During 20+ years, companies could have changed ownership (Even bought by different country of origin), manufacturing plants changed, production equipment changed, source and quality of brass alloy changed, lot variations changed, etc.
This certainly represents an incredible amount of effort, but for me (the simple recreational reloader) what actionable information is here? Should I be learning to do something different from this information?
Over the years, members sometimes perpetuate notions simply with something being "good or bad" without much explanation or based on decades old experience and information.
It is useful information, even for low-volume shooters like myself. EX: reforming 9mm Luger into 9mm Makarov. @AJC1 noted/asked about my cutting tool, assuming it was a cutoff. It was actually a left-hand facing tool. Why? So I can size/normalize the inside of the neck and chamfer post-cutoff without resetting the tool/piece. I simply run the tool past the cut and to the other side of the case wall where I can cut into the neck to get a uniform thickness down to the seating depth of the bullet. One run, two cuts: final length and inside diameter. With GFL, WMA, and MXT brass, uniforming the neck thickness down to the seating depth (.200") makes for a much better end product and only takes an extra minute on the lathe, at most, per case.Over the years, members sometimes perpetuate notions simply with something being "good or bad" without much explanation or based on decades old experience and information.
When I do "myth busting" threads, focus is made to either confirm or bust using objective, measurable, repeatable, factual data with more current lots and components (With 22LR misfire dud/no dud myth busting thread, decades old notion that some "cheap ammunition is junk" was busted as I achieved now going on 35,000 round testing with 99.9% primer ignition of 20+ brand/weight with blame going to rough shipping/handling of loose bulk ammo moving priming compound away from rim.)
With the "Neck tension and bullet setback" myth busting thread, several notions were addressed in achieving reloading consistency - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...nd-bullet-setback.830072/page-3#post-10712225
1. Case wall thickness consistency affecting finished roundness and dimensions of case neck / bulge - Measuring case wall thickness at 12/3/6/9 O'clock at .100"and .200" below case mouth demonstrated consistency of case wall thickness particularly at bullet base seating depth that bulged case neck to rub with chamber wall of tighter barrels. Inconsistency of case neck thickness can tolerance stack to produce oblong case neck (Not all bullets are perfectly round, especially if they are dropped/damaged during shipping). Since taper crimp is applied around .100" below case mouth, increasing taper crimp would not address case neck bulge .200" below case mouth.
So if you are using larger sized .356" diameter bullet and case neck is rubbing the chamber wall to prevent full chambering of finished rounds, using more consistent case wall thickness brass may resolve the case neck rubbing chamber wall issue.
2. Matching case wall thickness to diameter/seating depth of bullets - 9mm bullets come typically sized .354", .355" (Montana Gold, X-Treme, Precision Delta, Remington, Winchester, etc.), .3555" (Speer Gold Dot/TMJ, RMR, etc.) and .356" (Berry's, HSM, some HAP, some Zero, some Power Bond, lead/coated lead, etc.) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...re-sized-the-same.818806/page-2#post-10567453
If using smaller sized bullets, even using thicker case wall brass may allow finished rounds to fully chamber in tighter barrels. If using deeper bullet seating of 1.100" with FMJ/RN bullets or JHP/TC/FP bullets with deeper seated bullet base, using thinner case wall brass at case neck may allow finished rounds to fully chamber in tighter barrels.
3. Neck tension and bullet setback - It is not "finished OAL" that produce more consistent chamber pressures/muzzle velocities rather "chambered OAL" after bullet nose bumps the feed ramp and any subsequent bullet setback. I use feeding/chambering dummy rounds from the magazine as my QC check and to minimize or prevent bullet setback, I use thicker case wall brass.
The myth busting thread demonstrated using .354"/.355"/.3555"/.356" sized bullets which headstamp brass produced bullet setback and which brass did not with average bullet setback sorted in a final list when rounds were fed from magazines in Glock 22/23 using KKM/Lone Wolf conversion barrels.
So depending on the bullet sizing you use, you can reference the myth busting thread information to minimize/prevent bullet setback for your load development and powder work up to identify more accurate loads.
Enjoy and have fun.
Well I certainly agree with your premise and enjoy learning things even if I may never need to apply them. ThanksOver the years, members sometimes perpetuate notions simply with something being "good or bad" without much explanation or based on decades old experience and information.
When I do "myth busting" threads, focus is made to either confirm or bust using objective, measurable, repeatable, factual data with more current lots and components (With 22LR misfire dud/no dud myth busting thread, decades old notion that some "cheap ammunition is junk" was busted as I achieved now going on 35,000 round testing with 99.9% primer ignition of 20+ brand/weight with blame going to rough shipping/handling of loose bulk ammo moving priming compound away from rim.)
With the "Neck tension and bullet setback" myth busting thread, several notions were addressed in achieving reloading consistency - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...nd-bullet-setback.830072/page-3#post-10712225
1. Case wall thickness consistency affecting finished roundness and dimensions of case neck / bulge - Measuring case wall thickness at 12/3/6/9 O'clock at .100"and .200" below case mouth demonstrated consistency of case wall thickness particularly at bullet base seating depth that bulged case neck to rub with chamber wall of tighter barrels. Inconsistency of case neck thickness can tolerance stack to produce oblong case neck (Not all bullets are perfectly round, especially if they are dropped/damaged during shipping). Since taper crimp is applied around .100" below case mouth, increasing taper crimp would not address case neck bulge .200" below case mouth.
So if you are using larger sized .356" diameter bullet and case neck is rubbing the chamber wall to prevent full chambering of finished rounds, using more consistent case wall thickness brass may resolve the case neck rubbing chamber wall issue.
2. Matching case wall thickness to diameter/seating depth of bullets - 9mm bullets come typically sized .354", .355" (Montana Gold, X-Treme, Precision Delta, Remington, Winchester, etc.), .3555" (Speer Gold Dot/TMJ, RMR, etc.) and .356" (Berry's, HSM, some HAP, some Zero, some Power Bond, lead/coated lead, etc.) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...re-sized-the-same.818806/page-2#post-10567453
If using smaller sized bullets, even using thicker case wall brass may allow finished rounds to fully chamber in tighter barrels. If using deeper bullet seating of 1.100" with FMJ/RN bullets or JHP/TC/FP bullets with deeper seated bullet base, using thinner case wall brass at case neck may allow finished rounds to fully chamber in tighter barrels.
3. Neck tension and bullet setback - It is not "finished OAL" that produce more consistent chamber pressures/muzzle velocities rather "chambered OAL" after bullet nose bumps the feed ramp and any subsequent bullet setback. I use feeding/chambering dummy rounds from the magazine as my QC check and to minimize or prevent bullet setback, I use thicker case wall brass.
The myth busting thread demonstrated using .354"/.355"/.3555"/.356" sized bullets which headstamp brass produced bullet setback and which brass did not with average bullet setback sorted in a final list when rounds were fed from magazines in Glock 22/23 using KKM/Lone Wolf conversion barrels.
So depending on the bullet sizing you use, you can reference the myth busting thread information to minimize/prevent bullet setback for your load development and powder work up to identify more accurate loads.
Enjoy and have fun.
Never found a bad 357 GFL. S&B and blazer different story. Have Hornady 30-30 that you can't set a primer deep enough, trash can
A primer pocket uniformer solves that. Keep your Hornady brass and when you have four or five pounds, let me know. I'll pay the flat rate box charge.
Well, at 1.30 + each I'll just be reloading the Winchester brass with hornady bullets. I'll keep you in mind though
