reloading without sizing the neck?

[Rsadams]

That's not good...

 

[clowdis]

Most shooters can't measure .00035 much less in someplace they can't see. The Houston warehouse article was a great article, I've read it many times.

 

[mikecr]

Some of us can.
If your round chambers with ease, there is enough clearance to safely fire the round.

 

[bluestreakrem]

Some of us can.
If your round chambers with ease, there is enough clearance to safely fire the round.

I'm not disagreeing with you but I do what to clarify the word "ease" as it's meaning can be subjective as determined by the shooter.
Remember..............In Bolt Action guns there is a camming effect in addition to the added leverage of the bolt handle when you close the bolt.
In place of the word "ease" .........I would say that...........If your round chambers "without any noticeable increase of bolt handle force as compared to a round that has been neck and/or body sized"....... there is enough clearance to safely fire the round.
If there is ANY noticeable increase in bolt closing force, the round is being squeezed somewhere in the chamber. That somewhere just might be at the juncture of the neck and the end of the chamber which is pinching the bullet into the case. That can build pressure.
During every rifle case reload............Always make sure the case is below max.. O.A.L. to avoid the above condition.

 

[Dusty Stevens]

Tony Boyer's book: "The Book of Rifle Accuracy" makes for a much better "mentor guide" then Dave Scott's article: "Secrets of the Warehouse", in my opinion, that's oppositions are more modern in terms of current day technology, proven results, and accuracy contributes.

Truth and facts in tonys book that can actually be reproduced

 

[Texas10]

Virgil's efforts (secrets of the houston warehouse)were focused on uncovering methodologies that contributed to extreme shot to shot consistency. What I believe his neck preparation and bullet seating procedures exposed was that neck tension plays a significant role in shot to shot consistency. It was not regarded as a blueprint for others to follow. Don't forget, he cleaned after every 5 shots, then fired one fouling round before shooting 5 for record.

Boyer, on the other hand, gives good advice that most hand loaders can follow and replicate with their equipment. Good book!

 

[mikecr]

Did Tony speak to 'reloading without sizing the neck'?
The subject at hand

 

[mikecr]

I assume you have the book then. Did he speak to 'reloading without sizing the neck'?

 

[dcali]

Most shooters can't measure .00035 much less in someplace they can't see. The Houston warehouse article was a great article, I've read it many times.

Keep in mind that .00035 is per side - so .0007" total clearance on the diameter. That's enough clearance to fit a precisely turned neck into without any interference. If someone says they're measuring clearances to .0001" then I'm going to call BS, but "about .0007" I think is fair. That's basically saying "as tight as I could get it without it starting to rub".

 

[Texas10]

Did Tony speak to 'reloading without sizing the neck'?
The subject at hand

Boyer did not. On page 155 of his book, he states "Well maintained cases are one of the obvious things you needed to maintain peak accuracy.Three areas to watch are headspace, overall length and neck tension"

In Neck Tension (pg 158 & 159) he turns necks for .0025 to .0045 neck tension using a bushing die, assuming .0005 spring back in new, factory annealed brass.

This spring back is what Virgil King made use of in his case prep, only he held clearances to .00075 to the chamber wall. In his study, he eliminated the sizing of the brass as a variable that is hard to control once brass has been worked a few times. As I recall, he got about 25 cycles out of the brass before neck tension became unreliable due to brass work hardening.

Therefore, to answer the OP's question, yes, you can do without sizing necks if you also prep the case to make use of springback and your chamber is appropriately cut.

Otherwise, a loose bullet in the case can become a problem if ejecting a live round AND you're seating bullets into the lands. The bullet can remain lodged in the barrel and spilled powder will be your clue to stop and remedy the situation before continuing on, otherwise a barrel burst is likely.

 

[Dusty Stevens]

Boyer did not. On page 155 of his book, he states "Well maintained cases are one of the obvious things you needed to maintain peak accuracy.Three areas to watch are headspace, overall length and neck tension"

In Neck Tension (pg 158 & 159) he turns necks for .0025 to .0045 neck tension using a bushing die, assuming .0005 spring back in new, factory annealed brass.

This spring back is what Virgil King made use of in his case prep, only he held clearances to .00075 to the chamber wall. In his study, he eliminated the sizing of the brass as a variable that is hard to control once brass has been worked a few times. As I recall, he got about 25 cycles out of the brass before neck tension became unreliable due to brass work hardening.

Therefore, to answer the OP's question, yes, you can do without sizing necks if you also prep the case to make use of springback and your chamber is appropriately cut.

Otherwise, a loose bullet in the case can become a problem if ejecting a live round AND you're seating bullets into the lands. The bullet can remain lodged in the barrel and spilled powder will be your clue to stop and remedy the situation before continuing on, otherwise a barrel burst is likely.

its funny how many versions of this story he told. BR shooters that went to matches 15-20yrs ago got to hear the rest of the story from the others that were there that competed in matches

 

[HTSmith]

@mikecr - yes, I have the book. No he does not speak to: "reloading without sizing the neck".
Let me know of any books/literature on that topic (but only if the contents extend into benchrest accuracy (particularly LR-BR)).

Hope I'm not overstepping, but "fitted necks" are discussed in The Ulimate in Rifle Accuracy by Glenn Newick in the chapter on case preparation. He doesn't recommend for or against it but apparently it was used by some competitors in the 80's. He does state that done incorrectly it can be dangerous.

 

[mikecr]

Keep in mind that .00035 is per side - so .0007" total clearance on the diameter. That's enough clearance to fit a precisely turned neck into without any interference.

For fitted I maintain 0.0005" total. The chamber neck itself expands some tiny amount, maybe ~0.0001-0.0002", but I've set my neck thickness high enough to spring back this 0.0007" total.

I say easy because it's opposite of difficult.
The necks never size up or down, with firing or bullet seating, so they don't break grain structure to harden. It's true tension, ~0.0005" spring back force, that stays forever unchanged. The necks seal immediately, and combined with tight chamber end clearance, carbon blowback is mitigated from the git-go. So chamber neck stays clean. No additions of annealing, trimming, or sizing.

It holds with fitted case body area as well, but you have to build the gun for this, understanding that brass wants to go where it's been. Like shoulder bumping demonstrates, once you've ever had to size, you will always have to. And the more you size, the more you will have to.
The chamber has to be fitted to NEW brass, and you have to ensure that brass dimensions never change. Not even once.

As far as doing something incorrectly; consider the last error you made. Think about all the efforts it took on your part -to screw up. Stop doing that

 

[Dusty Stevens]

@mikecr -
With your method you describe to "fitted necks", how many shots in a string can you shoot before the brass spring back consistency is effected and depleting? And doesn't the ambient temperature also limit the string size for spring back consistency?

What I remember from "back in the day" those that played with "fitted necks" expressing that barrel/chamber heat played a big role to brass spring back consistency, greatly limiting there string sizes (which was also ambient dependent).

and the guys that experimented with fitted necks, as they described the process, would finally say just dont do it. Back in the days when a .350 agg would win it was more popular

 

[dcali]

Does .001" count as "fitted"? If so, I was able to get good groups doing it (with a .30 BR benchrest rifle). I also neck sized (this was "back in the day" - I no longer do that or use clearances that small - just too much fiddling and too many things to go wrong, and I haven't noticed that groups are any worse).

But I didn't *have* to size the necks - that always bothered me because if they're coming out of the rifle with enough spring back to hold a bullet, how much am I really sizing them in a die? It just seems like so much precision is needed that the benefits are dubious. Is it really more consistent tension than letting it go a few thou and then sizing it back? I don't know. I'm not sure if brass is consistent enough to get there.

 

[AckleymanII]

I and a bunch of people were shooting fitted necks in Registered BR in the mid 80's. It is a lot of work to say the least. I and shooting buddies ran .0002 clearance on a loaded round. Chambers had to be measured with gauge pins to assure that the reamer had not cut under size or over size. Reamer design regarding radius of neck and shoulder became a topic of major concern. Cleaning brass necks with steel wool was a no no.

Constant chamber cleaning, brass flow, was a nightmare. At the time, we figured we were duplicating what the "talking heads" were doing to achieve the ultimate accuracy in the Warehouse.

In a short time, about 6 months, I abandoned the process as my aggs were going up. We were still agging .210 or less, but that was not good enough, and I felt un accounted flyers were killing us all following the procedure.

I went back to a .001 total clearance on a loaded round, and I felt like my aggs improved sizing with Wilson bushings.

 

[Dusty Stevens]

I and a bunch of people were shooting fitted necks in Registered BR in the mid 80's. It is a lot of work to say the least. I and shooting buddies ran .0002 clearance on a loaded round. Chambers had to be measured with gauge pins to assure that the reamer had not cut under size or over size. Reamer design regarding radius of neck and shoulder became a topic of major concern. Cleaning brass necks with steel wool was a no no.

Constant chamber cleaning, brass flow, was a nightmare. At the time, we figured we were duplicating what the "talking heads" were doing to achieve the ultimate accuracy in the Warehouse.

In a short time, about 6 months, I abandoned the process as my aggs were going up. We were still agging .210 or less, but that was not good enough, and I felt un accounted flyers were killing us all following the procedure.

I went back to a .001 total clearance on a loaded round, and I felt like my aggs improved sizing with Wilson bushings.

Actual witnessed zeros have been shot in the beggs tunnel. You ought to study up on what has been done there if you want some good reading. Fitted necks are not really what people are led to believe- theres one step always left out and thats what will keep people from getting hurt and thats the inside neck boring that slip fits the bullet at exactly zero touch on a step.

 

[AckleymanII]

None of us bored the inside of our necks. We had neck checkers made with the reamer that we dropped our loaded rounds in to make sure that there was not an interference fit in the loaded round dimension and the chamber dimension.

I would never use a fitted neck situation again, just way too much trouble for any gain.