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
load development
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: 1155792" data-attributes="member: 1521"><p>Don't know, it doesn't matter. I won't ever be using new brass in the field.</p><p>I use fully formed brass that is sized the way I always size it.</p><p></p><p>Add to this that I don't have to replace my brass -ever.</p><p>For example, I bought and formed 50 Lapua cases for a .223rem. ~1900rnds later, same 50pc of brass in service. No problems.</p><p>That's ~37 reload cycles with STABLE cases, so why would I **** around with the moment my brass was still unformed?</p><p></p><p>The question amounts to whether results change from new to formed (sized or not). The answer is yes, for many it does. While I do not personally challenge myself with this, we do see it declared and discussed across shooting forums.</p><p>Some claim better results with new brass, some worse, some no change. </p><p></p><p>Makes no sense to me that anyone would roll dice on it, especially during load development. After all, if you did then you'd just be inclined to write-off any 'flyer' to the brass being new. Or was it? Changing powder AND case capacity is two changes at once, while load development is easier with single changes at a time.</p><p></p><p>If you really feel that 50-100 shots are wasted in brass forming alone, then use this opportunity to test big result items(coarse adjustments). Gun handling, primers, bullet seating depths, primer striking.</p><p>I have to say, anyone who doesn't acknowledge the potential in seating testing -knows little to nothing about load development.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mikecr, post: 1155792, member: 1521"] Don't know, it doesn't matter. I won't ever be using new brass in the field. I use fully formed brass that is sized the way I always size it. Add to this that I don't have to replace my brass -ever. For example, I bought and formed 50 Lapua cases for a .223rem. ~1900rnds later, same 50pc of brass in service. No problems. That's ~37 reload cycles with STABLE cases, so why would I **** around with the moment my brass was still unformed? The question amounts to whether results change from new to formed (sized or not). The answer is yes, for many it does. While I do not personally challenge myself with this, we do see it declared and discussed across shooting forums. Some claim better results with new brass, some worse, some no change. Makes no sense to me that anyone would roll dice on it, especially during load development. After all, if you did then you'd just be inclined to write-off any 'flyer' to the brass being new. Or was it? Changing powder AND case capacity is two changes at once, while load development is easier with single changes at a time. If you really feel that 50-100 shots are wasted in brass forming alone, then use this opportunity to test big result items(coarse adjustments). Gun handling, primers, bullet seating depths, primer striking. I have to say, anyone who doesn't acknowledge the potential in seating testing -knows little to nothing about load development. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
load development
Top