FEEDBACK FROM THE TUNNEL IN WEST TEXAS, Fireforming

how much do i not follow the leader ?
i build br guns on ar platforms.
i plan on using "beggs" reamers for my next three rifles:22,6, 30.
i plan on building a couple of fire form rifles for the method that jackie uses (cause i have a couple of recievers and will pick up used bbls and use it all to practice rifle building).

i enjoy the challenge of getting there by a different path.

mike in co
 
Hey Guys

When I fire form, I shoot the bullets into the ground through big insulation roll. I don't even use a "Rifle". It is a dedicated fireforming rig. Just goes "thump".
Maybe this is another one of those things that we should not even be telling other shooters about. Many of us have the means and facility to do things that are a little out of the ordinary. Most of the time we do things like this because it is so easy and hassle free, and we feel it gives the best results. But, if you are worried about putting bullets over a burm, or some other non desireable place, just do things the "conventional" way.......jackie
 
Woody said:
Where are you going?
Click to expand...

crap , i'm only 59 , how would i know...still growing and learning.

( i have three ar based rifles the are designed for br competition. an ar15 223 which finally shot sub 2's last month, an ar10 308 win br which has shot in the 1's and an ar15 in 6pp which does not want to work. i think it is a case taper issue which is why i'm going to the Beggs design. ar's work with 7.62x39(parrent of the220 russian), but i have problems extracting 6ppc's at the low end of the window.)

mike in co
 
mike in co said:
( but i have problems extracting 6ppc's at the low end of the window.)
mike in co
Click to expand...

Mike,
I built a 30 PPC on an AR and it is running fine now. It has an adjustable gas tube so I can adjust the amount of gas entering the system. I was not able to make the gun work with the faster powders like N120 and 4227 that folks were using in 30 PPC bolt rifles. I went to 4198 and now everything works ok. It may be that a different powder will make your 6 PPC extract better. That's one thing about a AR. There are lots of variables that are not involved in a bolt gun, (weight of buffer, recoil spring tension, amount of gas, etc). The AR guns are amazingly accurate. I think having the bore close to center of mass has alot to do with the AR's accuracy potential.
 
.270 neck is the way to go

At the Australian nationals in April, ALL classes were won with .270 necks.

They work great.


Rob Carnell
Sydney, Australia
 
Way to go, Rob.... Thanks

More proof that Jackie is on the right track with his thick necks !

Are carbide neck bushing available in .267 and .268 sizes ?
 
Last edited:
pat,
when i started i bought coated 266/7/8/9 from redding. i did not buy carbide..'casue i was not sure where i would end. i do not remember seeing the 1/2 sizes that have been available for the thin necks.

mike in co
 
Mike, I guess that I fall in the sheeple or whatever category. I will not buy another reamer, more carbide bushings, and another reamer for my sizing dies just to go to .268-.270 necks. I turn my necks in one turn and I have not had any fail. Give me a valid reason to change.
Butch
 
Butch Lambert said:
Mike, I guess that I fall in the sheeple or whatever category. I will not buy another reamer, more carbide bushings, and another reamer for my sizing dies just to go to .268-.270 necks. I turn my necks in one turn and I have not had any fail. Give me a valid reason to change.
Butch
Click to expand...
butch,
if you are happy with single pass results, there is no big diff...no big reason to change. i hear of guys doing two even three passes. it is this additional work that i see as a waste of time with todays brass. me thinks the thicker necks may last longer and less subject to damage. some guys shoot brass til who knows when, others just one weekend. for the shoot forever guy the thicker neck is an asset.
like i said, i had no inventory when i started, so in my case it made sense.
thanks
mike in co
 
I had a .269 necked reamer when .269's weren't cool.. Probably going on 15 years ago.. I used it very little and won't venture there again.. I gave that reamer away to a friend... I have the tooling for the .262 necks will stay with it. As far as I know most every Nationals, Supershoot has been won by folks using a ..261 or .262 necked reamer. Same goes for world records. So while the .269 may be as good as a .262 I don't believe they are better.
BTW, I turn necks for the .262 necks in one pass....

Best of luck,
 
Mr Beggs

Gene will your carbide bushings be availible in .265 size???

If so, I'd like to order a few when they become available.

Thanks

Vic
 
Last edited:
Speaking of radical thinking

Based on the 6PPC reamer prints I've seen Tony B. probably uses a .263 chamber neck. What will they think of next?? Ferris Pindell even went way out on a limb and used a .266 neck?!?!?!? Oh my gosh Gertrude....
 
Pat B. said:
I had a .269 necked reamer when .269's weren't cool.. Probably going on 15 years ago.. I used it very little and won't venture there again.. I gave that reamer away to a friend... I have the tooling for the .262 necks will stay with it. As far as I know most every Nationals, Supershoot has been won by folks using a ..261 or .262 necked reamer. Same goes for world records. So while the .269 may be as good as a .262 I don't believe they are better.
BTW, I turn necks for the .262 necks in one pass....

Best of luck,
Click to expand...

Pat, not to be rude at all, but your statement that the Nationals, Supershoot, and world records have all been taken by .262 necks is unfounded. If it is true, and I doubt that it is 100% correct straight down the line (since neck diameters are not listed on the equipment page and I doubt you've asked all 300-400 plus shooters what their necks are) the .262 outnumbers the .269 greatly and therefore is going to show up more often. It is the simple majority of numbers rule. Does that mean they're better? No. Does it mean they're worse? No. It simply means there are more .262"s out there and the fact that you noticed this and construed it as "the thing to do" echoes the the sheep analogy. But there are a few guys who broke the mold and didn't "follow the wooly butt in front of them" and made .269's and .270's work and work great. We were simply saying that the thicker necks work JUST AS GOOD as the holy 262 and they are easier to make. That's all. If you want to keep shooting a 262, go for it. No one is trying to take that away from you. Those of us who like less brass work are just liking the thick neck idea. Heck, last night when I turned my necks, I got .004" off of them and then .002" more and I remember thinking, "if my neck was a 269 I would have been done two hours ago!" Time is in short supply around my reloading room and all my gear is set up for the 262 but I like the idea of saving all that time so much that I'm willing to buy a new 269 reamer and all the gear to go with it just to save the headaches. The money invested would be worth it to me.

Btw, when I cut down onto the shoulder on my new fireformed brass, it made the most even cut I have ever seen on a shoulder by forming in the method I described. The necks also turned easier and the mandrel wasn't fighting the case and getting near as hot as normal. I really dig this 22 down the 6mm hole fireforming!
 
Last edited:
Jerry, you're right and I started to include the .263 and didn't, should have..

GG, you're also absolutely correct... I haven't talked to every singe winner or record holder, etc..

I'm not changing though, grin........
 
When the PPC was strickly Sako, 261.262 and 263 were what it was.
because thats what was left when they cleaned up. It simply became the norm. Neck turners that haven't been changed for years is a big reason
why .269 has not caught on yet. Besides Jackie and Gene , few are
willing to change, but it will happen. Especially if it saves time and work.
Now we have powders that may call for more neck tension. What better
way to find that. The guys that are doing these things are not followers,
but innovators
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top