Fixing ejector marks on headstamp

[Tidus56]

I have filed rim burrs on 223 for feeding, but never for pressure. That said, the smart folks say we should cull those.

i keep running them, but I'm average.

"But I'm average" might be the best thing I have ever read on here

 

[yobuck]

We do so-so on them. I'd be lying to you if I said we hammered them, but they are definitely in there. There's a few deep pools that they seem to hold up in on the stretch I like to run. But even in those holes, I mark a bunch but don't get much action. My best luck is running crank baits through fast moving, highly aerated water. Like an area right after a set of rapids.

That would be a good spot.
But you will have much better luck on the walleyes by using jigs.
Get some 1/8 ounce and tie it directly to the line.
Id be using 6 # mono or 10# braid.
Put curley tail grub or a bobby garland baby shad grub on the jig and cast it out into the slow water on the edges of the fast moving water.
Let the jig sink to the bottom.
Tighten up the line, and turn the reel handle very very slowly.
Dont twitch the rod, just reel very very slowly.
Now for the most important part.
Hold out one of your index fingers straight out.
Now tap on that with another finger as lightly as you can.
Do that a few times right now, and remember what that light tap feels like.
While your reeling very very slowly with the tight line, when you feel a light tap, set the hook right now.
Master that technique and it will change the way you fish.
And it will also change what you fish with by way of lures.
If you fish from a boat, move around and just fish the eddys near the faster water with jigs.
Early and late in the day will be best for the walleyes, but they are always going to be in those areas.

 

[Rich Coyle]

I use the same method of hand priming to catch loose primers as well. As for the decapping method I use a short arm Lee press solely for decapping. Due to its low mechanical advantage, it gives a pretty good feel for primer tightness. I really appreciate everybody's concern for safety here, and obviously it's first and foremost. And I would again like to stress to everybody that these cases are only exhibiting light ejector mark dimples and the one with the swipe only produced a very modest bolt lift compared to the others. No primer flattening, no cratering, no gas leakage. My end goal here was to simply see if there was a measurable advantage to attemp to true a headstamp back to flush or not. And if there was an advantage, what methods are others using that they are willing to share with the group. And just to reiterate, this is only for cases that do NOT have blown out primer pockets or show any signs of structural integrity damage.

I did an accuracy test with squared heads compared to factory head brass. Following are the results.

SQUARED HEADS
Rich Coyle (541) 479-4646
May, 1997

Theory: Cases with squared heads will print better groups than standard cases when everything else is equal.
A Savage .223 with a 26" blue barrel in a non-pillar bedded polymer stock was used to verify the theory. The only modification being a trigger job to reduce the intolerable eight-pound pull to a more pleasant two pounds.
I used moly-coated 52-grain JLK low-drag benchrest bullets; energized by 28.5 grains of AA2230. For a little variety, both Remington 7½ Benchrest and CCI 400 standard small rifle primers sparked their respective loads. I started with 100 Remington cases, which had been fired seven times. I prepared them for this test by first full-length resizing them because the bolt was a little stiff on the closing cycle. After trimming them to length, chamfering, deburing the flash holes inside and squaring the primer pockets, I weighed them. Forty fell within my tolerance of .1 grain. Using a Wilson case trimmer, I squared half the cases. While some needed no squaring, I found the worst cases needed to be trimmed .002" to bring them into square. They were then fire-formed and neck-sized.

Five shots at 100 yards established the groups. I fired two groups primed with the Remington 7½ Benchrest primers first. Following these, I fired four groups with the CCI 400 standard primers. The last two groups used the remaining Remington primed loads. I used this system so fouling (or lack of same) would not favor either company's primers.
The first Remington primed factory cases punched an .843" group. The squared Remington primed cases made a group of .513". The CCI primed factory base is slightly better than the bench rest primed group at .800". The squared CCI primed cases' group came in with a phenomenal .396". Following with the next CCI factory base, I fired a .909" group. The CCI primed cases' groups are certainly surprising. The next one is .469". The second Remington primed factory case is better than the first one at .606". The Remington primed square case is .685".
The averages are:
Remington primed factory cases: .7245"
Remington primed squared cases: .5990"

CCI primed factory bases averaged: .8545"
CCI primed squared cases averaged: .4325"

A week later I shot another eight groups to verify the first findings. The first Remington primed factory cases produce an .800" group. The square base Remington primed group is supporting the theory with a smaller at .757". The first CCI primed factory case group comes in at .556". Since smaller is better, the square base CCI primers triumph with a .500" group. The next CCI primed factory case load punched a .539" group. This is followed by the CCI primed square cases producing a sorry .683" group. The last Remington primed factory cases produced holes that spread .668". The last Remington primed square base group follows theory by printing .599".
This gives us four groups with each type of case for comparison. The averages of the last four groups are:
Remington primed factory case is .7293"
Remington primed square base is .6385"
CCI primed factory is .7010"
CCI primed square is .5120"

These numbers favor the Remington primed square bases by more than an 1/8", and the CCI primed cases by more than 3/16".

The importance of a "little variety" mentioned above obviously proves the value of trying different primers in one's quest for maximum accuracy.

Results: The averages of the group's tend to support the theory stated

 

[drumjunky91]

T

I did an accuracy test with squared heads compared to factory head brass. Following are the results.

SQUARED HEADS
Rich Coyle (541) 479-4646
May, 1997

Theory: Cases with squared heads will print better groups than standard cases when everything else is equal.
A Savage .223 with a 26" blue barrel in a non-pillar bedded polymer stock was used to verify the theory. The only modification being a trigger job to reduce the intolerable eight-pound pull to a more pleasant two pounds.
I used moly-coated 52-grain JLK low-drag benchrest bullets; energized by 28.5 grains of AA2230. For a little variety, both Remington 7½ Benchrest and CCI 400 standard small rifle primers sparked their respective loads. I started with 100 Remington cases, which had been fired seven times. I prepared them for this test by first full-length resizing them because the bolt was a little stiff on the closing cycle. After trimming them to length, chamfering, deburing the flash holes inside and squaring the primer pockets, I weighed them. Forty fell within my tolerance of .1 grain. Using a Wilson case trimmer, I squared half the cases. While some needed no squaring, I found the worst cases needed to be trimmed .002" to bring them into square. They were then fire-formed and neck-sized.

Five shots at 100 yards established the groups. I fired two groups primed with the Remington 7½ Benchrest primers first. Following these, I fired four groups with the CCI 400 standard primers. The last two groups used the remaining Remington primed loads. I used this system so fouling (or lack of same) would not favor either company's primers.
The first Remington primed factory cases punched an .843" group. The squared Remington primed cases made a group of .513". The CCI primed factory base is slightly better than the bench rest primed group at .800". The squared CCI primed cases' group came in with a phenomenal .396". Following with the next CCI factory base, I fired a .909" group. The CCI primed cases' groups are certainly surprising. The next one is .469". The second Remington primed factory case is better than the first one at .606". The Remington primed square case is .685".
The averages are:
Remington primed factory cases: .7245"
Remington primed squared cases: .5990"

CCI primed factory bases averaged: .8545"
CCI primed squared cases averaged: .4325"

A week later I shot another eight groups to verify the first findings. The first Remington primed factory cases produce an .800" group. The square base Remington primed group is supporting the theory with a smaller at .757". The first CCI primed factory case group comes in at .556". Since smaller is better, the square base CCI primers triumph with a .500" group. The next CCI primed factory case load punched a .539" group. This is followed by the CCI primed square cases producing a sorry .683" group. The last Remington primed factory cases produced holes that spread .668". The last Remington primed square base group follows theory by printing .599".
This gives us four groups with each type of case for comparison. The averages of the last four groups are:
Remington primed factory case is .7293"
Remington primed square base is .6385"
CCI primed factory is .7010"
CCI primed square is .5120"

These numbers favor the Remington primed square bases by more than an 1/8", and the CCI primed cases by more than 3/16".

The importance of a "little variety" mentioned above obviously proves the value of trying different primers in one's quest for maximum accuracy.

Results: The averages of the group's tend to support the theory stated

THIS. THIS EXACTLY. Thank you! This is exactly the information I was reaching for. Measurable data supporting the theory that any variance in case headstamp imperfection can produce wide varying groups if not corrected. Thank you for this data.

 

[Mike Matteson]

I did an accuracy test with squared heads compared to factory head brass. Following are the results.

SQUARED HEADS
Rich Coyle (541) 479-4646
May, 1997

Theory: Cases with squared heads will print better groups than standard cases when everything else is equal.
A Savage .223 with a 26" blue barrel in a non-pillar bedded polymer stock was used to verify the theory. The only modification being a trigger job to reduce the intolerable eight-pound pull to a more pleasant two pounds.
I used moly-coated 52-grain JLK low-drag benchrest bullets; energized by 28.5 grains of AA2230. For a little variety, both Remington 7½ Benchrest and CCI 400 standard small rifle primers sparked their respective loads. I started with 100 Remington cases, which had been fired seven times. I prepared them for this test by first full-length resizing them because the bolt was a little stiff on the closing cycle. After trimming them to length, chamfering, deburing the flash holes inside and squaring the primer pockets, I weighed them. Forty fell within my tolerance of .1 grain. Using a Wilson case trimmer, I squared half the cases. While some needed no squaring, I found the worst cases needed to be trimmed .002" to bring them into square. They were then fire-formed and neck-sized.

Five shots at 100 yards established the groups. I fired two groups primed with the Remington 7½ Benchrest primers first. Following these, I fired four groups with the CCI 400 standard primers. The last two groups used the remaining Remington primed loads. I used this system so fouling (or lack of same) would not favor either company's primers.
The first Remington primed factory cases punched an .843" group. The squared Remington primed cases made a group of .513". The CCI primed factory base is slightly better than the bench rest primed group at .800". The squared CCI primed cases' group came in with a phenomenal .396". Following with the next CCI factory base, I fired a .909" group. The CCI primed cases' groups are certainly surprising. The next one is .469". The second Remington primed factory case is better than the first one at .606". The Remington primed square case is .685".
The averages are:
Remington primed factory cases: .7245"
Remington primed squared cases: .5990"

CCI primed factory bases averaged: .8545"
CCI primed squared cases averaged: .4325"

A week later I shot another eight groups to verify the first findings. The first Remington primed factory cases produce an .800" group. The square base Remington primed group is supporting the theory with a smaller at .757". The first CCI primed factory case group comes in at .556". Since smaller is better, the square base CCI primers triumph with a .500" group. The next CCI primed factory case load punched a .539" group. This is followed by the CCI primed square cases producing a sorry .683" group. The last Remington primed factory cases produced holes that spread .668". The last Remington primed square base group follows theory by printing .599".
This gives us four groups with each type of case for comparison. The averages of the last four groups are:
Remington primed factory case is .7293"
Remington primed square base is .6385"
CCI primed factory is .7010"
CCI primed square is .5120"

These numbers favor the Remington primed square bases by more than an 1/8", and the CCI primed cases by more than 3/16".

The importance of a "little variety" mentioned above obviously proves the value of trying different primers in one's quest for maximum accuracy.

Results: The averages of the group's tend to support the theory stated

That's very interesting, How did you achieve squaring the end of the case? I know about that squaring the bolt face. It's probable I am not following?
Now back to overpressuring! You are over pressure with ejector marks on the case. I am really surprised that you have blew a primer out of the cases. It's going to catch you somewhere along the line. You are probably creatoring you primers all the time.

 

[drumjunky91]

That's very interesting, How did you achieve squaring the end of the case? I know about that squaring the bolt face. It's probable I am not following?
Now back to overpressuring! You are over pressure with ejector marks on the case. I am really surprised that you have blew a primer out of the cases. It's going to catch you somewhere along the line. You are probably creatoring you primers all the time.

For the 43rd time now, yes, I was overpressure. That was never the question here, but thank you. The question is about truing up headstamps on case that are still very much so usable, i.e. no loose primer pockets, no stretching in the web area, primer didn't explode out of the case and my bolt didn't sink 8 inches into my skull. The question being: Would a small raised ejector mark cause larger group sizes, and if so, how are people correcting headstamps on GOOD cases. Not blown out, run-ragged brass.

ADG brass has a pretty soft headstamp and is notorious for leaving ejector prints in 28 Nosler brass on even the mildest of loads. Ones that are well below book max, quickload and GRT as well. Low chrono speeds to boot. If I threw out every piece of brass that my 28 left a small imprint on, then I had better take stock in brass because I'd have to shoot virgin brass strictly. This is across 3 different 28's that I know of personally, handloads and factory ammo. And forget Nosler brass. Might as well wrap some powder up in aluminum foil and stuff a bullet in to it.

 

[Mike Matteson]

For the 43rd time now, yes, I was overpressure. That was never the question here, but thank you. The question is about truing up headstamps on case that are still very much so usable, i.e. no loose primer pockets, no stretching in the web area, primer didn't explode out of the case and my bolt didn't sink 8 inches into my skull. The question being: Would a small raised ejector mark cause larger group sizes, and if so, how are people correcting headstamps on GOOD cases. Not blown out, run-ragged brass.

ADG brass has a pretty soft headstamp and is notorious for leaving ejector prints in 28 Nosler brass on even the mildest of loads. Ones that are well below book max, quickload and GRT as well. Low chrono speeds to boot. If I threw out every piece of brass that my 28 left a small imprint on, then I had better take stock in brass because I'd have to shoot virgin brass strictly. This is across 3 different 28's that I know of personally, handloads and factory ammo. And forget Nosler brass. Might as well wrap some powder up in aluminum foil and stuff a bullet in to it.

I know you state that you are over pressure. Why do you push over the envelope? Somewhere it's going to get you into big trouble. The last I am going to say about it. Hope you stay safe.

 

[drumjunky91]

I know you state that you are over pressure. Why do you push over the envelope? Somewhere it's going to get you into big trouble. The last I am going to say about it. Hope you stay safe.

I'm sorry about my snarky response, but it is not my common practice to load over pressure by any means. It happens for me typically when I'm running up through an OCW test. But I've also found myself in a good node in cold weather previously and the next time I shoot may be in hotter Temps and I develop small ejector marks. It sucks, but it happens. All part of the reloading experience. When it happens, I don't trash my brass because of a light dimple when the case is still in good shape otherwise.
My 28 however is a different story. It's just angry all the time.

 

[Rich Coyle]

That's very interesting, How did you achieve squaring the end of the case? I know about that squaring the bolt face. It's probable I am not following?
Now back to overpressuring! You are over pressure with ejector marks on the case. I am really surprised that you have blew a primer out of the cases. It's going to catch you somewhere along the line. You are probably creatoring you primers all the time.

I use a Wilson case trimmer. It is like a collet used on a lathe. I purchased a larger cutter so I can cut larger heads square. Works like a champ.

 

[codyadams]

@drumjunky91, I get where you're coming from. An ejector mark is a pressure sign. If you don't see it, or any other pressure signs, you have room to go up. When you see it, you know that you are at pressure, then you stop, pretty standard stuff. You HAVE TO have it appear for that pressure sign to be present, obviously. Your asking how to square up the small ejector mark once it appears. We pay our gunsmiths to give us a chamber true to the .000X", so if we have brass with a portion of the case head raised even .0003" above the rest, why not fix it? Your not saying that you run all your loads over pressure, and from reading your initial post, you do not need a lecture on pressure, that is not your question and you know what caused the ejector mark.

@Rich Coyle answered your question perfectly. Ejector marks happen to everyone that reloads and works up to pressure, reading pressure as reloading manuals state. Assuming primer pockets are good, I think it would be beneficial to square up the head. I like the method Rich explained, sounds more precise than sandpaper on a flat surface, though honestly that was my initial thought on how to fix it!

Good luck sir.

 

[drumjunky91]

@drumjunky91, I get where you're coming from. An ejector mark is a pressure sign. If you don't see it, or any other pressure signs, you have room to go up. When you see it, you know that you are at pressure, then you stop, pretty standard stuff. You HAVE TO have it appear for that pressure sign to be present, obviously. Your asking how to square up the small ejector mark once it appears. We pay our gunsmiths to give us a chamber true to the .000X", so if we have brass with a portion of the case head raised even .0003" above the rest, why not fix it? Your not saying that you run all your loads over pressure, and from reading your initial post, you do not need a lecture on pressure, that is not your question and you know what caused the ejector mark.

@Rich Coyle answered your question perfectly. Ejector marks happen to everyone that reloads and works up to pressure, reading pressure as reloading manuals state. Assuming primer pockets are good, I think it would be beneficial to square up the head. I like the method Rich explained, sounds more precise than sandpaper on a flat surface, though honestly that was my initial thought on how to fix it!

Good luck sir.

Yes sir, I agree 100%. So far chucking the case up in a Wilson case trimmer is definitely sounding like the #1 candidate for sure. I actually just ordered mine last night to give it a try. @Rich Coyle's post was exactly the data I was looking for to support my theory. I knew I couldn't be the only one out there that has thought about this lol. I was using the sandpaper method up to this point, but I'll always take any excuse to buy new tools haha

 

[Mike Matteson]

I'm sorry about my snarky response, but it is not my common practice to load over pressure by any means. It happens for me typically when I'm running up through an OCW test. But I've also found myself in a good node in cold weather previously and the next time I shoot may be in hotter Temps and I develop small ejector marks. It sucks, but it happens. All part of the reloading experience. When it happens, I don't trash my brass because of a light dimple when the case is still in good shape otherwise.
My 28 however is a different story. It's just angry all the time.

Different based powders can cause lots of problems. One time I developed a load. Great accuracy for the rifle. Loaded hot in the winter time. Blew the primer out in the summer time. That was about a 50 degree change in temp. Gave away the powder and never used it again.
Velocity was down 100fps the different powders, but never had that problem again.
The other is I was a Medica in Vietnam. Seem so many people killed and hurt. So if I think I see something going possible wrong I will wave my hands. Sometimes I go overboard too about it too. Glad we cleared the air.