Join this channel to get access to perks: / @reeseontherange As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Tap this link to subscribe! / @reeseontherange
Thanks for the video. And the extra questions which certainly suggests that handloaders aren't dealing with settled science yet. More fun having something else to learn.
Thanks for doing this. All good questions too. I think the problem is that confusion is introduced when different people have different objectives. Are we annealing our brass so we can get longer life out of them? Are we annealing for accuracy (consistent neck tension, as you said). I suspect that a different objective requires a different hardness.
What we need is a way to test hardness at home. We'll, an inexpensive way... It really wouldn't matter if it was the Rockwell scale or the Reese Hardness scale as long as it was consistent. I've looked at the Webster hardness tester but that's still a 500 to $800 experiment. I'm not there... Yet.😏
What is the hardness of the new, unfired case? Would this imply that we should anneal after sizing? Or Maybe both before sizing (for consistency of sizing process) and after?
The new unfired case depends on the manufacturer. They have their own targets, and they guard that number pretty closely. I don't recommend annealing after sizing still at the moment unless there's a different process that can be developed. My concern is a continually increasing hardness that's not the same, whereas annealing before sizing can still land you in the same hardness. That's why a big question I have now is what should a loaded round hardness be? We've been able to generate consistent annealing and sizing results, but there's not a lot of looking at the final result that I'm aware of.
@Reese on the Range can we potentially control how much hardness returns to the brass by changing our neck bushing size? Perhaps the bushing change the hardness as much as the spring tension?
@@reeseontherange The study I linked to above and the work done by AMP are the only studies I have found re softness 'targets'. Given you have access to a Vicker's tester it would be worth testing some new, unfired Lapua brass. My approach is that I want my brass as consistent as possible and hopefully suitably pliant at firing. So I full length size with a bushing die, slightly undersizing the neck, trim etc and then anneal. All that remains is to run a mandrel through the neck for slight expansion, leaving the graphite from this step in the neck for bullet seating immediately afterwards. There's several of us running annealers that allow us to hit a target temp (achieved by calibrating a flame sensor with, for example, 1000F Tempilaq) and then hold that temp within a tight range for desired time (by rapidly toggling on/off the induction board). Of course the 'accuracy' of the brass temp achieved depends on being able to decipher well Tempilaq color change and on flame sensor stability, but this allows for considerable control. However it still lacks the ability to test the outcome of the setup with a hardness tester and of course there is still room to debate what amount of softness is ultimately desirable. With respect to the latter, getting to levels similar to new, unfired premium brass is likely sensible.
@@Longshothawk exactly!!! For instance, if you're only using a neck bushing that gives you 2 thousandths neck tension, you won't have as much hardness (and thus actual force of neck tension) as if you go under 6 thousandths and then use an expander to get back to the same 2 thousandths dimension.
To get it under 100, it had a strong red glow. Even the one that was still a little above 100 had a slight glow, the kind that people say they're looking for with the lights turned off.
Thanks. Then Im doing it right as I espected. Nice to have some real proof, thanks! I found that it takes a lot to ruin the brass. I melted some brass just to check where that point is 😮
