Wonder what you guys thought about the quality of Starline brass as compared to Winchester.

I use it in 32-20, 38-55 and 45-70. Has lasted well, no complaints so far.

I have been very pleased with it. However a have not used a lot of Winchester brass in the past.

I have used Starline in 3 calibers - though 2 are related.

.45-70 and .40-65

The case mouths are much harder than Winchester and do not seal off with low pressure loads unless annealed.
Starline's forming process for 40-65 leaves a few defects like creases in about one case in 15.

.38-55

I have a rifle with the stupid SAAMI standard based on someone's ancient design.
It has a .380 groove dia but a .394 chamber neck. The thinner Starline cases work fine.
Winchester are too thick without some special effort.

TEN times better than Winchester. Much thicker. SR is right about obturation; Starline is thicker so it does not expand like Win brass does, but it lasts much longer. If you are getting creases in forming 40-65s, you need to milk them in in stages, and wipe the lube off between thrusts (that sounds bad) with your fingers. I take them to 38-56 with very few creases. 40-65 first.
I use a lot of 45 LC starline; thick and tough. Does not obturate with cowboy loads so the brass gets dirty. Oh well.
I have used other SL brass; all excellent.

I've had good luck with their pistol brass.
Of the major manufactures in the US,the only one I stay away from is Remington. Their rifle brass is just too thin at the web and I have had several case head failures over the years.
I have never had that happen using the same loads with Winchester brass.

I use Starline in 460 S&W 460 mag. Excellent results.

I use Starline for all my heavy revolver loads.
Great stuff.

The 40-65 brass is Starline headstamped brass.
They get the creases not me.

The reason the Starline does not obturate at low pressure is it is not annealed after final forming. It is too hard to seal well.

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
TEN times better than Winchester. Much thicker. SR is right about obturation; Starline is thicker so it does not expand like Win brass does, but it lasts much longer. If you are getting creases in forming 40-65s, you need to milk them in in stages, and wipe the lube off between thrusts (that sounds bad) with your fingers. I take them to 38-56 with very few creases. 40-65 first.
I use a lot of 45 LC starline; thick and tough. Does not obturate with cowboy loads so the brass gets dirty. Oh well.
I have used other SL brass; all excellent.

I use Starline and Winchester Brass in 45-70, and 45 Colt. Starline only in 44 special. Winchester and Remington brass does not seem to be as high quality as Starline. Starline brass seems thicker, stronger and more consistent in weight and overall length within lots. I use Winchester brass for "cowboy" loads in the 45 colt, and it works just fine. For heavier 30k loads in Ruger Blackhawks, or the super heavy loads that you can use in the big 5 shot revolvers (I don't load for them, but I would use Starline or Federal if I did.), Starline holds up a lot longer. If I only loaded for Cowboy loads, I would choose Starline, but I use Winchester just to help me keep my low pressure and high pressure loads separated. I use Starline for all of my 44 special loads, as they are all within SAAMI specs. If I were a competitive blackpowder shooter, I would use winchester brass, as it has the most case capacity. The walls are pretty thin. I load H4895 and 405gn RCBS to about 1750fps for hunting. I haven't reloaded enough of them to wear out either brand, but I strongly suspect the starline would last twice as long. Starline brass always has very clean flash holes. Winchester, (45 Colt and 44 Special anyway) almost always has brass attached to flash holes on the inside of the case due to the punch not making clean holes. These are just my observations.

I use a lot of Win brass. But I use Star Line in 38-55, 50-70, 357 mag, and 45-70. My . I can't say if its better or worse than Win.

I have used Starline brass in a lot of different pistol cartridges and find it as good as anything else and better than some. I wish they would make more rifle brass, and if it was a good as their pistol cases I would use it.

Good stuff, but it is irritating that they stopped annealing it a few years ago.

Thanks guys,

The reason I asked is that I picked up a Winchester 92 in 38-40 the other day and I can get Win or Starline brass for it. Thanks to you guys I think I'll give Starline a shot.

Tip for your 38-40; that is my main cowboy cartridge and I use it in a 92 and two Colts. I use 44-40 brass! Why; much easier to get and when you size it, you do not notice any difference; the neck sizes right down.

Thanks for the information DPCD, forming 38 WCF out of 44-40s was my second choice if no brass was available. I have a question for you though, what powder are you using and if you were loading for just your rifle (180 grain lead bullets), what realistic velocity would you strive for?

I have several thousand Starline brass cases in both .357 Magnum and .40 S&W. I think they are a great value.

I do wish Starline made .30-30 and a few additional other rifle cases though...

Don't be tempted by the "High Velocity" loads in some references. They give energies in the
30/30 range, but they are inaccurate and really
stress your rifle.

My brand of choice these days. Currently have Starline in 44 mag, 44-40, 45 colt, 500 S & W, 50 Alaskan, 50-110, 38-55 and 45/70.

quote:

Originally posted by hawkins:
Don't be tempted by the "High Velocity" loads in some references. They give energies in the
30/30 range, but they are inaccurate and really
stress your rifle.

Playing around with loads in QL with the cartridges listed P Max, I'm looking at around 1000-1300 fps (180 grain jacketed Bullet) as a realistic velocity for a modern (2003) 92 carbine. All the information I have on 180 grain cast bullets hold the speed down to pistol velocity at around 800-875 fps. What do you (guys) think?

Mick,
If you can find the powders, AA1680 or old Win. 680, try those in the 38-40 with a 180 gr. lead bullet. You will get good velocities with low pressure. Use magnum primers as both are ball powders to assure good ignition.

I have an old 92 and have not sustained any pressure problems. I also use the same powders in my 357 Marlin and 158 gr. SP's lighted by a small rifle primer or Rem 7 1/2 match primers. I chrono'd the load and was getting 1840-1860 fps. No pressure signs.

I will not give you the gr. charge, but it pretty much fills the case. That combo does wonders when whacking pigs. Accuracy is so-so due to the microgroove rifling and velocity but can guarantee minute of pig.

Geoff

quote:

Originally posted by geoff:
Mick,
If you can find the powders, AA1680 or old Win. 680, try those in the 38-40 with a 180 gr. lead bullet. You will get good velocities with low pressure. Use magnum primers as both are ball powders to assure good ignition.

I have an old 92 and have not sustained any pressure problems. I also use the same powders in my 357 Marlin and 158 gr. SP's lighted by a small rifle primer or Rem 7 1/2 match primers. I chrono'd the load and was getting 1840-1860 fps. No pressure signs.

I will not give you the gr. charge, but it pretty much fills the case. That combo does wonders when whacking pigs. Accuracy is so-so due to the microgroove rifling and velocity but can guarantee minute of pig.

Geoff

Thanks for the info Geoff.