Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment > Reloading

Reloading Techniques For Reloading


Reply

For Those That Weigh Brass

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #8  
Old 08-22-2010, 03:37 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,844
Re: For Those That Weigh Brass

Quote:
Originally Posted by royinidaho View Post
Boss Hoss,

Does this mean that when deburring the flash hole, from the case mouth side, that you are getting as much as 2 grains or so of "filings"?

I suppose you are using a deburring device that results in a constant flash hole depth from case to case?

Or maybe you could describe your flash hole deburring process.

Thanks

Roy
Roy---yes

First start with trimmed brass then use the tool to (which you set the depth) and you will be surprised at what comes out. When first looking into the case you can see how ugly it is.

Just got back from doing some fire forming for the 300 Jarrett----WAS IT HOT! At 10:00 it was already 94!!!!!!! About 106 now-----going to get in the pool in a few minutes!
__________________
The Truth Is Not Always Good For Business!!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-22-2010, 11:44 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,384
Re: For Those That Weigh Brass

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikecr View Post
So J E, your contention is that there is enough gain in doing 'easier' lesser things, to discount the 'tougher' better things..

Maybe. There are lots, of certain cartridges,, that correlate fairly well w/regard to weight-vs-capacity. I have seen this, and as well I've seen the correlation go to hell with different lots of the same cartridge and brass brand.
I have also found that no brand is better than another in holding consistent capacities.

There is no question from my experience that proper capacity checks are more accurate than brass weight assumptions. And you will never know without doing capacity checks anyway. Right?
Afterall, improved SD after weight batching may imply improvement, but not from matching case capacities, as they haven't actually been matched. This is just assumed so.

At any rate, it's rarely good habit to compromise merely for convenience.
With this, if you'll do it here, you'll do it there...
Lot of it going on around here, and ironically, the competitors among us seem worse about it.
Well, let's call it 'time management'..
No !

That is not what I said .

I said that the volume test with water did not produce any better results and the other
methods using granules of any kind were very inconsistent and I would not recomend them
under any circumstances because any granular media will compact with different densities
changing the volume for the same weight.

I am a stickler for details (Ask anyone that knows me) and If something will produce better
results I will use use it.

The fact that someone wants to use water in lieu of weighing is not a problem for me just
because I think the "Proper" weight method works as good or better than any other way
to match cases.

And in the case of it being a wast of time (I am assuming you are talking about my not
doing it on short range weapons) like pistols at 25 to50 yards the reason is that SDs
in reasonable ranges are not measurable as far as accuracy at these ranges.

And in fact the very best scenario for accuracy and consistency it to use only one case
and shoot and load it. With the right chamber setup this will give you the best SDs and
ESs because it remains the most accurate in volume . But this is not practical under
hunting conditions for obvious reasons.

The reason I recomend the prep and weigh method is because anyone that reloads
has everything available to do it this way and It works.

I constantly get standard deviations in the 3 to 5 ft/sec range and groups under 1/10 of
an inch in hunting rifles so I will continue to weight sort my brass even if it hair
lips the pope or some of the other people in the shooting world.

I don't tell anyone that there way of doing something is screwed up I will just tell them
how I do it If they ask. If they don't wan't to try it I'm not offended why should you be.

I am allways willing to learn so I keep an open mind and if something is reported to be
better you can bet I will try it and if it does better than the way I "Was" doing something
then I change and adopt the new way.

I am sorry that you are offended by my recommendations because you have not offended
me with yours.

J E CUSTOM
__________________
"PRESS ON"

Last edited by J E Custom; 08-22-2010 at 11:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-15-2011, 03:31 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 17
Re: For Those That Weigh Brass

Quote:
Originally Posted by J E Custom View Post
No !

That is not what I said .

I said that the volume test with water did not produce any better results and the other
methods using granules of any kind were very inconsistent and I would not recomend them
under any circumstances because any granular media will compact with different densities
changing the volume for the same weight.

I am a stickler for details (Ask anyone that knows me) and If something will produce better
results I will use use it.

The fact that someone wants to use water in lieu of weighing is not a problem for me just
because I think the "Proper" weight method works as good or better than any other way
to match cases.

And in the case of it being a wast of time (I am assuming you are talking about my not
doing it on short range weapons) like pistols at 25 to50 yards the reason is that SDs
in reasonable ranges are not measurable as far as accuracy at these ranges.

And in fact the very best scenario for accuracy and consistency it to use only one case
and shoot and load it. With the right chamber setup this will give you the best SDs and
ESs because it remains the most accurate in volume . But this is not practical under
hunting conditions for obvious reasons.

The reason I recomend the prep and weigh method is because anyone that reloads
has everything available to do it this way and It works.

I constantly get standard deviations in the 3 to 5 ft/sec range and groups under 1/10 of
an inch in hunting rifles so I will continue to weight sort my brass even if it hair
lips the pope or some of the other people in the shooting world.

I don't tell anyone that there way of doing something is screwed up I will just tell them
how I do it If they ask. If they don't wan't to try it I'm not offended why should you be.

I am allways willing to learn so I keep an open mind and if something is reported to be
better you can bet I will try it and if it does better than the way I "Was" doing something
then I change and adopt the new way.

I am sorry that you are offended by my recommendations because you have not offended
me with yours.

J E CUSTOM
So, JE Custom,
what weight increments do you sort your brass into?
5 gr? 2 gr? 1 gr? 0.5 gr? 0.1 gr?

I just bought 100 pieces of Norma for my 7mm Rem Mag, measured their trim length and weighed them all.

I found one "reject", which was shorter than the rest (and had a pinch in the neck and poor neck trim, upon closer inspection), and weighed a bit less.

Trim length on 99 pieces was very close to 2.490 (about 2.488 to 2.493", as best I can tell with plastic calipers), with the reject being about 2.455".

The weight on 99 pieces was as follows:

Avg: 215.07 gr
Max: 215.96
Min: 214.25
Range: 1.72
Stdev: 0.382

So is that tight enough? Or, would you sort these 99 pieces into two or three groups?


I know there are arguments saying that case weight has little or nothing to do with capacity / resulting pressure profile / muzzle velocity / accuracy, . . . but I don't see any real easy/good way to measure case capacity, and I like the looks of your groups.

I am currently getting as good as 0.35" groups out of my 9 lb hunting rifle. If sorting brass by weight will get me down to 0.20" @ 100 yds, I'll do it. If not, I'm going to go start throwing powder for a ladder test.

Hmm . . .
I suppose one could do two ladder tests; one with brass all within 0.1 gr, and another with brass ranging beyond 1.5 gr . . . and then see if there is a difference in the results.

Sanity check:
Assuming that brass is 8 to 10 times as dense gun powder
(8.5 gm/cm^3 vs . . ~1 gm/cm^2 ? How densse is gun powder? I can put 70 grains of Retumbo into a case which holds about 4.5 cm^3 of water)

and assuming that ALL of the brass variation translates into capacity variation (a conservative assumption),

and assuming that 0.1 grains of powder variation is acceptable (if you are on a good node),

then . . . one could say that 0.8 to 1.0 grains of brass weight variation is negligible.

If half the weight variation translates into capacity variation, then you can neglect 2 grains of weight difference in your cases.

If 10% translates into capacity . . . well, you get the idea.

I guess I'm superstitious. There are too many variables, and I'm tempted to sort the brass, at least to 1 gr increments.

-C A L
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06-15-2011, 03:31 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 17
Re: For Those That Weigh Brass

Quote:
Originally Posted by J E Custom View Post
No !

That is not what I said .

I said that the volume test with water did not produce any better results and the other
methods using granules of any kind were very inconsistent and I would not recomend them
under any circumstances because any granular media will compact with different densities
changing the volume for the same weight.

I am a stickler for details (Ask anyone that knows me) and If something will produce better
results I will use use it.

The fact that someone wants to use water in lieu of weighing is not a problem for me just
because I think the "Proper" weight method works as good or better than any other way
to match cases.

And in the case of it being a wast of time (I am assuming you are talking about my not
doing it on short range weapons) like pistols at 25 to50 yards the reason is that SDs
in reasonable ranges are not measurable as far as accuracy at these ranges.

And in fact the very best scenario for accuracy and consistency it to use only one case
and shoot and load it. With the right chamber setup this will give you the best SDs and
ESs because it remains the most accurate in volume . But this is not practical under
hunting conditions for obvious reasons.

The reason I recomend the prep and weigh method is because anyone that reloads
has everything available to do it this way and It works.

I constantly get standard deviations in the 3 to 5 ft/sec range and groups under 1/10 of
an inch in hunting rifles so I will continue to weight sort my brass even if it hair
lips the pope or some of the other people in the shooting world.

I don't tell anyone that there way of doing something is screwed up I will just tell them
how I do it If they ask. If they don't wan't to try it I'm not offended why should you be.

I am allways willing to learn so I keep an open mind and if something is reported to be
better you can bet I will try it and if it does better than the way I "Was" doing something
then I change and adopt the new way.

I am sorry that you are offended by my recommendations because you have not offended
me with yours.

J E CUSTOM
So, JE Custom,
what weight increments do you sort your brass into?
5 gr? 2 gr? 1 gr? 0.5 gr? 0.1 gr?

I just bought 100 pieces of Norma for my 7mm Rem Mag, measured their trim length and weighed them all.

I found one "reject", which was shorter than the rest (and had a pinch in the neck and poor neck trim, upon closer inspection), and weighed a bit less.

Trim length on 99 pieces was very close to 2.490 (about 2.488 to 2.493", as best I can tell with plastic calipers), with the reject being about 2.455".

The weight on 99 pieces was as follows:

Avg: 215.07 gr
Max: 215.96
Min: 214.25
Range: 1.72
Stdev: 0.382

So is that tight enough? Or, would you sort these 99 pieces into two or three groups?


I know there are arguments saying that case weight has little or nothing to do with capacity / resulting pressure profile / muzzle velocity / accuracy, . . . but I don't see any real easy/good way to measure case capacity, and I like the looks of your groups.

I am currently getting as good as 0.35" groups out of my 9 lb hunting rifle. If sorting brass by weight will get me down to 0.20" @ 100 yds, I'll do it. If not, I'm going to go start throwing powder for a ladder test.

Hmm . . .
I suppose one could do two ladder tests; one with brass all within 0.1 gr, and another with brass ranging beyond 1.5 gr . . . and then see if there is a difference in the results.

Sanity check:
Assuming that brass is 8 to 10 times as dense gun powder
(8.5 gm/cm^3 vs . . ~1 gm/cm^2 ? How densse is gun powder? I can put 70 grains of Retumbo into a case which holds about 4.5 cm^3 of water)

and assuming that ALL of the brass variation translates into capacity variation (a conservative assumption),

and assuming that 0.1 grains of powder variation is acceptable (if you are on a good node),

then . . . one could say that 0.8 to 1.0 grains of brass weight variation is negligible.

If half the weight variation translates into capacity variation, then you can neglect 2 grains of weight difference in your cases.

If 10% translates into capacity . . . well, you get the idea.

I guess I'm superstitious. There are too many variables, and I'm tempted to sort the brass, at least to 1 gr increments.

-C A L
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-15-2011, 04:58 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: NC, oceanfront
Posts: 3,171
Re: For Those That Weigh Brass

SakoShooterSD, consider something very basic here:
Even if your 100 new cases weigh EXACTLY the same, even if so after preps,, their capacities can vary significantly once fireformed.
So the real gain in weighing to begin with is in finding gross deviations from the pack.
It's a quick check for problem brass.

Going all probabilistic assumption about it, 'probably' isn't going to buy you more than it really amounts to.
Just sayin
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-15-2011, 06:06 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Potomac River
Posts: 5,057
Re: For Those That Weigh Brass

I weight sort brass and it does not do anything much for your "average group size" what it affects is your "maximum group size". I,E, you are trying to get rid of a couple of potential flyers. +/- 1 grain is a reasonable spread

While you can see things at 100 yards if you know what you are looking for. the real issue is out at long range.

What works reasonably well is a two step process of first weight sorting and then isolating any case that give you an unexpected result at the range. Mark such a case and see if it behaves in a deviant manner the next time you fire it.
__________________
The Smokin Fur Rifle Club
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-15-2011, 07:06 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,114
Re: For Those That Weigh Brass

Weighing cases has been the best and only accurate way of measuring case capacity since the first ones were used decades ago. Why? It's simple to figure this out.

A given chamber has a given amount of volume.

Cartridge brass weighs about .308 lb. or 2156 grains per cubic inch.

The metals used in cartridge brass are uniform enough in percentages to not make any difference across a few, dozen, hundred or thousand cases.

Cartridge cases are at their maximum capacity when peak pressure in the chamber gets above about 20,000 psi. That's when their outsides are pressed hard against the chamber wall and each one at this time will have the same exact outside dimensions.

This is so simple, I'm surprised that weighing a case filled with water, sand, or anything else is so popular. Especially when new cases, even if they are all exactly the same weight, will have different volumes 'cause they're slightly dented, oval shaped or any other dimensional irregularity.

Has anybody realized that for a given case weight, it'll have different case volumes across all the chamber dimensions its fired in? Why do heavier cases give higher pressures with the same load than lighter ones?

Shooting 25 or so rounds with unprepped new unfired cases (no neck turning, flash hole and primer pocket uniforming, tirmming to exact length) all the same exact weight compared to cases with a 1% weight spread show no difference in accuracy. I get 1/2 MOA at 600 yards and 3/4ths MOA at 1000 yards with such ammo. This is as good as benchrester's ammo gets with everything as "exact" as they claim they make it.

So, weigh your cases. Their volume is subtracted from chamber volume to get case capacity at the time when its important; when it's fired.

Last edited by Bart B; 06-16-2011 at 06:05 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads for: For Those That Weigh Brass
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How much does it weigh? joseph Antelope Hunting 15 12-17-2012 12:49 AM
How much does your LRH rifle weigh? Len Backus Rifles, Bullets, Barrels and Ballistics 34 04-03-2011 06:49 PM
4 more reasons to weigh rimfire ammo top predator Rimfire and Airguns 1 11-14-2010 10:40 PM
Anyone Weigh there Brass? Dust270WSM Reloading 0 09-02-2009 02:33 PM
CZ 550 22-250 Varmint Laminate Should Weigh....... DONTSTROKEME General Discussion 6 02-13-2007 11:35 AM

Current Poll
Do You Think Slingshots Should Be Legalized For Hunting Brown Bear?
Yes - 47.07%
890 Votes
No - 52.93%
1,001 Vote
Total Votes: 1,891
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC