AMPs 'Annealing Under The Microscope' Part 5 - Section 3 released 27-Nov

[Lbart]

I can't speak for anyone other than myself but if the tunnel test had been done using a machine rest ........

Lou is about as close as you can get to a machine rest and be alive Matt keep up the good work.

 

[Ned Ludd]

I think it's pretty safe to assume that a shooter of Lou's caliber can print consistent groups, especially when shooting in a tunnel. Nonetheless, if he's willing to use a machine rest and do more testing, I'll give him a thumbs up and a "Thank You!" in advance. I think the most important thing to note is that the spread of the 20-shot group with annealed brass did not stay approximately the same, nor did it grow larger than the group fired with non-annealed brass. In fact, it decreased in size by very close to 1/3, which is a substantial improvement.

 

[gman47564]

im a firm believer in annealing every cycle... we try to do everything else exactly the same every time... might as well anneal every time as well... if for no other reason peace of mind...

 

[Ccrider]

I thought the article noted that the Es between annealed and unannealed was about the same.

 

[Sandstorm]

I anneal my brass every firing just because it cant hurt...Im now starting to think its helping.

 

[JimSC]

I did a bit of thinking on this after waking up at 3AM and I could not go back to sleep. A couple of questions/thoughts came up

#1- case life. Both annealed and non annealed cases were fired 20 times and no neck splits were reported. If I can get 20 firings from a quality case non annealed, I think I have gotten my moneys worth

#2 -The slopes of the charts. In part 5 section 2 the non annealed case numbers should have steadily increased, they did not. If you look at the various charts the slopes of both annealed and non annealed cases for all shooters were virtually parallel. In a number of the tests the numbers got better with the number of firings. There was no correlation at all with the number of firings and performance. The non annealed cases numbers should have climbed in a steady manner as they became work hardened, they did not. The non annealed slope should show a steady decrease in accuracy from firing one to firing twenty on the non annealed cases while the annealed cases numbers should have a even slope.

As Riflewoman pointed out in post 6 any tests in the future needs to be performed in a double blind manner. The placebo effect is well documented and any tests not performed using a double blind procedure should be taken with a grain of salt. All placebo effects, observer bias, conformation bias, and the human/environmental effect need to be removed for any future tests to be valid. My first reaction to seeing these tests was that annealing does work, but after some thought and analysis they have created more doubt than before on whether annealing has any positive effect at all on accuracy or case life. The numbers just do not add up

 

[Shooter13]

I suspect AMP could run this test 100 times over, with the exact same results, and people would still be skeptical of it; and rightly so. The simple fact remains, it's still the vendor doing the testing. Regardless, the shooting community doesn't exactly have a lot of folks (outside of Litz) independently conducting tests like this; even when individuals come along and try, it's not as though they've got an unlimited budget and infallible testing methods that will satisfy the masses. Hell, even Litz's testing in Modern Advancements Vol 2 was pretty flawed & limited..to the point of being nearly irrelevant.

At some point I think you're kind of forced to take anecdotal reports & the limited 'pseudo-scientific' testing that is available, and make your own decision.

I will say I don't think the AMP guys are doing this kind of analysis purely as a marketing play (although it certainly serves as one); I suspect you'd see the same results with a flame annealer...because by their own admission/findings, they work too.

My 2c.

I agree with you 100%..................except for one point, I think the amp is much more consistent than flame, my $.02 ;-)

 

[JimSC]

I agree with you 100%..................except for one point, I think the amp is much more consistent than flame, my $.02 ;-)

no argument with either of your statements. Let's assume test #2 is 100% correct and just look at the slope of the averages. Can you answer these two questions? Why did the non annealed cases go through the same number of firings as the annealed cases with no split necks or other case failures noted and why did the accuracy and performance of the non annealed cases remain roughly the same from the 1st though the last firing? If case hardening is a factor in accuracy by the tenth or so firing the non annealed cases should have exhibited a noticeable deterioration in performance. Instead it was just the opposite in most tests. Dennis Dean had a increase in ES, but the vertical spread dropped by 40%, Tony Shankle - flat ES and a slight drop in group size, Ken Faulk - increase in ES, substantial decrease in vertical MOA, David White - decrease in ES and vertical MOA. With the .338 there was a increase in ES and MOA however the annealed had the same issues with the slope of the non annealed and annealed cases being parallel.

Taking a look at part II's test average trends it seems as if annealing has no effect whatsoever in vertical spread, ES, or case life. Any differences in group sizes appear to be caused by the placebo effect, a double blind test could confirm that.

 

[Keith Glasscock]

no argument with either of your statements. Let's assume test #2 is 100% correct and just look at the slope of the averages. Can you answer these two questions? Why did the non annealed cases go through the same number of firings as the annealed cases with no split necks or other case failures noted and why did the accuracy and performance of the non annealed cases remain roughly the same from the 1st though the last firing? If case hardening is a factor in accuracy by the tenth or so firing the non annealed cases should have exhibited a noticeable deterioration in performance. Instead it was just the opposite in most tests. Dennis Dean had a increase in ES, but the vertical spread dropped by 40%, Tony Shankle - flat ES and a slight drop in group size, Ken Faulk - increase in ES, substantial decrease in vertical MOA, David White - decrease in ES and vertical MOA. With the .338 there was a increase in ES and MOA however the annealed had the same issues with the slope of the non annealed and annealed cases being parallel.

Taking a look at part II's test average trends it seems as if annealing has no effect whatsoever in vertical spread, ES, or case life. Any differences in group sizes appear to be caused by the placebo effect, a double blind test could confirm that.

Hi Jim,

Interesting observations. Like you, I would like to see some more writing on stone tablets.

Disclaimer:
I am a fully sold proponent of annealing for competition use. After much time and reflection on methodologies, I am in the process of changing from flame to induction annealing. I fully intend to do some intensive testing to satisfy my own curiosity as I have hundreds of cases around here that have been recently flame annealed.

Back to your observations:

To get 20 firings from brass of any description requires a rather mild load. In competition use, we normally beat a case to death long before that. With that in mind, I think we might see some different results based on load pressure and neck clearance. I know for a fact that my heavy FT/R loads will slowly increase velocity over the life of a case without annealing.

As for ES, I don't fully understand what methodology was used to obtain that data. I do know that a barrel will "walk" the velocity as it warms. Rate of fire and the sequence that shots are fired will induce a certain amount of noise to the data. I have to fire 2 warming shots through certain barrels to prevent this problem when chronographing.

On group size, I see two difficulties in making determinations:

First, if a rifle is properly tuned, small deviations will likely result in a small, but increasing percentage of fliers. 5 shot groups are unlikely to identify this trend. Lou's data tends to suggest this phenomenon at short range.

Second, at 1k, it is difficult to use vertical results without considering other noise in the data. That noise would include wind and its effect on vertical, shooter aim variation (the placebo effect is part of this), and barrel fouling condition/temperature.

Where I was not on-site observing the testing, I can't make any assertions about the results of the testing other than it suggests that annealing might be a good idea. In other words, it verifies that my opinion has not changed.

 

[JimSC]

Hi Jim,

Interesting observations. Like you, I would like to see some more writing on stone tablets.

thanks for the kind comments. I do not have access to 1000 yards without a drive but I do shoot out to 850 on a regular basis. I did anneal using a flame based Annealeeze for about two years until I decided to do a bit more research and testing. The research was interesting and I won't bore everyone with the elasticity modulus and the positive and negative charges in a metals atomic structure but suffice to say that neck tension is not affected in the least by a metals ductility/malleability which is what annealing does accomplish.

When I first saw this the other night I honestly thought the tests would show that annealing would prolong case life and possibly show a deterioration of the non annealed numbers as the number of firing cycles increased. What leaped out at me at 3AM was that the numbers on almost all of the testing did not deteriorate but in most of the graphs actually improved. They should have started off even on the first firing and groups and ES's should have steadily climbed on the non annealed cases as the metal was work hardened after each sizing. Instead on the majority of the graphs the numbers on the non annealed and the annealed improved as the testing progressed. I would have thought the annealed numbers would stay steady but even they improved but no faster or slower than the non annealed group.

The placebo effect was more obvious the more I looked at the numbers. As I said above the two groups should have started off even, they did not. The non annealed groups were lower even in the groups shot using virgin cases. This is not to be interpreted as a slam on the shooters, the placebo effect has been documented and verified many times which is why in any valid experiment a blind and preferably double blind testing procedure is used. I would bet a fair sum that in a test tunnel using double blind methodology that even with a human shooter the numbers would be exactly the same.

I am not here to tell anyone to anneal or not, as I said the placebo effect is real and if you think annealing helps, then it probably does. At least at the subconscious level. However I have pretty much made my decision now and will not be going back to annealing unless I decide to go with a wildcat cartridge which would benefit from improving malleability which is what annealing will accomplish. In which case I will probably use the old flame and pan of water method for budget reasons

 

[WIB3]

The AMP is a top notch product. Many hours of research have been done to eliminate all the guessing. I have owned other top flame devices and they all worked fine. Their only down fall was set up and consistently. The flame people will bitch about the price. Nothing in the competitive shooting arena is cheep. It’s no different than 2000 custom bullets, a custom action or NF scope. Repeatedly is the key to consistency in your reloaded match ammo.

 

[WIB3]

Flame machines are wonderful once set up. If you are running a couple thousand.223’s it’s the ticket. If you are setting it up every 2 weeks to do your 18 pieces of match BR brass, not so much. Different tools have different applications.