It may have become apparent that I'm some what a nut about rifle accuracy. I'm hoping I'll be given information about prepping cases that I don't use, or a better way to do it. This is how I prep cases now.
1) clean all cases in tumbler.
2) Size cases to headstamp.
3) Use a .084" drill bit to check flashholes. Any
case that the bit enters is discarded.
4) Use a .081" bit to uniform all flashholes.
5) Back into the tumbler.
6) Weigh all cases, set weight standard. discard.
any cases that don't meet standard.
7) Uniform primer pockets.
8) Deburr interior flashholes.
9) Size cases to whatever I'm going to use them
for. Also size six rejects.
All of my sizing dies have been adjusted to the headspace of the chamber. The Redding body die has been adjusted as well.
10) Trim cases to within .002" of actual chamber
length. Including rejects.
11) Use rejects to adjust outside neck turning
tools cutting depth and length. Junk rejects.
12) Turn all case necks.
13) Last sizing with body die.
14) Back into the tumbler.
15) Case inspection is a constant ongoing thing,
this is the last inspect before loading.
16) load and fire form cases.
17) Inspect cases.
18) Decap, clean primer pockets, neck size and
start on test loads.
If any one knows of anything I'm missing or a easier way to do things let me know. I need all the help I can get. Thanks in advance.

What you are missing is reading the recent article in Handloader by Barsness. He claims that prepping doesn't really matter and that even benchresters are getting away from it. In his recent test he claims that firing 100 case, half of which were prepped and sorted and the other as received, the unprepped cases were actually MORE accurate than the prepped ones by a few thousands of an inch.

He says it's more important for the neck walls to be within .001" of each other.

I've prepped to the extent of uniforming primer pockets and deburring flash holes and then "fire sorting" them. That is, marking any cases that threw flyers out of a group. If it does it twice, the case is culled. He, Barsness, may be on to something. I've also sorted according to weight and checked for uniform case length just for my own peace of mind. I'll probably continue, but I think he may be correct.

BOB338,
Perhaps as I have aged I've become more cynical, especially when it come to gun mag writers. I will agree that unless a rifle is tuned, it's a waste of time. However, over the years I've learned that every step I've listed have had a positive effect on accuracy. In the rare cases that they didn't help, they sure didn't hurt anything. That's why I'm looking for additional procedures and/or methods. After fifty years of reloading, the main thing I've learned is how little I know. Thanks for the article info. I'll find it and read it. Have fun all.

Hey Big Bob, Bob338 and I've been discussing the Barsness article through email and I think he is going to run a couple of "Tests" to see how it goes for him.

I'm all for whatever a person wants to do as long as it is SAFE.

As for me, I'll continue to do a full case prep whether it gains anything or not. I do it because it gives me confidence in my final Hunting Loads that everything has been done to make them as close to the same as possible. Consistency being the strong motivation.

In looking at your list, it seems that you are talking about "Range Pick-Ups". I used Range Pick-Ups for a long time in practice loads, but have pretty much given them up. The only exception is if I actually see the guy shooting the "Factory Loads", and then I'll occasionally use them.

Concerning your list above, I'd move your #18 into the #2 position and use one of the special Universal Decapping Dies.

And, I'd move #6(Weight Sorting) at the end. I want to do ALL the uniforming in the beginning and then do the weight segregation. Depending on your Lot Sizes, you can often get 15-18 real close together.

But, if you ever shoot "against me", don't bother with any of this case prep stuff.

BOTTOM LINE: The less resilient the load recipe, the more difference you'll see with attention to minor details in case prep, etc.

If you have an OCW load, (an acronym I coined to mean "optimal charge weight,") you'll have much better day to day performance from your load, and it will be *much* more forgiving of case variations and lot to lot variations in powder, primers, and bullets.

I've posted here regarding my procedure for the development of an OCW load, which is based on the Creighton Audette method. I believe my method is easier to execute, and provides more credible information. The thread should still be there, just do a search...

One example of such a load is the 168 grain Sierra Matchking in the .308 Winchester using IMR 4895. At 300 yards, a group consisting of one shot with 43.3 grains, a second shot with 43.6 grains, and a third shot with 43.9 grains came in at 1.5 inches. That's 1/2 MOA, in spite of a total powder variation of .6 grains.

A second example is my 30-06, Remington 700. I've been doing some load development with H4350 and the Sierra 165 grain Gameking. Two days ago, using a charge of 57.5 grains of the H4350 (which I now believe is the OCW for that load) I shot a 7/8" four shot group at 225 yards. This was using once fired Winchester brass. I've shot tighter groups with that rifle, but wait! There's more...

I then fired two shots into that same group using REMINGTON cases, which weighed about ten grains more than the Winchsters. The Remington cased loads were of course using the same 57.5 grain powder charge and 165 grain bullet. The two shots fell right into the group, so well that I couldn't discern which holes they had made from the holes made by the Winchester cases.

Folks, this is the kind of load you're after, whether it be a hunting load, target load, or whatever. I call such a load "resilient load."

Take your favorite load for your favorite rifle. Then load a few rounds with a 1% reduced charge, and some with a 1% increased charge. If these won't fall neatly into a group with the control load (your usual recipe) at 300 yards, you don't have an optimized load, and you're not deep in that "accuracy groove."

The varied charge weights mentioned above will simulate differences in pressure caused by variations in loading components, as well as variations in temperatures outside. A OCW load will be able to tolerate temperature swings better than a non-optimized load will. And you can throw powder charges without worrying about a tenth of a grain or two.

Boots Obermeyer wrote a piece which should still be displayed at jarheard.com. He told of a high-power match he had won a few years ago. He had a box of meticuluously prepared ammunition, and had brought along a second box of "practice ammo," made without prepped brass, and without individually weighed powder charges. He realized at the end of the match that he had shot the entire match with his practice rounds! He mentions that he no longer goes to all of the trouble of weighing cases, et al...

Dan Newberry
green 788

Dan,
That was a very interesting post. I've felt that some of my loads were more "resilient" than others. I copied your post and will use it in the future.
I also liked the idea of fire sorting. Think I'll give that a try too.
Max

Big Bob,
I have a question for you about your preparation. Since I have never been that thourough about case prep I cant answer it for myself. My question is when all is said and done , how much better do the super prepped cases shoot than do the cases that have just been minimally prepped? I am curious to the difference.Thanks!!

HOTCORE,
The reason I cull by weight early in the list is because I tend to be a little lazy. Culling early eliminates a lot of effort on cases that will not make the weight cut. I donot use pickup cases. I order new cases, usually 100 at a time, and size them to remove dents and dings. I use a Forester case trimmer which requires a pilot be inserted into the mouth of the case. New cases come with some pretty good dents in the neck that would make it impossible to get a pilot onto the neck. Thank you for your suggestions. WOULDN'T IT BE GREAT IF WE COULD GET TOGETHER FOR A TURKEY SHOOT?

DAN,
I think we are both doing just about the same thing in a search for accuracy. To mix case brands and shoot into the same group is remarkable. I've never had simular results. That rifle is a keeper! Thanks for the imput.

MAX503,
Thanks for your imput.

I hope all of you have a good week and a great season.

Bob,

I don't think my rifle is that remarkable. I think it is the powder charge that is allowing this to occur. It would appear that 57.5 grains of H4350 in the 30-06 with the 165 grain Sierra (or perhaps any other decently made boattail bullet) is the optimal charge for that powder in that application.

If you fine tune by seating depth as the final step, you can tighten the group with the optimal powder charge.

I have a strong hunch that your rifle will perform the same as mine with the 57.5 grain charge of H4350. Numerous folks at the various sites I visit have mentioned good results with the 57.5 grain charge in this application. The Nosler #4 manual recommends 57.5 grains as their most accurate load tested using these components.

It's likely that your groups would open up a bit if you went to this charge weight, but that would be only temporary. If you then adjusted the seating depth to tune for tightness of group, you'd find that the group size would shrink.

Try mixing some cases and seeing how the 57.5 grain charge works. I've even noted that a *primer* swap does little to affect POI with this charge weight. Such a load builds a lot of confidence!

Let me know how things go if you choose to try this, okay? And thanks for the kind reply...

Dan Newberry
green 788

JIM81147,
I haven't run a comparision test with the two rifles, a .270 and a .30-06, yet. With test I've run in the past, the results depend a great deal on the quality of the cases I'm working with. With good brass loads group around an inch or slightly less. Groups with prepped cases usually run about half the size of prepped brass, if I neck size all cases. If the unprepped cases are full length resized groups don't seem to get under an inch and a half or two inches. If the brass quality is low, unprepped brass seem to shoot patterns rather than groups. A few years ago I ordered 500 .22-250 cases. The rifle had been tuned and was very accurate, but I couldn't get it to group less than four inches. When I checked the cases I found a glich that I'd never seen before. The thickness of the case necks varied .006", from .011" on one side of the neck to .017" thickness on the other side of the same case neck. The manufacture made it good, but it prompted me to make my .22-250 cases out of .243 cases. This gives me a neck thick enough to turn the outside of the necks to fit my chamber. Currently I'm working on a .270 and .30-06, both in Remington M-700 BDL. I'm making these cases out of Winchester brass for the .280 Rem. The .280 is .050" longer in the body than either the .270 or the '06. The .280s give me a longer case neck in both so I can trim for a length to fit both rifle chambers. This allows for a better grip on the bullet when seating the bullets to the lands. The accuracy of the '06 has resulted in the average of five five shot groups to be .247" with the Sierra 165 grain SPBT. Extreme spread average of the groups averaged 11.0fps. Standard deviation average is 5.1fps. I trim the cases to 2.510" for a chamber that is 2.517" long. Cases weigh 185.8 grains, +/- .4 grains. O.A.L. is 3.428" with the lands marking soot on the bullet, but not the bullet itself. That kind of accuracy makes all the work worth while. I'm not as far along with the .270 and would rather not quote verse and chapter just yet, but five shot groups are around .350" with the Nosler 130 grain Ballistic Tips. I've still a couple of steps to go as well as testing for seating depth.
The next step for the '06 is to test the 165 grain Nosler Partition, 150 grain Sierra flat base and boattail bullets as well as the Hornady 150 grain SST and Interlock bullets. HEY--- it keeps me out of the bars and away from the wild women. Have fun all.

If you are fortunate enough to use a cartridge that Lapua makes brass for you can save yourself a lot of work..it is the most consisent brass around.

"Fortunately, time will normally correct this misimpression as education/experience is gained."

Let us hope so...

If I gave the impression to anyone that conformity of brass was insignificant, I'm sorry for that. Certainly the more uniform the loading components, the more consistent the performance should be. My experience (and the experience of some very seasoned competetive shooters) has been that meticulous case preparation is often not the panacea that we believe it to be--especially when the powder charge is optimized. Again, the more precarious the load recipe, the more difference you'll see with meticulous case preparation.

I received the following email from Gerard Schultz regarding my method of load development, which he says is very similar to his:

Hello Dan,
Your method of load development is right on the money. I have designed 140 new bullets and developed optimal loads with them in even more calibres over the last 9 years and this method is the only way to go. Tuning a group by varying the load is a waste of time and components. If the col for a rifle is optimised, speed variations are of lesser importance. See the page below on our website where we recommend a very similar method.

http://gunlinks.zibycom.com/members/002245268/Site2/hvloadguide.html

Regards
Gerard

I post this email in hopes that my musings here won't be taken as the idle chatter of an uneducated rookie.

Check out this interesting Boots Obermeyer quote, taken from the article which can be found at

http://www.jarheadtop.com/article_handloading.shtml

"How critical should you be? Back in the old days, when we had just got around to loading from the rear end of the rifle, I carefully sorted some ammo for a Wednesday night practice. I had a box of 20 that everything was just perfect down to an equal weight of the assembled round. I shot a super score at 600 yards and being justly proud of it announced to everyone that I had shot this because of my total inspection and careful loads and I showed them the boxes sorted as to culls and best loads. Then was I shocked and still remember it well to this day. I had shot a box of culls by mistake. I thought the ammo I was shooting was the best and the only error would be me. I really bore down with full confidence in the ammo, but it wasn't the ammo that made the fine score. It was my shooting, the same thing that gave me bad scores. You constantly have to judge just how much gain there is in each of the loading details as to the time taken from practice."

Many others distinguished shooters are beginning to realize that with good load recipes, case prep becomes less of a factor in accuracy.

I hope this information is helpful,

Respectfully,
Dan Newberry

Hey Dan, You are still missing the "Point".

I've no argument at all with your concept of "Working Up A Load" that will work well in one specific rifle. You can call it OCW, a Developed Load, a Tuned Load, or whatever you choose.

There are as many ways to get to that "Best Load" as there are Reloaders. Granted some ways of getting there are SAFER, easier and better than others. But, I'm not being critical of your Load Development Method. Obviously it works well for you since I've seen some group sizes you have mentioned shooting in other Threads. And it is appropriate to say that is some "exceptional" shooting you are reporting.

Where your OCW becomes MUC(Magic Universal Charge) is when you "claim" the Load that works well in one rifle of a given caliber will work well in ALL rifles of that same caliber. That is just flat out wrong.

If in fact that was so, the Bullet Manufacturers could just write the MUC Load on the box and we could all toss away our Manuals. Same with the Case, Powder and Firearm Manufacturers.

I'd not been able to address the OCW(MUC) Load concept when you first brought it up because I was traveling back then.

For you to give others the impression that a MUC Load exists for each caliber is simply misleading. On the other hand, if I suggested such foolishness, that there actually exists such a thing as a MUC Load, it would be grossly irresponsible and dangerous.

I can give you example after example of actual "same caliber" rifles that prefer different Loads for the best accuracy. But, since you firmly believe otherwise, that gains nothing.

What I'd suggest you do is get a bunch of "Experienced Reloaders" on this Board with 30-06s(or any caliber you choose) to load-up some of your OCW(MUC) Loads and see if they all have the very best accuracy from that firearm they have ever had. Be sure to remember to tell them to "Work-Up" to it rather than just dumping it in and start blasting away.

Ask them to shoot a 10-shot group of their favorite "Accuracy Load" on a single Target. Do likewise on a separate Target with "your" OCW(MUC) Load. Disguard any fliers created due to flinch or known Shooter Error problems. Then measure the Groups and tell us how they did.

It is a waste of time. But it seems apparent that my just saying so based on over 4 decades of Handloading experience as well as ALL the various Loads listed in the actual Component Manufacturers Manuals is not going to be enough to convince you otherwise.

And, I do respect your resolve on this issue. It is good for people not to cave-in at the first inkling of someone disagreeing with them. At some point though, the facts will make it become obvious to you that there just is no such thing as an OCW(MUC) Load.

Best of luck to you on getting some "Experienced Reloaders" to try the Tests. I look forward to seeing the group sizes.

Okay, let's do it! I'll begin another thread and we'll see how it goes...

Sierra techs refer to the optimal charge of powder for a given recipe as "load balance." This simply means that there is a specific amount of powder for a given set of load components that will burn most efficiently, and be the most likely to yield consistent results. While some rifles will be exceptions, they are just that--exceptions.

We see 55 grains of IMR 4350 doing splendidly in the .270 with 130 grain bullets of various makers. I'll try to include .270 shooters in the test, and see how many come up with 55 grains of the IMR 4350 as the best load in their rifle. For years, Winchester loaded their 130 grain factory ammo with a 55 grain charge of IMR 4350. They had simply discovered that this charge was "most likely to succeed" in the largest number of rifles.

If your bullet seating depth is left constant, you may well have to increase or decrease the powder charge to tighten groups. However, if you begin with an optimal charge of powder, and then tune for group with OAL adjustments, you can get tight groups as well, and the final product will be a very tolerant or "resilient" load.

If your load will group MOA or better with a 1% increase and a 1% decrease of powder charge (fired into the same group) you have a good load. If your load won't pass this test, I believe redevelopment is necessary.

And I'm not kidding about the Remington cased loads I mentioned shooting into the same 1/2 MOA group at 225 yards as the Winchester cases loads. I will admit that I was as surprised as you are incredulous!

We'll see how things go with the test you propose. It sounds interesting, and fun...

Dan Newberry
green 788

Count me in on this little test if 25/06 data is desired.

Just love bein' a mad scientist!

~Holmes

THANK YOU,
This wide difference of opinion is exactly what I was hoping for. I don't intend to discard any of these suggestions out of hand, but rather to look at them, do some testing and incorperate some into my loading methods. One thing I've learned is that when you get to a point when you think you "KNOW IT ALL," you're in for trouble or something will open your eyes to how little you know. I hate to say this, but I've had to learn that lesson more than once. The heck of it, the price tag keeps getting higher.
HOTCORE,
Sounds as if you've fallen into a heck of a deal. If that .223 brass you bought is all police department brass I'd think that it will be one brand and lot. Perhaps even match grade brass. I'd use that type of pickup myself. The type of pickup I'd not use is what you can get at a public range. Lucky!

Thank you for your comments and tips. Please keep them coming, I'm not the brightest guy in the woods and can use all the help I can get.

Hotcore,

I thought you got your handle from a Speer bullet.

I see differently now ...

Please know that your contentions, in addition to being at odds with my own findings, are at odds with the opinions of more than one Sierra ballistics tech as well as the opinions of a man whom I find quite learned, Gerard Schultz of G.S. Custom bullets.

Somebody pass the cornbread...

Dan Newberry
green 788

HOT CORE,
I do a little consultation work for a couple of local police departments. Everyone of them buy large quanties and specify that the entire purchase be of the same make and lot. You probably have either Rem., Win. or Fed. A department here was using another brand and switched to a brand that uses the Sierra 69 grain matchking bullet. You may have struck it rich.

DAN,
Thank you for the input. It has some interesting aspects.

HAVE A DAY AND LOTS OF LUCK.

Bob338: I've been doing "fire sorting" for years now kind of learn that from an old benchrest shooter. Even if you have a bench rifle and do all the case prep you will still get a round that will be out of the group and you get rid of it. I use to start out with 50 cases and be lucky to have 25 for match. I found out the same thing when I had a 30x44 hunter rifle built. I think case prep is alittle out of control now or some guys have too much time on there hands. I think doing the primer pockets is a good thing and clean up the necks if you use dies with bushings. On a standard factory chamber I've never noticed much difference with weighting brass etc. I think seating depth, neck tension play a more important role than all the case prep people do. I use hand seating dies for every rifle I own. Well good luck!

Tom~
Except for the benchrest crowd, you and I are odd balls. But then I've been told that for years!

On domestic brass I do ream flash holes, uniform primer pockets and trim to the same length after fire forming. My luck fire sorting has been a bit better, but then I no longer shoot benchrest. I take a Marks-A-Lot to the range and X those noticeably out of a group. I shoot them a second time and cull only if they do it twice. Works for me!

Another good thing to pay attention to is the amount fo force needed to seat the bullet. If the case is getting tired, or the neck has a flaw of some sort, you'll note that the bullet goes in with noticeably more or noticeably less force than usual.

I agree that neck tension is at the top of the list of importance.

I also set aside cases in which the primer goes into too easily. I keep a box of "foulers and sighters" to put those into.

I recently bought a bag of 50 Winchester 30-06 cases (would you believe my local Walmart sells reloading supplies--brass cases too?!) and noted that the flash holes had some huge burrs inside. I believe that reaming those burrs off is important.

Dan Newberry
green 788

Hotcore,

There are polite ways in which gentlemen disagree. You really take the cake, the ice cream, and all of the presents!

I don't know what else to say to you, except that you are one extremely rude individual...



Dan

Q. "How did the Test Results come out? Did any of the people who responded have the same exact MUC Load?"

A. The definition of an optimal charge for a rifle cartridge precludes an *exact* amount of powder by virtue of the fact that 1% increases and decreases from the optimal number will work well.

I believe where folks go wrong is they fail to take advantage of the OAL adjustment as a final group tuner, and they instead leave the OAL the same and alter the powder charge to get onto the best harmonic node of the particular rifle they are shooting. In my opinion, this is like leaving the engine timing where it is, and changing pistons until the engine starts running properly.

I'll include the link here again, but Gerard Schultz truly does agree with me here, or perhaps I should say that I agree with him since he came to the same conclusion long before I did.

His email to me is posted above, so I won't repeat that, but here's his website link:

http://gunlinks.zibycom.com/members/002245268/Site2/hvloadguide.html

Anyway, what I'm saying is that with, say, a 57.0 grain charge of IMR 4350 in the 30-06 with the 165 grain bullet, you could deviate .57 grains, or .6 for simplicity, above and below that charge and still have optimal load density, which would yield the best powder burn.

So we could get good reports in this particular recipe ranging from 56.4 grains to 57.6 grains or so. In order to get a meaningful sample of what is really going on out there in the reloading world, we'd have to get a lot of responses for one particular recipe.

In a nutshell, I believe it is best to identify (through a method I've described elsewhere at this site) the *center* of the optimal load density zone, and use that charge of propellant, and then make group adjustments with OAL or perhaps primer swaps.

Hotcore, can we simply agree to disagree on whether this is a good approach or not? It was impetuous of me to call you rude, and I'm sorry for that. I should have merely said that you're extremely opinionated! And I can't fault you there, for so am I...

By the way, for anyone interested, here is a link to another site where my load development method was put to the test, with good results. My predicted OCW for the load the shooter was developing was off by only one tenth of a grain. !!

http://216.219.200.59/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=000108

Dan Newberry
green 788

[ 07-17-2002, 23:31: Message edited by: green 788 ]

I don't put much into John B. opinion these days. His results come out badly I think. Every time I see an article by him in American Rifleman and Handloader, he seems to be condemning a procedure of one or another. He can't even explain his results from the latest article. All of his articles show poor groups also besides this gun he did the prepping article on.

Last year I came into a bunch of once-fired mismatched brass of different manufacture in 300 Winnie. Instead of sorting it by maunfacturer, I simply full-length sized it, trimmed it to the same length, and loaded it with my favorite hunting load (the venerable 75 grains of H 4831 and a 180 grain Grand Slam).

When I shot this mish-mash at the range, it grouped exactly the same as my carefully loaded, weighed and matched reloads. This has led me to believe that what you put into brass is a lot more important than the brass the load is put into.

Not a scientific study. Simply my $.02 worth.

Before neck turning, make sure you full length resize the brass in a standard type (rcbs)fl die. If you fl size using a bushing die, the bushing will not size fully to the neck, shoulder junction area.243winxb