• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

Lou Murdica's process

Mr Murdica's procedure is pretty much the same as a lot of bench rest folks use, I think. My procedure is almost the same. You ask why not start .003" or so off the lands. First - his reference to using powder that fills the case is not to be interpreted as starting high on a ladder test. He is just trying to use a powder that most fills the case when load is developed as opposed to one which leaves a large powder void in the case - which many powder options will do - even at max safe operating velocities. The void will create erratic velocity. I'm, guessing he chooses to shoot "jammed" as opposed to off the lands for a few reasons. First in my mind is shooting jammed eliminates much bullet "damage" from the bullet otherwise hitting the lands slightly off-center due to concentricity issues or "slop". While some loads just don't like being jammed - it is not lost on most shooters that a lot of loads love it above all else- be it because it tightened up concentricity or because of other dynamics which made it the better load in that rifle. About 75% of my target barrels prefer a jammed load with the load I shoot in them. Maybe that is because I automatically go to jam as Mr. Murdica does and that enables me to see that the benefits of jamming are consistent enough to go there first - whereas someone who always starts well off the lands and never feels comfortable jamming just picks the best setting he came across. It is assumed by Mr. Murdica a REDUCED load is used initially, I'm sure. But a newcomer might interpret what you stated as just starting off jamming a bullet with a full case of powder. Not something any of us ever wants to do. You will encounter, as you say, velocity differences when seating bullets at different seating depths - but anytime a major seating depth change is made, an initial reduction in powder is warranted - especially when seating much deeper or going jammed..
Another thing about starting at jam that seldom gets discussed, but I feel matters, is starting pressure relative to neck tension. There's a point where it takes more pressure for the bullet to begin to move than what it takes to open the brass neck. Think about that for a minute...IOW, it takes most or all tuning related to neck tension out of the equation entirely. The biggest factor related to tension becomes, how far into the lands can I go with a given neck tension before I see it matter on target.

That ought to way up the peanut gallery for a while.
 
Another thing about starting at jam that seldom gets discussed, but I feel matters, is starting pressure relative to neck tension. There's a point where it takes more pressure for the bullet to begin to move than what it takes to open the brass neck. Think about that for a minute...IOW, it takes most or all tuning related to neck tension out of the equation entirely. The biggest factor related to tension becomes, how far into the lands can I go with a given neck tension before I see it matter on target.

That ought to way up the peanut gallery for a while.
I agree. For years with most of my match shooting being with 6PPC I shot with very heavy neck tension and bullets seated very close to a square mark. When I started with the 6BRX I did the same thing shooting from 100 to 500 yds. When I ventured into 1000 yds and was advised to go to light neck tension with the BRX I have found I am shooting from . 001 to .007 in the lands, far from where I shot with heavy neck tension. I believe there can be more than one way to skin the cat, so to speak. Actually I like cats, interesting creatures.
 
Murdica Quote. "If you’re not using an AMP annealer, you’re better off not to anneal."

Opinions on that quote ??!!??
I think there are merits of what Mr. Murdica is saying. Anyone who has used a force measuring device and messed around with levels of annealing knows that there are big variations in seating force relative to how much a case has been annealed. So - if we have variation in the cases - there will be variation in neck tension. Now - whether the AMP annealer is capable of getting each case to the same hardness to the point one can see a difference of improvement as seen on the force indicator when seating the bullets - that WOULD be worth knowing. I know my annealing machine does not leave them all the same.
 
The assumption that AMP brings brass back to itss almost virgin state is based on expert witnesses testimonies ("it does a great job for me" "it helped me in accuracy department"). I have not seen a compelling evidence that AMP has helped in significantly reducing neck tension variation. I think AMP helps prolong life of our cases but I would be hesitant to take AMP-annealed 10 times fired brass to a major competition. I would rather take 2 times fired not annealed brass.
 
I have used many different prescriptions to develop loads. Hell at one time early in my precision benchrest venture I was convinced fitted neck's were the way to load, and used cram for my seating. It worked, I won a lot of local matches, and thought I was using the best method. But then I finally realized to many times my results were not being consistent, especially as yardage changed. A chronograph showed why.

Back then in my early days many of the well known better shooters told me tips that explained why, and how important consistency is in precision shooting. I believe most al top competitive shooters use the methods Lou outlines, for the most part. I also know it is the best way to find the results I am looking for in the most efficient way.

Since them early days I have shot most disciplines in bench shooting, many in competition from format to format. Even in Silhouette shooting, those shooters that always finished at the top knew one thing, even offhand, their best chance at finishing on top was always more likely with ammunition that was as capable of same hole accuracy as they could get it!

So for those that think their need is in proving their ability, and work endless hours on their own shooting ability, and knowing their conditions, but don't put the same discipline in their reloading and ammunition, it will always open more doors for others to put them lower on the final list than they could be.

I am not the best teacher or giver of advice, but after decades of chasing precise accuracy, I find what Lou is saying as hard to beat and way I develop mine. All mine are 3 shot instead of two, but once I get to testing the most promising, always 5 shots, EXCEPT, for hunting rifles and the bigger boomers.

Then for hunting I start out the same, I choose a couple three shot groups over a five shot. I also test with a clean barrel for my Varmint and hunting rigs, as the first shot is my most important shot out of a cold barrel, as well as not having the option of a fouler shot when trying to be efficient hunting.

Don't get me wrong with the first shot in my target guns, that is also something I strive for, but in competition I rarely shoot a discipline that does not allow sighters, and when I can always use that to my benefit and for reference to my reading of the conditions presents.

But By all means possible this is as good of advice from Lou as I could suggest, and regardless how much accuracy I "need",, I will always strive for the "most" I can achieve, I welcome all the the help I can get masking my ability, and have found through years of short range competition, one will never have to much accuracy, but most often will be in need of more than they can get!
 
Another thing about starting at jam that seldom gets discussed, but I feel matters, is starting pressure relative to neck tension. There's a point where it takes more pressure for the bullet to begin to move than what it takes to open the brass neck. Think about that for a minute...IOW, it takes most or all tuning related to neck tension out of the equation entirely. The biggest factor related to tension becomes, how far into the lands can I go with a given neck tension before I see it matter on target.

That ought to way up the peanut gallery for a while.
Speaking from the perspective of a 6PPC shooter, with respect, no it doesn't. I have always loaded that caliber with bullets seated longer than touch, an I have experimented with neck tension in that situation quite a bit. Different powders respond differently. Some "like" quite bit of neck tension, and others "prefer" quite a bit less. Because the powder that I use most of the time, VV133, likes .003+ neck tension, and my necks are relatively thin, .008 these days, I do not want to do anything to reduce bullet pull, so no annealing. What I do is to sort by bullet seating force (arbor press) as I load, segregating loads by force required to seat bullets, and shooting like with like. Getting into why I think that bushing size has mattered is a longer discussion, and from a practical point of view what really matters is what happens at the target. I have done the test and the differences on target were were significant.
 
Murdica Quote. "If you’re not using an AMP annealer, you’re better off not to anneal."

Opinions on that quote ??!!??
I am certainly not in any position to argue with Mr. Murdica as he has far more experience than me. I have learned a lot just from listening to what he has to say.
What I do know is that annealing is a function of time and temperature. Ideally you want to get the brass to the proper temperature as quickly as possible and hold it there for a precise amount of time with consistent results case to case. Although I do not presently own one, the Amp, with its induction heating is ideally suited to do this since induction heating is very fast and consistent. I believe what Mr Murdica is saying is that inconsistent annealing is worse than no annealing at all.
One thing I have found with flame annealers is that the propane bottle burners they normally use are definitely not ideal as the flames are not always precise and can vary as the propane in the tank is used up.
What I am presently using is an Annealeez unit retrofitted with specialty natrual gas burner tips. My late father was a glassblower by trade and I inherited his equipment. These burner tips are supplied with natrual gas and forced air from a compressor or in my case a small vane type blower. They give a precise hot flame that doesn't vary. (precisely heating glass isn't any different than heating a brass case) I use two tips and can heat a 284 win neck to the proper temperature in just under 4 seconds. The timer function on the Annealeez is first rate and with this setup I can anneal 100 cases in no time flat with much better consistency than a propane flame. Is this setup as good as an Amp I just don't have any way to tell.
I do have a force gauge bullet seater but the problem with seating force is it varies as much or more with the friction of the bullet moving against the neck as it does with the tension the neck is exerting on the bullet. To really measure true neck tension you would need a force gauge that could measure the force required to either squeeze or expand the neck by .002 in. I don't think such a device is available.
I guess if I had an Amp I could do an Eric Cortina test and compare 10 cases annealed with each method on an actual target. The only difference being I don't have a shooting tunnel like Mr. Murdica and I don't Have Eric Cortina's shooting skills.
The only drawback that I can see to the AMP is the price.
 
I am certainly not in any position to argue with Mr. Murdica as he has far more experience than me. I have learned a lot just from listening to what he has to say.
What I do know is that annealing is a function of time and temperature. Ideally you want to get the brass to the proper temperature as quickly as possible and hold it there for a precise amount of time with consistent results case to case. Although I do not presently own one, the Amp, with its induction heating is ideally suited to do this since induction heating is very fast and consistent. I believe what Mr Murdica is saying is that inconsistent annealing is worse than no annealing at all.
One thing I have found with flame annealers is that the propane bottle burners they normally use are definitely not ideal as the flames are not always precise and can vary as the propane in the tank is used up.
What I am presently using is an Annealeez unit retrofitted with specialty natrual gas burner tips. My late father was a glassblower by trade and I inherited his equipment. These burner tips are supplied with natrual gas and forced air from a compressor or in my case a small vane type blower. They give a precise hot flame that doesn't vary. (precisely heating glass isn't any different than heating a brass case) I use two tips and can heat a 284 win neck to the proper temperature in just under 4 seconds. The timer function on the Annealeez is first rate and with this setup I can anneal 100 cases in no time flat with much better consistency than a propane flame. Is this setup as good as an Amp I just don't have any way to tell.
I do have a force gauge bullet seater but the problem with seating force is it varies as much or more with the friction of the bullet moving against the neck as it does with the tension the neck is exerting on the bullet. To really measure true neck tension you would need a force gauge that could measure the force required to either squeeze or expand the neck by .002 in. I don't think such a device is available.
I guess if I had an Amp I could do an Eric Cortina test and compare 10 cases annealed with each method on an actual target. The only difference being I don't have a shooting tunnel like Mr. Murdica and I don't Have Eric Cortina's shooting skills.
The only drawback that I can see to the AMP is the price.
For the reasons you state, I f I did not have an amp, I would only anneal with a salt bath setup because you can regulate the heat and maintain a consistent temperature.

I prefer starting at touch only because more often then not, I can find a good load by the time I am .1 in or so. The upside to starting as far into the lands as the neck tension will hold is that you can only move one way searching for proper seating depth.

The main thing is to choose a method, test for yourself and refine based in the results you get. That is the only way to learn and trust what you are doing.
 
I don’t buy into Amp’s findings regarding salt bath annealing. I know what my targets and LabRadar showed; and they showed that salt bath annealing at 550 works. I get no better results using the Amp. The Amp is just much faster.
 
'Annealing' as applies to case necks is just stress relieving. This stress relief can be done at all different temperatures, depending on the amount of stress relief the necks need to get them to behave the way you want to. This varies with characteristics of the specific case you're using, neck clearance used, amount of sizing...to name the top three.

When you hear that temps must be at such-and-such for 'annealing', that should be the first red flag. o_O

Good shootin'. -Al
 
'Annealing' as applies to case necks is just stress relieving. This stress relief can be done at all different temperatures, depending on the amount of stress relief the necks need to get them to behave the way you want to. This varies with characteristics of the specific case you're using, neck clearance used, amount of sizing...to name the top three.

When you hear that temps must be at such-and-such for 'annealing', that should be the first red flag. o_O

Good shootin'. -Al
I wish I knew who to believe on all this...
 
I wasn’t going to wade in but: I anneal with a flame annealer. I tested quite a bit with tempilaq and made some conclusions based on both malleability and perceived neck tension while seating. I’m comfortable that my process delivers the results I need for SR. I am happy.
 
I wasn’t going to wade in but: I anneal with a flame annealer. I tested quite a bit with tempilaq and made some conclusions based on both malleability and perceived neck tension while seating. I’m comfortable that my process delivers the results I need for SR. I am happy.
IzQyyp0l.jpg
 
Square mark refers to marks that the rifling, specifically the leade angle of the rifling makes on a bullet that is seated some amount longer than just touching. They should be evenly spaced around the bullet's circumference at the point where the ogive transitions to the shank of the bullet. Under magnification the marks have length and width, the later being the width of the lands. You have square marks when their length equals their width.

To make them easier to see, before chambering the dummy round, hold the loaded round in one hand and grab the bullet tightly with a wad of steel wool while rotating the round so as to produce very thin and uniform striations around the bullet (These do not harm the bullet.)

Never try a live round in your rifle anywhere where firing it would be a safety issue. If you need to check a round for fit , always remove the striker assembly from the bolt before you do, so that it cannot fire.
 
I don’t buy into Amp’s findings regarding salt bath annealing. I know what my targets and LabRadar showed; and they showed that salt bath annealing at 550 works. I get no better results using the Amp. The Amp is just much faster.


Isn't that kind of the point? 90% of people used gas/flame anealers a couple years ago and people were still shooting cleans lying on their stomachs and guys sitting on a bench were also shooting very small groups. Now that the AMP is getting used all the "old" methods of anealing doesn't work
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
164,941
Messages
2,186,887
Members
78,605
Latest member
Jonathan99
Back
Top