When is a Neck Too Loose?

S

Slowshot

Member
A recent experience with a new procedure in case prep. has me wondering what is a correct amount of neck tightness, when seating bullets.

First, here is what I have been doing up until now:
I have been loading 222 Rem. for my BAT rifle for a couple of years now. I neck size, de-cap and seat bullets with a set of Wilson dies and an arbor press. I clean brass with a Lyman Sonic cleaner. I also have been swabbing out the primer pockets with Q-tips, because the sonic cleaner does not get them completely clean. Then, I let the brass air dry for a couple of days before priming and loading. I have not yet needed to trim any of my Lapua cases. They do not seem to be growing very much.

Because I (finally) plan to compete this spring and summer I am bearing down on my loading technique, especially brass preparation. One thing I have noticed when seating bullets has been uneven resistance. It seems easy to assume cartridges with bullets seated against different resistance will not be giving excellent groups. I also have noticed primers seating with differing resistance. So, just the other day, I finally uniformed all of the primer pockets, and cleaned the inside of the necks of a box of 50 rounds of already fire formed, primed and neck sized Lapua brass. For both of those procedures, I used the proper attachments to a Lyman Case Prep Express that has been sitting unused in my Gun stuff cabinet, since I bought it.

The inside neck brush is nothing more than a rotating nylon brush similar to a barrel cleaning brush. It went in and out of the necks with almost no resistance. It did clean burnt powder off the inside of the necks but removed no other material and seemed to do nothing else, as I had hoped. Then I seated primers in all 50 rounds, fired up my RCBS Chargemaster and started loading powder and bullets.

I was a bit surprised at how little force was required with the bullet seater on the first round I loaded. To be sure the inside neck cleaning brush had not spread the necks, I ran all of the remaining 49 rounds through the neck sizing die again. There seemed to be absolutely no resistance with the neck sizer, so I went ahead and loaded all 50 rounds with my favorite load.

All of the bullets went in with seemingly the same amount of light resistance, so I did achieve the uniformity I was looking for. I will shoot that batch soon to see how they do.

Before you suggest I just buy a tighter neck sizing bushing, I need to mention that I already went down one size from the recommended .247" to a 246" bushing, when I found .247" was not tight enough to keep the occasional failure when a loaded bullet would drop into the case after loading.

I realize my description of the lack of resistance when loading bullets is not precise. None the less, I would appreciate any comments on this. As long as all of the bullets are seated with the same resistance and there is no threat of any of them moving or falling into the case, prior to firing, is everything OK? Can I safely standardize on this new feel, while loading, or is there a problem?
 
Slowshot said:
... Before you suggest I just buy a tighter neck sizing bushing, I need to mention that I already went down one size from the recommended .247" to a 246" bushing, when I found .247" was not tight enough to keep the occasional failure when a loaded bullet would drop into the case after loading.

I realize my description of the lack of resistance when loading bullets is not precise. None the less, I would appreciate any comments on this. As long as all of the bullets are seated with the same resistance and there is no threat of any of them moving or falling into the case, prior to firing, is everything OK? Can I safely standardize on this new feel, while loading, or is there a problem?
Click to expand...

If a 0.247" bushing will let bullets drop in, then a 0.246" bushing is not small enough.

Try one thou smaller.
 
XBBR Shooter said:
If a 0.247" bushing will let bullets drop in, then a 0.246" bushing is not small enough.

Try one thou smaller.
Click to expand...

Ok, fine. I will buy a .245".:( I can add the .246" to my collection of bushings. I also needed to buy a second bushing for my 204 Ruger neck sizing die.

I am using Lapua brass and finding myself surprised at how much variation there is in various measurements among the cases in a single box of 100. Neck wall thickness, weight, primer pocket depth and diameter, concentricity of the neck to the body, are all measurably different, from one piece of brass to the next. If Lapua is supposed to be the most consistent, what are the others like?

.
 
One other thing that you might want to consider. Your goal of squeaky clean brass is pretty much irrelevant. Virtually all of the benchrest shooters that I have known for a couple of decades, including world record holders and hall of fame members do not want all of the powder residue out of their necks, because leaving some in improves consistency of seating force. My friend Gary Ocock, who regularly does quite well up in your part of the country, shooting his rail gun, does not clean the insides of his necks at all. Some years ago he did a shooting and that method gave superior results. If you look in the record book, you will see his name in several places. If you have brass such that use of the same bushing allows some bullets to fall in the case, while others do not, my first thought would be that you should survey your case neck thicknesses with the appropriate tool, a neck mic. that reads to .0001. It may be that you have more neck thickness variation than you realize. Round numbers, for most situations, I prefer to work with about .002 neck tension. On the primer pockets, a uniformer cuts the bottoms of pockets. Differences in seating force come from differences in ID, which the cutter does not modify. As long as the primers are secure in their pockets, IMO differences in seating force do not matter. Another thing that you may want to note is that virtually all short range benchrest shooters FL size with dies that are a close match to their chambers. My first specialized rifle that I build for bench shooting was a tight necked .222 that I loaded for with a custom fitted set of Wilson dies, neck and seating. I still have that rifle, and it still gives a good account of itself. Finally, I have a suggestion while differences in flash hold diameter may be worth correcting, if that is not an issue, I suggest that you do a careful evaluation comparing uniformed primer pockets with those that have not been touched, seating primers by feel so that they bottom and then get a little preload.
 
Boyd Allen said:
One other thing that you might want to consider. Your goal of squeaky clean brass is pretty much irrelevant. Virtually all of the benchrest shooters that I have known for a couple of decades, including world record holders and hall of fame members do not want all of the powder residue out of their necks, because leaving some in improves consistency of seating force. My friend Gary Ocock, who regularly does quite well up in your part of the country, shooting his rail gun, does not clean the insides of his necks at all. Some years ago he did a shooting and that method gave superior results. If you look in the record book, you will see his name in several places. If you have brass such that use of the same bushing allows some bullets to fall in the case, while others do not, my first thought would be that you should survey your case neck thicknesses with the appropriate tool, a neck mic. that reads to .0001. It may be that you have more neck thickness variation than you realize. Round numbers, for most situations, I prefer to work with about .002 neck tension. On the primer pockets, a uniformer cuts the bottoms of pockets. Differences in seating force come from differences in ID, which the cutter does not modify. As long as the primers are secure in their pockets, IMO differences in seating force do not matter. Another thing that you may want to note is that virtually all short range benchrest shooters FL size with dies that are a close match to their chambers. My first specialized rifle that I build for bench shooting was a tight necked .222 that I loaded for with a custom fitted set of Wilson dies, neck and seating. I still have that rifle, and it still gives a good account of itself. Finally, I have a suggestion while differences in flash hold diameter may be worth correcting, if that is not an issue, I suggest that you do a careful evaluation comparing uniformed primer pockets with those that have not been touched, seating primers by feel so that they bottom and then get a little preload.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the advice. As luck (or good planning) would have it, I have 475 pieces of Lapua 222 Rem. brass. I did all of that work on that box of 50 in order to find out if it makes a difference or not. As I said, this is my first experiment with cleaning the inside of necks, primer pocket uniforming, etc. Up until now, all I have done is fire forming, neck sizing and(when needed) full length sizing, along with basic cleaning. I have not been cleaning to get shiny pretty brass. It has been to clean primer pockets and to avoid powder residue buildup inside the cases. Mostly just to have the different cases as identical as possible. I also clean to be able to inspect cases for metal fatigue.

It isn't like I have not achieved some fine results with my rifle. It is just that I am still learning what is important and what is not. I assumed that fire forming my brass along with neck sizing should achieve the same result as full length sizing. When ever shooting for measured groups I am using brass that has been fire formed to fit my custom chamber, then neck sized before loading primers, powder and bullets. This usually gives me two additional reloads before the cases get so enlarged that I need to use my body die and then start all over again. I was surprised the other day to measure the length of a few cases that have been fired four time and body died once. I found they are still well with in spec. When I used to shoot 220 Swift, the cases grew pretty fast.

It is good to read that cleaning powder out of the necks is not needed. As I said, I am just learning what matters and what is a waste of time. It was .002" of neck tension that I was supposed to achieve with the .247" bushing for 222 Rem. and also with the first bushing that came with my 204 Ruger die set. In both cases, I needed to buy a second bushing .001" smaller to get acceptable neck tension.

As I also said, I bought Lapua brass because it is supposed to be the most uniform brass you can buy. I have been surprised at how un-uniform it is. I think I can borrow a neck mic. and measure all 475 pieces of brass I have and then sort them. Should I be able to do that once and be done with it?
 
Why not just skim turn em all to the same dimension? Any cases used for serious accuracy must be uniformed and neck turning is just part of it
 
Take off just enough so that all of your cases have uniform neck thickness, with the least amount of brass removed to achieve this. I take it that you have been working with unturned necks up to this point? What is your loaded round to chamber neck clearance? Another way to deal with unturned necks is to use a Lee collet die in conjunction with your body die. The Lee die actually deals with the inconsistencies of unturned necks better than you Wilson neck die. I have made this suggestion several times in the past and shooters have gotten back to me with reports of very good results. I have and shoot a fully kitted 6PPC benchrest rifle, with all of the bells and whistles, and my bench .222 has a tight neck. My varmint rifles do not. I have a lot of experience with both turned and unturned necks.
 
Like boyd said just barely turn enough off to get 75%+ cut on em and thatll uniform em enough. Some will cut 100% but id get the thinnest one at least 75%
 
Turning the necks seems like the best solution. I had not been doing so because I was told by other "experts" that I should not need to with Lapua brass. My experience with widely varying resistance while seating bullets has been an eye opener. I will go ahead and fire form and neck turn another box of 50, leaving the inside of the necks and the primer pockets alone and see how it shoots.

I guess I have not mentioned that I finally broke into the ones for a 5-shot 100-yard group. After seeming to be stuck in the low 2s, as my best, for a year and many groups fired, I finally got a .196" group a few weeks ago. Now, if I can solve the neck thing and practice more with flags, I will be ready to not make a fool of myself when I compete this coming spring and summer.

I have found another mentor who is an experienced short range BR competitor and a regular at my club. Yesterday at the range, I was shooting my Ruger No. 1, while he was shooting a rimfire BR rifle he just put together. We are going to meet again at the range soon and he is going to watch me set up and shoot with my BAT gun and tell me what I am obviously doing wrong. I will be paying him with samples from my extensive collection of rimfire match ammunition.

I apologize if I frequently ask obvious questions. Almost everything I know, I learned by asking such questions and paying attention to the replies.
 
I often wonder why Lapua places such an effort to achieve very consistent wall thickness on some cases, but others are deplorable.

220 Russian, 6BR, 308, and a few others seem to be darned near good enough to just shoot a chamber that does not require neck turning. Others, such as the 3006, can vary as much as .003 inch in wall thickness concentricity.
 
Thats what i see too jackie. Any common match caliber is like slowshots mentor said-"good enough to shoot" so slowshot dont count your mentor out just yet. Ive seen some lapua 30-06 that was worse than remington factory stuff. Im sure the 222 is the same and the 223 is real good. I guess theyre just trying to get it out there. And if you got too much match rimfire ammo i can always use some and have plenty of br stuff to trade.
 
Dusty Stevens said:
Thats what i see too jackie. Any common match caliber is like slowshots mentor said-"good enough to shoot" so slowshot dont count your mentor out just yet. Ive seen some lapua 30-06 that was worse than remington factory stuff. Im sure the 222 is the same and the 223 is real good. I guess theyre just trying to get it out there. And if you got too much match rimfire ammo i can always use some and have plenty of br stuff to trade.
Click to expand...

No problem really. I am sure I can set up the Lapua brass just fine. It's all just part of what they call a learning curve. My only regret is that I waited until I was over 60 before getting started ( I am now 68). As is still true, I could not off-hand a rifle in my 20s and 30s but I had 20/15 eyesight in both eyes back then. I never heard of BR shooting back then and thought I could never shoot a rifle with any accuracy. Discovering BR shooting changed the world for me. My main issue with getting old is these days my eyes get tired pretty fast and then the view through even a great scope gets pretty fuzzy. Due to that, I try to spend as little time behind the scope as is possible and shoot free recoil/pinch trigger while looking only at wind flags. Seems to work just fine.

I am not abandoning any mentors. I do need to spend a lot more time at the range than Russ has time for. Since he retired, he wants to go fishing and hunting, a lot more than hang around a shooting range. Who can blame him. My other mentor Kimberly has retreated into mostly rimfire with her beautiful Anschutz bench gun. Again, who can blame her. Rimfire is still less expensive than centerfire and a lot less stressful on the body.

As I have said, I listen to anyone with experience and success. I even (mostly) follow their advice, though sometimes I like to try my own ideas to see if I can come up with something new. That's how I ended up the "Adaptations Adviser" for a national organization of disabled motorcyclists. I took every lesson I could get and then synthesized it all into my own approach to the problems involved in setting up motorcycle controls for riders with missing or non functioning arms, hands, legs or feet.

I do not actually need any brass or bullets. I even recently bought 5000 Rem. 7 1/2 BR Primers and 2000 Barts bullets. The only thing I am in danger of running out of is powder. That I buy locally to avoid HASMAT fees.
 
An update on the loose neck issue.

I spent Monday at the range shooting the cartridges described in my first post in this thread. I had a wind flag mentor there to help me learn reading the flags. (thanks Mark) I shot half (25) of the cartridges in 5-shot 100 yard groups. Though I did not match my best ever groups and averaged a bit larger than my usual, I saw nothing to suggest the ammunition was the issue. More likely it is that I was cold and my glasses kept fogging.

I am heading to the range the next day that heavy rain and freezing cold is not predicted. I will bring the other 25 loose neck rounds and 50 other rounds (not cleaned inside the neck) to shoot at 200 yards to see how much of a difference it makes. Next, I am also going to borrow a neck turning tool from a friend and see what affect that has on my results.

I may have mentioned that I recently got the rifle to shoot under .200" at 100 yards. Now, that is the new benchmark I want to achieve regularly. You know how it is, anything larger is no longer acceptable. I would ask, "does it never end." but I know it does not. It is a good thing I am shooting 222 Rem, rather than 6 PPC or I would need a new barrel before the coming spring competitions begin. Then there is the question of how I will handle the pressure of competition. I really cannot say. It has been many years since I competed in anything.
 
I've read what you've done...

But, ... have you measured what chamber size you actually have? I understand that you have tightened up your neck sizing. If you can compare your actual chamber dimension to your round dimension, how much slack between the two at the neck? If your slack is appreciable, aka .002-.004 per side, then you're probably need to measure your run-out. There is a lot to consider when trying to remove problem areas. Run-out good, one problem area resolved, necks uniform in diameter, another problem resolved, uniformity in projectile length and weight, and so on etc...

A lot to consider, and that is not the end of the list (actual headspace, touching the lands dimension, and so on...)

I am bookmarking this thread for my education...

Phil Fortin aka tazzman
 
As to bullets, I had been using Berger 52 gr. FB Target Bullets. Recently, I bought a large order of Bart's 52 gr. FBs from Ron Hoehn. If there is any difference between the Berger and the Bart's 52 gr. FBs, it has not shown in my loading or shooting.

The truth is, my problem is still reading wind flags. Part of that is my eyes and the other part is lack of experience. I am trying to make up for the lack of experience by shooting as often as possible this winter. Even with my new glasses, my eyes go out of focus pretty fast and I have trouble seeing the exact angle of a flag. That was confirmed to me the other day when Mark would say a flag was at 10:00 and I could not see it, even after he said so.

Yesterday I had a talk with Russ, who built my rifle. He was with me when I first fired the rifle. The length to ogive that I use to get the bullet touching the lands is from his knowledge of the chamber. I cannot say I have the figures he used to decide that but progressive seating of a bullet until it fully chambers and just touches the lands shows his number is still correct. Russ also assured me that cleaning the inside of the neck is not needed. He loaned me his neck turning tool and I plan to skim turn all of my 222 brass to get them identical as possible. Russ said I am overly obsessing on loading and brass prep. He agrees my weakness is reading wind flags.

I want you all to understand, I do not expect to do well against experienced shooters this spring and summer. This is just my latest obsession. My physical decline made me give up motorcycles recently and I needed something to spend my pension on. Mainly it is another learning experience to keep my brain from turning to mud.

With all of that, I truly appreciate all of the advice and technical information. I really am having a good time with this. I just complain a lot.
 
Just an opinion...

jackie schmidt said:
I often wonder why Lapua places such an effort to achieve very consistent wall thickness on some cases, but others are deplorable.

220 Russian, 6BR, 308, and a few others seem to be darned near good enough to just shoot a chamber that does not require neck turning. Others, such as the 3006, can vary as much as .003 inch in wall thickness concentricity.
Click to expand...

Just an opinion...but maybe they put a lot of quality effort into the brass that the bench rest crowd uses. They may perceive us as a steady user of brass that they can count on.:confused:

virg
 
jackie schmidt said:
I often wonder why Lapua places such an effort to achieve very consistent wall thickness on some cases, but others are deplorable.
Click to expand...

Maybe because Lapua has been known to subcontract some brass out over the years? Substandard brass (substandard from the norm we expect out of Lapua) from Lapua subcontractors has been noted in the past and maybe the specs Lapua has for those cases isn't up to what they produce themselves. The subcontracted Norma 300 WM brass seemed to be an exception.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top