I neck size only for all of my bolt actions. The only one I full length size is my AR.I do notice increased accuracy as well as case life. It is also more convenient just to lube the neck and resize than it is to lube the whole case and then have to wipe all the cases down.It may be that I,m just lazy, but I,ll stick with the increased accuracy reason.

Hot Core,
I have no problem visualizing the mechanical relationship you described. But I do not believe the description accurately portrays the event.
I use fl dies for all of my rifles. I adjust them so that the last 1/16 to 1/32 inch of neck is left unsized. Once the case is fireformed to the chamber of my rifle, I want nothing to disturb that relationship.
I understand what you have professed as your belief, but I disagree with your theory. I do not believe that a neck sized case is less concentric to the chamber than a fl sized case (or a pfl case as you described).
Remember that scientific methodology demands, a theory is only an interesting idea until proof is offered to support such theory.
In this case, proof would be easy to acquire for anyone with access to an X-Ray machine. Such proof would convince me that my ideas were mistaken, and I would accept your theory as fact.

What Hot Cor is saying is that if a chamber is machined off-center to the bore to any degree, the neck-sized case will be off-center as well. If the chamber is off-center whatever amount, it is impossible that the next time the case is bolted into the chamber that it will be turned in the EXACT same position as the last time it wass fired. This will certainly create tension on the body of the case, whereas if the body is partially sized it has a bit of relief in the chamber to always allow the body to perfectly align the case between the bolt face and the bore. The tension between the shoulder and the bolt face holds the case in straight alignment with the bore without any significant tension on the case body (if the chamber is reasonably true).

To assume that this can be done with the bullet seated into the lands, is correct for aligning the case, but a flawed procedure in the sense that the shoulder then over expands with each firing shortening case life. The tension between the boltface and the bullet will vary based upon any imperfections in the ogive, different lots of bullets, and wear in the throat over a period of time. Secondly such an assumption is not a good one in a hunting rifle for three reasons:
1. You are more apt to get pressure spikes tight into the lands
2. You lose the ability then to vary the seating depth from the lands to find the sweet spot for that particular bullet in that particular rifle.
3. sometime in the field you may pull the bullet from the case when unbolting a round

In summary I believe that neck-sizing only is best left to benchrest rifles or custom varminters where there is a higher degree of quality control in chamber dimensions, where necks are also turned for consistency, and where quickly bolting a round without the danger of case binding is a non-issue.

For a hunting rifle I would never consider anything other than partial resizing to achieve a slight shoulder tension for good bore alignment while maintaining the ability to quickly bolt a round with ease and reliability. I would also surmise that in most factory rifles a properly adjusted FL die for each rifle in that particular cartridge will give better accuracy results than neck sizing only.

In my mind while testing may or may not prove these theories of significant consequence either way, there are enough of sound mechanical reasons to convince me to stick with partial FL sizing only on all my hunting rifles.

quote:

---

Originally posted by woods:
... The latest I've been doing is using a sized case with the best concentricity ( .001" ) and screwing the FL die onto the case in order to straighten the die in the press before sizing the rest of the cases. Does this work or do you have a better method for maximizing concentricity? ...

---

Hey Woods, Good to have you posting her at AR. I wasn't avoiding you, I had to go help a friend with a serious problem last night.

But, I can't help you concerning "concentricity", because I don't measure for it. There are a whole lot of guys on this Board that can answer your questions concerning it due to their first-hand experience of working to reduce it. You could probably start a separate post concerning it and get some fine input, do a search on it, or just look back at some of the old posts.

I'm just not the right person to help you with it. Best of luck to you.

quote:

---

from Ol` Joe:
HC isn`t this acually the proper method of die adjustment and not partial sizeing?

---

Hey Ol` Joe, I completely understand the question and the confusion. Same for me.

Over the years I've read and heard slightly different explainations in the Gun Rags, expert's books and from people who's opinion I respect. And, it had me wondering what the correct definition was too.

So, I've chosen to accept:
1. Full Length Sizing means the Case has been reformed to SAAMI Specs and have a slightly loose fit(aka some small amount of Headspace) in all chambers cut to SAAMI dimensions for that cartridge.

2. Partial - Full Length Resizing means the FL Resizing Die is adjusted so the Bolt closes on the resized case with a small amount of resistance(no Headspace). This is done for a specific rifle by adjusting the FL Die.

3. Neck Sizing can mean many things depending on the type of Dies being used. Some people only NS half the Caseneck and the Die never touches the Casewalls or the Case shoulder. Some completely resize the neck and don't resize anything else. But, basically Neck Sizing(to me) means the focus is on resizing "only the Caseneck" to some degree, while no other part of the Case is changed.

If those definitions differ with anyone, that is fine by me. They are just what I use in order to differentiate between the methods.

---

I also understand your thoughts on the Shell Holder making contact with the bottom of the Full Length Die. And I understand about "camming over".

I believe "most" of my Dies just happen to work the same as yours do. But, there have been occasions where I would need to remove a slight(very slight) amount from the top of a Shell Holder in order to get the Dies to Fully Resize a Case. Haven't had to do that in a very long time though.

But, I see the definitions above as being focused on what happens to the "Case" rather than how close the Shell Holder and Die come together.

I still think your observations are valid and I can see the same with my Dies as well.

Best of luck to you.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Idaho Shooter:
Hot Core,
I have no problem visualizing the mechanical relationship you described. But I do not believe the description accurately portrays the event.

---

Hey IS, How about describing your impression concerning what I posted that "describes what accurately portrays the event" as you see it?

quote:

---

... I understand what you have professed as your belief, but I disagree with your theory. I do not believe that a neck sized case is less concentric to the chamber than a fl sized case (or a pfl case as you described).

---

Good for you. That is why I mentioned that P-F:R "might" work well for some folks, or they might have better luck with NSing.

However, to quote you, "Remember that scientific methodology demands, a theory is only an interesting idea until proof is offered to support such theory." So, what do you offer to refute what I said? Where is your "proof"?

Saying you disagree with me is fine, I've no problem with that at all. However, if you want me to continue "discussing it with me", it behoves you to explain "why" you disagree and the reasons for it. Maybe I will agree with you.

quote:

---

In this case, proof would be easy to acquire for anyone with access to an X-Ray machine.

---

If you want X-rays, go get them.

If you really "... have no problem visualizing the mechanical relationship you described.", then it is self-evident. So, you either:

1. Don't understand the mechanical relationship and that is causing your disbelief.

2. You do understand and simply want to argue without offering credible rebutal.

I won't allow you to drag me into another nonsensical "argument", but if you choose to discuss it by offering a rational difference of opinion with credible thoughts, I'll be glad to "discuss" it with you.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
from Hot Core:
Over the years I've read and heard slightly different explainations in the Gun Rags, expert's books and from people who's opinion I respect. And, it had me wondering what the correct definition was too.

So, I've chosen to accept:
1. Full Length Sizing means the Case has been reformed to SAAMI Specs and have a slightly loose fit(aka some small amount of Headspace) in all chambers cut to SAAMI dimensions for that cartridge.

2. Partial - Full Length Resizing means the FL Resizing Die is adjusted so the Bolt closes on the resized case with a small amount of resistance(no Headspace). This is done for a specific rifle by adjusting the FL Die.

3. Neck Sizing can mean many things depending on the type of Dies being used. Some people only NS half the Caseneck and the Die never touches the Casewalls or the Case shoulder. Some completely resize the neck and don't resize anything else. But, basically Neck Sizing(to me) means the focus is on resizing "only the Caseneck" to some degree, while no other part of the Case is changed.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm a relative novice, and I should probably keep my mouth shut, but I've noticed that discussion of this topic invariably gets animated.

I'm glad that HC posted his working definitions, because these debates often seem to be driven by differences in wording. I once followed a thread where two guys went at it for days on end over the virtues of FL and PLF resizing. Turned out that their differences wasn't in philosophy but in their equipment- the FL proponent's dies were giving him that glove-like fit when the die hit the shellholder. The PLF guy had to leave a slight gap to get the same result. The real root of their disagreement was based in large part on the fact that their definitions were a little different than HC's: to both of them, FL meant the die was set to contact the shellholder under tension, while PLF meant no contact; but under HC's definitions both of these guys were PFL resizing!

When I load my goal is to tailor that round for a specific rifle, so SAAMI specs are pretty much irrelevant. Sometimes the die contacts the shellholder, other times it doesn't- it all depends on the three variables in the equation: the die, chamber and shellholder.

The only valid rap I see on PFL is when it requires that the die not touch the shellholder, so it doesn't get squared up by the pressure of the ram- easy enough to remedy if you remember to square it with a piece of shim every few pulls or, even better (but more expensive) get a set of Redding Competition Shellholders and find the right one to match you die and rifle's chamber.

FWIW I don't neck size, but only because I reload for hunting and want the absolute reliability in chambering that a few thou's shoulder clearance provides.

Anyway, before this arguement goes even hotter I hope everyone will think about how they are defining their terms and decide whether they're fighting over procedures or semantics.

I know everyone was hoping this thread would die, but I've got a couple of questions.

I prepped some 270 cases last night exactly in the way Hot Core said and the cases chambered loose, then tight, and finally loose as he described it would. When the die was adjusted exactly for PFLR, I noted where the lock ring was locked down. It was in the same position as it would have been had I began by raising the shell holder and screwing the die down onto it and then tightened it about 1/4 turn more.

This was unexpected, as I did not think I would be tightening it past where the shell holder and die meet. Normal?

Also, in previous neck - sizing attempts I had been sizing too far down the neck and the shoulder was being pushed forward as Hot Core described. That was causing chambering resistance. If neck sizing is stopped just before the shoulder starts to be pushed forward, then the case should be neck sized only and still be able to be chambered with little or no resistance. I'm not sure I see a downside to that.

I can't visualize how you can compress the case body, the shoulder (a little), and the entire neck as in PFLR and it not be laying in the chamber more so than if you have not sized anything except part of the neck.

Seems the only downside to following Hot Core's procedure up to the first time that the die starts to compress the case body enough to push the shoulder forware, THEN BACK OFF about a 1/16th turn, is that it will ruin that one shell that you are working on. It will be hard to chamber because the shoulder has started forward. Right?

I would think that when a cartridge has been fired, the case expanded, and shrinks in all directions a MINISCULE amount, that amount has to be a lot less than when it is PFLRed in all directions.

Gotta retry neck sizing.

quote:

---

Originally posted by woods:
I know everyone was hoping this thread would die, but I've got a couple of questions.

---

Hey Woods, Naw, I was hoping to see what Idaho Shooter's grand "proof" was to rebut P-FLRing. Now, he is either out getting the X-rays he wanted so badly, or has realized I called his bluff and he has nothing worthwhile to offer.

quote:

---

I prepped some 270 cases last night exactly in the way Hot Core said and the cases chambered loose, then tight, and finally loose as he described it would. When the die was adjusted exactly for PFLR, I noted where the lock ring was locked down. It was in the same position as it would have been had I began by raising the shell holder and screwing the die down onto it and then tightened it about 1/4 turn more.

This was unexpected, as I did not think I would be tightening it past where the shell holder and die meet. Normal?

---

I really don't believe it is possible to say that is true or not. Reasons are because of all the "variables" in the manufacturing of the chamber, dies, shell holder and press. All of those vary, so it would be misleading to suggest everyone can adjust their Dies as you described and then they will be P-FLRing.

The only way I know to get it set up correctly is to do the "Trial and Error" repetition just as you did. If anyone else has a quicker way, please post it.

quote:

---

Also, in previous neck - sizing attempts I had been sizing too far down the neck and the shoulder was being pushed forward as Hot Core described. That was causing chambering resistance. If neck sizing is stopped just before the shoulder starts to be pushed forward, then the case should be neck sized only and still be able to be chambered with little or no resistance. I'm not sure I see a downside to that.

---

It is difficult to do what you describe with some chamber and die match-ups. Quite often the Pressure Ring and Casewall will begin to be Resized "before" the entire Neck is Resized.

But, that does not mean what you believe is happening is wrong. With your specific chamber and dies, it may work just fine that way.

Only problem I anticipate is that since you are not controlling the "Shoulder" in your example, it will begin moving forward on it's own just like it does with all Neck Sizing. Don't let that keep you from trying that Method though. The best thing about all of this is you can do it one way for awhile and if you discover a problem down the road(the shoulder moving forward), then you can adjust the Method to fit your needs.

quote:

---

I can't visualize how you can compress the case body, the shoulder (a little), and the entire neck as in PFLR and it not be laying in the chamber more so than if you have not sized anything except part of the neck.

---

Think of them happening in a sequence.

1. First the FL Die begins to Resize the Caseneck and nothing else on the Case is touched.

2. You screw the Die in a bit, Resize the case and you get the same as before except a little bit more of the Caseneck is Resized.

3. You continue screwing the Die in and at some point the Pressure Ring(widest diameter on a non-belted, "fired", case forward of the Extractor Groove, or forward of the belt on a belted case) begins to be Resized.

As the Pressure Ring(and Casewall) is reduced in diameter, the Case material has to go somewhere, so it ends up effectively increasing the overall Case length. You could verify this with regular 0.001" capable Calipers.

And as the Case is lengthening, the Caseneck is still "not" resized for it's entire length. Therefore the Case shoulder has moved forward the same amount as the overall Case length.

4. This process continues until you find it difficult to close the Bolt, because the distance from the Casehead to the "datum point" on the Case shoulder is longer than the distance from the Bolt face to the "datum point" on the Chamber shoulder.

And it might be difficult to see, but at this point, you might have all the Caseneck resized, or you might not. But, it will be very close to a complete resize of the Caseneck.

5. You screw the Die in a bit more and the Pressure Ring and Case walls are still being reduced which causes the Case to lengthen a bit more. But, now the Case shoulder has just made contact with the Shoulder "inside the Die". The Caseneck is now fully resized it's entire length.

You may not be able to close the Bolt on the empty case when it has reached this point.

6. You barely screw the Die in a bit more. The Pressure Ring and Casewalls are reduced in diameter a bit more which would lengthen the Case more, but since the Case shoulder was against the Die Shoulder in #5, the Die is now going to cause the Case shoulder to be pushed back slightly.

If you try the Case in the Chamber and you can close the Bolt with a bit of resistance, that means the Case is being held in a compressed state between the Bolt Face and the Chamber shoulder.

7. If you screw the Die in a bit more, then the Pressure Ring and Case walls are reduced even more and the shoulder is pushed back farther. Now the case will be "loose" in the Chamber.

But, where the position of the bottom of the Die is in relation to the top of the Shell Holder, is really not relative to what you are trying to achieve. It may end up being the same on all your Dies, it may just "give the appearance of" being the same, or it might be different. Too many variables from rifle to rifle, die to die and press to press for it to be a given.

quote:

---

Seems the only downs ide to following Hot Core's procedure up to the first time that the die starts to compress the case body enough to push the shoulder forware, THEN BACK OFF about a 1/16th turn, is that it will ruin that one shell that you are working on. It will be hard to chamber because the shoulder has started forward. Right?

---

You may not have "ruined " the case. It will just have a bit more Headspace than the others. That is why you want to screw the Die into the Press in very small increments.

quote:

---

I would think that when a cartridge has been fired, the case expanded, and shrinks in all directions a MINISCULE amount, that amount has to be a lot less than when it is PFLRed in all directions.

---

This might be the point of confusion for you.

Let's just use "one length" in an example, but most dimensions of the Case are really being affected. Lets use the Length from the Case head to the Datum Point on the Case Shoulder. And we will just call it the "Length to Shoulder" or LTS. (Oh yes, if I don't mention that I'm just "making up" this example, some of the resident fools get upset.)

When the case is new (in this made-up example) the LTS will be 3.75". When the Case is fired, the LTS extends way out to 3.90" and then contracts back to 3.80".

We begin resizing the Case and at some point the LTS lengthens to 3.86" and we can not close the Bolt.

We continue Resizing the case and the LTS is reduced to 3.84" at which point we can close the Bolt with some small amount of effort (aka P-FLR).

If we continue screwing the Die in the LTS will continue to shorten and as the Bolt begins to close with "no effort", we have effectively Full Length Resized (FLRed) the case for that "specific rifle".

Let's say it now has an LTS of 3.82". It might not fit in some SAAMI chambers. So to completely FLR the case, we would need to continue screwing the Die in until the LTS is once again 3.75" and it will now fit in ALL SAAMI chambers.

quote:

---

Gotta retry neck sizing.

---

Good idea. You never know which way will work the best for you until you try it. I believe some people are willing to sacrafice a small amount of accuracy to have the convenience of Neck Sizing. And I also believe some folks just have better accuracy with Neck Sizing. But for me, P-FLR just works the best.

I have been waiting for HOT CORE to explain it in this detail. So many people have questions about how to PFLS properly, and this gives the right step by step instructions in detail with explanation of what is happening to the case along the way. In my experience, I usually have 2/3 of the neck or so resized when PFLS and the shoulder has been pushed forward just enough to have a nice slight crush fit. Of course this depends on your die dimensions in relation to FIRED case dimensions, and on the cartridge you are reloading for (things such as body taper will affect how much of the neck is resized). The tighter your rifle's chamber and closer it is to the dimensions of your die, the more of your neck will be resized while moving the shoulder forward only a very tiny amount to give you a crush fit.

I use neck dies exclusively when I'm preparing new cases. The best way to staighten out the necks, etc., is to run new your cases through a neck die after dipping the necks in dry case lube.

I partially resize fired cases in a full-length die, rather than just neck size them. This ensures optimum feeding, simply because even the best chambers are a little bit off from one side to the other, and unless you rechamber a fired, neck-sized case EXACTLY the same way it came out of the chamber the last time you fired it, you'll meet resistance, and you'll also create stresses that can adversely effect accuracy.

I have never seen the day when partially resized cases didn't deliver all the accuracy you could ever take advantage of, but I have seen neck-sized reloaded ammo create feeding problems. I've also seen factory chambers that were so off that neck-sized fired cases actually HURT accuracy and could not be properly chambered.

Every rifle is a law unto itself. There are are no hard and fast rules about much of anything, including neck-sizing versus partial resizing. In general, neck-sizing fired cases works best when you have an extremely uniform chambered barrel fitted to a properly blueprinted action. For a hunting rifle (the world doesn't begin and end at the bench!) I've found that even the finest, most uniformly chambered rifles feed best and deliver best accuracy if I partially resize the brass, adjusting the dies so the case just chambers with only the very slightest resistance, and feeding is absolutely perfect.

I WILL NOT compromise optimum feeding for a few thousands of an inch group size, which hasn't been the case so far anyway as much as I can tell.

Quite honestly, I think neck-sizing fired cases is for the statisiticians and benchrest players. It's not optimal for hunting rifles....

AD

Thanks everyone,

I think I have a grip on this now. I did notice that the last adjustment with PFLR just before the case has no more resistance is very small and therefore you could go from a compresssed head-to-shoulder fit to a loose fit in a 1/16 turn of the die or less. Also had some different type cases, Normas and Winchesters, that had different adjustments even though fired from the same rifle.

I think I will try neck sizing on fired cases until I can't use them without a "crush fit", and then PFLR the whole batch.

Thanks again

Allen,
I think you and I have conveyed essentially the same thing as Hot Core in our own different ways.

I think more people hurt then help their accuracy with neck sizing in a mass produced chamber.

Hot Core,
The proponents of Christianity, Buhdism, Judaism, Hinduism, Atheism, Moslems, Republicans, Democrats, Socialists, Nazis, Communists, and Anarchists each hold their beliefs to be self evident. They believe every "Right Thinking" person must come to the same conclusion as they, though they can not offer any imperical data to support their conclusions, let alone proof. They just continue to espouse their circuitous logic.

In the matter of discussion to which this thread is oriented, we have two theories.

1: The cartridge is held in better alignment with the bore if you can achieve a crush fit of the shoulder into the chamber with pressure exerted from the bolt face, without the case sides touching the chamber walls.

2: The cartridge achieves better alignment to the bore if it is fireformed to the chamber and that relationship is left undisturbed through neck sizing.

Let me immediately state that theory number 1 is acceptable to me for a rifle with sloppy machine work and an eccentric chamber.

For a rifle with accurate machine work I must hold with theory #2.

It is supported by decades of imperical data and statistics.

It has been supported by many, much more experienced reloaders and shooters than I in numerous magazine articles over the last thirty years.

It is supported by the instuctions in many of our reloading manuals. Read pg 5 of Sierra #5, pg 19 of Hornady #6, Pg 33 of Nosler #4, pg 140 of Sierra #3 or pg 14 of Sierra #2.

The early Sierra manuals warn that it is easy to "offcenter the neck of the case when neck sizing" which can diminish accuracy. This explains why some people achieve better accuracy with fl sizing. Neck sizing must be done in a very exact manner. The early Sierra manuals also state "Partial sizing should never be attempted with tapered cases"


If theory #1 were the truth in a well manufactured rifle, the big boys at the benchrest matches would be telling us so.... in no uncertain terms.

While I well understand that impirical data and statistics are evidence, and not proof. I am hesitant to accept a theory for which such data is contrary.

Also I beleive that FL or PFL resizing are desirable for use in the field for most shooters. As A D stated, one does not wish to deal with difficult chambering when hunting. And the minimal accuracy differences are only important in a bench rest match.

quote:

---

The early Sierra manuals warn that it is easy to "offcenter the neck of the case when neck sizing" which can diminish accuracy. This explains why some people achieve better accuracy with fl sizing. Neck sizing must be done in a very exact manner. The early Sierra manuals also state "Partial sizing should never be attempted with tapered cases"

---

Since Hot Core has given a very detailed and helpful discription of the process of PFLR, I would really like to see an explanation of the correct way to neck size.

Thanks

Woods"I would really like to see an explanation to the correct way to neck size."I agee,interesting suggestion..

Hot Core politely asked me for an explanation of why I disagreed with his earlier statement, that a pfl case is more concentric to the rifle chamber than a neck sized case.

This, I have done with my earlier post.
I do not profess to have the skill to build cartridges which are more accurate than those built by Hot Core. (by any method of resizing)Nor do I claim that his professed method of PFL does not build excellent ammunition. As a matter of fact, as I read his material, I really suspect that I have been failing in my attmpt to neck size my own brass and more likely PFL sizing it.

I still feel that neck sizing is more desireable when searching for the last vestige of available accuracy.

My discussion is with the idea of tossing out a well known and understood theory thoughout the world of reloading, based on one person saying "It must be so". I have seen a lot of evidence to the contrary, and no evidence to support Hot Core's idea in this matter.

When the majority of people, well educated and skilled in a particular endeavor, profess an idea about such endeavor, I tend to accept that they know what they are talking about.

From everything I have read concerning this subject over the last thirty years, Hot Core is the "heritic" in this discussion. It is not presumptuous to ask for proof or even evidence before we accept this new theory.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Idaho Shooter:
...From everything I have read concerning this subject over the last thirty years, Hot Core is the "heritic" in this discussion. ...

---

Hey Idaho Shooter, I believe what is tripping you up is that I am speaking from first hand experience coupled with an excellent Engineering Degree, and you seem to be simply regurgitating things you have read from Reloading Manuals. But the BIG thing you are missing, is it doesn't matter at all to me if "you" choose to use P-FLR, NSing, FLRing or shoot factory ammo. What ever makes you happy and allows you to shoot the best groups, have at it.

---

Hey Woods, First off, it is best to Neck Size by using a Neck Sizing Die. They are relatively inexpensive and can be purchased as a single Die.

Here you simply screw the NSing Die into the press while watching how much of the Caseneck is being Resized. You can "Blacken" the outside of the Caseneck with a Magic Marker and see the progression.

Lots of discussion on how far down the actual Caseneck to actually Resize. Some believe Resizing only 1/2 the Caseneck is best because they believe the larger non-resized portion will assist in aligning the Case properly. Others believe doing a full resizing of the Caseneck is best.

Again, the very best way to find out is to actually shoot the firearm and see what the Targets indicate rather than just reading about it like Idaho Shooter.

But, you "might" be able to achieve some degree of NSing with your FL Die. It again depends on the variables of the chamber and Die relationship.

There is a trick to it that I've never seen in print, but that doesn't mean it is original to me.

1. Take a pair of 0.0001" capable Micrometers and measure the Pressure Ring while rotating the case between the anvils. You are looking for the widest diameter. Go slow and when you feel the case begin to get tight in the anvils, loosen the Spindle so you do not "resize" the Pressure Ring in the Micrometers.

Let's say you get 0.4695" for the Pressure Ring.

2. Screw the Full Length Die into the press and begin resizing the Caseneck.

Each time you complete a resizing operation, re-check the Pressure Ring to make sure it is still 0.4695". When you measure it and find the diameter smaller (aka 0.4964" or less), you have gone too far. At this point the FL Die is beginning to resize the Pressure Ring and Case walls as well as the Caseneck and it will cause the Case shoulder to begin moving forward.

So, you want to STOP right before the Pressure Ring starts being reduced with the FL Die.

3. Now, you want to look at the Caseneck and see if enough of it is being resized to hold the Bullet or about 1/2 the Caseneck. If it is, load some up and try them. If not, you really need a Neck Sizing Die or to just go on and begin P-FLRing.

---

Nothing tricky about it. And you should still use whatever works the best for you, or some combination as Woods mentioned.

Best of luck to all you folks, you too Idaho Shooter!

Still waiting for the evidence.

Don't think that had anything to do with it.

We were discussing partial full length resizing as opposed to neck sizing with a couple of very knowledgeable posters, one who must work for CSI and wants evidence and one who is an avowed heretical engineer, and had gotten all the way to me trying to figure out exactly where the pressure ring is.

Hey Woods, The Pressure Ring is easy to locate on a "fired" case.

On a Belted case - It is the widest diameter forward of the Belt.

On a non-Belted case - It is the widest diameter forward of the Extraction Groove.

---

By the way, measuring Pressure Ring Expansion is the very best Pressure Detection Method of all time and has been in use for well over 100 years by knowledgeable reloaders. But, that is a separate topic all together.

quote:

---

By the way, measuring Pressure Ring Expansion is the very best Pressure Detection Method of all time

---

Not according to Ken Waters, who popularized the method.

quote:

---

Ken Waters, “Developing Pet Loadsâ€, Sep. 1982 Handloader magazine, p6a ff.

“Controlling pressure is therefore a major concern for handloaders, but to control it, we must first have some means of judging the height of its peak. Ballistics laboratories utilize special pressure barrels and copper or lead crusher gauges—or, alternatively, electronic transducer strain gauges—to measure chamber pressure. Such systems, however, require both costly equipment and skilled technicians, placing them beyond the reach of individual handloaders.

Even if we had a pressure-barrel setup and knew how to use it, that still wouldn’t tell us how much pressure that identical cartridges would develop in the barrel of our favorite sporting rifle or the cylinder of our favorite revolver, they being so entirely different in factors that affect pressure as well as in their abilities to withstand chamber pressures.

I have agreed to explain in detail the system that I’ve been using for some thirty years in developing handloads totaling countless thousands of rounds for a variety of both standard and wildcat cartridges. It has yet to let me down.

Two terms that I use are somewhat different from those in wider use concerning the same concepts—developing rather than working-up loads, since it is frequently necessary to work down from early loads and unsafe to work up; and judging rather than reading pressures since any such method is far too inexact to qualify for any term such as reading that implies a greater precision than is actually the case.

Now of course, no such system of judging pressures can reveal the actual pressure in pounds per square inch or copper units of pressure. It must be understood that this is only a means of determining comparative pressures, with nothing more to be expected of it.

---

According to Ken, the strain gage and CUP methods are superior to PRE. The only problem is that they are expensive, and take a modicum of skill to use. That was 20 years ago. Technology has since solved the technical problems.

You don't believe NIST on calibration, you don't believe OKShooter (professional ballistician), you don't believe Ken Howell and refer to him disparagingly as "Howl", you don't believe the results of my test, and you don't believe Ken Waters. Your theories are superior to them all. Yet, you have no data, no credible references. And you claim to be an EE, and are not.

I agree with using a seperate neck sizing die.

For hunting cartridges, I suggest sizing the neck for its full length until just before it begins to taper into the shoulder. This method may not cut it in the benchrest game, but it does hold the bullet in place much better and eliminates bullet setback in the magazine from recoil.

AD

Hot Core,..so if I take and adjust my FL dies down to where the stoney point caliper mounted headspace guages show that my shoulder has been moved .002" foreward after sizing,..that is about where I should be correct? tension when closing a 700rem bolt can be misleading or hard to determine.

quote:

---

Originally posted by JustC:
Hot Core,..so if I take and adjust my FL dies down to where the stoney point caliper mounted headspace guages show that my shoulder has been moved .002" foreward after sizing,..that is about where I should be correct? tension when closing a 700rem bolt can be misleading or hard to determine.

---

Let's see if I'm a good pupil and understand this:

All your fired cases should have exactly the same head space according to your gauge before sizing because they have expanded the exact same amount. Say that measurement on your head space gauge is 2.655. During the sizing the shoulder will be pushed forward and increase that measurement more and more until you have threaded the sizing die in far enough to start contacting the shoulder. At that point the head space gauge measurement should be less and less until you again reach the original measurement of 2.655. Now, I don't know if you will then want to reduce that by .001 or stop before you reduce it to the 2.655 example.

You might be right in that since a fired shell chambers easily, that you would want to increase the head space to achieve a "compressed fit".

By the way, in case some of you found my last post confusing, someone else had posted a message in between Idaho Shooter and myself and must have deleted it later.

quote:

---

Originally posted by denton:

quote:

---

By the way, measuring Pressure Ring Expansion is the very best Pressure Detection Method of all time

---

Not according to Ken Waters, who popularized the method.

quote:

---

Ken Waters, “Developing Pet Loadsâ€, Sep. 1982 Handloader magazine, p6a ff.

“Controlling pressure is therefore a major concern for handloaders, but to control it, we must first have some means of judging the height of its peak. Ballistics laboratories utilize special pressure barrels and copper or lead crusher gauges—or, alternatively, electronic transducer strain gauges—to measure chamber pressure. Such systems, however, require both costly equipment and skilled technicians, placing them beyond the reach of individual handloaders.

Even if we had a pressure-barrel setup and knew how to use it, that still wouldn’t tell us how much pressure that identical cartridges would develop in the barrel of our favorite sporting rifle or the cylinder of our favorite revolver, they being so entirely different in factors that affect pressure as well as in their abilities to withstand chamber pressures.

I have agreed to explain in detail the system that I’ve been using for some thirty years in developing handloads totaling countless thousands of rounds for a variety of both standard and wildcat cartridges. It has yet to let me down.

Two terms that I use are somewhat different from those in wider use concerning the same concepts—developing rather than working-up loads, since it is frequently necessary to work down from early loads and unsafe to work up; and judging rather than reading pressures since any such method is far too inexact to qualify for any term such as reading that implies a greater precision than is actually the case.

Now of course, no such system of judging pressures can reveal the actual pressure in pounds per square inch or copper units of pressure. It must be understood that this is only a means of determining comparative pressures, with nothing more to be expected of it.

---

According to Ken, the strain gage and CUP methods are superior to PRE. ...

---

Don't you just love it when someone who has no more common sense than to recommend "Hammering on the Anvil of a live Primer Seated in a case" tries his best to correct you and ends up making an even BIGGER fool of himself.

If you folks will re-read Mr. Waters post, he did not say, "the strain gage and CUP methods are superior to PRE." He did say,

quote:

---

require both costly equipment and skilled technicians, placing them beyond the reach of individual handloaders.

Even if we had a pressure-barrel setup and knew how to use it, that still wouldn’t tell us how much pressure that identical cartridges would develop in the barrel of our favorite sporting rifle or the cylinder of our favorite revolver

---

And I see he has gone to outright Lies about me and my background. Despirate tactics which reflect his true character.

Just another Classic Example of someone trying to "skew the truth" to fit their agenda.

Absolutely pitiful!

quote:

---

Originally posted by JustC:
Hot Core,..so if I take and adjust my FL dies down to where the stoney point caliper mounted headspace guages show that my shoulder has been moved .002" foreward after sizing,..that is about where I should be correct?

---

Hey JustC, I don't know. But, that is an interesting concept and well worth your effort to try it.

You could take a couple of cases and set them each at a different length and then see which one allows you to close on it with just the right amount of pressure.

Excellent idea. If you do try it, let us know how well it works. I can see that it might vary a bit from cartridge to cartridge, but it still has merit. Good for you.

I don't have a Stoney Point device to do those measurements with, so I have no experience to share with you about them. Perhaps some of the other folks who do use them will jump in and answer that. It seems to be a right popular tool with people on the Board.

quote:

---

tension when closing a 700rem bolt can be misleading or hard to determine.

---

I do understand what you are talking about. It is partially due to the Ejector Spring pushing on the Case and the drag on the locking lugs camming in place.

But, "feel" is what I've used for so long, that I'm just used to doing it the way I described. It might help you a bit to put a small dab of grease on the Locking Lugs and give the Ejector a tiny bit of oil.

Best of luck to you.

quote:

---

Originally posted by woods:
...You might be right in that since a fired shell chambers easily, that you would want to increase the head space to achieve a "compressed fit"....

---

Hey Woods, Actually, you would want to "decrease" Headspace in order to get crush-fits.

Headspace is basically how much "slop" exists between the Boltface and point on the Case where Headspace is measured. This spot varies depending on the type of case it is by SAAMI specs.

If you are using P-FLR, then the Headspace is controlled by the length from the Casehead to the Datum Point on the Case shoulder if it is a bottle-neck design, belted or not.

quote:

---

Ballistics laboratories utilize special pressure barrels and copper or lead crusher gauges—or, alternatively, electronic transducer strain gauges—to measure chamber pressure.....

and judging rather than reading pressures since any such method is far too inexact to qualify for any term such as reading that implies a greater precision than is actually the case.

---

Waters clearly said that strain gages and copper crushers measure pressure, and that the PRE method is far too inexact to qualify for any term such as reading. If you accept Ken's word, there is no possible conclusion except that Ken believed that PRE is inferior to CUP and strain gages.

Of course, Ken is quite right that the pressure in your particular firearm will be different from that in a SAAMI standard test barrel. What's your point? The nice thing about a strain gage is that it tells you what's going on in your own gun. High cost? $189, plus laptop if you don't have one. Skilled technician? Not anymore. Time and technology march on.

Now, as to your qualifications: You claim to be an EE. You cannot answer simple questions that any engineer can answer without difficulty. So, try the quiz. Show the world I'm wrong.

1. Roughly how fast is the net drift of electrons in a conductor, moving under the influence of an EMF?

2. What are the symbols for divergence, gradient, and curl of an expression? What type of expression does each operate on? What type of expression does each produce?

3. What is the effect of a Fourier Transform on an expression?

4. What does it mean to have a system "critically damped", and why is this of interest?

5. Under what circumstances would you use a Taylor's or a MacLauren's expansion?

Come on, Mr. EE man. Now's your chance. Show the world that you're for real, and that I'm wrong. I guarantee you can't get out of ANY form of respectable engineering school without being able to roll off at least three of those, with no hesitation. A good web rat should be able to knock off two with ease.

Since you can't, are you now going to hint that I am "queer for you", as you did last time you got your butt handed to you?

quote:

---

Originally posted by JustC:
Hot Core,..so if I take and adjust my FL dies down to where the stoney point caliper mounted headspace guages show that my shoulder has been moved .002" foreward after sizing,..that is about where I should be correct? tension when closing a 700rem bolt can be misleading or hard to determine.

---

JustC

I guess these guys are fighting old battles, but back to the subject. I also have a stoney point head space gauge so I went through the previous mentions process for PFLR that Hot Core outlined and got the following results.

Sako 270 fired cases all had a measurement with the headspace gauge (though it is actually a measurement from the bottom of the rim to a datum point on the shoulder) of 4.046". I started with the die set high and the measurement stayed the same till about 85% of the neck was sized where it JUMPED to 4.052". I was adjusting the die down about 1/16 of a turn at a time, but evidently when the die started to resize the case walls it pushed the shoulder forward with a small adjustment. The case then became harder to chamber. That measurement stayed the same, 4.052", until it JUMPED back down to 4.044. The case became easy to chamber at the same time.

I think the process can be shortened by raising the shell holder and screwing the resizing die down onto the shell holder. At this point, with this gun and this die I am within 1/8 of a turn of PFLR. In other words, if I sized a case with the die screwed down onto the shell holder, the case is still hard to chamber, but another 1/8 turn and the case becomes easy to chamber. A difference of .006" on the stony point gauge.

And I don't give a damn whether Hot Core is an engineer or denton is. I appreciate what each has to offer and use it to stimulate my own thought process. Are we trying to find out who is best here or how to be a better reloader?

Woods, just for kicks try to resize your case with the expander stem removed and see if the shoulder moves at the same point in resizeing. I`ve found with out lube the shoulder moves quite a bit as the expander ball runs back out of it and even when lubed with some dies to a smaller degree.

A little magic marker or candle soot on the shoulder will tell if you are setting the shoulder back or not. I "think" what happens in alot of cases is the ball pulls the shoulder forward, more as the neck is sized farther down its lenght, and it is acually pushed back to a shorter lenght as we adjust the die down and pulled back out. Especially with tapered cases such as a `06. The more straight walled cases might be expanding foreward from resizing the walls but you have to be almost down to the shell holder in most dies to touch the walls of a `06, 6.5 swede ect which in my experiance shows shoulder growth the almost the same as a straighter walled 308 based round.
The bench shooters use collet type neck sizers because they they don`t move the shoulder or change the case body from it`s fire formed state. They resize the shoulder for headspace when the cartridge gets tight with "bump" dies that only hit the shoulder and allow them to move it a predetermend amount to ease chambering.
Concider too the ejector/extractor will cause the case to set out of square with the chamber if there is any play in the case to chamber relation. The claw in a Mauser based action will push the base of the case to one side while a M700 type will shove one side out away from the bolt face. Out of round chambers, sloppy fitting ammo, run out in the bullet, uneven neck wall thickness all will hurt concentric bullet to bore alinement.
I can`t prove it but I feel the ring of unsized case neck left when neck sizeing a case that was fire formed in the chamber it is to be used in will hold the cartridge in about as good of alinement as you`ll get in a factory rifle chamber if it`s round. Remember the neck sizer doesn`t size all the way down the case neck, it stops a half a tenth or so off the shoulder. The fully (fuller) expanded body helps prevent lateral movement of the case in the chamber from the ejector/ extractor or gravity.

This is all just something to ponder as I`m NOT a engineer, don`t know and can`t prove any of what I`ve said is true in all cases, nor am I a bench shooter with the ability to shoot well enough to prove one method works better then another in all rifles. I DO set a FL die to just touch the shoulder on my cases when resizeing. I don`t push it back I just set it to leave the shoulder where my Stoney Point said it was before I ran it in the die. The case life is good, runout is minimal, and accuracy is likely better then I can achieve on most days.

I use the FL in place of a NS simply because I don`t want to find out the shoulder should have been bumped when I`m out in the field with a sticky chambering cartridge.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ol` Joe:
They resize the shoulder for headspace when the cartridge gets tight with "bump" dies that only hit the shoulder and allow them to move it a predetermend amount to ease chambering.

---

Not familiar with what kind of die will do this, but it sounds like a helluva good idea.

Will remove the decapper and see if it makes a difference. Also, will use the concentricity gauge on the "pressure ring" to see how and when this is resized in relation to the headspace gauge measurements.

woods
Here`s a link to a "bump" die. I guess I screwed up, they call it a body die, my mistake. I`ve never used one and only know what I`ve read or been told of them.


http://www.redding-reloading.com/pages/bodydies.html

I think you`ll find when checking your cases for shoulder movement the thickness of the case wall, amount of reduction the dies gives, and the amount of neck sized will have a effect on the amount of pull. The necks tension on the ball controls it.
Again I have found this when I`ve played with my case sizeing and it may just be a quirk with my dies and cases. I do think it will prove true for more then just me though.
I never measured the P-ring, just watched the amount of neck resized and weather or not I was hitting/moveing the shoulder. I don`t remember the cartridges but I have at times seen the shoulder move forward-as mearured on a Stoney Point- and the ink on the shoulder showed contact with the die. Not much maybe .002-.003 growth max, but it was there. This lead me to believe the movement had to come after the die hit, only leaveing the expander ball as a culprit. Lube seems to reduce it, as does sizeing a limited amount of neck lenght. Less drag?

Went to the description on the body die and it says that they are designed to "full length resize the case body and bump the shoulder". Essentially this is what you are doing with a regular die except it does not resize the neck. I was thinking that what you described did not resize the case body, only bumped the shoulder back, which would be great cause the case would be still be fire formed to fit the chamber and you would still be able to avoid the crush fit by moving the shoulder back. Don't know if that is possible since moving the shoulder back has to move the brass somewhere.

I believe this guy has the right answer http://www.6mmbr.com/reloadingfroggy.html
A FL die with neck section opened up to size to .002†undersize (bullet diam) so that there is no need to expand the neck.
Neck expanding= deformation

Regards Martin

First, my apologies for diverting this thread.

On Dec 4, Hot Core posted

quote:

---

I'm an EE, myself.

---

He is no such thing.

I challenged his claim, and have given him a wide-open opportunity to show the world that he has the credential that he claimed. I cannot imagine that he would miss such a golden opportunity to rub my nose in the dirt if my claim were wrong.

The questions I posted last night are all things that every engineer learns about, to some degree or other, regardless of discipline. Question 1 is from Sophomore physics, Question 2 is from Jr. year Vector Analysis, and so on. Since they are purely conceptual questions, even I can still answer them, having graduated 35 years ago, and not used them much since. You certainly don't need any such knowledge to be a competent reloader, but you do to be an EE.

Hot Core, you could be a respected and valued member of the board. All you have to do is stop pretending to have knowledge and credentials that you don't, and trying to bluff when someone calls you. Bluffing only works when there is no one around who is competent, and this is a very competent collection of shooters. They have taught me a lot. If you have an opinion, by all means, express it, but call it an opinion. If someone disagrees, that's fine. He's entitled to his opinion, too.

If you make an assertion, you have the burden of supporting it. If you can't support it, or if people find that it has consequences contrary to demonstrated facts, or that it has internal inconsistencies, you do yourself no favor by trying to deny what everyone else can see. It's a sucker move.

Not that anyone has the slightest interest in answers to the quiz, but here they are, just so you know the questions are real, and have real, and simple answers.

quote:

---

1. Roughly how fast is the net drift of electrons in a conductor, moving under the influence of an EMF?

It is surprisingly slow. Even though the electrical signal propagates very quickly, the net drift of individual electrons is 1-100 cm/hour for common circuits.

2. What are the symbols for divergence, gradient, and curl of an expression? What type of expression does each operate on? What type of expression does each produce?

Let (del) represent a small equilateral triangle, apex down, and let (dot) represent a dot in the middle of a line, above where a period would occur. Divergence is (del) (dot) the vector expression. It returns a scalar. Gradient is simple (del) expression. It operates on a scalar and produces a vector. Curl is (del)X the expression. It operates on a vector, and produces a vector.

3. What is the effect of a Fourier Transform on an expression?

The Fourier Transforms flips an expression back and forth between being a function of time and being a function of frequency, with a change in multiplicative constant. Basically switches time series data between "oscilloscope" and "spectrum analyzer".

4. What does it mean to have a system "critically damped", and why is this of interest?

When excited by a single pulse signal, a critically damped system will not oscillate back past zero. This is of interest in mechanical structures, and is often important in electrical systems. For example, if the circuit contains electrolytic capacitors, it hurts their innards if you try to reverse their polarity.

5. Under what circumstances would you use a Taylor's or a MacLauren's expansion?

These are infinite series solutions that are often used when an expression is difficult to analyze. It breaks an expression down into an infinite series of simpler terms, which diminish in importance as the series gets longer.

---

Thank you all for your indulgence. Now, back to our regularly scheduled topic....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ol` Joe:
Woods, just for kicks try to resize your case with the expander stem removed and see if the shoulder moves at the same point in resizeing. I`ve found with out lube the shoulder moves quite a bit as the expander ball runs back out of it and even when lubed with some dies to a smaller degree.

A little magic marker or candle soot on the shoulder will tell if you are setting the shoulder back or not. I "think" what happens in alot of cases is the ball pulls the shoulder forward, more as the neck is sized farther down its lenght, and it is acually pushed back to a shorter lenght as we adjust the die down and pulled back out. Especially with tapered cases such as a `06.

---

Ol` Joe

Did a test on 2 ea 270 cases that had the each been fired twice. One was resized with the expander stem removed and one in the normal way with the expander ball/decapping rod.

Bothe had measurements of 4.045 with the stoney point head space gauge before resizing.

I started by marking the die, running the shell holder all the way up, and screwing the die down hand tight. That we will call 0 turns.

Both shoulders moved forward to 4.047" at about
-3/4 turns and the cases became harder to chamber.

Both remained at 4.047" and hard to chamber until +1/8 turns, where there was an immediate falloff to 4.044" and became easy to chamber.

I saw no difference in any of the reactions except that the concentricity of the necks was much better in the case that was rexized without the expander ball. Also the outside diameter of the neck on the case that was sized without the expander ball was 2.965" and with the expander ball it was 3.01.

Question - isn't the neck that has a smaller inside diameter because it was sized without an expander ball going to hold the bullet with more pressure and does this make a difference?

Also, I found the easiest way to get to PFLR for me with this gun and this die was to run the shell holder up, tighten the die down by hand. Then resize, remove the case. run the shell back up which will hold the die in place, unlock the lock nut, and with a pair of channel locks shlightly tighten the die down with the shell holder still up, and then lock the nut back. Continue this in VERY small increments until the shoulder moves and the case becomes slightly easier to chamber. That happened for me at about another 1/8 turn, but the reaction is immediate, so go slow.

Probably old news to some of you but an epiphany for this rookie.

Seems the best would be to neck size only, move the shoulder back .001", and not resize the case body. Anybody figured out how to do that yet?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Buzz:
I was just wondering how many people use neck sizing dies versus using a Full Length resizing die that you have set to only partially resize.
QUOTE]

I've been partial-sizing for quite a while, started as a substitute for neck-sizing since money was tight, and kept doing it as accuracy was good enough.

Woods;"Seems the best would be to neck size only,move the shoulder back .001",and resize the case body".I agree with that.What I am looking for is a F/L sizer?(neck sizer?) moving back the shoulder of the case .001-.002",not resizing the body of the case(5 reloads or so).Neck area near .0015" press fit on the bullet.I want buying Z_Hat custom dies(174 bucks,expensive).

Woods,
Strange, I tried a 270win just to see what I could find inre to your findings and had the following result.
Unsized fired Remington factory ammo case shoulder measured @4.052 with Stoney Point

RCBS FL sizer set 3/4 turn off the shellholder with ram at top of stroke as starting point and lowered in 1/4 turn increments, with a 1/8 turn as last adjustment before bottoming the die. The case shoulder didn`t show the die hitting it (inked the shoulder and lined the walls with marker)until the die touched the shell holder.

with stem --------------with out stem
@3/4 turn out 4.053 -----------4.052
@1/2 turn out 4.054 -----------4.052
@ 1/4 turn out 4.056 -----------4.053
@1/8 turn out 4.056 -----------4.056
touching the holder 4.051 ---------4.050+

Case necks were NOT lubed dureing this sizeing, outer case walls were. The die didn`t touch the P-ring until closer then 1/4 turn from contact with the shell holder, and case wall and shoulder were also sized at less then this point from appearance of ink on case walls and shoulder. The body / shoulder juction showed a bit of touching at this point (1/4 turn out) and the case sized with the expander stem missing had .001" growth at this point. The P-ring showed ~.001" average reduction in total resizeing for .4791 max to .4782 max with a Starret .00005" resolution mic when cases were sized and shoulder bumped.

There must be a difference in our tools and tecniques, but I`ve found this happening most of the times I`ve looked at it.