Armory Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Differing Case Weights (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 1/3/2011 4:09:08 PM EDT
|
After my last thread of Newbie questions I decided to take a look at my LC and Hornady .223 brass and see how much different they are. I measured an empty, deprimed case that had no primer crimp. I took a sample of 8 cases from each year, 06, 07, 08, as well as from Hornady. Here's the results:
Overall: Average: 91.54 grn Median: 91.95 grn Mode: 92.4 grn Max: 93.7 grn Min: 88.4 grn Range: 5.3 grn Standard Deviation: 1.28 grn Hornady Average: 89.76 Max: 90.8 Min: 88.4 Range: 2.4 Standard Deviation: .77 LC-06 Average: 91.66 Max: 92.7 Min: 90.2 Range: 2.5 Standard Deviation: .84 LC-07 Average: 92.63 Max: 93.7 Min: 92.0 Range: 1.7 Standard Deviation: .52 LC-08 Average: 92.11 Max: 92.8 Min: 91.2 Range: 1.6 Standard Deviation: .60 Are these differences significant? It seems that for each one having at least 1.5 grain range would be significant. The only thing I can think of to explain this is that they aren't all trimmed evenly. I don't have a case gauge and I don't have a trimmer, I'll be getting them soon. But should I be worried? How should I treat these? |
|
Quoted:
The LC stuff is always heavy, It's thicker walled as per MIL SPEC. That's where your extra wt. is at. This is why you have to load any and all military brass lighter. As it will build up extra PSI due to less case capacity. That's correct for 7.62X51mm; however, for 5.56mm, the LC cases are almost exactly the same as Winchester. This subject has been beat to death here. Research it. |
|
Quoted:
The LC stuff is always heavy, It's thicker walled as per MIL SPEC. That's where your extra wt. is at. This is why you have to load any and all military brass lighter. As it will build up extra PSI due to less case capacity. Totally incorrect with 223/5.56 brass. 
Please don't post information you haven't confirmed yourself. |
|
Quoted: The LC stuff is always heavy, It's thicker walled as per MIL SPEC. That's where your extra wt. is at. This is why you have to load any and all military brass lighter. As it will build up extra PSI due to less case capacity. Not this again! There is some 5.56/.223 that is heavier and does have thicker walls, and it is not LC. |
| Well i'm not using H2o, Water doesn't fire lead down the barrel, So using water to compare is not correct. And i'll prove that the LAKE CITY case's I have in 5.556/223 don't hold the same amount of powder as some of the major ammo mfgs. I'm still in my office so it will be later in the day. check back. |
|
Quoted:
Well i'm not using H2o, Water doesn't fire lead down the barrel, So using water to compare is not correct. And i'll prove that the LAKE CITY case's I have in 5.556/223 don't hold the same amount of powder as some of the major ammo mfgs. I'm still in my office so it will be later in the day. check back. The purpose of the study was to determine the internal volume of the cases. Filling the case with water completely fills the case and the weight change due to the water translates to case volume. Filling the case with propellant and weighing would be like filling a bucket with bricks or stones. Different sizes would pack differently and some stones are more or less dense than other stones. The outside dimensions of the case are the same (or they wouldn't fit in the chamber). The internal volume of the case can be more or less, depending on the manufacturer. Therefore, the greater the internal volume, the thinner the walls/head. I'm really looking forward to where you run with your line of reason. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well i'm not using H2o, Water doesn't fire lead down the barrel, So using water to compare is not correct. And i'll prove that the LAKE CITY case's I have in 5.556/223 don't hold the same amount of powder as some of the major ammo mfgs. I'm still in my office so it will be later in the day. check back. The purpose of the study was to determine the internal volume of the cases. Filling the case with water completely fills the case and the weight change due to the water translates to case volume. Filling the case with propellant and weighing would be like filling a bucket with bricks or stones. Different sizes would pack differently and some stones are more or less dense than other stones. The outside dimensions of the case are the same (or they wouldn't fit in the chamber). The internal volume of the case can be more or less, depending on the manufacturer. Therefore, the greater the internal volume, the thinner the walls/head. I'm really looking forward to where you run with your line of reason. Not to mention his poor grasp of lab methods. |
|
Here's your other thread on this topic:
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=6&f=42&t=332805 |
|
Quoted:
Here's your other thread on this topic: http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=6&f=42&t=332805 I didn't mean to duplicate threads, I just figured it'd be better to have one only about the case weights with the data I had rather than making the other thread all about the cases rather than the other questions |
|
Ok, so here is what I've come up with AGAIN. I've had this go around with others and have proved it correct. Yes, water would give you a better "LAB" feel for case capacity. But since water doesn't burn and push lead down the barrel its not viable. Here is the Lake City brass I'm using "LC 80". After trimming all the brass tested to 1.760 and using Hodgon's Varget powder ( A powder used in 223 reloading). The LC case's came in at a empty wt. of 94 grains to 95 grains. These case's all still have the spent OEM primer in them. 26.3-26.5 grains is all I could get into the case even after tapping the side of the case to settle the powder.
Next in line. PMC. Empty wt at 97 gr. And took 28 grains of Varget. Remington. Empty wt. 96.5gr. And took 29.6 gr. Varget. Fiocchi. Empty wt. 97.1 gr. And took 28 gr Varget. Next was 2 Winchesters case's. White Box (Red lettering) Head stamp "WCC-06" Empty wt of 95 gr. And took 27.9-28.1 This suprised me knowing that this stuff is LC brass loaded for Winchester. Winchester head stamped. Empty wt. 96.7gr And took 28.6 grains of Varget. I wonder if LC has not done something to mod. the case's from then (1980) to 2008?? So just for shits and giggles I tossed some empty LC-78 308 case's on the scale. They came in at 184-186 gr. And then put the Winchester White box 308 head stamped WCC-08. And it was from 179-182 gr. All case's where empty with OEM spent primers still in them. So that's the facts I've lived by. Yes it's old brass,But that's why they warn you about ANY of the military LC stuff. I'd love to find a test barrel that had a psi gauge to really see how much more psi they make. |
|
Water is a convenient medium for gaging internal volume of a case. Gunpowder is useless for that task due to the variability in its bulk density from type to type. Water allows us to "normalize" the volume with a material that behaves perfectly at the temps and pressures where we need to make the measurements.
The primers weigh approximately 2 grains. Your measurements are no better than provisional at this point until the error for the primer weights is corrected. What you confirmed is that LC, Winchester, WCC, and Remington cases run from about 92 to 94 grains. Lapua, too. We already knew this, and once again we have proof that it's far better to experiment and verify than to go by hearsay. |
|
Maybe this will also help the "Food for though idea". I took apart 3 223 case's
#1. A Lake City case, Head stamp LC 88. #2. A Remington case, Head stamp R.P 223. #3. A Winchester , Head stamp WCC-06. So I cut all these case's length wise. And started measures and found that the Lake City LC-88 is .070 thick from where the primer bottoms out to the bottom of the comb. chamber. The Rem. case is .060 at the same place, And the Win. WCC-06 case is 0.61. As you can see here for your self what the wall's look like. 
|
|
Here's a common reference. Again, this one has been around a couple of years and you might find newer cases that don't match this chart.
http://www.6mmbr.com/223Rem.html Read the old threads about the head thickness in FC brass from about 4 years ago, and older. Those cases had case webs that measured around 0.046 inches, and that is the reason they expanded or blew out with high pressure reloads. Some people shot the crap out of them with mild loads. The load manuals that make a blanket statement about the weights or capacities of all surplus cases are simply wrong. There are a couple of absolutes - 1) If it's wrong, it's wrong, and 2) If it works, it works. |
| AR-Doctor, I'm curious as to why you went to all that trouble measuring powder rather than measuring case cap by water. Your explanation of not shooting water down the barrel doesn't have anything to do with how much volume a case will actually hold. Dropping, dumping powder is going to be a much less exact method simply because the packing and density of the medium leaves far more room for error. |
|
Quoted:
AR-Doctor, I'm curious as to why you went to all that trouble measuring powder rather than measuring case cap by water. Your explanation of not shooting water down the barrel doesn't have anything to do with how much volume a case will actually hold. Dropping, dumping powder is going to be a much less exact method simply because the packing and density of the medium leaves far more room for error. Exactly.... 
|
|
Ok gentlemen, All that follows is straight from Hornady them self. I called and talk to Bill in Tech support this afternoon about this subject. And he gave me all kids of good info.
First of all Yes, Winchester is now running the Lake City plant producing ammo. Also the SOP for checking charge capacity in any case is to be done with Winchester 540 ball powder. NOT WATER. In these steps, Take a case and trim it to spec. Fill the case with 540 till it fills to the top of the case. Next tap the side of the case 6-8 times to settle the charge. Next top off the case with more 540. Next weight the case and the charge. Then dump charge and weight the case empty. The difference is that case's powder capacity. He also added this. Older LC case's mfg before 1990 held a "touch" less powder in his words. And that by rule of thumb the older case's should hold 28-29.6 grains. And anything after 1990 should be around the same as all the others between 29-30.7 grains. Some even as high as 32 gr. (Federal) Also he said that anything that's labeled or stamped 5.56 is subject to change on the above. I quote, "God only knows who MFG, and to what spec.'s. There's stuff out there being made in South America that's runs from mild to wild. It was old Remington tooling and when they pulled the plug on Mfg there they just left it like old socks" He advised that unless you know for sure what case's your loading. That you reduce all loading by 3% on the max end of any loading info. until you check for high pressure signs. That a lot of guys don't sort there brass good enough and just load it blind. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well i'm not using H2o, Water doesn't fire lead down the barrel, So using water to compare is not correct. And i'll prove that the LAKE CITY case's I have in 5.556/223 don't hold the same amount of powder as some of the major ammo mfgs. I'm still in my office so it will be later in the day. check back. The purpose of the study was to determine the internal volume of the cases. Filling the case with water completely fills the case and the weight change due to the water translates to case volume. Filling the case with propellant and weighing would be like filling a bucket with bricks or stones. Different sizes would pack differently and some stones are more or less dense than other stones. The outside dimensions of the case are the same (or they wouldn't fit in the chamber). The internal volume of the case can be more or less, depending on the manufacturer. Therefore, the greater the internal volume, the thinner the walls/head. I'm really looking forward to where you run with your line of reason. why not use powder instead of water? When reloading why do we use the weight of such and such powder?? it is a method by powder companies and those selling reloading supplies to achieve set volume within a case repeatability if we do not achieve that volume what happens within the case/ chamber ––––S.E.E happens look it up your self it happens usually with subsonic loads with faster powders. thus why back in the day P.O. Ackley, & Hatcher recommended filler for subsonic loads nowadays it is discouraged most reloaders set a Lyman 55 or RCBS powder measure to throw a volume versus weighing each charge do we not? and accept small variances within weights. I understand why some prefer to use H2O, but you are measuring the flash hole (all web heads are NOT the same thicknessas well as walls) as well as a spent primer as well as the neck which the bullet occupies. Using powder you are not measuring the flash hole and the spent area within the primer, the argument that it like stacking bricks well yes that is true but that is exactly like we load the case anyways the only way I know to get the dense load is to use a drop tube. and yes I agree with AR Doctor on case capacity maybe he and I are from the old school prior to the adoption of the M16A2 and modification to issue ammo. I believe that if you check pre-1988 M16A1 and before you will find the case capacity is not the same as what ya'll are quoting as gospel. so those that state LC 5.56mm did you use LC brass that was during the M16 / M16A1 era ammo. if you do not believe in cautioning a fellow reloader to reduce and work up loads then....... |
|
AR-Doctor, with all due respect sir, I must just be too dense (no pun) to understand what the Hornady man told you. How can tapping a case 6-8 times be any kind of an exact way to get the same density in powder? Is it 6, 7, or 8 and how hard do you tap each one? How much does that vary from case to case, or even from tap to tap? Then you refill the case some more? Man that's weird from my perspective.
Secondly why would you dump the powder out and weigh the case? Why not just weigh the powder? I have heard that some of the older LC cases might have been thicker with less case volume but I thought that was like pre-70 or 80 stuff. Actually I'm not even sure about that as it might just be a sentence fragment running around in my head. Like I said, I must be too dense, but I can't see how any of this can be more accurate in determining case volume than water, JMHO. |
|
I could be way out in left field with this but I'm sure I'll find out soon enough.
So lets say we put the same charge in 2 of the cases that he has shown here. The LC case being #1 and the Remington being #2. Lets also say that this charge that we used gets us a pressure in case #2 of 50,000 PSI. The ? is when we put this same charge in case #1 which has a web that is .010 thicker than case #2 exactly how much if any did the pressure go up?? My thinking is that it would NOT be enough to make any real big difference. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Quoted:
Maybe this will also help the "Food for though idea". I took apart 3 223 case's #1. A Lake City case, Head stamp LC 88. #2. A Remington case, Head stamp R.P 223. #3. A Winchester , Head stamp WCC-06. So I cut all these case's length wise. And started measures and found that the Lake City LC-88 is .070 thick from where the primer bottoms out to the bottom of the comb. chamber. The Rem. case is .060 at the same place, And the Win. WCC-06 case is 0.61. As you can see here for your self what the wall's look like.http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e22/toptrophy/223Brass.jpg |
|
The bottom line is this, pay attention to the weight of your resized and trimmed cases. It will be the first warning that something is dramatically different. I have run into cases (FNM-79 headstamp) that weighed over 103/104 grains unprimed. This is 10 whole grains heavier than Lake City.
Back to the original posters question, the answer is NO. The small variations from lot to lot that you have discovered will not have any effect on your reloading data. I think you were within 2.0 grains +/- with five different brands of brass. .308 is where this urban legend got started. It's where reloaders first experienced problems. It's not unusual to find Hornady, Black Hills or Winchester brass in .308 that only weighs 155 grains unprimed. Lake City usually runs between 178 to 180 grains. The difference is huge and pressure issues will rear it's ugly head if you don't lower your charge for Lake City (.308) accordingly. Not so with .223/5.56mm Lake City. I believe good advice was always circulated regarding Lake City .308, somewhere in translation it got changed to included .223 by mistake. People heard things that weren't said exactly the way they thought? They jumped to the conclusion that all Lake City was heavier and thicker? Who knows? I remember in junior high a teacher asked one student to repeat a whispered statement and to whisper it to their neighbor until it got completely around the room. The "secret" didn't sound anything like what it started off as. He did it to make a point about gossip. The same applies here. |
|
I could be way out in left field with this but I'm sure I'll find out soon enough. So lets say we put the same charge in 2 of the cases that he has shown here. The LC case being #1 and the Remington being #2. Lets also say that this charge that we used gets us a pressure in case #2 of 50,000 PSI. The ? is when we put this same charge in case #1 which has a web that is .010 thicker than case #2 exactly how much if any did the pressure go up?? My thinking is that it would NOT be enough to make any real big difference. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Good question, Kind adds to the conversation I had with Bill from Hornady on why there new manual(#8) has a lot of loads on the lighter side than where the others have with bullets of the same style. His answer was. "Yes, they have had a fare amount of fed back about that. And that Hornady spent a pill of $$ getting new testing equipment that has proves that the older stuff was not up to today's standards". His words not mine. So take it for what it's worth. |
|
Seriously guys. The reason we use water instead of powder to measure case capacity is the same reason we use calipers instead of tape measures to measure case length. Water is a much more accurate and repeatable way...unless you use small frozen water chips. THEN, your measurements might be a little off.
WAIT!!! Using small chips of ice sounds an aweful lot like using powder. And we all know that is what we shouldn't be doing...unless you tap it 6-8 times to settle it, of course.
J |
|
Quoted:
The LC stuff is always heavy, It's thicker walled as per MIL SPEC. That's where your extra wt. is at. This is why you have to load any and all military brass lighter. As it will build up extra PSI due to less case capacity. So, I find your original statement compromised sir, and I don't think you have proven anything about case capacity in 5.56/223. Again JMHO. Could you give me a link where you found Winchester now running the Lake City Arsenal? I remember reading a year or so ago that ATK (Federal) had signed a contract with DOD to run Lake City for 4 more years. Was not aware that it had lost the contract before the 4 years were up. |
|
actually Reef it could depending on burn rate say the charge is the faster powder that is used with a set bullet weight shape and bearing surface in a more confined area yes it would drive pressure to beyond what the normal operating pressure this coupled with back thrust could have not exactly desire results which is why back in the 80/ early 90 everyone cautioned to reduce loads on all Mil / LC cases
from 1941 to 1985 Remington staffed and produced ammo at Lake City under AMC control, From 1985 to 2001 Olin aka Winchester ran the plant in 2001 until now ATK is staffing and producing ammo ATK is Federal , Speer and SEVERAL other companies. I only mention this so that one can see that even though AMC controls the plant each Contractor can request deviation to established standards in production |
|
also ATK staffs the production of Radford Army Arsenal where all propellant for small arms as well as Artillery is produced. Then shipped to Lake City for stuffing into the case. Since 2001 all Army units that are within the US have been ordered to consume Commercial packed ammo. All Milpacked ammo has been shipped to overseas deployed units for use.
P.S. IIRC ATK contract for both facilities have been extended to I think 2023 this is all pretty much opn source that one can simply use a search engine ie Google |
|
Quoted:
I could be way out in left field with this but I'm sure I'll find out soon enough. So lets say we put the same charge in 2 of the cases that he has shown here. The LC case being #1 and the Remington being #2. Lets also say that this charge that we used gets us a pressure in case #2 of 50,000 PSI. The ? is when we put this same charge in case #1 which has a web that is .010 thicker than case #2 exactly how much if any did the pressure go up?? My thinking is that it would NOT be enough to make any real big difference. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Good question, Kind adds to the conversation I had with Bill from Hornady on why there new manual(#8) has a lot of loads on the lighter side than where the others have with bullets of the same style. His answer was. "Yes, they have had a fare amount of fed back about that. And that Hornady spent a pill of $$ getting new testing equipment that has proves that the older stuff was not up to today's standards". His words not mine. So take it for what it's worth. What do you mean by "older stuff" As a RSO I get lots of range brass when I want it. I can't tell ya the last time I got any LC that was in the 80s. I'm not saying that its not out there but I'm also sure there's not much of it left either. Keep in mind that it was not that long ago that many of us here would ever pick up any brass at all. That would be me, now it pains me to have to lose it or leave it sometimes. The other thing is most data that is out there is conservative. Maybe Hornady feels they would be better served by using even more conservative data. |
|
I see your point Reef,
however the directive to destroy brass prior to resell by Government Liquidator is back on This will cause folks to empty there basements etc etc, another point is now some folks are now shooting that hoarded ammo and selling that old brass to off set buying more. check here these fine folks located in MO usually pick up far more than you as a Range Safety Officer or I as a Class V manager could ever touch. The fact that there could be 1980 /90 production out there is why I personally believe that we should caution to reduce loads and work up the brass and rifle will let us know when to back off rather let folks get in over there heads. |
|
Quoted:
I see your point Reef, however the directive to destroy brass prior to resell by Government Liquidator is back on This will cause folks to empty there basements etc etc, another point is now some folks are now shooting that hoarded ammo and selling that old brass to off set buying more. check here these fine folks located in MO usually pick up far more than you as a Range Safety Officer or I as a Class V manager could ever touch. The fact that there could be 1980 /90 production out there is why I personally believe that we should caution to reduce loads and work up the brass and rifle will let us know when to back off rather let folks get in over there heads. They have been destroying everthing over .50cal for a long time now. If they try to do it all they will meet with the same resistence they did the 1st time they wanted to do that. There are a lot of LEO that shoot the ammo that gets reloaded off that brass, even the DOE is now shooting some reloaded ammo. My concern is only with what started this whole thing and thats more current production LC and LC only. As for powder burn rates I don't see that much of a differance in the 2 main powders that I use which are H335 and TAC. I like my LC 5.56 brass and I load and shoot my share.
|
|
This is not a discussion about working up loads, that's common sense. I hope.
Packing powder in a case is no accurate way to determine capacity, so Bill is incorrect also. I wonder how you worded the question to him? I'm thinking he was telling you of an easy but not necessary an accurate method of measuring case capacity. Measuring the water capacity has been the standard for years. Your "we don't shoot water" does not address repeatability, which measuring powder can't hope to accomplish. Filling a case with water is repeatable, and can be used as a reference when comparing different case capacity's. What I want to know is this AR-Doctor, what first hand experience loading the various types/brands of 223/5.56 do you have? I have loaded LC 223 brass from the 70's, 80's, 90's, and the 00's. Also loaded Win, Rem, PMC, S&B,CCI, FC,and others. I haven't found the differences you believe in. The only heavy 223/5.56 brass I have found is PMP, not very common. But no heavy 5.56 LC brass. Quoting myths that are printed in reloading manuals that you haven't confirmed is not a good posting policy. Here is a thread you might find interesting, Link. |
| Ok well since we've gone way more in depth on this discussion than I expected, lets see if you have an answer to another question. I have a Frankford Arsenal electronic caliper that I bought today. I tried to turn it on, nothing. I pulled out the battery, put in a new one, nothing. I looked on the back and it says battery "SR44", but on the battery it says "LR44". After looking up the difference, they're interchangeable but SR is silver oxide and LR is alkaline, and SR lasts longer but isn't very available. I'm going to go tomorrow and get a battery to see if that's the problem, but has anyone had a problem with these calipers? I just want to ask before I go run to the store tomorrow since everything's closed now. |
|
Quoted:
Did you try packing powder into the battery slot and seeing if it would turn on? Seems by the above logic you would get a more accurate reading. Also...after years of digital cals breaking on me...I've just decided to use a quality old fashion one. Shit. I closed the cover and the calipers blew up in my hand. I think I put in too much powder... |
|
Quoted:
Ok gentlemen, All that follows is straight from Hornady them self. I called and talk to Bill in Tech support this afternoon about this subject. And he gave me all kids of good info. First of all Yes, Winchester is now running the Lake City plant producing ammo. Also the SOP for checking charge capacity in any case is to be done with Winchester 540 ball powder. NOT WATER. In these steps, Take a case and trim it to spec. Fill the case with 540 till it fills to the top of the case. Next tap the side of the case 6-8 times to settle the charge. Next top off the case with more 540. Next weight the case and the charge. Then dump charge and weight the case empty. The difference is that case's powder capacity. He also added this. Older LC case's mfg before 1990 held a "touch" less powder in his words. And that by rule of thumb the older case's should hold 28-29.6 grains. And anything after 1990 should be around the same as all the others between 29-30.7 grains. Some even as high as 32 gr. (Federal) Also he said that anything that's labeled or stamped 5.56 is subject to change on the above. I quote, "God only knows who MFG, and to what spec.'s. There's stuff out there being made in South America that's runs from mild to wild. It was old Remington tooling and when they pulled the plug on Mfg there they just left it like old socks" He advised that unless you know for sure what case's your loading. That you reduce all loading by 3% on the max end of any loading info. until you check for high pressure signs. That a lot of guys don't sort there brass good enough and just load it blind. Winchester hasn't operated Lake City for almost 10 years. Alliant has the contract these days. Get over your idea that the use of water is not the correct method for gaging the capacity of a case. A different liquid would also be suitable, but water is the superior choice due to it's safety, availability, and physical properties. Particulate solids, such as gunpowder, are almost the worst possible method. (There is a worse method, but I'm not going to discuss something so retarded.) Now if every single person on the planet used identical gunpowder from the "standard", then that would work, too. But there is no standard lot, let alone one available to everyone. Water is everywhere people live, and its identical everywhere. Plus there's no air in between the particles. Simply weighing a case is not sufficient for determining the internal capacity, an actual measurement is necessary. The distribution of the brass through the case walls and head has a strong effect on the case weight that is not necessarily intuitive. I would consider everything that customer rep at Hornady tells you to be suspect if what you relay to us is accurate. |
|
Quoted:
http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg272/dryflash3/30-30/PB080601.jpg Mine works fine, might try one more battery. If no go, you got a bad one. 
Call Midway, they will make it right. And sorry your thread got hijacked.  Yup, that's the one. Makes a nice bench decoration right now, and it holds open manuals pretty well. I'm going to run to the store in the morning to find a battery to see if it works. Unfortunately, I didn't get it from Midway. I got it from a local shop and they don't have another one. This has turned into a much longer thread than I anticipated, but after 2 pages I still don't get why people would measure capacity with powder rather than water. Oh well. Oh, and as a separate rant, why the hell doesn't any place around here carry a fucking Lee chamfer/deburr tool? I don't want the shitty Lyman one, and I don't want to pay $35 for the RCBS one. Rant over |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did you try packing powder into the battery slot and seeing if it would turn on? Seems by the above logic you would get a more accurate reading. Also...after years of digital cals breaking on me...I've just decided to use a quality old fashion one. Shit. I closed the cover and the calipers blew up in my hand. I think I put in too much powder... Your problem is clearly because you didn't tap the calipers 6-8 times. Kidding aside, I use that same one at home. It works better then the cheaper one I bought from Harbor Freight. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did you try packing powder into the battery slot and seeing if it would turn on? Seems by the above logic you would get a more accurate reading. Also...after years of digital cals breaking on me...I've just decided to use a quality old fashion one. Shit. I closed the cover and the calipers blew up in my hand. I think I put in too much powder... Your problem is clearly because you didn't tap the calipers 6-8 times. Kidding aside, I use that same one at home. It works better then the cheaper one I bought from Harbor Freight. I tried 5 and it didn't work. I think I might have put in a primer instead of the battery, but I'll try the 6-8 taps. I'm going to check out the battery today and I'll post an update |
|
Reef looks like the DOJ and DOE military brass days are numbered here
now ATK is behind the move go figure Give this a Look too check it out |
|
Quoted:
Reef looks like the DOJ and DOE military brass days are numbered here now ATK is behind the move go figure Give this a Look too check it out That one link was a good link. I think I may order some of their bullets. Thanks. As for the brass thats old news I'm sure we have not heard the end of it though. It will not affect my contacts for brass one way or the other though. My Brothers would never turn their backs on me 
|
| I have always wondered how many reloaders weigh brass cases. I weigh mine but usually only for safety reasons. I weigh all my loaded rounds after they are assembled and that way I know for a fact that they are not over or undercharged. I weigh the cases and the bullets. Since I only load 20-30 rounds at a time, it lets me put togther a very accurate set of reloads. |
|
Quoted:
I have always wondered how many reloaders weigh brass cases. I weigh mine but usually only for safety reasons. I weigh all my loaded rounds after they are assembled and that way I know for a fact that they are not over or undercharged. I weigh the cases and the bullets. Since I only load 20-30 rounds at a time, it lets me put togther a very accurate set of reloads. Weigh the components separately, then put them together and re-weigh. Tell us what you learn. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The LC stuff is always heavy, It's thicker walled as per MIL SPEC. That's where your extra wt. is at. This is why you have to load any and all military brass lighter. As it will build up extra PSI due to less case capacity. Totally incorrect with 223/5.56 brass. http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg272/dryflash3/ARF%20pics/casecapacitiesresized.jpg Please don't post information you haven't confirmed yourself. LOL What cases did he use, and how many? I will stick with my findings, which agree with AR-doctor |
|
What I want to know is this AR-Doctor, what first hand experience loading the various types/brands of 223/5.56 do you have? I have loaded LC 223 brass from the 70's, 80's, 90's, and the 00's. Also loaded Win, Rem, PMC, S&B,CCI, FC,and others. I haven't found the differences you believe in. The only heavy 223/5.56 brass I have found is PMP, not very common. But no heavy 5.56 LC brass. I've been loading LC head stamped milatry brass since the early 1987 when I accuired/stold a good amount from Ca. right of the USMC range. Then in 1996-97 I accuired over 4 tons from the then Ravenna Arsnal (RET.) in Ravenna, Ohio when the Company I worked for was contracted to remove over 600 tons of brass that was sorted and put in old oil drums. So when we opened the drums we had 223/5.56,45ACP,7.62/308 brass all over the place. Some has been found to berdan primed But most was boxer witha mil. crimp. If i was to "guess" This was stuff shot from the Ohio Nat. Guard. Seeing that most of the head stamps where from the early 80's-about 89. And according to locals, They would have been the only one's on that range on or about in the time peroid. But I wasn't there. Maybe someone else could add more to the time line. And as for PMP brass, HOW MUCH DO YOU WANT, I HAVE BUCKETS OF IT???????? |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Differing Case Weights (Page 1 of 2)
Armory Sponsor