Hi all,

Squeezing down and trimming some .223 brass into .222, and heard from a friend I need neck ream. Is this true, or would letting the rifle and loading process dictate be OK, too?

Thanks,
Stephen

depends on the rifle, but usually - i think you can get away with an outside neck turner, rather than an inside neck reamer

Thanks Jeffe, I like the tip.

Stephen

I've done hundreds, never turned any, inside or outside.

quote:

Originally posted by craigster:
I've done hundreds, never turned any, inside or outside.

It would depend on the rifle and also how deep seated a bullet.

You are turning the thicker brass of the shoulder of the 223 into some of the neck of the 222.

Both are factory Remingtons, a 722 and a 700.

Craigster,

Sounds as I am worrying about a non-existing problem. Haven't loaded any yet, so will wait until the loading process or rifle suggests a method adjustment. I surely like your affirmation, thanks.

Stephen

quote:

Originally posted by craigster:
I've done hundreds, never turned any, inside or outside.

quote:

Originally posted by Lord Frith:
Craigster,

Sounds as I am worrying about a non-existing problem. Haven't loaded any yet, so will wait until the loading process or rifle suggests a method adjustment. I surely like your affirmation, thanks.

Stephen

quote:

Originally posted by craigster:
I've done hundreds, never turned any, inside or outside.

Factory rifles chamber are usually oversize and that includes the neck which is the critical dimension for this exercise.

my last 222 was a super duper shilen DGR ... i had to neck turn 22 brass, because the guy that ordered it wanted super tight necks -- and sold it because he had to turn necks

It would be unusual to need to thin the necks of 223's reformed into .222's. I've never needed to in several .222's.

I just finished doing about 500. My 722 doesn't seem to mind if the neck's a little thick. No problem with chambering, and it still throws acceptable groups- as in tighter than I can hold with an 18x scope at 100 yds.

Porosonik.

quote:

Originally posted by Porosonik:
I just finished doing about 500. My 722 doesn't seem to mind if the neck's a little thick. No problem with chambering, and it still throws acceptable groups- as in tighter than I can hold with an 18x scope at 100 yds.

Porosonik.

One possibly nice thing is that if the necks are a little thicker than normal and you wanted to do a skim turn on the necks to clean up concentricity, your necks probably won’t end up super thin after turning and will work harden less in multiple firings. Years ago, when I worried about accuracy a lot more, I would neck turn crapy Winchester 222 brass. It would end up VERY thin, and not last very long. I loaded it with as much 4198 as it could stand, though.

Have you done 223 to 222?
What brass are you using?
You do not need a neck reamer in my opinion.

Your certainly better off if you don't have to neck ream, never neck ream if everything works without it..I see so much of that these days, and all you have is a loose neck and overworked brass...Ive made a lot of 222s from 223s and short of a bench rest chambered rifle none required neck reaming..Also when I do need neck reaming, Ive had much better luck with outside neck reaming as opposed to inside neck reaming.

BTW a proper outside neck ream should only take off enough metal to even up the neck,not make it smaller so to speak...

Its always a good idea to start off with a chamber case before you ruin the throat..

I have to outside neck ream my 6x45 or it won't chamber the 223 case, it has a 0 tolerance bench rest chamber and I can actually reload it without re-sizing with WW and IMI brass, but not with Rem or other brands as I recall.