Just on this, opening up minimally would not pass the yield point ?......
- Open neck back up minimally with correct size mandrel pin referenced above.
Just on this, opening up minimally would not pass the yield point ?......
- Open neck back up minimally with correct size mandrel pin referenced above.
Just on this, opening up minimally would not pass the yield point ?
Sometimes you have to run a +.003 mandrel to get +.001 in the end according to brass hardness
I don't disagree but if the neck brass is annealed I am not sure whether minimal 0.001 expansion up (that may not break the yield) is better that say 0.004 that may break the yield but run out gets worse (my experience).
Using the standard force pack for the K&M Arbour press with a Wilson seater die what reading range on the dial indicator would indicate seating force ranges from 1 to 2 and 3 thousands in neck tension in correlation with the bullet seating force with new .308 lapua brass.only one way i know of to know how consistent your neck tension is and that is an arbor press with some sort of seating force indicator gauge. otherwise you are just guessing. i got the 21st century shooting hydro press. Quite an enlightening experience for me.
Wonder how some would react to setting cases up for only .0005 interference fit ? I know some who you can spin the bullet in their cases , literally . And their names would shock many on here .![]()
Havent soft seated bullets for years due to a cease fire been called during a match and upon round extraction left powder lodgged in behind bolt locking luggs that even a can of air couldnt dislodge.Oh ; You know a couple of them , Ned . Some "refer" to the process as "soft seating" .![]()
It seems to me that beyond some amount of interference, you cannot actually increase neck tension because either the neck will yield or the bullet will or both to varying degrees. The material properties sheets strongly suggest that the bullet will yield before the neck does. Even annealed, the brass has a 44ksi yield point. Lead is less than half of that. Damon Cali's excellent article (linked in a previous post) shows that phenomenon of neck yield occurs with relatively low amounts of interference fit.
I am curious of some of the observations we attribute to neck tension are actually artifacts of the process used to achieve some given neck tension. For example if you use a Collet die vs an Expander Mandrel and have the same neck OD measurement before seating, do you actually have the same seating *force*? I suspect close, but not the same. The surface finish/friction in the neck matters. Neck tension just provides the "normal force" but the coefficient of friction is the other half of the equation, so BOTH are pivotal in determining final seating force. I suspect that the force to dislodge the bullet actually is what matters-- not so much the neck tension that delivered that force.
It seems many on this forum want to get into all these engineering terms. Frankly i have an engineering degree and know with neck tension there are way too many variables to calculate with any accuracy.
I say consistent neck tension is probably more important then the actual forces involved. The reason i say this is i can see it on the target. Before getting a 21st century hydroseater i thought i had consistent neck tension. Boy was i wrong. Learned a lot about what it takes to get consistency and once i did it showed on the target.
You have to find what works for you and your rifles.
It seems to me that beyond some amount of interference, you cannot actually increase neck tension because either the neck will yield or the bullet will or both to varying degrees. The material properties sheets strongly suggest that the bullet will yield before the neck does. Even annealed, the brass has a 44ksi yield point. Lead is less than half of that. Damon Cali's excellent article (linked in a previous post) shows that phenomenon of neck yield occurs with relatively low amounts of interference fit.
I am curious of some of the observations we attribute to neck tension are actually artifacts of the process used to achieve some given neck tension. For example if you use a Collet die vs an Expander Mandrel and have the same neck OD measurement before seating, do you actually have the same seating *force*? I suspect close, but not the same. The surface finish/friction in the neck matters. Neck tension just provides the "normal force" but the coefficient of friction is the other half of the equation, so BOTH are pivotal in determining final seating force. I suspect that the force to dislodge the bullet actually is what matters-- not so much the neck tension that delivered that force.
Which powder & bullet was used with your .308 Loads.It might blow some minds,but in my most accurate and winning 308 barrel, 0.007 interference fit was the most accurate. Not only did I validate this multiple times, but it continues to shoot lights out after 3050 rounds. I have some theories about this, but the target has the final say. Drew
This. Foremost is neck hardness imho. But it’s not just one thing.This is not a question anyone can answer for you. There are many variables that effect whether a combo will want light or heavy neck tension. And even knowing all of those, you still have to test it to know for sure.
the problem with having some facts is that they can be misapplied.It seems to me that beyond some amount of interference, you cannot actually increase neck tension because either the neck will yield or the bullet will or both to varying degrees. The material properties sheets strongly suggest that the bullet will yield before the neck does. Even annealed, the brass has a 44ksi yield point. Lead is less than half of that. Damon Cali's excellent article (linked in a previous post) shows that phenomenon of neck yield occurs with relatively low amounts of interference fit.
.