This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
gap. As with Test #1, neither of these limitations makes much difference to the conclusions one can draw. As with Test #1, this test proved that unless the die is adjusted so that the shellholder solidly abuts the die during case resizing, variations in case-to-case resizing resistance will increase case- to-case variation in case body length. This will result in a significant increase in case-to-case variation in functional headspace of resized cases (see Test #3 table).


As we all know, consistency is


the benchmark of accuracy. Therefore, any case-to-case increase in functional headspace variation is almost certain to reduce accuracy potential. This con- firms what I saw with my 270 in 1975. Therefore, I am satisfied that if the shell- holder does not solidly abut the resizing die during the resizing operation, the handloader is giving up a measure of accuracy. Conversely, eliminating any unnecessary case-to-case headspace variation is worthwhile because doing so is almost certain to improve accuracy. For Test #3, I removed the decap-


ping and neck-expanding stem from my tightest 270 Winchester full-length


resizing die. I used that die to progres- sively resize each cleaned and lubricated case in steps. After taking an initial case headspace measurement using the RCBS Precision Mic, I adjusted this die until it was just snug against a fully raised case (my adjustment goal was to remove all slack in the system without applying any additional stress). Then, I turned the die one turn into the press and resized each case with that setting. Then, I used the RCBS Precision Mic to take body-length measurement for each case. Then I turned the die one-turn deeper into the press and repeated the size-and-measure process. I repeated this procedure until


the die was seven turns from the just- touching setting. At this setting, the die was sizing practically 100% of the case body before the die shoulder began to touch the case shoulder. With this die adjustment, when the ram was fully raised the shellholder-to-die gap was about 25/1000-inch. So, the die was not touching the case shoulder.


For the final measurement (listed as “ABUTTING” in the table), I adjusted the die one-half-turn deeper, to assure that the shellholder solidly abutted the


TEST #2


Random 30-06 Springfi eld Range Cases: Resizing Force Comparison Study


Case Make Stress Gap Comments (1/1000-Inch) 12 11 11 10 9


F-C


R-P 1 R-P 2 Win 1 Win 2 Win 3 Win 4 Win 5 Win 6


In a larger sample, such uniformity would be unlikely


10 9


12 11


Super-X 11 Mil-HXP71 9 Mil-TW 54 9 Mil-TW 54 11


Notes: The following factors would progressively increase the differential case-dependent gap between shellholder and die (and therefore functional headspace variation of chambered resized cases): • Less rigid press;


• Less uniform lubrication; • Less effective lubricant; • Sharper or wider case shoulder; • Larger or otherwise tougher cases; • Temperature variation during sizing; and, • Less uniform press operation.


Under these test circumstances, these measured case-to-case stress-gap variations are about as small as we could expect to see with 30-06 and similar cases.


www.varminthunter.org Page 139


Nickel plated same lot, fi red in same gun Newer nickel plated


Same-lot Frontier 270 Winchester Case-Comparison Study


Case Stress Gap Nominal Body Length (1/1000-Inch) -1


9 2 3


10 9


0 -1½


4 10 +1 5 11 +1½ (Relative Headspace)


Black Hills


Ammunition


Gun


Collections Wanted


Phone: 605-341-5211


Fax: 605-341-0431 strum@rapidcity.net


First Stop Guns 701 Main Street


Rapid City, SD 57701 Sightron Sport Optics Headquarters


die during full-length resizing. As noted, I used the RCBS Preci-


sion Mic to measure the length of each case body at each step of this process. With careful use of that tool, I expect measurement precision of about +/- ¼-thousandth-inch. For this study, this degree of measurement accuracy was marginal but sufficient.


Test #3 proved that resizing the


case body at first drives the case shoul- der forward (just as Wilson demonstrat- ed). This also proved that case-to-case variation in springiness is significant (otherwise each measurement change would be essentially identical for each


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190  |  Page 191  |  Page 192  |  Page 193  |  Page 194  |  Page 195  |  Page 196