Malig8r Posted April 24, 2017 Report Share Posted April 24, 2017 Ok, I've never necked up a cartridge case...doesn't that work harden the case neck and do you have to anneal it afterwards? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted April 24, 2017 Report Share Posted April 24, 2017 Repeated reloading and use is what will work harden the brass, and at that point if you don't anneal, you will split brass. Annealing takes the work hardening out, and extends the life of it. Simply expanding it won't work harden it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted April 24, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2017 (edited) 7 hours ago, Malig8r said: Ok, I've never necked up a cartridge case...doesn't that work harden the case neck and do you have to anneal it afterwards? Damn 98 , you typed faster then me . I plan on Annealing the Brass before I form it to make it easier on the brass to do so ,but look what came today . Port is close to 0.100" , kind of large , but we will see . Edited April 24, 2017 by survivalshop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtallen83 Posted April 24, 2017 Report Share Posted April 24, 2017 How big is that gas port? from a guy that always seems to need to know these things.............. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted April 24, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, survivalshop said: Port is close to 0.100" , kind of large , but we will see . This is in the post & I have to get some drill bits out to see what they show . My 16" 308 rifle gas port is around 0.1095" , if I'm typing the reading correct . Its a 20" Light weight Barrel , SS of course . I think I'm going to just put a Thread Protector on for now , till I do a little research on what if any benefit a different Muzzle Device made for a .25 cal. , I don't really think it will make a difference , but have no raw data to back it up , one way or the other . Edited April 24, 2017 by survivalshop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted April 24, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2017 (edited) Talking about Gas Port Sizes , I got this from the Tactical Machining on a search . AR-15 GAS PORT SIZES Disclaimer: These are lists of compiled information from multiple sources. While we make our best effort to test and produce these should be considered for reference only. Any time you start messing with the gas port on your rifle you run the risk of destroying the barrel or causing it to be over gassed. It is much better to slowly work your way up to what you would be happy with. AR-15 Platform 5.56mm 20" rifle 5.56 0.0935 20" rifle 5.56 0.096 20" rifle 5.56 0.098 16" mid 5.56 0.078 16" mid 5.56 0.081 16" car 5.56 0.0625 16" car 5.56 0.065 16" car 5.56 0.07 14.5" car 5.56 0.067 14.5" car 5.56 0.086 11.5" car 5.56 0.081 11.5" car 5.56 0.089 24" rifle 5.56 0.089 AR-15 Platform 7.62x39mm Conversion 20" rifle 7.62x39 0.12 20" rifle 7.62x39 0.125 16" car 7.62x39 0.078 16" car 7.62x39 0.081 16" car 7.62x39 0.0938 DPMS LR-308 Style Rifle 18" rifle 0.308 0.0960 18" car 0.308 0.0635 16" mid 0.308 0.078 16" mid 0.308 0.081 16" car 0.308 0.07 16" car 0.308 0.073 16" car 0.308 0.076 20" rifle 0.308 0.0935 20" rifle 0.308 0.096 AR-15 Platform 300 BLK Conversion Subsonic Ammo 16" car 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.12 16" car 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.125 16" car 300 BLK SUPRESSED 0.106 16" car 300 BLK SUPRESSED 0.11 16" pistol 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.067 16" pistol 300 BLK SUPPRESSED 0.086 9.5" pistol 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.093 9.5" pistol 300 BLK SUPPRESSED 0.093 8.1" pistol 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.104 8.1" pistol 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.12 8.1" pistol 300 BLK SUPRESSED 0.086 8.1" pistol 300 BLK SUPRESSED 0.093 AR-15 Platform 300 BLK Conversion Supersonic Ammo 16" pistol 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.0625 16" pistol 300 BLK SUPPRESSED 0.059 16" car 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.099 16" car 300 BLK SUPPRESSED 0.093 9.5" pistol 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.073 9.5" pistol 300 BLK SUPPRESSED 0.067 8.1" pistol 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.076 8.1" pistol 300 BLK SUPPRESSED 0.067 The 300 Blackout data has been compiled from Micro MOA Edited April 25, 2017 by survivalshop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted April 24, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2017 I was wondering about a Head space Gage & found this . Looks like the .223 HS Gage will work for the 25-45 Sharps also. http://www.jgstools.com/HS Gauge Interch.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted April 24, 2017 Report Share Posted April 24, 2017 That's a good looking barrel! I like the profile on that. I ended up with the heavy barrel on the 18", at least heavy out to the midlength gas port. It's a constant .740" after that. Can't wait to see some of the loads you come up with - I'm playing around with a couple Barnes 100 TSX tonight, to see if I get them seated to max mag length. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted April 25, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2017 I ended up ordering the same 90 gr. Bullets you have tested , Hand Guard & Gas Tube were also included in the order from Brownells so I'll be running as soon as that order is in . Gives me about a week to get the Brass ready . I will order more next week or so of a different flavor to test . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted April 25, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2017 (edited) Took some drill bits & the 3/32" fits like a glove , could be a hair larger but I'm going with it , because it fit pretty good .That would make it about the same as a 20 " rifle length 5.556 Barrel . 3/32" = 0.09375" Edited April 25, 2017 by survivalshop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt.Cross Posted April 25, 2017 Report Share Posted April 25, 2017 7 minutes ago, survivalshop said: Took some drill bits & the 3/32" fits like a glove , could be a hair larger but I'm going with it , because it fit pretty good .That would make it about the same as a 20 " rifle length 5.556 Barrel . 3/32" = 0.9375" 3/32" = 0.09375" That extra zero is very important... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted April 25, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2017 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Matt.Cross said: 3/32" = 0.09375" That extra zero is very important... The way I had it before I edited it , made it a very big hole I did change it once , it didn't edit the change , WTF Edited April 25, 2017 by survivalshop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted April 26, 2017 Report Share Posted April 26, 2017 Found these while looking up .277wolverine data. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted April 26, 2017 Report Share Posted April 26, 2017 Interesting, interesting, interesting... So, in the load testing last weekend, I only had 5 rounds in a mag at a time... So, I just finished loading another 100 rounds of 90gr SGK BTHP, 23.1gr RL-7, once fired PMC Bronze cases. Set them all at 2.260" again. Grabbed up my Lancer L5AWM FDE 30-round mag, and proceeded to load it up full. No go. With about half a mag full, it got tight, and I kept shoving rounds in there anyway, until I got to 30. They were tight in there. So, I strip them out, one by one. With about half a mag left to go, the follower stopped and I took the mag apart to get the rest of them out - 2 were stuck in the middle, and I smacked the mag body on the counter to get them out. I grabbed out ANOTHER of the same mag, same results... Fuk. Alright, I'm thinking... I effed up this load, and they're too long... Measure them ALL - either 2.260" or 2.259". Conclusion? Lancer L5AWM might be 2.272" at the mouth of the mag, but that fucker tapers down in the middle. Solution? Resize all the loaded ammo to 2.255". Done. Now, I go to load up that Lancer 30-round mag again - it was getting tight in the middle again, but it was easier to load. I stripped them all out, and they all came out, but somewhere around the middle of the mag, I had to give the mag a smack to get that next round up to the feedlips and strip it out. It was only a couple times. That's a big no-go in my book, if they're not gonna feed reliably. Solution? Downsize the ammo again? Maybe. I need to seat it all shorter, until all the rounds feed, and THEN duplicate the load testing again, at shorter seated lengths. Fuk me... Or, try a Lancer 20-rounder. Okay, I did that, and the rounds are kinda tight in there, but they all stripped out okay, even loaded now at 2.255" COL. I'll shoot that mag and see if rifle recoil is enough to keep bouncing them all up to the top... Hey, there's a Gen 3 PMag 20 - load it all up fine, they all strip out easily - like normal. Testing that one today, too. Oh, there's 2 x Gen 2 PMag 20 - let's load 'em. Okay, issues in one, but not the other... Hmmm... Look at them closely, and see what it is - bumps on the sides of the mags, at the top, and the little protrusion that separates rounds at the top of the mag. "Massage" them a little with the knife, and they load and strip just fine. So, interesting development with the .257 ammo loaded up to 2.260" now 2.255" here, and magazine choice... I'll figure all this out, and report back with range results, and magazine pictures showing what's up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted April 26, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 26, 2017 (edited) 17 minutes ago, 98Z5V said: Interesting, interesting, interesting... So, in the load testing last weekend, I only had 5 rounds in a mag at a time... So, I just finished loading another 100 rounds of 90gr SGK BTHP, 23.1gr RL-7, once fired PMC Bronze cases. Set them all at 2.260" again. Grabbed up my Lancer L5AWM FDE 30-round mag, and proceeded to load it up full. No go. With about half a mag full, it got tight, and I kept shoving rounds in there anyway, until I got to 30. They were tight in there. So, I strip them out, one by one. With about half a mag left to go, the follower stopped and I took the mag apart to get the rest of them out - 2 were stuck in the middle, and I smacked the mag body on the counter to get them out. I grabbed out ANOTHER of the same mag, same results... Fuk. Alright, I'm thinking... I effed up this load, and they're too long... Measure them ALL - either 2.260" or 2.259". Conclusion? Lancer L5AWM might be 2.272" at the mouth of the mag, but that fucker tapers down in the middle. Solution? Resize all the loaded ammo to 2.255". Done. Now, I go to load up that Lancer 30-round mag again - it was getting tight in the middle again, but it was easier to load. I stripped them all out, and they all came out, but somewhere around the middle of the mag, I had to give the mag a smack to get that next round up to the feedlips and strip it out. It was only a couple times. That's a big no-go in my book, if they're not gonna feed reliably. Solution? Downsize the ammo again? Maybe. I need to seat it all shorter, until all the rounds feed, and THEN duplicate the load testing again, at shorter seated lengths. Fuk me... Or, try a Lancer 20-rounder. Okay, I did that, and the rounds are kinda tight in there, but they all stripped out okay, even loaded now at 2.255" COL. I'll shoot that mag and see if rifle recoil is enough to keep bouncing them all up to the top... Hey, there's a Gen 3 PMag 20 - load it all up fine, they all strip out easily - like normal. Testing that one today, too. Oh, there's 2 x Gen 2 PMag 20 - let's load 'em. Okay, issues in one, but not the other... Hmmm... Look at them closely, and see what it is - bumps on the sides of the mags, at the top, and the little protrusion that separates rounds at the top of the mag. "Massage" them a little with the knife, and they load and strip just fine. So, interesting development with the .257 ammo loaded up to 2.260" now 2.255" here, and magazine choice... I'll figure all this out, and report back with range results, and magazine pictures showing what's up. Good , straighten it all out so I don't have any issues with mine next week Quote from the first page , this is what they load COL & some 100gr. they show 2.230" , is it because of the large HP on that Bullet that you can get them that long ? "We load our factory ammo with a maximum OAL of 2.250" in order for it to fit in the magazine of an AR." If you remember , with some bullets in the 300BLK , some mags were altered or the Bullets were set back more , for the same reason . Edited April 26, 2017 by survivalshop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted April 26, 2017 Report Share Posted April 26, 2017 (edited) 2 minutes ago, survivalshop said: Good , straighten it all out so I don't have any issues with mine next week Quote from the first page , this is what they load COL & some 100gr. they show 2.230" , is it because of the large HP on that Bullet that you can get them that long ? "We load our factory ammo with a maximum OAL of 2.250" in order for it to fit in the magazine of an AR." Yes, gotta be. That's a short bullet. Might be that the hollow point is so large, that IT is what's rubbing the inside of the magazine, too. I have a feeling I'm gonna be duplicating all my load testing at 2.250" COL... Edited April 26, 2017 by 98Z5V Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted April 26, 2017 Report Share Posted April 26, 2017 Tom , I experienced this situation with 6.8spc rounds loaded into 223 mags with a 6.8spc floor plate. I could only load 18 to 22 in a 30rg mag. The thicker bullets would not roll freely up the mag with a fully loaded mag, you will find out what your limit is. Also check the feed lips of the mag for interference , a trim on one mag may be in your near future as a test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted April 26, 2017 Report Share Posted April 26, 2017 It's too big ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted April 26, 2017 Report Share Posted April 26, 2017 1 hour ago, MikedaddyH said: Tom , I experienced this situation with 6.8spc rounds loaded into 223 mags with a 6.8spc floor plate. I could only load 18 to 22 in a 30rg mag. The thicker bullets would not roll freely up the mag with a fully loaded mag, you will find out what your limit is. Also check the feed lips of the mag for interference , a trim on one mag may be in your near future as a test. Not the case at all, with this round. The parent case is .223 Rem, the projectile isn't even as large as 300BLK, which seats 30 in a 30, and 20 in a 20, just fine. Your issues with 6.8 SPC and AR15 mags ain't the same as the issues with my loading length, and what these magazines will hold... 6.8SPC vs. .223 Rem: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted April 26, 2017 Report Share Posted April 26, 2017 (edited) Ammo performance test gettin' ready to go down on steel, as well as the magazine test on these handloads. 5.56 gun is the Mk12, 18" barrel vs. the 25-45 with 18" barrel. Should be pretty similar, and only show how hard the rounds hit. Back in several hours with some video, men. I hope I don't shoot my GoPro... Edited April 26, 2017 by 98Z5V Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted April 26, 2017 Report Share Posted April 26, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, 98Z5V said: Not the case at all, with this round. The parent case is .223 Rem, the projectile isn't even as large as 300BLK, which seats 30 in a 30, and 20 in a 20, just fine. Your issues with 6.8 SPC and AR15 mags ain't the same as the issues with my loading length, and what these magazines will hold... 6.8SPC vs. .223 Rem: Just tryin' to give you some insite . Check the feed lips !!!! With a different brand of mag. Edited April 26, 2017 by MikedaddyH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted April 26, 2017 Report Share Posted April 26, 2017 1 hour ago, MikedaddyH said: Just tryin' to give you some insite . Check the feed lips !!!! With a different brand of mag. It's not insite, brother - it's comparing apples to hammers, on your part. Different cases, completely. I'm running a 5.56 case, you're running a big fata$s case that needs to have the magazines modified in order to run it in the AR15 platform... Apples to Hammers... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted April 26, 2017 Report Share Posted April 26, 2017 1 minute ago, 98Z5V said: It's not insite, brother - it's comparing apples to hammers, on your part. Different cases, completely. I'm running a 5.56 case, you're running a big fata$s case that needs to have the magazines modified in order to run it in the AR15 platform... Apples to Hammers... OK , Whatever. Check the feed lips. My point is the bullet head is bigger and more forward than the 223/556 just like the 300blk. Look at the rear corners of the feed lips , a file might do it. Ammo could work itself forward as the rounds move upwards in the mag and make contact at that point. Just Sayin' !¡! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted April 26, 2017 Report Share Posted April 26, 2017 3 minutes ago, MikedaddyH said: OK , Whatever. Check the feed lips. My point is the bullet head is bigger and more forward than the 223/556 just like the 300blk. Look at the rear corners of the feed lips , a file might do it. Ammo could work itself forward as the rounds move upwards in the mag and make contact at that point. Just Sayin' !¡! Okay, riddle me this one - 300BLK with a big fata$s 150gr FMJ round in there, and I don't have to fuk with the feedlips on the standard AR15 magazine to get all off them to work perfectly. Perfectly. Never had an issue with a .308" diameter bullet... Now, why, all of the sudden, are those same magazines gonna have an issue with a .257" bullet, Mike? Short answer is, they aren't gonna have a feedlip problem in those magazines. You're trying to relate what happened with you, with 6.8SPC and AR15 magazines. Follower change, can't load to full capacity because the case is larger in diameter, etc. That shiit ain't the same here, with this cartridge, Mike. You are literally comparing Apples and Hammers here - NOT Apples and Oranges. They're not a little bit different - they're on different planets, man. I'm trying to tell you that, and you keep pushing what you think you know. It's different, whether you want to understand it or not, man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted April 26, 2017 Report Share Posted April 26, 2017 FWIW, in continuation with the thread now, I didn't have one single functional issue with the Lancer L5AWM 20-rd mag, the Gen 3 5.56 PMag 20, or the slightly tweaked Gen 2 5.56 PMag 20s. All fed reliably, functioned the rifle, and locked back on the last round - with my loads (now) at 2.255" COL. I didn't try the Lancer 30, based on what I saw at home. For the record, I didn't try any 30-round mags... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.