Rookie neck tension question

[chav0_12]

Do you find either process helps with concentricity better than the other? I've heard from some they feel a mandrel will do a better job of straightening or uniforming the neck after the sizing process? Just curious of others opinions.

I haven't compared the two. I will try to though. Also don't want to mess with a process that's working.

 

[MarkInPA]

I have heard that,as mentioned above, if you're not using quality brass with consistent neck thickness then just using a bushing from the outside may give uneven tension due to neck thickness variance. With quality brass it's not usually an issue. Obviously plenty of people just use the bushings and get good results. One of my spring projects is going to be testing my regular dies which give about .002 to a bushing with .002,.003 and .004 and see if I can tell any real world difference.

I think this is why it good to finish the sizing operation from INSIDE the neck. Whether that be a sizing button or a mandrel. By so doing, any case neck thickness variations are pushed to the outside and you are left with a uniform inside diameter.

If you are turning your case necks and create an even case neck thickness, then maybe you can forgo sizing the inside of the case neck.

For someone using factory rifles for hunting purposes, they probably are not turning their case necks.

 

[Rick Richard]

How exact do you think that is? There's already some tension on the bullet, so wanting .003 might net you .0035 or .004. That's all I'm saying I think it's easier and more exact using a a mandrel, same can be done with expander buttons but I think that just works the brass more than necessary. I've had good luck with bushing dies too, I've had good luck/noticeable differences playing with different tensions using different bushing sizes too. You don't think, just grabbing a mandrel of the exact size you wanted the inside of your neck to be would be more accurate? I think I hit on this too, as there have been reports of brass "acting funny" when annealed or not. I can imagine the brass acts differently the more and more it changes as we trim and anneal and work harden. To get that exact neck tension that we want it seems the mandrel would be the easier route. Again, idk for sure, I haven't personally done enough testing to say which is better. It just seems that a mandrel is easier.

Doesn't matter which method you use you will get "springer back" and have to adjust accordingly….with a different bushing or mandrel. The bottom line is how well does a rifle shoot with all variables being equal.

 

[Rick Richard]

I haven't compared the two. I will try to though. Also don't want to mess with a process that's working.

Exactly, we can agree on this. lol.

 

[Alibiiv]

Do you find either process helps with concentricity better than the other? I've heard from some they feel a mandrel will do a better job of straightening or uniforming the neck after the sizing process? Just curious of others opinions.

For me turning the case neck is the only process that will make the case neck wall thickness the same all around the neck. If a bushing die is used it will squeeze the brass in to get a particular neck size, but it will not make the outside of the case neck thickness equal all the way around. I have seen some case neck thickness out as much as .0015 thousandths. While turning case necks I've also found where the neck is slightly tilted off from the body of the case. It is no different than primer pockets. Anyone who has used a primer pocket reamer has noticed that the primer seats are not parallel with the base of the shell, some are crooked. This brass is mass produced and pumped out. It is mostly close to tolerances, but not necessarily so for every case. I think we've hijacked this thread??

 

[WahooYahoo]

I noticed no difference at all whether I turned the necks or not, weight sorted the cases or not, wished upon a star or not. But I shoot hunting rifles.

If I can repetitively get 3 shots in .5 minute, I'm thrilled. If I can shoot 10 under 1 MOA, just as good. I use very good components, keep my process consistent, from loading session to loading session and case to case.
I anneal before each loading for consistency and use LE Wilson (or Sinclair) chamber dies so no run out. As long as I do these basic things, all of the expensive and complicating processes add nothing.

In case you wanna try, I have a 21st century lathe, turning arbors, 21st Century Consentricity wheel, digital thickness guages, and a heap of other stuff. Like new.

 

[MarkInPA]

I noticed no difference at all whether I turned the necks or not, weight sorted the cases or not, wished upon a star or not. But I shoot hunting rifles.

If I can repetitively get 3 shots in .5 minute, I'm thrilled. If I can shoot 10 under 1 MOA, just as good. I use very good components, keep my process consistent, from loading session to loading session and case to case.
I anneal before each loading for consistency and use LE Wilson (or Sinclair) chamber dies so no run out. As long as I do these basic things, all of the expensive and complicating processes add nothing.

In case you wanna try, I have a 21st century lathe, turning arbors, 21st Century Consentricity wheel, digital thickness guages, and a heap of other stuff. Like new.

I'm curious. I really like your response. It sounds like you have a lot of practical knowledge from trying things on your own and learning what works and what doesn't. I respect that. What I am curious about is if you still check and cull your brass for variations in neck wall thickness and if you check your cases for concentricity? I'm guessing no.

 

[huntoregon]

Wow, had a long day at work and came home to a lot of reading and a lot to digest. Will try to go back and follow up with any questions or comments.

 

[huntoregon]

What Randy Tidell said and more. What you have written is that you may be looking at hunting at ranges out to 700 yards. 700 yards is not a simple walk in the park, well at least for some of us, so you want reliable ammunition that is capable of reaching out that far to take ethical shots at game. I have read the replies up to #27. I have not read anything about addressing the donut. No matter what method you use to adjust neck tension, sooner or later there will be a donut and it has to be addressed to maintain a proper neck tension. When brass is shot and reloaded it is going to stretch, when it stretches that material has to move and has to go somewhere, thus the donut. Annealing is the first step in the process, no matter what process one chooses. My experience is to either remove the donut from the neck with a mandrel, meaning pushing the donut material to the outside of the neck and then turn the necks or FL resize and ream the neck out with the proper sized reamer. Presently I FL resize with the expander plug removed, set the neck tension with a Sinclair mandrel die and then turn the necks with a Forster neck turning tool that also doubles as my case trimmer. Neck turning is not that big of a deal once one is set up and has ruined a few cases figuring out how it works. With turning the necks, the neck thickness is maintained with the inside of the neck and the thickness/concentricity of the neck (outside inside/neck thickness) is consistently maintained. My thoughts are that reaming will remove the donut, however, depending on the maker of the brass, not all of the neck thicknesses are going to be controlled by this process, nor will the concentricity of the neck to the case will be maintained. A neck reamer will not correct neck material that is not concentric with the outside of the neck. Reaming will only serve to remove material with the cutting edges (front) of the reamer and follow the existing neck. What I am saying here is that any variations in the thickness of the neck wall will make it impossible to set a consistent neck tension, and that any variations of neck thickness has to be addressed before using a mandrel or using a bushing die.

I would like to thank you for acknowledging and engaging with the replies that you are getting with this thread. Oftentimes members will take the time to share their knowledge and comments and the OP will not acknowledge that they read the reply with a simple "LIKE" . Thanks for doing this, I am sure many of the readers of this post appreciate this as well.

Thank you for donut school. On a side note we are already hunting out to 700 yards successfully and more importantly ethically. I think this whole thing may be turning into more than I bargained for. I am not looking for every last ounce of accuracy. I have a young son who asked me "why i dont make bullets anymore" because he wants to participate. I thought maybe it would be fun to start reloading again and include him, and I figured if I was going to do it I might as well try to do a good job. The gun has already proven to shoot 1/2 MOA with factory Hornady ammo.

 

[huntoregon]

OP, as a new reloader, save yourself a LOT of grief and aggrivation and get a set of Forster Benchrest dies. I would not advise you to get into mandrels, bushings until you have a couple of seasons of reloading under your belt. To go from a Novice reloader to the most advanced reloader is a fool's errand unless you have a machinist background.

The process and the equipment are all understood. I don't think it is above my paygrade.

 

[huntoregon]

What I have done with the expander ball is to make it collateral damage. Meaning that I place the stem of the die with the expander and using a sanding drum in my Dremell tool I turn the drill press on and grind the outside diameter of the expander down to the point where it not longer functions as an expander. I them place it back into the die and deprime with it. This saves me a step in the reloading process. It will deprime, yet the expander doesn't hit the neck. One less step in the process. I too have a universal depriming tool as well.

Question here, you mention you deprime during your sizing step. Do you not clean the brass before you size? I have always knocked all the primers out and cleaned the brass and then sized, maybe I am making extra work for myself?

 

[huntoregon]

I noticed no difference at all whether I turned the necks or not, weight sorted the cases or not, wished upon a star or not. But I shoot hunting rifles.

If I can repetitively get 3 shots in .5 minute, I'm thrilled. If I can shoot 10 under 1 MOA, just as good. I use very good components, keep my process consistent, from loading session to loading session and case to case.
I anneal before each loading for consistency and use LE Wilson (or Sinclair) chamber dies so no run out. As long as I do these basic things, all of the expensive and complicating processes add nothing.

In case you wanna try, I have a 21st century lathe, turning arbors, 21st Century Consentricity wheel, digital thickness guages, and a heap of other stuff. Like new.

This right here sums up my thought process in a nutshell. Question, you anneal after every firing from new? I do not have an annealer and not sure I will. I can almost guarantee I will never turn case necks.