the container, gently agitated to mix thoroughly, and metered as part of the charge. I have often wondered whether Moly may or may not be a part of modern powder kernel coatings.
When I tried plating it on bullets in the recommended manner, it was an incredible mess, and at the time was also discussed on this site as probably more likely to cause a pressure ring, or exacerbate a pressure ring, than the propellant and any additives by themselves. IMHO, the plating method is probably overkill.
It was for these reasons that I now exclude it from my handloading process. I'm also interested in how the information you've kindly supplied impinges upon brass life.
FWIW, I was also employed on NASA projects by a NASA Optical Contractor, Razdow Laboratories; on contracts for items like the Apollo Command Module Docking Windows, and the Solar Optical Tracking Network.
At 20 Y/O, I wasn't into the research end; I worked on production and delivery.
As I recall, Teflon was also employed to defeat vacuum welding on exposed moving parts.
Greg
Last edited:
When is a primer pocket considered too loose? Just primed 80 rounds of lapua 260 brass and 6 or 7 I noticed very little resistance pushing the primer in. This will be the 4th load on the brass.
None of the primers are loose enough to move or fall out
None of the primers are loose enough to move or fall out
I'll be absent briefly, we are taking a day trip to Tombstone for lunch. I've begun answers for both members' questions, and will respond within a day or so.
Greg
Greg
I run them till the pretty much don’t hold a primer.
If your load is reasonable they won’t leak and etch your bolt face.
That is something you need to watch for though.
I just ran my original batch of 150 Winchester 260 cases through anneal, body die and collet die.
About 40% are probably done for after this just to be safe as primer pockets are definitely loose.
I don’t feel like burning spots in my nucleus boltface
Notes say-36 loadings, Annealed 7 times, Ran through tumbler 4 times.
I got my money’s worth on those.
My techniques are essentially outlined in the more popular cartridge reloading manuals.
For the 260, I do it a little differently, more in line with something from decades back, before the more sophisticated Bushing, etc., dies arrived that accommodate non-SAAMI chamber necks. Since I only use SAAMI chambers, the technology still works for me.
It's called partial length neck sizing. It results in the aft portion of the case neck remaining at its expanded diameter. It's accomplished by raising the f/l die position enough that a significant rearmost part of the neck is not resized. This also results in the rest of the case, moving rearward, being also left with a bit more of the expansion remaining.
I will mention that my 260 die and my 308 die are adjusted so that the resized cases both very closely adhere to the dimensions of the same 308 case gauge, and the barrels are headspaced (Savage, one of the reasons why I prefer Savage rifles) on the same "Go" Headspace gauge.
I don't load to match up to individual chambers, I load to match common gauges; and use common gauges to set the headspace on the sister chamberings. Otherwise, all my chamberings are SAAMI.
What it does not address is shoulder creep. To deal with that, I use my standard .308 die as a bump die; so I can restore shoulder height without needing to alter my 260 F/L die setting, and also without touching the 260's case neck.
The resized case will enter the chamber with only barely perceptible additional drag, and when fired, will be the same as any other fired case.
So what does this achieve? First of all, the brass working is kept to a minimum. I also believe that the wider remaining expansion centers the new cartridge better in the front and rear, perhaps achieving a better case concentricity. And..., the snug seating for the rear of the case neck allows the case to seal better; as manifested by the carbon seepage line, which stops dead abruptly at the point where the unsized case diameter begins.
When that occurs, it tells me that my case necks are work hardened, and I then have to decide whether to replace the brass or anneal it. So far, I've never annealed any of my cases in going on three decades...
If barrels are consumables, so is brass. I buy my brass in larger quantities, there's usually enough already onhand, and the choice doesn't come up all that often.
I actually start my new case prep with 7mm-08 brass. It's often significantly cheaper, and the neck will remain expanded before the first firing. I could, and have, also used 243 brass, but a lot of talk on this site said the necking up left a higher likelihood of neck donuts than necking down, and I stuck with the latter. I don't neck turn because I don't have a Match Chamber.
This is also why I prefer the 260 over the 6.5 CM. There are no other "sister" chamberings for the CM with a neck only difference like the 243 and 7mm-08 share with the 260. There is a tradeoff of case capacity for increased neck length, and I chose case capacity; because I feel it allows for lower chamber/bore pressures, perhaps increasing throat life.
Maybe this relationship also exists for the 6.5 Grendel?
Despite the SAAMI chamber, the 28" L-W barrel my 260 runs with is a built-to-spec Lothar-Walther LW50 Stainless (possibly the prototype for the L/W Drop-In barrels), and they don't grow on trees. I got it around 2003, and with some sparing usage, it's still shooting pretty fine. Remember, I stay away from Peak/Hot Loads, and treat the barrel with respect, despite shooting several seasons of 1000yd F Open with it at Bodines between 2005 and whenever it was that they outlawed shooting with people in the pits there.
Whether I'm right or wrong regarding the definitions of Moly and Graphite as dry lubes; it matters not for me, since I don't use either.
The rest is pretty much to the plan as outlined in the reloading manuals. I get a bit antsy when primers come out and go in with noticeably less force.
I seat to jump, always jump. By that, I mean I get far enough off the lands to be comfortable that none of the ogives are actually contacting when chambering is complete; they do vary.
I don't shoot expensive brass, and will usually prefer to buy Starline when I can.
By coincidence, I gravitated away from Sierra in favor of Hornady bullets, but that is NOT a reflection of my confidence in either brand. I can't really say why; I just did.
I hope this provides what you asked for.
Greg
PS, If anyone chooses to try this degree of simplicity, I'd really like to hear about what happens with accuracy. I just ask that they do whatever they do with significant care to maintain consistency,.
For the 260, I do it a little differently, more in line with something from decades back, before the more sophisticated Bushing, etc., dies arrived that accommodate non-SAAMI chamber necks. Since I only use SAAMI chambers, the technology still works for me.
It's called partial length neck sizing. It results in the aft portion of the case neck remaining at its expanded diameter. It's accomplished by raising the f/l die position enough that a significant rearmost part of the neck is not resized. This also results in the rest of the case, moving rearward, being also left with a bit more of the expansion remaining.
I will mention that my 260 die and my 308 die are adjusted so that the resized cases both very closely adhere to the dimensions of the same 308 case gauge, and the barrels are headspaced (Savage, one of the reasons why I prefer Savage rifles) on the same "Go" Headspace gauge.
I don't load to match up to individual chambers, I load to match common gauges; and use common gauges to set the headspace on the sister chamberings. Otherwise, all my chamberings are SAAMI.
What it does not address is shoulder creep. To deal with that, I use my standard .308 die as a bump die; so I can restore shoulder height without needing to alter my 260 F/L die setting, and also without touching the 260's case neck.
The resized case will enter the chamber with only barely perceptible additional drag, and when fired, will be the same as any other fired case.
So what does this achieve? First of all, the brass working is kept to a minimum. I also believe that the wider remaining expansion centers the new cartridge better in the front and rear, perhaps achieving a better case concentricity. And..., the snug seating for the rear of the case neck allows the case to seal better; as manifested by the carbon seepage line, which stops dead abruptly at the point where the unsized case diameter begins.
When that occurs, it tells me that my case necks are work hardened, and I then have to decide whether to replace the brass or anneal it. So far, I've never annealed any of my cases in going on three decades...
If barrels are consumables, so is brass. I buy my brass in larger quantities, there's usually enough already onhand, and the choice doesn't come up all that often.
I actually start my new case prep with 7mm-08 brass. It's often significantly cheaper, and the neck will remain expanded before the first firing. I could, and have, also used 243 brass, but a lot of talk on this site said the necking up left a higher likelihood of neck donuts than necking down, and I stuck with the latter. I don't neck turn because I don't have a Match Chamber.
This is also why I prefer the 260 over the 6.5 CM. There are no other "sister" chamberings for the CM with a neck only difference like the 243 and 7mm-08 share with the 260. There is a tradeoff of case capacity for increased neck length, and I chose case capacity; because I feel it allows for lower chamber/bore pressures, perhaps increasing throat life.
Maybe this relationship also exists for the 6.5 Grendel?
Despite the SAAMI chamber, the 28" L-W barrel my 260 runs with is a built-to-spec Lothar-Walther LW50 Stainless (possibly the prototype for the L/W Drop-In barrels), and they don't grow on trees. I got it around 2003, and with some sparing usage, it's still shooting pretty fine. Remember, I stay away from Peak/Hot Loads, and treat the barrel with respect, despite shooting several seasons of 1000yd F Open with it at Bodines between 2005 and whenever it was that they outlawed shooting with people in the pits there.
Whether I'm right or wrong regarding the definitions of Moly and Graphite as dry lubes; it matters not for me, since I don't use either.
The rest is pretty much to the plan as outlined in the reloading manuals. I get a bit antsy when primers come out and go in with noticeably less force.
I seat to jump, always jump. By that, I mean I get far enough off the lands to be comfortable that none of the ogives are actually contacting when chambering is complete; they do vary.
I don't shoot expensive brass, and will usually prefer to buy Starline when I can.
By coincidence, I gravitated away from Sierra in favor of Hornady bullets, but that is NOT a reflection of my confidence in either brand. I can't really say why; I just did.
I hope this provides what you asked for.
Greg
PS, If anyone chooses to try this degree of simplicity, I'd really like to hear about what happens with accuracy. I just ask that they do whatever they do with significant care to maintain consistency,.
Last edited:
I would agree with all that , good techinques . I have been doing about the same for a long time , except your post was negative about Moly coating but without any true knowledge of the subject . That's the only reason I reacted .
I think we all bring our experiences to the table. Our experiences differ, and that's what colors our approaches. So does my ignorance; some stuff I don't get knee deep into because I'm not wading in that river to begin with; I'm a true believer in KISS. All knowledge is useful, some less so in a given context. There's nothing wrong with the picture; and I really enjoyed our exchange.
BTW, if anyone can point out a relatively common case design that's the same as the 6.5 Grendel from below the neck on down, but with a larger neck, I'm interested. Or I guess I could also use a link for a 6.5 Grendel bump die.
If it looks like I'm putting a lot of emphasis on my 6.5's (Grendel/260); that's true, and also, not the whole story. The preceding year or two (five?), I did much the same with .223/5.56; and whoa, Boy, I just realized that Wylde is not what I've been calling a SAAMI chambering.
These conversations teach me about me, too.
The point with these smaller calibers is that the same neck treatment has more (severely) limited returns. Not worth doing, so I don't anymore. If I wanted to do this with the 308, I'd need a .358 Win f/l die in order to bump shoulders.
The 7,62x39 is an interesting subject. Common as the breeze, it's found in a lot of places.
But it's actually two calibers, literally; and I prefer the less common one, with the .308 bore.
I had bought a Savage 10FCM Scout 7,62x39 quite some time ago, before the current Savage Scout replaced it. Intending to do a barrel replacement to a PPC chambering; I paused to do some rudimentary load development using the .308 V-Max, since the Savage employs the .308 bore.
That was the end of the PPC project right there.
The x39 case and the 110 V-Max are made for each other, and were probably the subconscious lead-in to my current relationship with the 6.5 Grendel.
Greg
PS Found it!
BTW, if anyone can point out a relatively common case design that's the same as the 6.5 Grendel from below the neck on down, but with a larger neck, I'm interested. Or I guess I could also use a link for a 6.5 Grendel bump die.
If it looks like I'm putting a lot of emphasis on my 6.5's (Grendel/260); that's true, and also, not the whole story. The preceding year or two (five?), I did much the same with .223/5.56; and whoa, Boy, I just realized that Wylde is not what I've been calling a SAAMI chambering.
These conversations teach me about me, too.
The point with these smaller calibers is that the same neck treatment has more (severely) limited returns. Not worth doing, so I don't anymore. If I wanted to do this with the 308, I'd need a .358 Win f/l die in order to bump shoulders.
The 7,62x39 is an interesting subject. Common as the breeze, it's found in a lot of places.
But it's actually two calibers, literally; and I prefer the less common one, with the .308 bore.
I had bought a Savage 10FCM Scout 7,62x39 quite some time ago, before the current Savage Scout replaced it. Intending to do a barrel replacement to a PPC chambering; I paused to do some rudimentary load development using the .308 V-Max, since the Savage employs the .308 bore.
That was the end of the PPC project right there.
The x39 case and the 110 V-Max are made for each other, and were probably the subconscious lead-in to my current relationship with the 6.5 Grendel.
Greg
PS Found it!
I use a decaping rod and try to push the primer out by hand. If it stays put it’s gtg. Never had them leak.
Similar threads
