I cant find the thread, but not to long ago we were tangentially on this topic....I think it was BartB who mentioned this first. It was something about the military crimp, the circular one vs. the "four stakes" crimp.
The upshot was, (and my apologies to BartB if I am mis attributing this to him) that the four stakes type may not be as accurate, or something to that effect.
I have used both the Sheridan "cutaway" case gauge, as well as the LE Wilson gauge in watching for proper amount of shoulder pushback.
Enter a new purchase, The LE Wilson case gauge depth micrometer. it sets on top of the gauge and measures the change your sizing die imparts on the case.
http://ads.midwayusa.com/product/29...son-_-290601&gclid=CI7Ep9fAgNACFQERaQodgcQByQ
While testing it out, I found several LC brass that while "Passing" the touch test with both case gauges,
Failed by the measurement being over headspace, which is indicated by a few thousandths (1-2) past the zero mark, which the instructions say is max headspace.
Then I began to notice a pattern, the over sized ones were all of the four staked variety, and if a round crimp was in the pile, going through the sizer again fixed them...not so the few four stakes variety....
But...the funny thing is looking at the gauges by touch, without the depth gauge it was apparent that much further sizing would put it below minimum!
Cases are to be tested W/O primer, so it isnt that a primer isnt set in far enough....cases and case gauge are cleaned well of all excess lube and any foreign particles, careful measuring and re measuring were employed.
My conclusion so far is that the brass has proper set back, but isnt perfectly level around those staking marks, which fell rougher when felt with a finger than the circular crimps....I am getting ready to lightly sand the surface and see if that helps, even though I wouldnt reload the case, unless the sanding is very minimal.
Taking a small Lee deburring tool, I stuck the pointy end in the primers hole and gave it a light turn or two. I could see a bright mark around the top edge of the primer pocket and remeasured. It improved slightly...
Previously, if they passed the gauges, they went in the gun, and fired without issue. So far, my ARs have functioned everything I fed them. Never a jam or misfire. (once it wasnt picking up a new shell, but the castlenut had come loose)
Now, question from all this is: Is it possible to have a case show "acceptable" in the two different cases, yet still be incorrect amount of setback? I dont see how its possible, but there's lots of things I'm wrong about!
And, could these "tags" caused by the staking method cause the inaccuracy spoken of?
So, to you guys! Monday I will try to contact LE Wilson for inquiry.
I figured if I am right, I have probably put hundreds of them like this through the gun, and perhaps that would "hammer" them flat, but now that I see the funny business, dont want to fire them if they COULD be incorrect?
Maybe I should have left well enough alone...
Thanks
The upshot was, (and my apologies to BartB if I am mis attributing this to him) that the four stakes type may not be as accurate, or something to that effect.
I have used both the Sheridan "cutaway" case gauge, as well as the LE Wilson gauge in watching for proper amount of shoulder pushback.
Enter a new purchase, The LE Wilson case gauge depth micrometer. it sets on top of the gauge and measures the change your sizing die imparts on the case.
http://ads.midwayusa.com/product/29...son-_-290601&gclid=CI7Ep9fAgNACFQERaQodgcQByQ
While testing it out, I found several LC brass that while "Passing" the touch test with both case gauges,
Failed by the measurement being over headspace, which is indicated by a few thousandths (1-2) past the zero mark, which the instructions say is max headspace.
Then I began to notice a pattern, the over sized ones were all of the four staked variety, and if a round crimp was in the pile, going through the sizer again fixed them...not so the few four stakes variety....
But...the funny thing is looking at the gauges by touch, without the depth gauge it was apparent that much further sizing would put it below minimum!
Cases are to be tested W/O primer, so it isnt that a primer isnt set in far enough....cases and case gauge are cleaned well of all excess lube and any foreign particles, careful measuring and re measuring were employed.
My conclusion so far is that the brass has proper set back, but isnt perfectly level around those staking marks, which fell rougher when felt with a finger than the circular crimps....I am getting ready to lightly sand the surface and see if that helps, even though I wouldnt reload the case, unless the sanding is very minimal.
Taking a small Lee deburring tool, I stuck the pointy end in the primers hole and gave it a light turn or two. I could see a bright mark around the top edge of the primer pocket and remeasured. It improved slightly...
Previously, if they passed the gauges, they went in the gun, and fired without issue. So far, my ARs have functioned everything I fed them. Never a jam or misfire. (once it wasnt picking up a new shell, but the castlenut had come loose)
Now, question from all this is: Is it possible to have a case show "acceptable" in the two different cases, yet still be incorrect amount of setback? I dont see how its possible, but there's lots of things I'm wrong about!
And, could these "tags" caused by the staking method cause the inaccuracy spoken of?
So, to you guys! Monday I will try to contact LE Wilson for inquiry.
I figured if I am right, I have probably put hundreds of them like this through the gun, and perhaps that would "hammer" them flat, but now that I see the funny business, dont want to fire them if they COULD be incorrect?
Maybe I should have left well enough alone...
Thanks
Last edited:
