Armory Sponsor
Posted: 9/11/2011 5:53:35 PM EDT
|
I have been kicking the idea of annealing around for awhile now and am wondering what benefit those that do it are seeing? Do you get better accuracy out of the cases? More life?
I mainly reload for semi autos like the garand/M1a/Ar style rifles and except in 223, haven't had any problems with split necks. I would be more interested in better accuracy to spend the time and money to get set up to do this. Tell me what your results are. Thanks! |
|
I believe annealing is more for case life and case workability.
Heres a good article i find this site a great resource. annealing |
|
Unless you have some match brass that has allot of work into it and you plan to use it for as long as possible it's not worth it.
I use mine for 6.8 brass because I have up to 20 reloads on many of the cases I'm using now and after 3-4 warm reloads the brass starts to get hard and does not size as easily or as consistently so I have to anneal it to keep the shoulder/neck soft. For cases like .223 that you will be lucky if you use 4-5 times total before discarding it's just not worth it since the brass is so cheap and easy to replace. You'll be money and time ahead to just use good annealed brass like LC to start with, it will not work harden in most cases before you discard it. I anneal brass for many people cheap compared to what it cost to get setup with the equipment I use. |
|
Agree with the group.
If you have time and money in the case, you have to decide if the cost and time of annealing is worth it. For cheap cases, it isn't. For mid to long range, or expensive brass, yes it is worth it. The case life is extended. It won't change precision or accuracy, that is due to other factors. It will prevent the work hardening from splitting the neck. The case body and head then become the limiting factor and annealing won't fix those issues. |
|
Quoted:
The only time you'll notice accuracy difference is 600 yards plus. For shorter distance, it will extend neck life for exotic brass. Other than that, it's not really worth it. 'Borg Sir, WADR I've been considering buying one of the Bench Source rotary annealing machines ever since I started reloading 260 Rem. for my AR10. While I don't consider the Remington brass too expensive at $55/100 it's not cheap either. I'm at the 4X point with most of the cases I have and I've begun to notice a difference in neck tension between some of the reloaded cartridges that I've had to pull bullets from. I'm wondering if annealing might ensure uniform case neck tension particularly with my MR loads. What's your experience? 7zero1 out. |
|
Quoted:
Since the Isreali IMI ammo is already annealed, will these cases make for better reloading than a non annealed version? By military standard the cartridge brass case necks must be annealed to remove work hardening effects during forming. Some of the commercial houses polish back out the coloration from annealing so you do not see the tell-tale. .Mil ammo provides no such polishing frill, so you see the coloration from the annealing process. If you have some very expensive cases, say Quigley 45-70 lapuas, you might consider gearing up to do annealing. If not, then just round up enough cheap once fired brass cases to last a lifetime with 3 or 4 reload cycles. No annealing is then required. Resizing the neck over and over again will eventually work harden the neck (make it more brittle) and will lead to splits, etc. Work hardening is removed by the annealing process. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The only time you'll notice accuracy difference is 600 yards plus. For shorter distance, it will extend neck life for exotic brass. Other than that, it's not really worth it. 'Borg Sir, WADR I've been considering buying one of the Bench Source rotary annealing machines ever since I started reloading 260 Rem. for my AR10. While I don't consider the Remington brass too expensive at $55/100 it's not cheap either. I'm at the 4X point with most of the cases I have and I've begun to notice a difference in neck tension between some of the reloaded cartridges that I've had to pull bullets from. I'm wondering if annealing might ensure uniform case neck tension particularly with my MR loads. What's your experience? 7zero1 out. If you could get a friend to anneal some for you the first time, you would be able to see if the investment is worth it to you. Some issues can be solved with the neck, but if the head expands too much and the primer pockets no longer hold, the neck won't do you any good. Your particular situation can only be known by trying. For myself, it is worth it for some of my cases based on the time I have put into the case prep. I am able to get 10 cycles through silhouette rigs by using a collet die and no anneal. Since some brass is easy to get, I don't bother with them after 10 good cycles. For others, I can double the case life by annealing so the real savings is the time I put into those cases. You will certainly see the state of those necks recover after an anneal. Just be sure the rest of that case isn't ready to let go before you worry too much about the neck life. Cases fail in other ways too. |
|
Quoted:
Since the Isreali IMI ammo is already annealed, will these cases make for better reloading than a non annealed version? I can't say that there was a big difference based on the color of the case when new. In other words, we are assuming that the mil-spec brass color means it is annealed and that the commercial color means it is not. For example, I used to run Remington against PMC Mil-Spec in .30-06 with the annealed necks. This was in the 80s time frame. Presumably the Rem wasn't annealed and the PMC was. (I don't think one can really tell.) When necks were turned and prepared the same way, those case lives were equal to within one cycle. In general, I think the IMI (ammo or brass) quality makes it a good value regardless. |
|
All brass gets annealed from the factory just because the forming process makes it very hard, in most cases(no pun) they are annealed three times during the forming process with the third annealing being when they are finished and as others have said they get polished out so there are no annealing marks left on the case.
For example all Hornady brass is factory annealed but they polish them to a brite shine before they ever get loaded or sold as components. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The only time you'll notice accuracy difference is 600 yards plus. For shorter distance, it will extend neck life for exotic brass. Other than that, it's not really worth it. 'Borg Sir, WADR I've been considering buying one of the Bench Source rotary annealing machines ever since I started reloading 260 Rem. for my AR10. While I don't consider the Remington brass too expensive at $55/100 it's not cheap either. I'm at the 4X point with most of the cases I have and I've begun to notice a difference in neck tension between some of the reloaded cartridges that I've had to pull bullets from. I'm wondering if annealing might ensure uniform case neck tension particularly with my MR loads. What's your experience? 7zero1 out. You will notice a more consistant neck tension on annealed cases, at least I have. Have you ever wondered why the long range shooter always say that the first couple of shots with new brass is more accurate? Most LR shooters do anneal their brass. Like I said, you'll notice little accuracy at short range. I anneal every 2nd shot on all my brass, seems to keep the accuracy edge. I have a machine similar to the bench source from a guy that was selling just the disk, easy to make and use. He even has a Dillon case feeder on his. 'Borg |
|
If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right.
Giraud Annealer It rotates the case while it is in the flame for even heating. |
|
Quoted:
Sir, WADR I've been considering buying one of the Bench Source rotary annealing machines ever since I started reloading 260 Rem. for my AR10. While I don't consider the Remington brass too expensive at $55/100 it's not cheap either. I'm at the 4X point with most of the cases I have and I've begun to notice a difference in neck tension between some of the reloaded cartridges that I've had to pull bullets from. I'm wondering if annealing might ensure uniform case neck tension particularly with my MR loads. What's your experience? 7zero1 out. 7zero1. I purchased the Bench Source and am very happy with it. For 223 Lapua I only need one torch to anneal in a few seconds. I am extremely attentive to neck tension for consistency and only use a bushing die to neck size to the correct neck ID. Other than in very subjective ways I do not know how to properly measure the tension holding a bullet into the brass. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sir, WADR I've been considering buying one of the Bench Source rotary annealing machines ever since I started reloading 260 Rem. for my AR10. While I don't consider the Remington brass too expensive at $55/100 it's not cheap either. I'm at the 4X point with most of the cases I have and I've begun to notice a difference in neck tension between some of the reloaded cartridges that I've had to pull bullets from. I'm wondering if annealing might ensure uniform case neck tension particularly with my MR loads. What's your experience? 7zero1 out. 7zero1. I purchased the Bench Source and am very happy with it. For 223 Lapua I only need one torch to anneal in a few seconds. I am extremely attentive to neck tension for consistency and only use a bushing die to neck size to the correct neck ID. Other than in very subjective ways I do not know how to properly measure the tension holding a bullet into the brass. 
Keep your eye out for these Chattilon mechanical load cells on Ebay tooling. The one I found is good for 50 lb range. That is about right for 5.56 ammo. If you are working with the larger caliber like 7.62 then you should look for one with a 100 lb range. |
| CCW, I can see this providing catastrophic failure testing which will be useful. However for measuring neck tension for consistency we should know for X force the bullet moves either in or out of the brass Y distance. Controlling this measurement will allow us to achieve consistant neck tension. With the load cell you are part way there. |
|
Yes, it is destructive testing, for the most part. What I have found is that motion starts at the peak load, then drops rapidly, provided the barrel of the bullet body is fully engaged with the neck. This may be due to static coefficient of friction being larger than dynamic coefficient of friction (classic sliding friction). The Chatillon has a peak hold indicator to capture the maximum force. Measuring the tail-off after peak load or accurately measuring force vs. displacement with no lost motion, would require a more sophisticated set up.
Checking to see that your tension meets Mil-Spec works well just using the Chatillon. |
|
Quoted:
Hi CCW,
Can you tell us how you use this instrument? It appears that it can measure both push or pull peak force. In your photo, are you measuring push force i.e. how much to push the bullet into the case? Have you tried pull force? Yes, the device can push or pull from top or bottom. The red slide switch sets the peak hold indicator to push peak or pull peak. In the center position there is no peak hold function. The bezel rotates to tare zero set before start. I am using it for push now, with a plastic meplat adaptor to avoid scratching the bullet. For pulling I would need a bullet puller collet or a shell holder attached to the threaded shaft of the chatillon. Pushing is more tidy, particularly if there is powder in the case and the neck releases the bullet. There is a two bolt pattern in the rear for mounting the load cell on the cross head of a press. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Hi CCW, Can you tell us how you use this instrument? It appears that it can measure both push or pull peak force. In your photo, are you measuring push force i.e. how much to push the bullet into the case? Have you tried pull force? Yes, the device can push or pull from top or bottom. The red slide switch sets the peak hold indicator to push peak or pull peak. In the center position there is no peak hold function. The bezel rotates to tare zero set before start. I am using it for push now, with a plastic meplat adaptor to avoid scratching the bullet. For pulling I would need a bullet puller collet or a shell holder attached to the threaded shaft of the chatillon. Pushing is more tidy, particularly if there is powder in the case and the neck releases the bullet. There is a two bolt pattern in the rear for mounting the load cell on the cross head of a press. Interesting, and thanks for the info. I was actually thinking of mounting a bullet puller upside down and with a shell holder on the other end. The reason I was thinking of pulling is because this is first the natural direction for the bullet to move and frankly could not quite figure out how to get the bullet to come back out if I push and it dropped into the casing? I suppose you probably only do a slight push to see what it takes to break the hold? Coming from a research background and like you always concern about neck tension, this instrument appeals to me. |
|
I have had a few setbacks (the cartridge assemblies you see with setbacks are the ones fed and ejected, not fired, usually). I have not purposely tried firing setbacks as an experiment. One hypothesis is that setbacks cause kabooms from time to time, but the evidence is destroyed. The same could be said about set forwards also. The setbacks I first noticed were in LC crimped-in XM193. So, my first concern is setbacks in AR-15 handloaded ammo.
My theory is that if you meet the M193 / M855 mil spec criteria for retention force, without a cannelure, then you are good to go in AR-15s. So how does one proceed to no-crimp production with that theory? IMO, spot checks with the Chatillon would lend a good deal of assurance that your handload is going to stay together during the AR-15 autoloader dynamics. Now as for the AR-10...Wideners had some interesting Brand X 168 gn OTMs a while back. The ogive ran back to the heel of the boat tail end. There was no straight barrel section. I noticed it when the seating force would always drop off as the heel cleared the neck moving into the shoulder area, to hold the 2.80" COAL during seating. I miked the bullet and documented the extended Ogive. I still wanted to use them (I bought plenty). So, I bought a canneluring machine. Then after seating the cannelured versions applied a healthy roll crimp. The increase in retention force (in that application..not relative to other applications, mind you) was amazing. |
|
Hi CCW, Thanks again for writing more on this topic. Yes, I can imagine that if you are concerned about setback, adjusting neck tension so that they meet M193/M855 mil spec criteria would be pretty reassuring. The question would be would you not get the same thing measuring the round’s ability to resist setback i.e. OAL after feeding be a more direct method? The reason I ask is because the latter method is what I was planning to do to check my own handloads. The other potential advantage is that you can also measure possible changes in concentricity? Apart from changes in OAL, I was also interested in the Chatillon because theoretically it could measure consistency in neck tension and the effects of what one might do to increase this bench mark i.e. things like internal neck diameter, etc. That Brand X 168 OTM sound interesting. I was wondering how you keep the thing concentric if it had no straight barrel section and the ogive ran all the way back to the heel of the boat tail end? |
|
I anneal for bolt action rifles, not semi's. My thought process is an AR or M1 is going to chew up the case rim or expand the primer pockets before I have to worry about the necks splitting.
With my low powered (11 grains Trailboss, 170gr lead bullet) 30-06s and Springfield 1903a1, I have cases with more than 20 loadings. I anneal every 3rd or 4th reload with a plumber's torch in a dark room. |
Armory Sponsor