In the newest issue of Handloader, John Barsness tests case prepping theories. He mentions shooting a series of groups using a Remington 40X .223. All brass tested was once fired in that rifle.

Batch one was weighed to a tolerance of .2 grains. Pretty precise! This batch also had the flash holes deburred, and the primer pockets uniformed.

Batch two had none of the above modifications, and varied more than .5 grains in weight.

Both batches were trimmed for uniform length, and necks were chamfered inside and out.

Long story short: The unprepped batch shot the best average of five different five shot groups. The prepped case batch was close, but behind by a notable margin.

The groups fired with the unprepped brass came in at an average .24".

I know some of you don't particularly agree with Barsness all of the time (or any of the time!), but I think these results are quite interesting.

Barsness mentions that he achieved similar results in a test he performed a while back.

He has some controversial, and quite compelling points on rifle accuracy. Barsness' contentions echo those of Boots Obermeyer and many other high power and long range competitors regarding the meticulous preparation of brass.

Dan Newberry
green 788

Read the thread on "Prepping Brass." It's covered there.

Dan -

I read that article, and I'm wondering if all the time I spend on the cases is worth it now It seems hard to believe that cases that are closely matched for weight, etc.., will not shoot better than a mish-mash.

I do recall him saying that the bullets that Juenke(?sp)'ed the best, shot the best. Have to find me one of those machines.

R-WEST

[ 07-16-2002, 22:31: Message edited by: R-WEST ]

I am one of those reloaders who is meticulous about consistency in handloads ie. weighing cases after primer and flash hole uniforming, neck turning, use of bench rest primers, weighing powder charges rather than throwing, inside and outside chamfer, segregating cases by number of times fired, etc.etc.

If anything l plan to continue this even if it is proven that there are limited benefits. Its just that confidence thing and sometimes what we believe to be true sometimes helps

Chico,

I agree that confidence in a load is a good thing, and one thing is for sure: Case prep certainly doesn't *harm* anything, and it may help for some load recipes.

RWest,

I am using your same charge of 57.5 grains of H4350 in my 30-06, and am having splendid results. I nailed a groundhog at near 400 yards with my unassuming little Remington ADL 700 with that load! It's my opinion that this particular charge of H4350 in the 30-06/165 grain load configuration is at or close to perfect. I've tested charge variations as low as 57.2 and as high as 57.8 with no deviation in POI beyond MOA. As I mentioned in another thread, the 57.5 grain charge of H4350 actually shot a nice, sub MOA group at 225 yards with three Winchester cased loads and two Remington cased loads. If you have an opportunity to try a couple of mismatched cases in your next group, please do so and post your results.

I believe that the issue of case prep is as simple as this: The less optimized the powder charge, the more difference you'll note in meticulous case preparation. Without a doubt, the more uniform each component can be made, the more consistent the performance.

I think what we may fail to realize, however, is that the subtle variations in unprepped cases are of less consequence than other factors, such as "load balance" as Sierra techs refer to it, which simply means having the best amount of powder in the case for the application at hand. Too little powder can create inconsistencies in ignition, and too much can create pressure related problems that rob accuracy.

Let's do this: Let's take a batch of cases and prepare half of them to the hilt, and do nothing to the other half. Trim all to equal length and chamfer in/out. Tumble clean so that all cases look similar. Load all with the same recipe.

THEN...

Put ten prepped cases into one bag, and ten unprepped cases into another. Put a lable into each bag reading either "prepped" or "unprepped." Take the two bags to your wife, a friend, or whoever, and have that person remove the lables from each bag (not in your presence!), and switch each lable, calling one lot the "A group" and the other lot the "B group." Have that person secretly note which letter group represents which batch of loads (prepped or unprepped).

Go to the range and fire alternately from each bag into two seperate groups. You'll have an "A group" target and a "B group" target. The reason for alternate fire is that you don't want to disadvantage the second group fired due to an overly fouled bore.

Come home with the two ten shot groups, measure, and then say "envelope please..."

Chico hit on a very important point regarding confidence. We do often shoot better if we *expect* to shoot better. The method I suggest here should make for the fairest evaluation.

Dan Newberry
green 788

[ 07-16-2002, 23:53: Message edited by: green 788 ]

I conducted a similare test with my brass in three different guns and my results mirrored those of Mr. Barsness. Now all I do is give my brass a light cleaning with 0000 S/W and Champher and trim as needed. I did this long ago on the advise of the techs at Lee.

This gentleman talked about using a candle to anneal cases,instead of a propane torch,one may be is not "hot" enough,the second may be too"hot"???.He said without good bullets(Juenked) uniform neck thickness and consistent ignition,all the rest amount not worth the try.He said more than often the expander ball pulls the neck crooked;doesnt agree wih neck sizing,it makes the neck out of alignment with the case body.Concerning neck turning I quote"I used to turn necks,but no more.As a general rule,brass with bad necks is lopsided all the way down through the body.It may be straight agter its fired but wont be after full-lengh sizing".

I dont do the more articulate things but I also dont understand what we are to deduct from these results. Maybe I should go out of my way to find uneven brass or bang it up a little bit before reloading They need to narrow down the cause of the discrepancies further through more tests IMHO. Do the same things but only one at a time.