So now we're going to the benefits of neck expansion, and mandrel expansion.
If you were to research back 20yrs+ you would find that I was the first person to suggest mandrel neck expansion. And, you would see that everyone thought it was a stupid notion. Why do this operation at all, much less separate?
I'm sure today, still, many reloaders are not inclined to bother with it.
Part of it goes to the common misunderstanding of what neck tension is.
People still think it's interference fit with bullet seating. More interference, higher seating forces, equals higher neck tension (even while partial neck sizing). That never was, and never will be true.
When you leave necks in high interference with seating bullets, you're merely using your bullets for neck expansion. It's not good for your bullets, for consistent CBTO, and it overly work hardens necks.
When you pull a seated bullet, that you just expanded a neck with, that neck springs back ~1/2thou. Doesn't matter how much you downsize it(beyond spring back), after seating a bullet & pulling it, necks spring back to ~1/2thou under cal (interference).
Now, using a mandrel, you can perform a 'pre-seating' operation that removes neck expansion from a bullet's duty.
Expansion being sizing, and sizing is that causing yielding.
Ideally the mandrel would be at cal (like a bullet), and this would leave necks in spring back interference (under cal), just as bullet seating would.
Tension is the spring back force that is gripping an area of seated bullet bearing. It is pounds per square inch (PSI). You should be adjusting this through LENGTH (area) of bushing sizing, to no more than seated bearing.
The bushing size needs only to produce prerequisite interference for effective neck expansion. This is often set 2thou under cal as a rule. Close enough.
You can go more or less with what you have, just keep in mind that it is beyond ideal. It isn't helping, only hurting.
I'm outta time, but tonight I'll lay out a couple more important aspects of expansion.