Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Annealing test
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mikecr" data-source="post: 2196273" data-attributes="member: 1521"><p>Well if you're a BR competitor shooting a 6ppc or 30br you're probably not annealing necks with each reload.</p><p>Underbores rely on high starting pressures to reach competitive pressures. They seat hard into lands and/or set high neck tension with FL sizing of necks(beyond seated bearing).</p><p>Heavily annealed necks would be counter productive for them.</p><p></p><p>With hunting capacity cartridges, slower powder & way lower pressures, high starting pressures mean little to no gain, but variance is amplified.</p><p>Frequently process annealing(NOT full annealing) should reduce tension and tension variances.</p><p>But your load still has to like it, and that means development with it for best.</p><p></p><p>Nothing wrong with that. I just don't like implications that any single abstract change holds meaning for the rest of us.</p><p>For example, someone might imply and show that a change between CCIs and Feds makes a world of difference -while reality plays out different across a high number of reloaders. It's because there is ALWAYS more to it than a single change.</p><p>Adjust optimum striking and load develop for each primer, and the results could be opposite than implied. </p><p></p><p>Someone brought up testing efforts. It would take a lot of effort to normalize a change to actual single affect.</p><p>It could be the powder chosen is not best for higher neck tension, so it happens to shoot better with lower tension. This can be achieved as easily without annealing. Or, you could use a powder shooting better with higher tension.</p><p></p><p>Bottom line: I don't think we should assign excess credit to shortcuts</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mikecr, post: 2196273, member: 1521"] Well if you're a BR competitor shooting a 6ppc or 30br you're probably not annealing necks with each reload. Underbores rely on high starting pressures to reach competitive pressures. They seat hard into lands and/or set high neck tension with FL sizing of necks(beyond seated bearing). Heavily annealed necks would be counter productive for them. With hunting capacity cartridges, slower powder & way lower pressures, high starting pressures mean little to no gain, but variance is amplified. Frequently process annealing(NOT full annealing) should reduce tension and tension variances. But your load still has to like it, and that means development with it for best. Nothing wrong with that. I just don't like implications that any single abstract change holds meaning for the rest of us. For example, someone might imply and show that a change between CCIs and Feds makes a world of difference -while reality plays out different across a high number of reloaders. It's because there is ALWAYS more to it than a single change. Adjust optimum striking and load develop for each primer, and the results could be opposite than implied. Someone brought up testing efforts. It would take a lot of effort to normalize a change to actual single affect. It could be the powder chosen is not best for higher neck tension, so it happens to shoot better with lower tension. This can be achieved as easily without annealing. Or, you could use a powder shooting better with higher tension. Bottom line: I don't think we should assign excess credit to shortcuts [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Annealing test
Top