Actual testing for carbon in the necks vs clean necks for low ES

[denobravo]

I don't have a light speed fiber-camera installed in a chamber throat, but I can provide anecdotal observation. I can coat bullets with tungsten disulphide (WS2) which has a friction coefficient lower than moly and way lower than graphite. Here, bullet seating is far lower than with uncoated bullets, but muzzle velocity does not change With this.
WS2 does not cool a charge like moly(which reduces MV).
It is very close to carbon fouling in every regard except friction.

Now I know that a bullet is pushed against that friction by burning powder or primer. That eventually charge pressure will overcome that friction and move the bullet. The lower the friction, the lower the pressure needed to push that bullet. And if that bullet is pushed prior to pressure peak, that would affect MV.
But I also know that increasing bullet friction alone, without increasing grip(tension), does not affect MV.
This confirms to me that bullets are released via neck expansion (loss of grip) prior to overcoming any pull force from friction. Something I was actually taught 43yrs ago in a reloading class.

This passes tests, perhaps all tests (which would make it a truth).
It's easy to increase bullet friction/pull force and test yourself. Take a neck and bullet to squeaky clean, loaded with the rest. Note the increase in seating force for this condition, and watch the chrono for a difference with that round. None.

very interesting point
thank you

 

[BoydAllen]

I did not really say that it was detrimental, just that some very good shooters had gotten their best results at 1,000 yards, with excellent conditions with ESs that were in the low teens, and had not done quite as well with their lowest single digits. Personally, I try to identify the biggest problems and deal with them first. Knowing that top shooters are getting their best results with an ES in the 12 to 15 range, once I got there, I would probably work on something else that I knew was limiting my outcome. Over the years I have come to accept that I will not always understand why something does or does not work, and I do not let that deter me from doing what tests prove works best.

 

[Howland]

AMP Annealing did a study on the benefits of annealing - imagine that!

An interesting note is that the presence of carbon inside the neck was one of the variables they had to control and account for.

Their study showed leaving the carbon inside the neck resulted in lower SD of the amount of force needed to dislodge the bullet but they didn't test to determine if it affected accuracy or lower velocity SD.

My instincts tell me that a more consistent grip will contribute to a more consistent velocity but I wouldn't hazard a guess as to how much it contributes.

https://www.ampannealing.com/articles/40/annealing-under-the-microscope/

 

[denobravo]

Perhaps you should clean the necks run a sample then only brush the carbon run another sample creating your own test and post your results.
I'm listening

I did my own test, but should really re do the test. I had lower es with clean.
I think it wont be for a while but I will and I will look for this post and and specifically you and do as you asked.
I see there is a bit of a misunderstanding, you may not have read it, but I said in a post that my test was not taken as empirical data and I was looking for others that had done a similar test
BTW i tested with Boron nitride, I was thinking my next one would be BN vs Naked


Thank you

 

[Lefty Trigger]

My actual test with pictures and LabRadar data,... and again these were my results your results may vary. AND I make no claim to be a perfect shooter at ANY distance.
http://forum.accurateshooter.com/threads/brass-cleaning-removing-carbon-layer.3962782/

 

[denobravo]

My actual test with pictures and LabRadar data,... and again these were my results your results may vary. AND I make no claim to be a perfect shooter at ANY distance.
http://forum.accurateshooter.com/threads/brass-cleaning-removing-carbon-layer.3962782/

thank you...you also got a lower es with clean
This is exactly what I asked for and I am grateful...thanks south paw !!

 

[JimSC]

My actual test with pictures and LabRadar data,... and again these were my results your results may vary. AND I make no claim to be a perfect shooter at ANY distance.
http://forum.accurateshooter.com/threads/brass-cleaning-removing-carbon-layer.3962782/

just a question, was the dirty brass in the test also FL resized or just neck sized? When I went to wet cleaning with pins I was changing so much in my routine any effect the the clean necks had was lost in the noise of other changes

 

[Lefty Trigger]

just a question, was the dirty brass in the test also FL resized or just neck sized. When I went to wet cleaning with pins I was changing so much in my routine any effect the the clean necks had was lost in the noise of other changes

Full length, my actual accuracy problem was with the Hornady dies undersizing my brass way too much actually causing me to fireform my brass on every reload. Using a Wilson die now and all is perfect.

 

[bbarber25]

Is your chronographs resolution and accuracy dependable enough to even measure the changes you’re looking for accurately enough? You’re talking about measuring some very small changes if you’re ES Is already averaging in the single digits. Can you say with 100% certainty you trust your equipment to measure a well than LESS than 0.5% change in SD variance from a load producing a 10ft/s ES to a 5ft/s ES?

Pursuit of data is good, but having the ability to measure it accurately is important if it is to have any relevance.

 

[Lefty Trigger]

If this is addressed towards me, then yes I trust my equipment. LabRadar is the utmost in chronographs using doppler radar. But as I have learned from some of the best on here,... it's not numbers its what's on paper. Learning to read the wind is my biggest challenge at the moment and after getting help reading test targets and getting my loads worked out it's all coming together

 

[David Christian]

@denobravo, why don’t you perform the tests you enquire about and then provide your empirical data to this forum?

 

[MislMan]

Denobravo - I believe what you will find in this forum is that the majority of us do our own testing of these type of parameters. We test to our criteria and use our results for our uses. Most do not perform laboratory level testing and DO NOT TABULATE these data for intense scrutiny. We are not developing empirical data to draw conclussions as they relate across the board (almost never found an across the board correlation). There are way too many variables at play to ascertain the minor changes and meaningful data to be captured to make such endeavours (for most of us) pratical based on available time, test conditions, brand of brass and end use for those of us so involved. We have goals for shooting smaller groups and concentrate on things that show on paper during our alloted time for our sport. If you do proceed to gather your own empirical data I’m sure we would all be interested in seeing your data.

 

[denobravo]

Is your chronographs resolution and accuracy dependable enough to even measure the changes you’re looking for accurately enough? You’re talking about measuring some very small changes if you’re ES Is already averaging in the single digits. Can you say with 100% certainty you trust your equipment to measure a well than LESS than 0.5% change in SD variance from a load producing a 10ft/s ES to a 5ft/s ES?

Pursuit of data is good, but having the ability to measure it accurately is important if it is to have any relevance.

I dont know if it is
Labradar is what I use

 

[denobravo]

Denobravo - I believe what you will find in this forum is that the majority of us do our own testing of these type of parameters. We test to our criteria and use our results for our uses. Most do not perform laboratory level testing and DO NOT TABULATE these data for intense scrutiny. We are not developing empirical data to draw conclussions as they relate across the board (almost never found an across the board correlation). There are way too many variables at play to ascertain the minor changes and meaningful data to be captured to make such endeavours (for most of us) pratical based on available time, test conditions, brand of brass and end use for those of us so involved. We have goals for shooting smaller groups and concentrate on things that show on paper during our alloted time for our sport. If you do proceed to gather your own empirical data I’m sure we would all be interested in seeing your data.

Good to know
I found this forum in Accurate shooter and have read quite a few articles, as well as many forums. It seems as though everyone does testing as I have. My results were challenged so I came here looking for corroboration.
Isnt that what the forums are for??
If I read your comments correctly, you are telling me I should not look here but I should report here. One person did respond with data. It was exactly what I am looking for. If you speak for the whole than I was wrong to come here. I am sorry.

 

[denobravo]

@denobravo, why don’t you perform the tests you enquire about and then provide your empirical data to this forum?

well Dave...I did, except I did not save the data and wish I had. I only went with the results like most people here.
So this is a forum, for disscusion and advise and sharing information.
I came here to corroborate my findings as they had been challenged by other shooters. When I read a post, if I cannot help I do not respond. Many here just respond. Some are amazing and have great things to say. Others are a bit rude and I am not sure why they have to respond at all. Thanks for the advise, after all it is a forum and anybody can throw in there 2 cents. Good shooting bro

 

[Bob L.]

Good to know
I found this forum in Accurate shooter and have read quite a few articles, as well as many forums. It seems as though everyone does testing as I have. My results were challenged so I came here looking for corroboration.
Isnt that what the forums are for??
If I read your comments correctly, you are telling me I should not look here but I should report here. One person did respond with data. It was exactly what I am looking for. If you speak for the whole than I was wrong to come here. I am sorry.

You joined in 2007. Don't leave now, over one thread.
I'm sorry you didn't get as much of the information you were searching for, but you did have one person respond with relevant data to your very specific test. It probably shouldn't have taken 5 pages to get that.

 

[CharlieNC]

The theme you will find on this forum is efforts are overwhelmingly aimed at shooting smaller groups, with little emphasis placed on chrono results. If it did not register enough in an earlier post positive compensation, that is harnessing barrel harmonics to optimize accuracy and precision, trumps the chrono stats. This relegates the chrono to becoming a characterization tool vs a defining tool. That is why you will not find much of the kind of chrono studies you are after.

 

[denobravo]

This is a forum
its a place to discuss all this reloading related.
It seems some dont understand that.
I finally found single digit ES when I changed one component of my reloading sequence.
I use only clean necks, and yes I anneal every time then full length size trim etc.
So in discussion with friends who also shoot and reload, either jokingly or serious, they challenged the results. So I thought "let me see if I can find anyone else who may have found this specific aspect to help lower their ES"
In other words corroboration of results
So I came to ACCURATE shooter to check with the brethren as I could not find anything with applied ballistics or an actual Accurate Shooter article.
Several people have been very very helpful.
Others not so much and I wonder why they feel a need to respond.
Some have misunderstood what I was looking for. Sorry
Thanks too all who helped, sorry to those who became upset, and for those who commented and did not even try to help...what can I say.
I hope this clears things up and I wish you all one hole groups.

good shootin brothers

 

[denobravo]

The theme you will find on this forum is efforts are overwhelmingly aimed at shooting smaller groups, with little emphasis placed on chrono results. If it did not register enough in an earlier post positive compensation, that is harnessing barrel harmonics to optimize accuracy and precision, trumps the chrono stats. This relegates the chrono to becoming a characterization tool vs a defining tool. That is why you will not find much of the kind of chrono studies you are after.

thats too bad...once I find the harmonic, I want to repeat it. Hence the search for single digit ES.
This is an article from precision rifle blog
https://precisionrifleblog.com/2015/04/18/how-much-does-sd-matter/
A trusted source for me
I am NOT a very good shot and need all the mechanical error out of the formula. I am happy at.2 groups but prefer a .000
That is why I tweak all aspects one at a time and why I am looking for corroboration.
We all want small groups and this is where we discuss how we get them. I appreciate your input, thank you very much.
Good shootin bro

 

[denobravo]

You joined in 2007. Don't leave now, over one thread.
I'm sorry you didn't get as much of the information you were searching for, but you did have one person respond with relevant data to your very specific test. It probably shouldn't have taken 5 pages to get that.

Thanx Bob...I was beginning to wonder lol