262 or 268 necks for 6mm PPC

My Bad

JerrySharrett said:
Gene, read Tonys book . He mentions. several times,he and Fays shoot a 0.263" neck.

.
Click to expand...


Jerry, I'm sorry for my mistake. On page 158 of his book, Tony says, "I turn brass to .0092 for a .263 neck chamber."

Maybe I better read Tony's book again; huh?

Hope all is well. I appreciate your input. Have a good one today.

Later,

Gene Beggs
 
Anybody know what Wayne Campbell uses? If I had the notion to immulate someone at this time, I think he would be my first choice.

Yes,wayne campbell uses a 268 neck. I asked him at the cactus.
 
gabe ledesma said:
Anybody know what Wayne Campbell uses? If I had the notion to immulate someone at this time, I think he would be my first choice.

Yes,Wayne Campbell uses a 268 neck. I asked him at the cactus.
Click to expand...


Gabe, I'm sure glad you posted that. Maybe I'm not going crazy after all. :rolleyes: Someone told me some time ago; maybe it was Mike Conry, I'm not sure, but I know for certain that Charles Huckeba and Mike Conry, both world champions, shoot a .268 neck because I had some custom carbide neck bushings ground especially for them. They discovered, as I did, that the thicker necks require far less sizing than the older thin wall necks.

With my 6mm Beggs cartridge, I followed Jackie Schmidt's lead and went with the .269 neck and found, much to my chagrin, that the .002 to .003 'squeeze' I normally used with .0080 necks was way too tight! The best results were obtained with a carbide bushing .001 smaller than the loaded round diameter.

So, what neck diameter is best for the 6mm BR cartridges? We've now used .261, .262, .263, .265, .268, .269, .270 and I even use .274 with my no-turn 6mm Beggs. :rolleyes: I think Wilbur Harris, the chief cook and bottle washer here on BR Central was right when he said, "It doesn't matter what neck diameter is used!" And I agree with Wilbur. As long as the shooter understands how to deal with his chamber and neck diameter, it doesn't matter. As far as I know, Jackie Schmidt was the first to go with a .269 neck; he said his reason was to simplify neck turning. As far as I know, I'm the first to go with a .274 no-turn neck. My reason??? It eliminates neck turning all together! :cool:

Later guys. Thanks again Gabe.

Gene Beggs
 
GENE back in the mid 90s when i started in this world of benchrest my go to reamer was always a 263 neck. just recently i have switched to 268.my main reason for the neck change had more to do with the type of actions i am using now . Back when i used a 263 my actions wher all RBLP NO EJECTION, I single handedely removed my cases by hand. Now i am using RBLPRE. when i get a good condetion my brass will start flying and now i get the occasional brass that will make it to the floor. having a thicker neck is a + when turning brass and i have found that brass that hit the ground especially when they hit the neck area dont get bent as bad. I never seen any difference in accuracy between both neck thickness.
 
Last edited:
Opinion from 30 shooter

I like a .267" neck. I have shot a PPC before, so I thought I would tell you why a .267" neck. For Lapua brass, while it is a little more turn than a .268" or .269", it is still not near as bad to neck turn as the .262" to .263". For the new Norma brass, you can shoot it as is for just a tad under .002" neck clearance, or just clean the Norma necks up for a tad over .002" neck clearance. This is why a .267" neck works best as a dual purpose diameter. Good for Lapua and Norma. It is also the only diameter I have seen overlooked by many, so again, I'm the odd one, but probably not for long now.

Some shooters use a .268" neck for the Norma, but it gives you close to .003" neck clearance with no neck turn. If that's where you want it, then fine, but if it's not what you like, then your stuck with it.

I base this on the last batch of Norma brass I purchased about 1 year ago. It measured .2652" with a seated bullet. Remember two things concerning neck diameter in the chamber. The reamer may cut around .0002" larger than it measures. Many reamer tolerances are minus .0000" and plus .0004". Many shooters will say they have .002" clearance if they have a .262" reamer, and measure a loaded round at .260". This is simply false, and they could be off over .0005".

Michael
 
Last edited:
The story a long time ago was that you needed case necks that were turned carefully and the same thickness at any point measured....blah, blah, blah. Sounded good so it became the norm...everybody did it. Come to find out, the thickness of the case neck doesn't matter that much and I don't think consistency does either. What does matter is case life and the closer you get, the longer your cases will last...generally speaking.
 
My first 269 neck

Wilbur said:
The story a long time ago was that you needed case necks that were turned carefully and the same thickness at any point measured....blah, blah, blah. Sounded good so it became the norm...everybody did it. Come to find out, the thickness of the case neck doesn't matter that much and I don't think consistency does either. What does matter is case life and the closer you get, the longer your cases will last...generally speaking.
Click to expand...

I followed the advice of a well known USA gunsmith (how also chambered my rifle ) and decided to use 269 neck in my new Bat Neuvo action, Im not disappointed. I was using 262 neck before The 269 has much stronger neck (as many have pointed out) and turning is much more easy. I have only fire formed the some 25 cased but I did shoot a test to find out the best seating dept and such Bullet-powder-test.jpg
The combined 36 shoots is around 0,216 agg
This is of coures 3 shoot groubs
 
Thanks guys!

Although I didn't originate this thread, I guess I've been guilty of hijacking it. :eek: It's been a most interesting conversation and I for one would like to say how much I appreciate everyone's contributions. :D

Don't be afraid to experiment with new ideas. That keeps it interesting. :p

Later,

Gene Beggs
 
Dusenberg said:
Tell us how your neck diameter is better
Click to expand...

I'm not saying the 269 or 268 are better necks, To many world record done with the 262 to say it is not good! They are more easy to turn and the necks are stronger. I you have a strong spring in the ejector the necks can also get a small dent in the neck when leaving the chamber. And depending on action type this small dent can be right in the area where the pressure ring on a flat base bullet will end up while loading the case again because we only size outside neck and do not expand the neck. So after my limited test with the new neck my best agg now for 5 groups in a row is 0,226 with one bullet making this agg go from 0,190 agg to 0,266 (This done at 100 meters with a 10,5 rifle ) I'm positive 269 neck will be my choice for 6 PPC neck in the future

To sum it up

269 neck
Stronger
Easy to turn
Better neck tension (more material to play with)

Joe
 
I haven’t read through all the posts, so maybe it’s been mentioned. I switched from a .262 neck to a .268 when I started shooting boattail bullets. With a 30.0 grain load of 133 the boattail bullets simply wouldn’t stay put. You’d have several different seating depths by the time you got to the bench. It didn’t matter how much neck tension you used the .262 couldn’t hold them.

The flat base bullets tend to stay put better since they have a pressure ring to help hold them.

Bart
 
Bart said:
I haven’t read through all the posts, so maybe it’s been mentioned. I switched from a .262 neck to a .268 when I started shooting boattail bullets. With a 30.0 grain load of 133 the boattail bullets simply wouldn’t stay put. You’d have several different seating depths by the time you got to the bench. It didn’t matter how much neck tension you used the .262 couldn’t hold them.

The flat base bullets tend to stay put better since they have a pressure ring to help hold them.

Bart
Click to expand...

It seems logical that a thicker neck will hold a compressed load better with boattails.
Just have to ask, have your aggs improved in the 100/200 environment with boattail bullets?

Interestingly, going through Ferris Pindells notebook his most improved test loads were with a 0.266" neck (and 40 degree shoulder). All the tooling I had previously bought from Ferris was 266/40.

More than once, in his latter days, was notes that he wrote "the first 6 went exactly through the same hole".


.
 
Jerry,

I decided it was time to switch when i was setting at the bench and I could see my bullets growing. To the point a couple came completely out of the neck sitting on top of the powder. I let Billy shoot the .268 for a year before I switched just to be sure there were no problems. Accuracy wise I don’t think there’s any difference. A properly turned neck with the correct amount of clearance will shoot equally as good. However the .268 necks will hold a boattail in place where a .262 with the same load can’t.

Bart
 
Last edited:
Right On !

Bart said:
Jerry,

I decided it was time to switch when i was setting at the bench and I could see my bullets growing. To the point a couple came completely out of the neck sitting on top of the powder. I let Billy shoot the .268 for a year before I switched just to be sure there were no problems. Accuracy wise I don’t think there’s any difference. A properly turned neck with the correct amount of clearance will shoot equally as good. However the .268 necks will hold a boattail in place where a .262 with the same load can’t.

Bart
Click to expand...


Good point Bart! Now we're getting to the bottom of the reasons for the trend toward .268 and .269 necks. I'm glad I followed Jackie Schmidt's lead of .269 long ago with my Beggs cartridges. Lately, I've been concentrating on the 6Beggs No-turn with a .274 neck. No neck turning at all! :cool:

Hey, I wonder how the 6PPC would work with a .274 No-turn neck? ! Huh? :cool:

Me? I'll stick with my 6Beggs no-turn but for those that believe there's something special about the PPC's Ackley body taper and 30 degree shoulder angle, a no-turn 6PPC might be just the thing! :cool: One of Richard Brensing's associates is already doing very well shooting Norma cases no-turn in his 6PPC. I believe he is using a .269 neck. Something to think about; huh?

But of course if you're gonna' continue using Lapua 220 Russian cases as most of us will, you will have to go to at least a .273 neck in order to have the optimum clearance on the loaded round.

And hey; lots of PPC shooters have been living with outdated chamber reamer designs requiring the use of expensive custom sizing dies when now may be the time to upgrade to a new reamer with more desirable dimensions. JGS, PT&G and other reamer manufacturers will just be delighted to help you and the cost of a new reamer is insignificant when compared to other items required by this madness we call benchrest. :p

For the 6PPC, my specs on a new reamer would be:

* .268 for a tight neck chamber using Lapua brass. .273 for no-turn.

* .4420 dimension'A', (.200 in front of the extractor groove.)

* .4310 at the shoulder before beginning of radius to shoulder angle.

* .040 freebore, .2435 diameter. (can use either flatbase or boattail bullets.)

* Case overall length (base to end of neck) 1.510.

* Of course, one and a half degree leade angle.

Let's see what everyone thinks of this; huh? :p

Later,

Gene Beggs
 
Bart said:
Gene,

I’ve got one just about like that except with a Improved 40 degree shoulder!

Bart
Click to expand...


As Jerry pointed out, Ferris Pindell was high on the 40 degree shoulder. I'm sure he had his reasons.

Good luck in 2019.

Best regards,

Gene Beggs
 
Gene Beggs said:
When the PPC cartridge was introduced in the late sixties and early seventies Palmisano and Pendell used the SAKO 220 Russian case which had much thinner neck walls than the Lapua and Norma cases in use today. Consequently, it was necessary to turn the necks to around .0080 to .0085 in order to completely clean them up which resulted in chamber neck diameters of .2620 and often .2610.


Gene Beggs
Click to expand...

I ask Ferris once why the original PPC had a 262 neck and he said the brass they had at that time required a 262 neck to clean up.

.
 
I ain't no Ferris Pindell but what I'm proposing is that the neck doesn't have to be cleaned up. There's too much that happens when the trigger breaks to make that as important as we once thought it was....all of us.
 
Wilbur said:
I ain't no Ferris Pindell but what I'm proposing is that the neck doesn't have to be cleaned up. There's too much that happens when the trigger breaks to make that as important as we once thought it was....all of us.
Click to expand...

Ferris's argument for a full cleanup of the neck was to give the bullet even release thus eliminating any in-bore yaw. A bullet that exits the bore wobbling isn't going to fly straight. Some of these high ogives we are shooting now have less than 40% of their length as bore diameter.

I think he further proved that with his "needle nose" bullet.Closing the meplat to a needle point actually reduces bullet drop by 12" at 1,000 yards.



.


.
 
I don't see how a .243 bullet could "wobble" in a .236 bore...but like I said, I ain't no Ferris Pindell. Further, I don't know as much as Jerry does either!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top