I am having a 6.5 96 Mauser sporterized with a Ramline stock. The gun is almost ready and I can't hardly wait to shoot it. My question is this; what is the pros and cons of using European vs. American brass? I know American brass is a little undersized. Will this matter that much with full power handloads? What about the life of the brass and accuracy? One can get twice as much Winchester or Remington brass than say Norma or Lapua.

Since you are probably not going to shoot matches with it, I see no reason to pay twice the money for the brass. I tried Lapua brass in 308 once and got half the life I did from Remington or Winchester. Yes, the US brass has a smaller rim diameter, but I wouldn't worry about it. The advantage you have with the 96 is that you can buy factory euro rounds and be fine as well.

What Larrys said, +1. There was another thread about domestic 8x57 stuff and European and I found there is a difference of .006" in the head size. Sooooo, I wouldn't worry about it.

Dear Chuck Boyer:

I bought some Lapua 243 Winchester brass six months ago as an experiment. On and off, since 1977 I have used Winchester, Remington and Federal 243 Winchester brass.

In my estimation, there is no comparison at all. The Lapua brass is beautifully made, has a larger head diameter .471" nominal, and a nice tight primer pocket. The resizing goes well, and the factory neck annealing appears to be right on.

So far I have only loaded them 3-4 times, but I have no measurable growth nor any of the primer pockets opening up, even with full power loads.

Recently, I shot a five shot 5/8" group and another just slightly larger, while using 100 grain .243 Nosler partitions. I used a 1961 Sako Forrester in .243 Winchester with a slender sporter barrel in the factory stock.

Seems to be pretty damn nice brass. It reminds me of the Federal brass from the 1970's. That, too, was beautifully made.

I have decided to buy the Lapua brass for as many of my rifles as possible. I just wish they made it in 8x57.

Sincerely,

Chris Bemis

To each his own, but following the same rationale, one would drive a Lambrigeni(spl) to his job at the 7/11 and wear an Armani suit to change the oil in his car.
As you pointed out, Chuck, Lapua runs twice the cost of Remington. Actually, more than twice. So, the question is, what are you going to use the brass for? Is this a precision target rifle? If so, then perhaps, Lapua is what you need. If it's for hunting and casual target shooting and fun competition, then perhaps, domestic brass is the way to go. YOUR question is: for my needs, is Lapua worth over twice what domestic brass cost?
I use a lot of Lapua brass but it is use specific for target rifles. Rifles where if you can gain 1/8th inch reduction in your groups, it's cause for a full scale celebration. But I don't stroke my ego by using Lapua brass in my hunting rifles and even some of my factory match rifles, I muddle through with domestic brass .
The difference in price will buy a lot of powder and bullets and gas to go shooting. Don'tchaknow.

I use US made brass for all my rifles except those that chmabered for metric cartridges. The US brass has a little smaller head that spec, but it seems to work. I seem to have had good luck with Lapua as far as longevity with hot loads.

Lou

Yes, Euro brass starts out with a generic case with a .471" head which is on the big side for 30-06, .243, etc but it works. The US start out with a generic case that is .465" (30-06 size) and use it for their Euro brass like 7x57, 8x57, etc. It's on the small side but it works.

Dear Wasbeeman:

Your satirical comparison about using the Lamborghini to drive to work at 7/11 doesn't hold a lot of water as satire.

The owner of a Hess station down the street, and one, who actually works there, drives to work in his 928 Porsche. I am sure if he had a Lamborghini, he'd drive it to work instead.

Let's look at a real world comparison.

In my experience, the more expensive Lapua brass means that I:

1. Don't have to trim it to length;
2. Don't have to take the burrs out of the flash hole;
3. Don't have to reconform the primer pocket;
4. Don't have to throw out seven brand new 35 Whelen Remington brass cases from a bag of 100, because they were split at the neck;
5. Don't have to turn the necks, and
6. Don't have to check if the necks are too thick on one side.

That is worth the extra bucks, since it saves me alot of time.

Also, in my experience, whenever I try to save money on a cheaper tool or cheaper parts (in this case cheaper brass) I find that I waste more time with the cheaper tool, and usually have to replace it. The outcome universally was that I spent 150%-200% more to do it right the second time with a proper tool or parts.

Sincerely,

Chris Bemis

Ahhh, the owner..... Your point?

Chris, obviously your time is very valuable.
However some of us lesser mortals do have a bit of time on our hands now and then and find case prep part of the total shooting package. Kinda like cleaning your rifle after shooting.
To review the time savings of buying Lapua brass, let's look at your list:

1. After you have fire formed Lapua brass, if you are interested in precise accuracy, you will need to uniform the length of your brass. I have fired too much Lapua brass not to know that's the truth.
2. I don't subscribe to that silly, time wasting notion.
3. I don't subscribe to that silly, time wasting notion.
4. The cost of 7 cases out of 100, especially at domestic prices, just doesn't compute. Really.
5. Only if you are shooting a tightly chambered custom rifle or are competing in a factory match is there any reason to turn necks. Granted you may gain a very slight increase in accuracy from a factory rifle --enough to perhaps win a match-- but shooting from field positions, you would NEVER be able to tell the difference.
6. See number 5

Chris, I'm not about to tell you not to buy Lapua brass. And you don't need to justify buying it by saying domestic brass is cheap and tawdy by comparison. As obviously time critical as you are, every little bit helps right?

My point to Chuck was that it was his choice and if he selected domestic brass, it was not a bad thing.

Let me ask you something, Chris. You have listed some trivial little reason as to why you buy Lapua brass, my question is: when you compare Lapua against say Remington is it twice as good?? After you have spent a whole 5 minutes prepping a Remington case and taking a Lapua case straight from the box, is the Lapua twice as good as the Remington? If you can reload the Rem 10 times b/4 you dump it, can you reload the Lapua 20 times? Do you have to trim the Lapua less times than the Remington? Now, I've used a lot a Lapua and a lot of Remington so I've a pretty good idea of the correct answer so let's see what you think.

Dear Wasbeeman:

In my opinion the Lapua brass is a better product that requires less case preparation.

Do I think it is worth twice as much as Remington brass? Yup.

For the $50-60 difference in 100 pieces, who cares what that increased capital cost is over the lifetime of the brass.

I'll re-anneal them at the fifth reloading, but after four reloads, I have not had to trim the cases.

All of my other 243 Winchester neck sized brass I had to trim after each firing.

Its great stuff, that I don't have to redo after each firing.

That's worth $50.00 to me.

As to the 7% failure/defect rate in the bag of new 35 Whelen Remington brass, that is unacceptable to me as a consumer. I'll neck up the 30-06 Lapua brass instead.

Ask yourself this question: Why did General Motors and Chrysler go bankrupt, but Ford, Toyota, BMW, Nissan, Mercedes Benz, etc. did not?

Its why I am on my third BMW. I gave up on GM and Chrysler years ago. And I have been a serious motor head for 32 years. I surely didn't buy the BMW's for status, but because they are much better rides.

Lapua figured it out. They are after a different market.

Sincerely,

Chris Bemis

Chris, had you read my post, you would know that I have said that Lapua needs less prep than domestic. But considering how little time it takes to prep a fire formed case, it is not worth it unless you are shooting competitively. or, as I said, you're doing the ego thing because you will not discern any difference in accuracy between the two types of brass when shooting from field positions. And, with a factory rifle, unless you're quite the accomplished shooter, you'll find damn little (if any) when shooting from the bench.
You stressed the time savings that Lapua would give you yet you reform brass and anneal. I find that rather pardoxical.
You have a good day, hear. Let's let old Chuck do what he wants to do. He's certainly got information overload.