I'm disappointed with the new Hornady Concentricity tool....

V

VaniB

New member
I just thought I'd let you guys know that I always check concentricity of my finished cartridges as I seek the tightest groups I can get whether it's my 20Tac bolt action Remington or my DPMS AR 308.

So I thought that the Hornady concentricity gage would be a nice edition to the two Sinclair concentricity gages and the one Redding "neck sorter" gage that I already have. I figured that it would not only be nice to seek out and find the accentric sized cases, but now I could also fix them right on the spot too.

Well, the Hornady gage first appears out of the box to be a precision crafted tool that is very reasonably priced. But, I can't get the thing to show me any kind of the same sensitivity readings with the brass case that either of my 2 Sinclair gages show me. For example, the 2 Sinclair gages may show me a case that is off 6,000ths.......while the Hornady gage commonly indicates much smaller readings of say 1,000th to 2 thousandths. (Yes, I know that the Sinclair gage is actually a 3,000ths reading when it shows you a 6,000ths reading on the gage)

I don't know what the deal is, but it just doesn't pick up those accentric cases like my Sinclairs do.

The only reason that I am keeping it, is because it does provide some means to straighten the out-of-round cartridges. But even that is not a fast and assured process. It's hit and miss requiring some trial and error. But, at least it's faster then dismantling the cartridge to do it over again. In that case I use my Sinclair gage to see if the cartridge is off say 7,000ths......then I put that cartridge on the Hornady gage and straighten it out to probably about a reading of 4,000ths on my Sinclair gage. (Remember that a reading of 4,000ths on the Sinclair gage is actually a cartridge that is off half that... ie; 2,000ths) While The Hornady gage does cut the accentricity readings in half (aproximately), I have not even been able to get it to turn out a fixed cartridge with a reading of say "0" or 1,000ths. It's just too hit and miss to accomplish that.

So, if you are shopping for your first concentricity gage, my recommendation to you is to first buy the Sinclair gage. This Hornady gage serves better as a fixer tool then a concentricity reading gage.

13738_7397_popup.jpg

09-175-l.jpg
 
Last edited:
VaniB said:
I just thought I'd let you guys know that I always check concentricity of my finished cartridges as I seek the tightest groups I can get
Click to expand...

For shooters contemplating measuring this sort of thing, the question remains: does bullet runout affect group size? The answer is maybe yes, maybe no.

But it sounds like the Hornady tool, if you're inclined to start measuring runout, doesn't do as good a job as some others. An excellent, but more expensive alternative, is the NECO concentricity gage. Sinclair sells it.
 
Hornady tool

VaniB: My results with the Hornady Concentricity Gauge Tool are a mirror image of yours. Recently put together 80 newly formed 6ppc from Lapua 220 Russian, outside neck turned to .013" for my .272" chamber necks. Turned them all under the Sinclair Concentricity gauge, and took the worst single example of runout, at .007". This does not bother me, since I know it will straighten out with the first firing. Took that same round, and put it under the Hornady dial indicator, and it showed a runout of .0015". Contacted Hornady Customer Service, Tech Rep. and they said this was because their reading is taken from the bullet tip and the case head/rim, while the Sinclair gauge takes the readings from the body of the case. While this is of course true, the runout is still there, it didn't go away, so the Hornady tool is giving a false reading, and if someone were using it alone, would give the impression (false) that runout is minimal. Rather than trying to straighten the case, my "fix" is to mark the R/O case and use it for first round foulers, basic scope adjustment and 100 yd max, where I've found it not to matter.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
f d shuster said:
VaniB: My results with the Hornady Concentricity Gauge Tool are a mirror image of yours. ........... Contacted Hornady Customer Service, Tech Rep. and they said this was because their reading is taken from the bullet tip and the case head/rim, while the Sinclair gauge takes the readings from the body of the case. While this is of course true, the runout is still there, it didn't go away, so the Hornady tool is giving a false reading, and if someone were using it alone, would give the impression (false) that runout is minimal.
Click to expand...




Hmmmm.(???) I'm starting to think that you and I have it wrong, but we are still correct to choose the sinclair tool. Let me explain;

I have always been aware that the Sinclair gage will produce these kind of exagerated readings of eccentricity, due to its readings being taken off of the outside of the case. (instead of readings taken off of the axis of the case like with the Hornady Gage) But, it never dawned on me that the extremity with how much slant or slope is present on a particular case design itself will also magnify that reading.
(for example; a 22-250 case has more slope on its walls then say does a 375 Winchester, and so for example the same 2,000ths accentricity in both cases will show as a much worse reading on the 22-250 case then it will on a straighter walled 375 with a Sinclair Gage)

So.....the Hornady gage might very well be giving accurate readings and NOT giving false "minimal" readings as you and I might have originally thought.

If we can believe the readings on the Hornady Gage that takes readings from off of the axis of a case as being accurate, then we might want to declare instead that it is actually the Sinclair gage that is the tool giving the exagerated readings....not the Hornady.

Having used my 2 Sinclair gages for some years now, it's nice to know that the vast majority of cases I have handloaded are actually a lot more concentric then the gage was indicating.... and I had been taken credit for. :cool:

HOWEVER: The bottom line stays that I will still rely on my sinclair gages for concentricity readings and NOT my new Hornady Concentricity Gage. The reason for this choice is that the Sinclair gage makes the imperfections larger and easier to see on the dial gage.
 
Hornady tool, part 2

VaniB; Yes, I see where you're coming from, but the fact remains ( in my opinion) that the example 6ppc round that I used had enough runout that when rotating it under the dial indicator of the Sinclair tool, I could watch the entire bullet and case neck jump up and down as the dial also jumped, a total of .007". To me, this is another visual proof that this particular round had a LOT of runout. Hornady tool is "gone" and I'll continue to use and trust the Sinclair as it has served me well for many years. My method of segregating rounds with an unacceptable amount of runout is also "working", so will continue with that also. If someone wants to straighten their rounds, then "have at it".
 
Bob Kingsbury said:
Facinating !!
Click to expand...

You're obviously way too smart and over our head for us, as you post a smug reply with a single word. But we also notice that you can't spell that single word properly. Nice touch. :rolleyes:



FD....
Did you not find that the Hornady tool would at least be useful for straightening out your eccentric rounds? I agree with you that these rounds can be used for foulers. But my problem is that I would have too many foulers with every 6th or 7th round that comes in at 5,000ths off with my screw-in seater dies. Many of my rounds are compressed loads, and I can't use my Wilson in-line seater which otherwise would produce straighter rounds. Screw-in dies produce more 5,000th-7,000ths rounds in the eccentric range then I can utilize. The Hornady Gage will help tame them to be a final 3,000-4,000ths reading on the Sinclair gage (which translates to tight groups on my targets.)
 
If my experience is anything to go by, "straightening" rounds that are crooked is sort of like straightening barrels. Sounds great in theory, but in practice it doesn't seem to work that way.

I've never tried straightening a barrel, but did try straightening crooked rounds a few times. The results were not encouraging.

BTW, the response to Mr Kingsbury's reply wasn't really necessary IMHO. It's great to be perfect in spelling and everything else, but the only people I've ever seen who never made a mistake were those who never did anything.
 
VaniB, your in a perfect position to see that low runout as measured on the Sinclair is also 'concentric', where concentric as measured on the Hornady can have any runout in the world.

Straight ammo isn't until it measures so on the Sinclair.

Also, don't assume runout as 1/2 TIR on loaded cases. That's absolutely false.
Total runout is a sum of many abstracts here.
And this is why you find that a compensating seating adjustment (on your case bender) does not reduce runout predictably.
 
VaniB

OK, Fascinating !!!
You should also write your fractions of an inch as 6/1000
or .006 as we do in precision work.
The Hornady guage has the ability to straighten where the
Sinclair does not, so it must read runout at a mid-point.
It is quite possible that a bullet point can show no error and
yet have the base of a bullet sitting off center. It is still crooked.
Straight chambers and straight ammo will shoot better, it can
be proven. World records are not shot with crooked chambers
or crooked ammo
 
Because it is not in the usual catalogs, many of you are not familiar with the H&H Concentricity gage. Here is a thread form another board.
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f28/h-h-concentricity-gauge-21338/
It is designed to measure and straighten loaded rounds, and it holds and supports them differently than others that I have seen and tried. One thing that the Hornady misses with their design is that the head of a case may not line up perfectly with the rest of the case body, due to uneven expanison. The H&H takes care of this in its design.
http://www.benchrest.com/hnh/
Generally, I view concentricity gauges as diagnostic tools for reloading dies and brass, but I have had some experience straightening with several. The H&H seems easy to use and the one unit is able to handle cases from the PPC up to large magnums. Using it I have been able to straighten PPC rounds to .00075 TIR quickly enough to make it practical to do at a match. This thing is built like a brick. If anyone is coming to a match at Visalia (or practices there) and wants to play with it, let me know. I will bring it to the range.
 
Larry Elliott said:
.........BTW, the response to Mr Kingsbury's reply wasn't really necessary IMHO. It's great to be perfect in spelling and everything else, but the only people I've ever seen who never made a mistake were those who never did anything.
Click to expand...


You don't get it. It wasn't about spelling or seeking faults with anybody.

IMHO, it's really not necessary for you to come to the defense of an individual who's only reason initially for providing input onto this thread was to be sarcastic and belittle the dialogue between me and the other participants. If you notice, BK has since returned to the thread and hasn't denied that his post was indeed sarcasm. You and I have gotten along fine. Let's not ruin it.

BACK ON TOPIC:

Gentlemen, thanks for the input. I'm glad that Boyd Allen seems to see merit in this straightening out routine too. I will continue to believe that straightening the bullet point on a cartridge 2 or 3 thousandths in one direction or the other isn't always so radical or indicative of case flaws. Very simply put; Sometimes my 7 /8" screw-in seater dies just doesn't get it right the first time. It often has nothing to do with the case, as much as the bullet just didn't quite seat perfectly straight. I have decided to leave the Sinclair Gage for readings, and the Hornady gage to do the straightening. Since I already have the Hornady tool, I see no reason to trade it off for an H&H tool. It is my review and opinion of the new Hornady tool that it's not a real good tool for measuring concentricity.

LHSmith;
To answer your question, none of my 3 Wilson In-line seaters are good with compressed loads. They leave indentations onto the bullet. Sometimes they may leave really DEEP impressions so you wonder if the bullet is distorted.
 
For a practical test....

Why not take 25 of your most out-of-round reloads and 25 "perfect" reloads to the range and see which group is the most accurate. You may find the time and effort required for those "perfect" straight rounds is not worth it. And...if it turns out that it is...well then you'll have some empirical data to share.;)

virg
 
The rifle has something to say about straight rounds as well.

I have worked very hard over the years perfecting my technique of making perfect ammo and the sinclair concentricity tool is key in evaluating how I am doing.

However, a couple of years ago I wanted to see the impact of bullet seating on accuracy so I took 10 rounds that were made at .001 using a Redding competition seater and 10 rounds that were .006 using an RCBS stock seater and chambered them in my 22-250. This particular rifle has a custom chamber, not factory. The result was that ALL 20 were .001 when I checked them after chambering. I shot all 20 at the range and there was no discernable difference between them. Please note that the OAL has the bullet just touching the lands so I hypothesize that the barrel and chamber straightened the rounds upon chambering.

I did the same test in my factory Remington 700 VLSS .204 and the chambering did not change the runout at all, I'm guessing due to the sloppiness of the chamber/barrel etc. However, upon firing, there was an improvement of almost 1/4" in the groups at 100 yards with the straight rounds.
 
It all circles back to the differences between 'concentric' and 'straight'.
Concentric is taken only to a centerline.
Runout includes everything.

There are ways to 'center' ammo on a tool which may or may not apply to your chambering. This in my view is where straight ammo is a better endeavor than concentric.
Straight measures just that on both the Sinclair, AND any of the neck benders. It is therefore, concentric as well.
If your casehead or any other part isn't straight, your chambered round isn't either(unless straight under great tension).

Will it matter? I think only with big sloppy chambers combined with hard seated bullets.
But there is nothing wrong with straight ammo. It can apply anyway concentric ammo can.
And VaniB, I predict that when your system produces ammo with low runout, you'll find no use at all for that Hornady. There will be nothing to adjust.
 
Last edited:
VaniB said:
To answer your question, none of my 3 Wilson In-line seaters are good with compressed loads. They leave indentations onto the bullet. Sometimes they may leave really DEEP impressions so you wonder if the bullet is distorted.
Click to expand...

Van- I have been able to "polish-out" the seater top to eliminate this problem.
Extra seater tops are available from Wilson.
However, the 6ppc, 30BR, and .222 seaters I use all work well ....even with moderately compressed loads. These stems have never been modified.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top