Hornady Case Concentric tool

Republic of Alberta

Republic of Alberta

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
25   0   0
Location
,location, location
Any one fool around with one of these things?

hrncongagelab1.gif



I bought one just because. It is obviously not going to be as accurate as a Sinclaire , just by virtue of how it holds the ammo. Ultimately it is measuring run out between the case head and the bullet ogive. Not off the case body like the Sinclaire.


I took a box of 223 reloads and ran it over the Hornady tool. I knew I was going to have huge run outs on that ammo due to really crappy lop-sided case wall PMC brass. I then then used it to straighten the bullets down to between .0005" and .0015" run out. (as measured on the Hornady) I have a second box of Identical reloads that I left alone so I can test "before and after" results.


I doubt I will see any accuracy difference, it may be worse as bending the necks around may adversely affect neck tension. I don't know.

Anyone try this? Did it make a difference?
 
I can't imagine that bending factory ammo in a press (essentially what this tool does) will create more accurate ammunition. Too many wierd forces applied to the case and bullet for my liking. I think a good press and die set giving concentric cases and necks would give better results than bending factory ammo. Maybe you could do a test and shoot the same box of ammo half untreated and half "straightened" with the tool and see if the results are measureable. Would be even better if you took ammo that was the same amount of crooked (say 2 rounds at .010", 2 at .015" etc) and straightened one of each then shot the crooked ones and the straightened ones to see if there was a measureable change given a known amount of "crookedness".

I look forward to seeing some results.
 
BigUglyMan said:
I can't imagine that bending factory ammo in a press (essentially what this tool does) will create more accurate ammunition. Too many wierd forces applied to the case and bullet for my liking. I think a good press and die set giving concentric cases and necks would give better results than bending factory ammo. Maybe you could do a test and shoot the same box of ammo half untreated and half "straightened" with the tool and see if the results are measureable. Would be even better if you took ammo that was the same amount of crooked (say 2 rounds at .010", 2 at .015" etc) and straightened one of each then shot the crooked ones and the straightened ones to see if there was a measureable change given a known amount of "crookedness".

I look forward to seeing some results.
Click to expand...

I picked up one of the Hornady concentricity units a while ago, just as another tool or procedure to use in basically making my hunting ammo/reloads a little more accurate. As with checking uniformity of brass or minimizing/sorting bullet by weight, just something else to help eliminate or at least to try and minimize some of the variables.

In essence, I'm just trying to tighten the group a little on my 'hunting class/level' ammo. I would guess reloading as a long range shooter or bench rest shooter, one would go considerably further or deeper in depth for quality control and/or load development.

I haven't used mine much with the exception of checking some reloads and just touching them up a bit closer to 'true' where required. I plan to do more later once the weather gets a little better but so far the only 'test' I've done is to see if being concentric does really make a difference. A 'quick' test at best. I used used my 219 Donaldson Wasp, primarily because of the case forming procedures I have to go through and also used my 25-06. All I did was to purposefully offset or missalign a total of eight rounds for each caliber 0.010" and mark which side the offset went towards. Then I loaded and trued up an equal number to within 0.001" for each rifle. When I loaded each offset round, I tried to make sure each 'mark' was @ 90 degrees to the previous. There were four rounds shot/target. Targets shot using the four rounds with very little or no concentric variation grouped well within 1". Those with a 0.010" offset error were about a 1 1/2" group.

Just for the hell of it, this summer, I'll try more tests and with other calibers. ;)That's the beauty of retirement, now I have the time. I've got a plan/tests for the question on bullets and their bush busting accuracy/ability, using plexiglass but that's another story.
 
There will always be a debate over the effects of a reloaded round that has .002" runout or a round that has zero runout but has been straightened and you've messed with neck tension etc.......
With factory ammo I think with the sum of all variables (powder charge, bullet weight/ogive variance, concentric necks etc), your wasting your time.......but it might give you that pyschological advantage :)
 
Johnn Peterson said:
In essence, I'm just trying to tighten the group a little on my 'hunting class/level' ammo. I would guess reloading as a long range shooter or bench rest shooter, one would go considerably further or deeper in depth for quality control and/or load development.
Click to expand...



This is exactly what I am trying to accomplish as well.

Simple fact of the mater is I am not a good enough reloader to get .001 or even .003 runout on my ammo.
 
The RCBS unit has the hooked "thingie" that detects internal signs of pending head separation. Its only a gauge though and doesn't straighten anything. My 1F brass, (TRG-42) all seems to guage within the .002 tolerance. If it didn't, there would be problems with the gun, no ? The "Instant Expert" DVD I bought suggests that crooked ammo would be corrected by dealing with chambers and dies and such, no mention of pushing the bullet around. No expert ! Just relating some info from my DVD.
 
Duck_Hunter said:
There will always be a debate over the effects of a reloaded round that has .002" runout or a round that has zero runout but has been straightened and you've messed with neck tension etc.......
With factory ammo I think with the sum of all variables (powder charge, bullet weight/ogive variance, concentric necks etc), your wasting your time.......but it might give you that pyschological advantage :)
Click to expand...

As I alluded to earlier, this depth of detail in reloading is relatively new to me. However, that being so, if between concentricity and neck tension I had to sacrifice one for the other, I'd go for the concentricity. They're both important qualities for the end result consistency but to me and IMHO , the emphesis on concentricity would yeild the the greater positive results. Besides, considering the amount of surface contact between the neck and bullet, I think the weaker point of resistence to bending is at the base of the neck where it starts to flare out to the shoulder.

That pyschological advantage is the reason I strive for the best level of accuracy I can get with my reloaded hunting ammo out of decent quality hunting rifles. Then, when the occasion or question comes up in taking a shot, the confidence in knowing the variables and what the equipment is capable of helps in deciding to go for it or to pass.
 
I have one and I'm definately not a precision shooter, I bought it and many other reloading items in the same basic quest as all, to squeeze the best possible performance out of my gun. Perhaps even bring my skills up a notch in doing so.
While I haven't straightened much with it, and haven't confirmed on paper that the straightening even gives a measurable improvement I have definately proved that some of my ammo has run out. I can measure it now, and like anything, once you measure it you can improve it. So I find I take a bit more care with it and my run out isn't as all over the place as it was before.
Whether it makes a difference, well I'll leave that for spring to decide.
 
Straighten it on the hornady, then check it on a sinclair. I have no issue with gently adjusting a bullet .002" to improve concentricity (although it really shouldn't be there in the first place). However, the hornady accomplished SFA as it references off the case head instead of the body.
You can push that bullet side to side all day if it makes you feel better.
 
BigUglyMan said:
I can't imagine that bending factory ammo in a press (essentially what this tool does) will create more accurate ammunition. Too many wierd forces applied to the case and bullet for my liking. I think a good press and die set giving concentric cases and necks would give better results than bending factory ammo. Maybe you could do a test and shoot the same box of ammo half untreated and half "straightened" with the tool and see if the results are measureable. Would be even better if you took ammo that was the same amount of crooked (say 2 rounds at .010", 2 at .015" etc) and straightened one of each then shot the crooked ones and the straightened ones to see if there was a measureable change given a known amount of "crookedness".

I look forward to seeing some results.
Click to expand...

X2.
No disrespect intended to anyone but I think its a gimmick. I'd rather use a sinclair or other gauge to check at each stage and work from there.
 
If we want to get silly the Sinclair is no good either as it measures off 2 points on one spot of the case wall. To get really stupid one would have to ream an identical chamber in a piece of stock short enough the bullet sticks out. Then push the case (on the case head) in to the fake "chamber" tightly so the shoulder, the case wall and the pressure from the case head align the brass exactly the same as the chamber would. Then get your run out reading off the bullet as you "re chamber" the brass in multiple positions.


I plan on building one of these for the next bbl I chamber.


Sinclair??? Pfffttt That's no good.:D
 
Republic of Alberta said:
If we want to get silly the Sinclair is no good either as it measures off 2 points on one spot of the case wall. To get really stupid one would have to ream an identical chamber in a piece of stock short enough the bullet sticks out. Then push the case (on the case head) in to the fake "chamber" tightly so the shoulder, the case wall and the pressure from the case head align the brass exactly the same as the chamber would. Then get your run out reading off the bullet as you "re chamber" the brass in multiple positions.


I plan on building one of these for the next bbl I chamber.


Sinclair??? Pfffttt That's no good.:D
Click to expand...

As I made mention in one of my previous posts, this degree of detail in reloading is , for the most part, new ground for me. To try and see what or how much effect concentricity has on reloads is why I purposefully offset some. Later I plan to do some serious testing, and although admittedly the test of that were minimal, I did see a difference. To that end, it 'seems' to be a worhtwhile effort to tiddle up the concentricity of my reloads where they may be out a little. Being retired with the time available, I may start checking all my reloads. In the last few days, I've reloaded and checked some 270 ammo for a recently acquired rifle and today loaded and checked some reload ammo for my 7x61 S&H. Most cartridges for both calibers were bang on but there were a few that were up to 0.003" - 0.004" out. These I trued up. Perhaps the greatest benefit is a degree of confidence one gets in knowing you've eliminated or minimized a variable for consistency.
 
I have also been considering buying one of these so I'm quite interested in this thread. I agree that way to go is to straigten the cartridge on the hornaday and then measure it on the sinclair. Regarding the neck tension, just an idea here... I wonder if a taper crimp die could be used for this.
 
So, I went to the range today with my "straight" ammo.

I had 20 rounds of straightened 223 and 20 rounds of "bent" 223 separated out in groups of .005, .003 and less than .002 run out. Seems the cold weather caused significant vertical stringing with my current load. The stringing was bad enough no difference in accuracy could be seen with this one.

I also had some 7mm rem mag ammo. This stuff had bad runnouts due to me creating too much neck tension which caused the bullets to seat quite crooked. I separated out some stuff with more than .005 run out to test against "straighted" stuff. I only had enough to do 2 three shot groups with each. The .005 run out stuff made groups that were 1" and .75" The straighten out ammo made groups that were 1.2" and 0.27" not nearly enough ammo to reach any sort of conclusion.

I think I will wait untill summer to do some more tests. I also need to pick better rifles to test with. Shooting light weight rifles, even if they are accurate, are always dam hard to get constant bench results with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom