why is random fired case sticking in chamber...no heavy bolt lift

[dedogs]

I would then use CatShooter's method to find proper fit. He has eons of experience with the .220 Swift. This can be done quite easily without the Hornady "headspace gauge" if you remove the firing pin from the bolt.

The OP has trouble interpreting die set-up instructions, and you want to have him remove his FP spring? LOL
Not only would that be terrible advice, as we all know such a method for checking H/S is inexact, but your asking him to check it with used brass fired from a different chamber....FLS or not, it is not a reliable method.
If you're going to give advice, you better make sure it is safe and proper.

LH, I don't believe that's what I suggested. What I said was to use CatShooters method to set up his die AFTER they had been fully re-sized, checked for incipient head separation and fired in HIS CHAMBER. And then re-checked for incipient head separation.

If you want to get on me about something I've suggested please don't twist around the order in which I suggest them.
Please explain to me why removing the firing pin from the bolt and then and using bolt closure to see if you have sized the case enough is wrong. Seems to me the easiest way for a fellow without the proper tools to find the best fit for his chamber.

 

[LHSmith]

I perhaps was a little to harsh towards the OP in my last post. I apologize for that. I have edited that post, and wish the OP well in his future reloading experiences.
A good read on setting cartridge H/S is found in "The Rifleman's Journal" by German Salazar under the article Setting Proper Headspace on Resized Cases." - Google it.

 

[dedogs]

I am always amazed when shooters are told not to measure. Using the rifle as a gauge assumes a proper relation between the size of the chamber and the dimensions of the die that we have no way of knowing from the information that has been provided. I have seen a lot of experienced shooters overlook this detail. There can be no argument against measuring bump, yet people act as if not measuring is some sort of virtue. As you may surmise, I disagree.

Boyd I am here trying to learn also. My question is how is measuring shoulder set back with a Hornady "headspace gauge" different from using the bolt of the rifle. Aren't they actually doing the same thing? I respect your knowledge and hope you can explain the difference to me. It seems to me using the chamber of the rifle is at least as accurate if not more so since it is actually measuring the entire case. Very curious. dedogs

 

[CatShooter]

You are correct in your statement IMO as far as the issue with the brass giving anyone problems. That is true. It has to be experienced to learn it's not a good thing to try to use brass from another rifle. Don't ask me how I know. LoL been there done that
Don't let this leave a bad taste. A lot of them can't help it.

I would disagree with that - if you have a rifle that brass is hard to come by, then you take what you can get and fix it... or you don't shoot it.

Knowledge is never a bad thing to have. I have a bench rifle that "good" brass is pure hell to come by - when I find it, I take it and make it better.

Also, last fall, I was given a large quantity of Norma .220 Swift, that someone had tried to make into 220 Wilson Arrow.

They did a Godawful horrid job and wound up with cases who's shoulders were wrecked with hydraulic dents.

Besides the Godawful oil dents (they are ALL like the above case), the cases have 170 thou of excess headspace from the attempt to make them into Wilson Arrow.

They are ready to go to the range, and when I get home, they will be a bunch of perfect, Norma .220 Swift cases, with a perfect fit to the chamber (their new home) ...

Knowledge is NEVER a bad thing, even if you don't use it.

 

[dedogs]

LHSmith, apology accepted, I will go and try to find that article. I may have more questions.

 

[Tim Singleton]

You are correct in your statement IMO as far as the issue with the brass giving anyone problems. That is true. It has to be experienced to learn it's not a good thing to try to use brass from another rifle. Don't ask me how I know. LoL been there done that
Don't let this leave a bad taste. A lot of them can't help it.

I would disagree with that - if you have a rifle that brass is hard to come by, then you take what you can get and fix it... or you don't shoot it.

Knowledge is never a bad thing to have. I have a bench rifle that "good" brass is pure hell to come by - when I find it, I take it and make it better.

Also, last fall, I was given a large quantity of Norma .220 Swift, that someone had tried to make into 220 Wilson Arrow.

They did a Godawful horrid job and wound up with cases who's shoulders were wrecked with hydraulic dents.

Besides the Godawful oil dents (they are ALL like the above case), the cases have 170 thou of excess headspace from the attempt to make them into Wilson Arrow.

They are ready to go to the range, and when I get home, they will be a bunch of perfect, Norma .220 Swift cases, with a perfect fit to the chamber (their new home) ...

Knowledge is NEVER a bad thing, even if you don't use it.

If you think using brass from a different chamber in another rifle is a good thing. Then yes we disagree. If you have no other choice then it's a different issue. But still not ideal by any means

 

[LHSmith]

Please explain to me why removing the firing pin from the bolt and then and using bolt closure to see if you have sized the case enough is wrong. Seems to me the easiest way for a fellow without the proper tools to find the best fit for his chamber.

Been searching for an article that can explain better than I....but until I can find it here goes: Many BR shooters(short range use your method (Hopefully after setting up their dies using a gauge).....but it is not a precise way of measuring due to ejector spring tension, case to case variance in dimension and squareness, and the "feel" of the bolt resistance is subjective and rather best "learned by experience". Hope this explains why some of us feel it's not the best method for newby's.

 

[dedogs]

LH, I have used the Hornady "headspace gauge" to determine shoulder set back on my 6.5/284 with minimum chamber. Yes I know that this is not the same as a factory chamber-- it's smaller. Some times after a few firings and after checking shoulder set back the cartridges still chamber hard. I attribute this to the base of the case swelling after repeated firings. The solution for me has always been either run the full length die down further or go to a body die. I know about using a small base die but do not have one--not even sure if they are made for this case. So I adjust my die until the empty case chambers with little or no resistance. What am I doing wrong?

 

[dedogs]

You are correct in your statement IMO as far as the issue with the brass giving anyone problems. That is true. It has to be experienced to learn it's not a good thing to try to use brass from another rifle. Don't ask me how I know. LoL been there done that
Don't let this leave a bad taste. A lot of them can't help it.

I would disagree with that - if you have a rifle that brass is hard to come by, then you take what you can get and fix it... or you don't shoot it.

Knowledge is never a bad thing to have. I have a bench rifle that "good" brass is pure hell to come by - when I find it, I take it and make it better.

Also, last fall, I was given a large quantity of Norma .220 Swift, that someone had tried to make into 220 Wilson Arrow.

They did a Godawful horrid job and wound up with cases who's shoulders were wrecked with hydraulic dents.

Besides the Godawful oil dents (they are ALL like the above case), the cases have 170 thou of excess headspace from the attempt to make them into Wilson Arrow.

They are ready to go to the range, and when I get home, they will be a bunch of perfect, Norma .220 Swift cases, with a perfect fit to the chamber (their new home) ...

Knowledge is NEVER a bad thing, even if you don't use it.

If you think using brass from a different chamber in another rifle is a good thing. Then yes we disagree. If you have no other choice then it's a different issue. But still not ideal by any means

Tim, I'm pretty sure all the guys snapping up .223 ammo and an outfit called the "Huntin Shack" in Stevensville, Mt. would tend to disagree with you. As well as any commercial re-loader. Hell even Cooper Arms uses once fired brass in some of their loads.

 

[LHSmith]

^^^^^ Not intending to be a smart***, but the problem is the minimum spec chamber.....they are problematic unless you have the corresponding re-size reamer made that closely matches your chamber reamer. Not sure if he makes them in that caliber but Paul Becigneal (PBike257) makes ring dies that supposedly reduce the base portion of the case....or have a reamer run thru that more closely matches your die. I would have to think you are setting the shoulder back too far using your current set-up.

 

[LHSmith]

Tim, I'm pretty sure all the guys snapping up .223 ammo and an outfit called the "Huntin Shack" in Stevensville, Mt. would tend to disagree with you. As well as any commercial re-loader. Hell even Cooper Arms uses once fired brass in some of their loads.

Tim and I speak from an accuracy viewpoint.....we both compete in shortrange BR. What we are saying is for those wanting optimum accuracy from those rifles capable of consistent sub 1/2 moa using brass from another rifle is going to incur never-ending problems.

 

[Tim Singleton]

You are correct in your statement IMO as far as the issue with the brass giving anyone problems. That is true. It has to be experienced to learn it's not a good thing to try to use brass from another rifle. Don't ask me how I know. LoL been there done that
Don't let this leave a bad taste. A lot of them can't help it.

I would disagree with that - if you have a rifle that brass is hard to come by, then you take what you can get and fix it... or you don't shoot it.

Knowledge is never a bad thing to have. I have a bench rifle that "good" brass is pure hell to come by - when I find it, I take it and make it better.

Also, last fall, I was given a large quantity of Norma .220 Swift, that someone had tried to make into 220 Wilson Arrow.

They did a Godawful horrid job and wound up with cases who's shoulders were wrecked with hydraulic dents.

Besides the Godawful oil dents (they are ALL like the above case), the cases have 170 thou of excess headspace from the attempt to make them into Wilson Arrow.

They are ready to go to the range, and when I get home, they will be a bunch of perfect, Norma .220 Swift cases, with a perfect fit to the chamber (their new home) ...

Knowledge is NEVER a bad thing, even if you don't use it.

If you think using brass from a different chamber in another rifle is a good thing. Then yes we disagree. If you have no other choice then it's a different issue. But still not ideal by any means

Tim, I'm pretty sure all the guys snapping up .223 ammo and an outfit called the "Huntin Shack" in Stevensville, Mt. would tend to disagree with you. As well as any commercial re-loader. Hell even Cooper Arms uses once fired brass in some of their loads.

Tell that to the OP

Once fired 556 brass being used in a large mil spec chamber doesn't usually give me any problems.

 

[dedogs]

^^^^^ Not intending to be a smart***, but the problem is the minimum spec chamber.....they are problematic unless you have the corresponding re-size reamer made that closely matches your chamber reamer. Not sure if he makes them in that caliber but Paul Becigneal (PBike257) makes ring dies that supposedly reduce the base portion of the case....or have a reamer run thru that more closely matches your die. I would have to think you are setting the shoulder back too far using your current set-up.

Lh, Thank you for that insight. It is a problem that has been bugging me for a while. Should have asked on here sooner. I am familiar with Paul and have a set of his shoulder set back dies for forming wildcats. They are great-- work just as advertised. I will check and see if he makes any small base bushings for my case. Also Boyd Allen came up with a way of doing this with a modified .45 ACP die but I don't remember what case he was working on. I thought at the time it was a slick trick though.
Thanks for the input. Very helpful.dedogs

 

[Tim Singleton]

The modifies .45 die works with the .308 family of brass.

I have one of Pauls ring dies for my ppc it works well.

 

[dedogs]

Thanks Tim I will look into Paul's ring dies. dedogs

 

[/VH]

Boyd I am here trying to learn also. My question is how is measuring shoulder set back with a Hornady "headspace gauge" different from using the bolt of the rifle. Aren't they actually doing the same thing? I respect your knowledge and hope you can explain the difference to me. It seems to me using the chamber of the rifle is at least as accurate if not more so since it is actually measuring the entire case. Very curious. dedogs

[/quote]

LH, I have used the Hornady "headspace gauge" to determine shoulder set back on my 6.5/284 with minimum chamber. Yes I know that this is not the same as a factory chamber-- it's smaller. Some times after a few firings and after checking shoulder set back the cartridges still chamber hard. I attribute this to the base of the case swelling after repeated firings. The solution for me has always been either run the full length die down further or go to a body die. I know about using a small base die but do not have one--not even sure if they are made for this case. So I adjust my die until the empty case chambers with little or no resistance. What am I doing wrong?

dedogs,

If you look at your two posts above, I think you will find that you have answered your own question about using a shoulder comparator gauge.

With the 6.5/284, you know that there are issues other than case (base to shoulder datum) length because you have measured it. If you had only attempted using your chamber as a gauge, how would you know if you are setting the shoulder back excessively when you continue to feel resistance attempting to chamber sized brass.

I do also use the chamber method along with measuring with a comparator and it seems to work well for me, especially for the rifles that I have custom sizing dies for. Where the relationship of sizing die to chamber is relatively "unknown", I recommend measuring shoulder set back with a comparator regardless of "chambering feel" for the very reason you explained in your post.

Also, regarding the "solution" you mentioned; I would remove 'running the FL die down further' from being an option and rely on correcting the real issue of body sizing, without causing excessive headspace, which as I'm sure you know, can cause several other issues, some of which can be dangerous, as well as detrimental to accuracy.

I hope this helps,

 

[fguffey]

I am here trying to learn also

VH, a smith should be able to measure the length of the chamber from the shoulder/datum to the bolt face. If that statement was true a reloader could have figured out "THE HOW" by now. I can measure the length of a chamber three different ways without a head space gage.

Head space gages come in three different lengths, go, no and beyond, for the 30/06 that is three possible lengths out of 14. I want to know the length of the chamber in thousandths, I do not want to know if the bolt will close on a go-gage. I can modify a go-gage to a go to-infinity gage. That is one gage that measure the length of the chamber in thousandths from minimum length to infinity or a more practical field reject length. There was one smith doing the same thing with a different gage in the 40s, he may not have been liked but he was famous.

F. Guffey

 

[searcher]

dedogs; I think the point to be made on the Hornady headspace guage VS using the "bolt method" is that the Hornady guage is very simplistic and is a bit foolproof. It is also inexpensive. The "bolt method" is probably the preferred method of experienced match shooters with bolt guns. I use this method for my PPC and 6BR. A shooter using this method can also attest that brass will spring back over several days and when he goes to load a round that would have been a "perfect" fit the day of a match, creates binding when closing the bolt a few weeks later. Loads often do not shoot consistently when the brass is "jambed" into position. It also entails constant manipulation of the die setting from loading to loading due to changes of brass hardness and brass flow to the neck area through firing cycles, unless one also minimizes the effects of this by annealing after every firing. The asker is loading for a varmint rifle - not a match rifle. it is not to say one can't also set the bump in this matter for varminting - but one will need to set it back a bit further. And how do you accurately measure that additional setback, once you have lost contact with the neck? Guess? These are a few reasons, I am sure, why many (myself included) would not condone the "bolt method" for this newcomer to reloading - and for a varmint rifle that will probably be pre-loaded for. That also does not get into him possibly having to purchase a bolt disassembly tool, etc.. I won't disagree with you on the method - at both work great. One may just be better suited for a use and with the level of experience of the user in mind.