Like to get your view point on ""reloadable"" steel cases or steel cases in general. Been finding more and more steel cases at the range other than 7.62x39.

I have some really negative feelings about them. What say you and why? roger

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
Like to get your view point on ""reloadable"" steel cases or steel cases in general. Been finding more and more steel cases at the range other than 7.62x39.

I have some really negative feelings about them. What say you and why? roger

I agree, but a buddy of mine has reloaded steel cases in 7.62x39, 7.62x54 and I think some 223's. He says he hasn't had any problems. I can't see any advantage over brass other than cost. If it has any advantages over brass, I would think that the US Military would be using it.

What about case separation or primer pocket expansion will they work harden ?.

I've never been fond of them myself , it's a Quick Cheap fix to the expense of brass is why Foreign Countries use them , after all they're not taking them back or reloading them !.

Be CAREFUL is all I can say .

Shoot Straight Know Your Target . ...

Phil Sharpe's update on his book on handloading has a whole chapter on steel cases and reloading them. It was written just after WWII, and since then steel cases have gotten even better.



Virtually every country in the world made steel cased ammo during WWII for combat use, including the U.S., which produced literally BILLIONS of them for many countries, including our own.

Brass cases ARE better, but steel cases are not problem ammo or junk. The major disadvantage with current ones on the U.S. bulk market is that they generally have berdan primers. Unless you have (and know how to adjust) berdan de-priming capability, and berdan primers to re-cap them with, that can make them a lot more effort to reload than many people care to bother with.

Anyway, historically right after the war many American reloaders would reload them from 10-20 times. It worked fine for them, and they certainly didn't have any better tools than we have now.

I still have some 6.5x53-R steel military cases from that era, and some 8x56-R steel cases from the 1930's, which I am still reloading with Norma primers...no problems yet.

Is any of the wolf stuff boxer primed? I heard that the steel cases are hard on sizing dies and require more force to size, but don't know if that is true or not.

I can think of one distinct advantage, useing a big magnet to pick up your empties, then I wouldn't mind picking up after my AR-15 and AK.

quote:

Originally posted by trekker111:
Is any of the wolf stuff boxer primed? I heard that the steel cases are hard on sizing dies and require more force to size, but don't know if that is true or not. .

Both are probably true, but not nearly to the degree one might imagine. I doubt very many folks here would load enough ammo in their lifetime to wear out a set of dies just because of steel cartridge cases. I know I never have. As to the amount of effort required, my personal experience is that the difference in effort required is noticeable, but not enough to make it difficult.

One additional thing you need to be careful of is corrosive primers in steel cases. Much military ammo of the world is still found with corrosive priming. With corrosive primed steel cases, you should de-prime and wash the cases ASAP after firing. Otherwise, the corrosive deposits' activity will rust out primer pockets and weaken case-heads, just like it rusts barrels if left in them.......

I'm sitting here listening to a good version of the thyeme from TrueGrit. LOUD

One of my biggest concerns with reloading steel cases was the elimination of the case as a fuse ( electrical circuit comparison )or protector from high pressure when establishing near max. loads. Indicaters such as case exspansion, loose or blown primers and bolt handle lift do to case material intrusion into extacter grooves and the like , would definitly appear different to the conditioned reloader.

Would wall thickness be different and affect case capacity to any degree?

How would the bullet retention and crimping force change? would different expanders be dictated?

Would the steel cases prevent sizing cases up or down or moving the shoulder back?

Currently when sizing 8x57 cases I must full length resize in order for the ammo to fit all 7 of my 8mms. This would mean moving the shoulder back depending what rifle fired that case last. I do not segragate ammo per rifle except for my .223 #1. you probably see where I'm going roger

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
I'm sitting here listening to a good version of the thyeme from TrueGrit. LOUD

One of my biggest concerns with reloading steel cases was the elimination of the case as a fuse ( electrical circuit comparison )or protector from high pressure when establishing near max. loads. Indicaters such as case exspansion, loose or blown primers and bolt handle lift do to case material intrusion into extacter grooves and the like , would definitly appear different to the conditioned reloader.

Would wall thickness be different and affect case capacity to any degree?

How would the bullet retention and crimping force change? would different expanders be dictated?

Would the steel cases prevent sizing cases up or down or moving the shoulder back?

Currently when sizing 8x57 cases I must full length resize in order for the ammo to fit all 7 of my 8mms. This would mean moving the shoulder back depending what rifle fired that case last. I do not segragate ammo per rifle except for my .223 #1. you probably see where I'm going roger

Hi, Roger -

Like everything else in handloading, nothing regarding steel cases is simple.

First off, many of the pre-WWII steel cases are not all steel. The Germans (and others)made a metal known as "Tri-Klad" amongst other names. It was thin steel between two sheets of copper, kinda like a sandwich. It was rolled together under such intense pressure it became virtually one sheet of material, with a molecular bond. It was not drawn or formed to case shape until after the rolling, of course. So, yes, it could be reformed IF all you are talking about is moving the shoulder back.

Necking it down might be another story, as the necks would thicken. Then if you either inside reamed them or outside turned them, you would likely remove all of the copper cladding for whichever side you would be cutting, and would then be cutting steel.

Other cases were copper plated, which was a quicker and cheaper method, but not as good from the handloader's point of view.

Still others were simply lacquer-coated mild steel. (Something was required to keep them from rusting until needed.)

Next, as to capacity, early cases are reportedly of thicker material than later ones. Most important, early steel cases did not have the same internal shape as brass cases. They did not significantly "enlarge" as much, as the "charge hole" in them neared the base. So they had smaller capacity than brass cases for the same nominal cartridge. Of course, they also stood pressure better, too.

By mid-WWII the internal dimensions of steel cases were reported as very similar to brass cases, mainly due to advancement in drawing techniques.

Also, there are reports of some European sporting ammo cases being made of steel, though I cannot avow that is correct.

The modulus of expansion is significantly different between brass and steel. I cannot remember which one does not spring back as close to original shape as the other does, but it seems it was the steel ones (they weren't "spring" steel, but soft steel). I guess I could look it up....either way, of course it would change both neck tension, and pressure signs.

There is absolutely no doubt the signs that one is approaching excessively high pressures are different between steel and brass cases.

It has been my experience, though, that normal "middle of the book" loads are absolutely safe in MY guns. I never tried for maximum loads when using steel cases, for the same reason I don't try for maximum loads in brass cases. If I want more powerful loads, I just use a bigger cartridge case and/or bore.

I guess I could sorta sum up by saying that with mild loads, I have been able to use steel cases with full satisfaction, with the same loads I use in brass cases. BUT, that is not something one can count on with hotter loads, or maybe even not with every rifle. They are a useable alternative if supply, political, or other reasons make a person unable to acquire sufficient brass cases for his/her needs.

When reloading steel cases, one is learning a whole new ball game, as different from brass cases as girl's slow pitch softball is from Major League Baseball. To be successful at it with high pressure loads will take a lot of experience, reading, trial, and error. If one is not willing to use mild loads only, or to undertake the study and experimentation (risks) associated with high pressure loads, then he probably should practice enlightened self-interest and stick to brass cases ONLY.

Hope I haven't stated this in a way which ruffles any feathers. Am just trying to warn off some of the newbies from assuming that because the cases look similar, they are the same.

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by bartsche:

Hi, Roger -

Hope I haven't stated this in a way which ruffles any feathers. Am just trying to warn off some of the newbies from assuming that because the cases look similar, they are the same.

I do believe we are singing from the same song book. You just happen to have a better voice. roger

never loaded steel for rifle, but sure have reloaded a bunch of old 45's long ago. didn't do any thing special outside of lubing the chit out of them.