My new case annealing machine

[DanConzo]

hammer47--No I think you got me, I got out in 67, but I wasn't in the Phillipines. I mined coal for over 30 years underground so my hands aren't the greatest. Sounds like we went thru the same times.

 

[jlow]

I know there is a lot of debate about whether the “accuracy” of the machine based annealing is necessary. I am no expert but I will share with you my thinking logic on this.

So people who neck turn to get constant neck tension work hard to get neck that have thickness variation of 0.003” because this will reduce the uneven hold the neck on the bullet and so giving a more even and reproducible neck tension.

In the same way, if the degree of springback of the neck which is affected by annealing and affects how hard the neck grips the bullet will also affects neck tension. Anyone who has seated a bullet into a really dead soft case will tell you the seating effort difference between that and a properly annealed case is quite dramatic. So I think keeping the degree of springback as close as possible should also give a person again more consistent neck tension.

So why be so accurate in one but so inaccurate in the other if both of them affects the same thing?

 

[DanConzo]

jlow--I turn my necks on a lathe w/ my own setup and I get my necks .0003" or under if I'm doing everything right, there is also feel w/ machinery too. I always anneal to a soft state from the get-go and my neck tension is very consistent and repeatable which I think is very important. I seat bullets in an arbor press also w/ good feel. If I can figure out how to post another picture I'll show you my neck turning set-up, however I'm not saying that it is the best or nothing like that. Probably some people can turn to .0001", but I think it's harder than people think it is. If you have 15 cases that shoot real good and you apply the same heat for the same amount of time and everything else is the same (as humanely possible) sizing, good bullets, proper priming, etc I don't see the irregularity that you indicated. Perhaps you can be more specific. But thanks for your input.

 

[Blaster-37]

One word for annealing, Tempilaq. Without it, your are guessing blind.
http://www.tempil.com/products/tempilaq-indicating-liquids/

 

[DanConzo]

Blaster-37--If you think so that is fine, probably good stuff. I have no use for it, but a lot of people do and I suppose it helps them which is great especially when they first set up for annealing.

 

[rvn1968]

JHORD,It looks like a lot of guys are trying to reinvent your wheel...The setup works for you as long as you can count to three,great and simply elegant Tom

 

[jlow]

jlow--I turn my necks on a lathe w/ my own setup and I get my necks .0003" or under if I'm doing everything right, there is also feel w/ machinery too. I always anneal to a soft state from the get-go and my neck tension is very consistent and repeatable which I think is very important. I seat bullets in an arbor press also w/ good feel. If I can figure out how to post another picture I'll show you my neck turning set-up, however I'm not saying that it is the best or nothing like that. Probably some people can turn to .0001", but I think it's harder than people think it is. If you have 15 cases that shoot real good and you apply the same heat for the same amount of time and everything else is the same (as humanely possible) sizing, good bullets, proper priming, etc I don't see the irregularity that you indicated. Perhaps you can be more specific. But thanks for your input.

Rvn1968 – thanks! I must apologize though, I meant more like around 0.0003” tolerance for my head turning. I have been talking to Savageshooter via IM last couple of days regarding the GemPro so much that I am stuck on the 0.00x digit count. ;D

I use a K&M neck turner and it is very precise. For example, my last batch of 23 cases I measured last week the range was 0.00015” and SDEV was 0.0003”.

 

[DanConzo]

Thats good jlow, that is about what I'm getting w/ my setup .0003" and under in wall thickness. I just don't understand specifically your last post before this one. I just don't know how to answer you. Thanks for your info though.

 

[Hammer47]

Dan.........if you have not had the chance to use the "PUMPKIN" turner fron Don Neilson you owe it to yourself to give it a try. What an OUTSTANDING MACHINE. It is just head and shoulders above the rest imho.
It does look like we shared the same times. I even remember when in race cars the tires were skinny and the drivers were fat.

 

[Immike]

JHORD,It looks like a lot of guys are trying to reinvent your wheel...The setup works for you as long as you can count to three,great and simply elegant Tom

I used a rotisserie motor from a grill to power and time my annealer. It has a consistent 11 seconds that can be used or divided for a mechanical or visual reference. Mike

 

[jhord]

That's ok, if it gives other people ideas they can run with it. I haven't had a whole lot of time to mess around but I have found a setup that lets me anneal my .223 high power brass fairly quickly, and good results on the chronograph. Once it's running all I have to do is concentrate on counting marks on the three-jaw chuck and shove a new case into the tube. I'll keep it that way. 8)

JHORD,It looks like a lot of guys are trying to reinvent your wheel...The setup works for you as long as you can count to three,great and simply elegant Tom

 

[rvn1968]

Damn,I have never used the 110v rotisserie on my grill.I'll have to plug it in and count rpm's.It can always be geared up or down. Tom

 

[DanConzo]

rvn1968--Sounds like you are trying to reinvent someone's wheel.

 

[rvn1968]

No,just plagiarizing his plans. Shamless Tom.

 

[DanConzo]

Hammer47--The pumpkin looks like a well made machine, but 27 years ago I had all the carpal row of bones removed from my right hand but I can still crank good, so I'll stick to my setup. I know I can use power and mount the turner in a vise, etc but there goes the feel thing. You notice he recommends(maybe even sells) the Forster collet holder which I use in my lathe to hold the case, and I can mount his turner in the headstock, or as Lilja does you can use a mill if you have one or even a good drill press, but I'm happy w/ mine. I never go in a restaurant if I get a look at the cook and he isn't fat.

 

[Erik Cortina]

Hammer47--The pumpkin looks like a well made machine, but 27 years ago I had all the carpal row of bones removed from my right hand but I can still crank good, so I'll stick to my setup. I know I can use power and mount the turner in a vise, etc but there goes the feel thing. You notice he recommends(maybe even sells) the Forster collet holder which I use in my lathe to hold the case, and I can mount his turner in the headstock, or as Lilja does you can use a mill if you have one or even a good drill press, but I'm happy w/ mine. I never go in a restaurant if I get a look at the cook and he isn't fat.

DanConzo, I just posted a video of my neck turning setup, this might interest you.
http://forum.accurateshooter.com/index.php?topic=3800995.0

 

[DanConzo]

Erik--I have the same setup only w/ the Forster Neck Turner and Collet Closer and an old small lathe from the 40s, I hold under .0003" on my wall thickness also. I turn at 174 rpms, and I also rigged a dial indicator stop for ram travel to cut to the same distance into the shoulder. Very good post Eric I really enjoy it, that's what I figured this site was for (exchanging ideas). I'll post a picture of mine when I figure how to do it again. I'm glad you posted this-I was starting to think that a lot of people here don't want ideas, but I believe your post changed that in my mind.

 

[TC260]

I know there is a lot of debate about whether the “accuracy” of the machine based annealing is necessary. I am no expert but I will share with you my thinking logic on this.

So people who neck turn to get constant neck tension work hard to get neck that have thickness variation of 0.003” because this will reduce the uneven hold the neck on the bullet and so giving a more even and reproducible neck tension.

In the same way, if the degree of springback of the neck which is affected by annealing and affects how hard the neck grips the bullet will also affects neck tension. Anyone who has seated a bullet into a really dead soft case will tell you the seating effort difference between that and a properly annealed case is quite dramatic. So I think keeping the degree of springback as close as possible should also give a person again more consistent neck tension.

So why be so accurate in one but so inaccurate in the other if both of them affects the same thing?

How do you know how inaccurate the different methods of annealing are? What are you using to quantify them?

Lets ignore "dead soft" cases. It doesn't make sense to include overheated (ruined) cases in a discussion of methods that don't overheat cases.

 

[DanConzo]

Blaster37--I grew up 150 yards from a coalmine, there was an alley behind the yard where a old Blacksmith had his shop, forge, anvils, the whole 9 yards, he hardened all the picks and drills and other tools for the coalmine and the miners, he could make a knife that was practically indestructable and hold an edge very well, he didn't have tempilaq or even a thermometer and his work was top notch, but thanks for your expert advice, it sure might help someone getting into this annealing process.

 

[jlow]

I know there is a lot of debate about whether the “accuracy” of the machine based annealing is necessary. I am no expert but I will share with you my thinking logic on this.

So people who neck turn to get constant neck tension work hard to get neck that have thickness variation of 0.003” because this will reduce the uneven hold the neck on the bullet and so giving a more even and reproducible neck tension.

In the same way, if the degree of springback of the neck which is affected by annealing and affects how hard the neck grips the bullet will also affects neck tension. Anyone who has seated a bullet into a really dead soft case will tell you the seating effort difference between that and a properly annealed case is quite dramatic. So I think keeping the degree of springback as close as possible should also give a person again more consistent neck tension.

So why be so accurate in one but so inaccurate in the other if both of them affects the same thing?

How do you know how inaccurate the different methods of annealing are? What are you using to quantify them?

Lets ignore "dead soft" cases. It doesn't make sense to include overheated (ruined) cases in a discussion of methods that don't overheat cases.

THAT my friend is the $64,000 question – well asked!

So when I anneal with the BenchSource, using two torches to get more even annealing because it covers both sides of the case, I generally run about 2-3 seconds. If you agree that I can keep the flames consistent and their distance from the case also consistent, then the absolute degree of annealing and therefore the resulting “softness” is completely dependent on the annealing time.

Now, if you stop and look back at the neck turning which we are using to control neck thickness and let’s just say the necks are 0.012” thick and we can turn them to 0.0003” accuracy then the % error would be about 2.5%.

So going back to annealing, if the annealing time is say 2.5 seconds, to get the same % error for annealing you would need to be able to reproducibly anneal your case with an error of 0.06 seconds. Even if you assume that using one torch and you go double the time i.e. 5.0 seconds, you still need to be able to reproducibly anneal within 0.13 seconds. I don’t know about you but I know I cannot get that kind of precision where I am looking at a stopwatch or listening to a metronome and get that case onto the flame AND get it off with the same degree of precision.

The reason that you can get that degree of accuracy using an automated rig like the BenchSource is because the dwell time at the flame is in fact automated.

BTW, I only include the dead soft case to show that over annealing can make a significant difference in neck tension. You obviously don’t need to go all the way there to have an effect just as you don’t need to cut your neck so unevenly that one side is twice as thick as the other.

Not saying this is right but at least thinking through it logically, this is what I came up with.