I have been checking case capacities using water,I have always used resized cases to do this,just playing around today with some 450 Alaskan brass,I took readings from both fired & unfired cases,fired brass was 96 gr h2o & unfired was at 86 gr h2o,which number do I use for load calculations?thanks for your comments.

The difference between the case volume in unfired cases and fired cases is the fire forming which "extrudes" or swells the brass all over its internal surface, including the neck, shoulder body and base head, as well as the primer pocket. The amount of swelling depends on the internal pressure and further it has to be pointed out that cases fired in a different rifles will have different dimensions.

There are quite a variety of dies available, some 2 die, some 3 die, some 4 die and even a 5th crimping die.

In a 2 die set you automatically full length resize the case. That reduces the case so it slips easily into the chamber. That is most desirable for hunting loads which you will want to chamber effortlessly.

When calculating your powder charge, look up the SAAMI specs on your case capacity. Your bullet will take up a certain percent of the capacity. What is left is available for charging. You need to look up load in publications. That will give you suggested and maximum loads.

There are 97 different gun powders presently. They range from fast to slow. Only a small proportion of these will be compatible with your caliber, perhaps 10 or 15. There will be quite a spread in pressures from one powder to another.

Some of those will leave you with a little bit of space in rifle cartridges and a LOT of space in pistol cartridges. Some powders may overfill the case and need to be compressed. I was never one to push the envelope and try to milk the absolute maximum performance, velocity. I prefer to be conservative by nature. Overloads lead to hard bolt opening, case head swelling, case life shortened, hard extractions - the last thing you want on a hunt.

Your propensity to measure case volumes by weighing water is very laudible. That's definitely a healthy curiosity. Politely I will explain that it is not a useable criteria for reloading.

Bottom line - resize and go by the book. I'll also mention again the Lee case measuring die that checks the diameter of your cases, the length and gives a visual on over/under neck and head. I have one for each caliber I own and too I have the conventional cases that are calibrated to SAAMI specs.

That was a lot of writing just to beat around the bush!
In essence you did'nt answer the mans question.

To do that i will say this: Use the unsized volume as it is what will be present for cumbustion when pressure rises.
That being said you must have a big fat chamber since it allows a case to swell 10%+ in volume during firing.

quote:

Originally posted by wetibbe:
The difference between the case volume in unfired cases and fired cases is the fire forming which "extrudes" or swells the brass all over its internal surface, including the neck, shoulder body and base head, as well as the primer pocket. The amount of swelling depends on the internal pressure and further it has to be pointed out that cases fired in a different rifles will have different dimensions.

There are quite a variety of dies available, some 2 die, some 3 die, some 4 die and even a 5th crimping die.

In a 2 die set you automatically full length resize the case. That reduces the case so it slips easily into the chamber. That is most desirable for hunting loads which you will want to chamber effortlessly.

When calculating your powder charge, look up the SAAMI specs on your case capacity. Your bullet will take up a certain percent of the capacity. What is left is available for charging. You need to look up load in publications. That will give you suggested and maximum loads.

There are 97 different gun powders presently. They range from fast to slow. Only a small proportion of these will be compatible with your caliber, perhaps 10 or 15. There will be quite a spread in pressures from one powder to another.

Some of those will leave you with a little bit of space in rifle cartridges and a LOT of space in pistol cartridges. Some powders may overfill the case and need to be compressed. I was never one to push the envelope and try to milk the absolute maximum performance, velocity. I prefer to be conservative by nature. Overloads lead to hard bolt opening, case head swelling, case life shortened, hard extractions - the last thing you want on a hunt.

Your propensity to measure case volumes by weighing water is very laudible. That's definitely a healthy curiosity. Politely I will explain that it is not a useable criteria for reloading.

Bottom line - resize and go by the book. I'll also mention again the Lee case measuring die that checks the diameter of your cases, the length and gives a visual on over/under neck and head. I have one for each caliber I own and too I have the conventional cases that are calibrated to SAAMI specs.

Appreciate your comment,I use QL for reloading,it says 97 grs h2o for the 450 Alaskan,internet search reveals 88 grs h2o,this is a wild cat cartridge,kinda confusing don't ya think? I have not seen any SAAMI specs anywhere,besides there are about four variations of this cartridge,plus the fact that different brands of brass are giving me different readings,why does Quick load mention h2o case capacity if this not a viable way to measure? anyways I am not one to maximize my loads neither,it's just a general guideline.

quote:

Originally posted by The Dane:
That was a lot of writing just to beat around the bush!
In essence you did'nt answer the mans question.

To do that i will say this: Use the unsized volume as it is what will be present for cumbustion when pressure rises.
That being said you must have a big fat chamber since it allows a case to swell 10%+ in volume during firing.

That is kinda what I was thinking,the fired case gives you true volume,& I was wondering as well whether I have an improved chamber or something,thanks for your response.

Hey Guys.

I'm a little bit backed up presently but I will get to all of your issues in the next few days. It takes time to research.

The Dane. You know something. I want to pick your brains. Stay with us.

Other matters pending which are definitely in the pipe line.

quote:

,fired brass was 96 gr h2o & unfired was at 86 gr h2o,

I run some numbers.....seems there are 454 grams per pound.....and 7000 grains per pound...this means (if I haven't made a horrible blunder) that there are 6 1/2 grains per cubic centimeter.....(this based on the definition of a gram as the mass of 1.000 cubic centimeter of water.....)

If you weighed 10 grains difference this means that the volume changed by 1.54 cubic centimeters.....

I suspect something isn't right here...Do it again and see if there was some error in the weighing or measuring....

QL uses fired volume.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

quote:

,fired brass was 96 gr h2o & unfired was at 86 gr h2o,

I run some numbers.....seems there are 454 grams per pound.....and 7000 grains per pound...this means (if I haven't made a horrible blunder) that there are 6 1/2 grains per cubic centimeter.....(this based on the definition of a gram as the mass of 1.000 cubic centimeter of water.....)

If you weighed 10 grains difference this means that the volume changed by 1.54 cubic centimeters.....

I suspect something isn't right here...Do it again and see if there was some error in the weighing or measuring....

Took your advice & rechecked,tried this on five cases & you were right the difference is not that great at all,it's between 1-2 grs is all,the lighter cases giving the highest,so I think my question is kind of redundant now,although I am still wondering why Quick Load gives 97 grs & my highest has been 94 grs so far? I am going to assume that its based on a different brand of brass,thanks everyone,at this point it wont matter much whether I use the fired cases or the resized cases to check case capacity because the difference is not that great anyhow.

quote:

I am going to assume that its based on a different brand of brass

I've found a lot of variance in brass weight...hense capacity.....and a great deal is in military brass compared to commercial brass.

I suspect you're right on here with that assessment.

Remember the density of brass compared to water. A large difference in brass weight doesn't always mean a large capacity difference.

Use FIRED case volumes FROM EACH RIFLE/PISTOL CHAMBER individually as each chamber will have a different volume, especially when doing wildcats. Powley uses FIRED case volume from the weapon chamber also.

Use this program or one like it to convert...http://www.onlineconversion.com/... much easier than doing the math the long way.

QL's volumes might be averages of several brands, I have found differences between my actual fired case volumes and QL's amounting to 5 gr's in some cases.

Use a digital scale with an accuracy of at least 0.0l gram (g) and round off to 0.1 gr. I have a couple of 80g x 0.01g jewelers digitals that cost <$20.00 that work great. One gram = ~15.4 grains so these scales measure to 0.15 grains accurately which is plenty close for case volume work.

AND...remember these are very small water amounts...I use an emptied saline solution bottle to fill my cases and each drop measures ~0.3 gram, ~0.5 grain or ~0.001 oz.

Set the case on the scale, set the mode to grains, tare out...this will give you a direct volume measurement...fill the case up to the shoulder...stick your finger over the mouth and bang the case a few times against the desk, then top off...that will make sure the bubbles are knocked loose from inside the case and no false measurements.

As mentioned...lots of variation but in reality all this analosity still only gives a ball park figure... and barring you having a pressure testing system, with/without a chrono, you STILL have to test your loads and only get a relatively close ball park figure.

My latest 375 JDJ chrono figures are ~100-125 fs less than what QL calculates and my case volumes are 0.5 to 4 gr different than QL's 375 JDJ or 375/444 depending on what brand/caliber case I formed my cases from.

Volume differences come from case design, wall thickness, inside base shape, extractor cut shape/depth etc...heavier cases usually mean less internal volume and visa versa but NOT always the case.

Do a search if you haven't already done so...lots if good information on this subject here on A.R.

Luck

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:
QL uses fired volume.

Agreed, the proper way to measure case capacity is to use fired brass that has not been re-sized.

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:
Remember the density of brass compared to water. A large difference in brass weight doesn't always mean a large capacity difference.

Yup....this is another in a long list of contributions of data from ramrod340. He has to be the single greatest contributor to my personal data bank on the subject of reloading.

If there was a college on the subject, Paul would be the first with a PhD in the field. We are indeed fortunate to have him posting here on AR

Red flag up! There is a problem.

First a little dissertation: There are thousands of cartridges. Some are similar and some are offshoots of previous/older. Over the years various manufacturers have engaged in a lot of sales spiel, spin, promotion, specialty, wildcats, custom. It may get confusing to some but not to me. I fell off the turnip truck many decades ago.

Fast forward to Ken Howells book designing and forming custom cartridges. I knew Ken back in the old days. He was supposed to publish volume 2 but I haven't seen it and heard back in 2008 that he was in a nursing home in Apache Junction, Arizona.

Ken says/writes that just the .308 brass can vary 35 grains from one manufacturer to another. My own personal experience with .30-06 Military match brass, gifted to me from a friend/colleague was a nightmare wake up call.

http://www.loaddata.com/member....cfm?MetallicID=1167

450 Alaska case dimensions shown.

Ken says the 450 Alaska case length is 2.1450

QL says the case length is 2.250.

Over the years Ken found many discrepancies and errors emanating from various writers.
___________________________________________

In the above, 2 parameters were considered, new case and fired case dimensions. But there are actually 3 elements the third being the resized volume.

1. New
2. Fired
3. Resized.

QL allows user input to change data/numbers.

The appropriate number to use is the one that correspond to the case condition at the time of loading.

Kens book says the 450 Alaska case weighs 1,069 gr brass; 125 gr water.

I'll mention also that I buy the Stony Point industry standard brass cases for all cartridges that I own. These have a threaded hole in the primer head part and they are used in conjunction with the Stony Point OAL gauge for bullet seating off the lands. This won't help with weight and internal volume but it will provide SAAMI external case dimensions.

Bottom line. The discrepancies in 450 Alaska cartridge need to be smoked out and resolved. dimension

quote:

In the above, 2 parameters were considered, new case and fired case dimensions. But there are actually 3 elements the third being the resized volume.1. New2. Fired3. Resized.QL allows user input to change data/numbers.The appropriate number to use is the one that correspond to the case condition at the time of loading.

Ok I haven't have my first so I'm

Just went back to the QL manual. It states use a case fired in the planned rifle and measure the case capacity prior to resize.

Yes QL allows you to input whatever capacity you wish. I just read it as the calculated results are better using fired non-resized. What am I missing?



As to the brass density comment just sharing it because not long ago I was scratching my head about a comparison of cases. And in a hurry forgot that little item. A member here reminded me to put that piece of data in my brain archive.

A FIRED case measures the RIFLE CHAMBER volume closely, discounting the brass volume...A SIZED case measures the SIZER CHAMBER closely discounting the brass volume.

As I mentioned somewhere in relation to my 375 JDJ but translates to ANY CARTRIDGE...a NEW Hornady 9.3x62 resized to 375 JDJ, trimmed to 2.24" had an internal volume of ~66-67 gr H2O...a trimmed FIRED case volume was
~69.4 gr H2O and resized, fire formed case ~1 gr less...I don't have that data in front of me so I could be off slightly.

Knowledge, expertise, years of experience aside, very, VERY few AVERAGE RELOADERS have the ability or desire to test the density of cartridge brass or to compare it to QL's data...in theory and reality.

QL allows me to input case data, save it and play around to your hearts content...I make up a new case with the parameters from a case fired in the actual rifle I'm going to use and those parameters allowed by QL, name it, then use THAT case data to calculate data. My 375 JDJ case data is saved as 9.5x57mm_9.3x62 HORN I also have the cases new, unfired AND sized case data to compare which will be deleted very soon as it's not needed anymore.

In actuality and reality, time and time again, all I get from QL AND Powley are approximate, CALCULATED, rough numbers that depend on the algorithm's extensiveness that run 100-200 fs or more contrary to what the chrono says...and as QL states in the manual, depends on many factors and can be inaccurate...as anyone who uses it extensively knows very well...and chrono numbers can vary just as much depending on the accuracy of the chrono...my Beta Chrony is ~100 fs faster than my Oehler 33 and the 33 is MUCH more accurate, so splitting flea hairs is not about QL's output.

These facts have been mentioned time and time again but many times, I think, it is forgotten(dis-remembered? ) in the "heat of battle".

One could argue that this velo difference is no more or no less than variation coming from differences in barrels, even ones that come off the assembly line sequentially and used to test velos...something that, again, is only theory...I haven't read of anyone doing such a test but it would be very interesting to know.

The difference between a fired and a resized case also depends on how well the sizing die fits the chamber dimensions...the closer they are together the smaller the difference...
averaged over at least 5 cases.

The difference between data with my 375 JDJ AND most of my other rifle cases where sized case and chamber match closely is ~.2 gr and ~2 H20 depending on the case size...less in 223 and more in mags, and the output is similar to using variation in case trim length.

Depending on the case size and caliber the difference in 0.01" can be large when comparing a .224 cal to a 50 cal, say.

Everyone here with any amount of experience and with a significant level of "nosiness" has sometime in their past figured this out and it's always interesting to me to read their views.

Other "problems" I see is very few give actual case measurements, trim lengths, new/old, sized/unsized, whether the sizer fits the chamber closely and so forth, which leads to generalities rather than specifics and mis-reading, "reading into" doesn't help either.

Always something new to learn and things to refresh the memory here on A.R.

Luck

quote:

A FIRED case measures the RIFLE CHAMBER volume closely, discounting the brass volume

Isn't that what you actually want? Assuming you are letting a set of formula's predict your results. If I take a 280 case and load and fire it in a 280AI chamber the QL prediction is WAY off. Use a volume from a formed AI case the prediction is darn close. Going from memory can't remember where the actual data is stored.

NONAGONAGIN I can't agree more QL is nothing more than a prediction. A modern day powley with more options to play with plus a memory option.

My reference to density was simply remind that you can't simply ratio the weight of 2 case to determine volume diff. I know I did it here online a while back without thinking it trough.

Stealing some data from another site they call UMC 06 brass as 206g and Nosler as 181.8. So the UMC was 13% heavier. The volume of the Nosler sure isn't 13% greater.
adjust for the density difference between water and brass and you should be darn close.

Paul & Nonag:

Time out.

I spoke to Ed at NECO about the manual and he guided me. I just downloaded/PRINTED it - 120 pages !!!!!! I will actually read every page.

I was backlogged before but now significantly loaded up. But that's OK I have the time.

I'll have to value judge loading this onto my grandson. He's smart as a whip and entering 2nd year advanced engineering college. Can't overwhelm him with peripherals. None the less thanks for the in depth thought provocations.

Physics is physics and numbers don't lie...to often. It would be nice to have the brass formulations of the various case makers and derive a simple formula to use, although all you really need is the empirically derived case volume you are going to use, the rest is just for BS'ing around the camp fire.

Doing some load workups and thought I would be more precise and do a before and after...fired vs resized case using the same primer while I eat lunch...I didn't' get really anal and weight the before/after primer weight...(my bad ) but used the same, fired primer cup to keep it closer.

B4 ~69.3 gr H2O...after ~68.1 gr...difference ~1.2 gr H2O.

Running the original load specs and B4/after numbers, 69.0(rounded down, I use .5 gr to KISS it.) gr H2O case volume, 64.8 gr CFE223 - 99.9% density/235 gr Speer/3.08" COAL - 0.010 shy of touching/2.24" trim QL gave 2775 fs/55536... ACTUAL Oehler 33 chrono ~2665 for 2 shots/ES 22fs...

Using QL with 69.3 gr volume/same amount of CFE - trim length/COAL etc, gave 2270 fs/54916/99.5%, adjusting to ~100%, powder increased to ~65.1/2784/55927...

And using 68.1 - 2793/57497/101.4%...adjusting for a 100% load dropped the powder amount to 64.0/2754 fs/55030.

It's interesting to see just what the program can do and even MORE interesting to see what those various changes actually do to pressures...information NOT lost on the more experienced but maybe lost or turned into bones of contention to some less understanding of what they can do with software...NO Diss or flame intended or implied.

Luck

It seems evident that some of us are expressing views and trying to communicate, in a cogent fashion, but we are apparently not all on the same song sheet - YET! That's typical.

After decades of trying to understand all of the most intricate, in depth, scrutiny and analysis of ballistics, by many very well educated egg heads, I am left with the conclusion that the many factors of case size, shape, bullets differences, primers, powders, gun barrels and more, are so complex that it is virtually impossible to understand the whys and wherefores of the variations for no plausible reason. Perhaps this is due to too high an expectation for precision and meticulous consistency where it just doesn't exist in the real world. Thus we/I may take a step back and accept that there will be inherent errors that will give us some close approximations and a plus or minus margin of error.

_______________________________________________

Try as I may I just didn't understand the above calculations completely.

Absolutely...but will never happen...it's called EGO and the male's need to have pissing contests no matter what, until a pecking order is established, or just plain, ordinary pecker breath meanness by those that have no life and want to stir the pot...which...again...will continue to happen on this forum that is full of testosterone.

Those that understand all those variables, understand the intricacies...those that don't understand haven't had time to learn, can't or don't want to and the bones of contention are contained in those mis-understanding/non-understandings.

There are no rules as in a classical debate... people mix and match to prove some point in their minds that is mostly unprovable coupled with a case of "what's good for General Bull Moose/my uncle, grandpa...etc., is good for ME", and general resistance to change...most are average, good middle of the road people with specific needs for specific actions that don't need or want complications, with limited knowledge/understanding of complicated ballistics OR need for the esoteric nit-picking that sometimes goes on...so the face-of goes on.

We males read into every post that which we want/need to read...sometimes it is useful, sometimes not...lots of very knowledgeable folks here but communication is not always present.

You can't intellectualize as that has very little to do with what side of the brain is being used.

No flame or diss intended...just observation. The world has turned and not necessarily for the best...everyday news is a microcosm of todays mental position, and one has only to watch the young to fear for the future of America.

Basically...ain't no thang, Bro...and/or F...OFF...SAD commentary on what has become of a great nation.

Tirade over...for a while.


Did you get your manual downloaded? You can access the manual ay START, all programs, QUICKLOAD, USERS MANUAL...anytime...and through ToolTip...Open QL, click on INFO and check "TOOLTIP help enabled"...if you didn't already learn/know.

Luck

NG:

Just to inform, I was actually one of Saeed's original moderators back in 1998-1999 when he first started. Back in those days the site was small and it was an absolute melee of uncontrollable lunatics posting. After a few years I burned out and I am now back after a decade hiatus, as I amplified -for my grandson. not for me. I'm over the hill , done, finished for myself. I'm involved to perpetuate for friends and gun aficionados.

Your philosophical ramblings are completely understood. You obviously have a very high IQ.

The premise of the dominant alpha male philosophy is understood. However it detracts from the basic matters here.

Sip a coffe and have a good day.

______________________________________________

I got the QL manual downloaded and printed 120 pages.

I remember those days...Did the same thing several times over the last 15 years...about to do it again...it certainly isn't as bad as it was.

What did Spock say when the dude snaked his wife...to paraphrase...wanting and having are not mutually exclusive...wanting is the dream, having is the nightmare.

Understanding doesn't change the action necessarily, unfortunately.

Luck

NG

Just a couple of quick questions to pick your brains;

I'm in the midst of an in depth study of pressure effect of various bullets of lead, copper clad lead and solid copper. The spreads are truly astonishing pressure wise amounting to significant differences from acceptable to very dangerous.

By way of explanation there are multiple considerations some of which are bullet hardness, bullet shape, *( ogive, boat tail,sliding length in contact with lands and grooves ), types of lands and grooves, lands and grooves diameters vs bullet diameter. Obturation of bullet.

Definition:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obturation

You seem to have easy access to chronographs.

My question: Have you been able to correlate, or quantify, the relationship of velocity to other parameters of external or internal ballistics ?

Either directly, or indirectly, is this even a ball park indicator ?

I quit trying to re-invent the wheel long ago...I have 2 chrono's now, A beta Chrony and an Oehler 33 and trust the 33 to produce velos closer to actual...I don't have any pressure testing equipment and am LONG past the need for that data....my interest is in what one or a few bullets do accuracy wise...many of my rifles shoot only one bullet, usually at or near top pressure/velos as indicated in many reloading manuals and produce the .5"/3-5 round/100-125 yd accuracy I expect/require.

QL gives very good information regarding shot start pressures and weighing factors so a thorough perusal of those definitions will get you going.

The information you are looking for is out there scattered all over the net and in publications...if you can obtain "the Powley Paper's" much of what you are looking for is contained in them...there is NO shortcut to understanding the parameters you seek, just research and reading...much of that information is contained here on A.R. but I would seek out more strenuously obtained empirical data rather that some forum blurb without any background knowledge of where the data came from.

Short answer I...NO CORRELATION...other than bullet hardness does impact pressure/velo/obturation...and most of that information is well beyond the scope of any forum, although you can find some now and then.

Each shooter seeks out their own nirvana as to what they consider adequate and Madison Ave is more than happy to "feed the need" and provide all the fodder for forum arguments.

Lots of information on various bullets upset contained herein both actual and biased...think of how much time, money and man power are involved by the various bullet makers to find that "unobtanium" perfect bullet.

As to what little brain I have left that hasn't atrophied or "Alz-hammered", I forgot what the question was...

Luck