Is Herters 303 British brass better than the other common types of boxer 303 brass?

[steelgray]

So, this is getting totally interesting! First of all, to Tiriaq and Cosmic, I give full credit to you both for the extent of your knowledge of things, including the obscure details of the history of various vintages of 303 British brass. However, I still disagree with Cosmic on some pretty important stuff.

Specifically, I have no idea why you are so concerned about something so relatively-unimportant as the consistency of the size of the flash holes of PPU brass, but never took the time to determine if the stuff lasted longer than common North American junk brass. Weren’t you curious about that – especially since you did take note of how the PPU brass was/ is is substantially heavier that the junk commercial stuff? Why wasn’t/ why isn’t that THE priority?

Why do you seem to treat the presence or absence of a web inside the case as a non-issue, saying “Still stuck on the web thing... Given that the incipient separation occurs ahead of the web, one could easily argue that provision of a web solves one problem and creates another.” Why did you care a rat*’s a*s whether the Herter’s stuff – that you gave-up – had an unimportant relief cut ahead of the rim yet, again, you didn’t test the stuff for longevity?

To me, longevity is number one. Nothing else matters if the brass you are using dies, when it isn’t supposed to! This is bad Karma, as far as I’m, concerned. I like the L-E because it is a tough, battle-proven gun and is really “all business”. Contrast that with running the gun with prissy brass that is basically made to fail. That contrast is bizarre to me.

As for why the junk 303 British brass – that you seem to be Okay with – fails at a place forward of the expansion ring, I can say this is sometimes, but not aways true. I have certainly seen case separation at the expansion ring area itself , but agree that the failure often is forward of this point.

As for why that happens that way, I think I know. Ever done any winching, or towing? What happens when a chain under tension breaks? Not much – the ends just fall to the ground. What happens when a cable breaks? A lot of really bad stuff. The new ends – of the broken cable – spring back violently. If one of these catches you, you can be severely injured.

Why? Because, if you put a stress gauge on the cable on either side of the pending point where the cable was about to break, you’d find that the gauge would measure a large amount of tension and when the cable breaks, the areas on either side of the break abruptly suffer a complete reversal of forces – from tension to compression.

Exactly the same thing happens when the inside of a 303 British case fails, in a way that releases tension on the case – when the interior wound opens-up behind the expansion ring. This shocks the metal on either side of the expansion ring, but the shock has the greatest effect ahead of the expansion ring, because the metal in that area (say, half an inch forward of the expansion ring, towards the neck) is much thinner than the part behind the expansion ring, towards the base of the case.

This means that those expansion rings aren’t something that you don’t need to be concerned about – as Cosmic suggests. The really abrupt change of tension – as the expansion ring wound occurs – effectively shocks the brass, ahead of the expansion ring and triggers the head separation. Cause and effect, baby!

Well - Your old Herters brass came from Higginsons years ago, and is of Scandinavian origin (Metallverken?). I had some, didnt particularly like it as 50% of the cases did not have a relief cut ahead of the rim, and fed poorly in my P-14s. Cant comment on the longevity, as I gave it away.
The PPU comes from the former Yugoslavia. It became more available after the wall fell, and moreso available these days. The ammo is budget grade, nothing more.
I've had various calibers over the years, including 303. It is thicker than most 303 brass, but that may be its only attribute. Poorly drilled flash holes (undersize), case runout, and varying neck ID/wall thickness are common faults that I have encountered. I have not tested it for longevity, as I have a large stash of Dominion and Imperial brass that I prefer to use.
Let us know how your PPU adventure goes. If you have an opportunity, pick up some of the older Remington brass, you may be pleasantly surprised.
BTW - What kind of groups are you getting with the pulled Russian pills? Are they copper clad steel jacket?

 

[cosmic]

We obviously shoot 303 for different reasons, brass longevity is not a salient priority for me. Being a mechanical engineer, and having studied ballistics in university, I find your various theories very amusing, but not particularly enlightening.

 

[steelgray]

What does "having studied BALLISTICS in university" or BALLISTICS, in general have to do with this? ... ZERO.

How do you explain why case head separations happen so routinely with US commercial 303 British case or why that typically occurs forward of the expansion rings?

You should have studied politics at university. You certainly seem quite capable of just changing the subject when you don't have a good answer for the question.

We obviously shoot 303 for different reasons, brass longevity is not a salient priority for me. Being a mechanical engineer, and having studied ballistics in university, I find your various theories very amusing, but not particularly enlightening.

 

[old303]

"Studying ballistics in university" usually means launching unauthorized #### over the dorm after a beer or two.

 

[tiriaq]

When a cartridge is fired, the brass expands to meet the chamber walls, sealing the breech. In a cartridge case there is a solid head (which doesn't expand unless pressures are truly excessive) and thinner sidewalls which do expand. There is obviously a transition zone between the solid head and the sidewalls. It is in this transition zone that the pressure ring forms. If the diameter of cartridge case is a close fit to the chamber, the expansion ring will be negligible. If the chamber diameter is significantly larger than the cartridge diameter, the expansion ring will be pronounced. This occurs regardless of the caliber. The appearance of an expansion ring after firing is indicative of the fit of the chamber and case.
My II** Ross target rifle has a "tight" chamber and fired cases show negligible expansion rings. Similarly my .260 precision rifle with a minimum chamber reamed with a Manson reamer produces fired brass with negligible expansion rings. With these rifles, it doesn't matter if the ammunition is factory or handloaded; the appearance is the same.
Dimensions are what determine the appearance of the expansion ring.

Measure the diameter of some of the Herter's brass just in front of the rim. See how it compares with other manufacturer's products. That will probably explain the insignificant expansion rings you are observing with the Herter's.

 

[Snider shooter]

When a cartridge is fired, the brass expands to meet the chamber walls, sealing the breech. In a cartridge case there is a solid head (which doesn't expand unless pressures are truly excessive) and thinner sidewalls which do expand. There is obviously a transition zone between the solid head and the sidewalls. It is in this transition zone that the pressure ring forms. If the diameter of cartridge case is a close fit to the chamber, the expansion ring will be negligible. If the chamber diameter is significantly larger than the cartridge diameter, the expansion ring will be pronounced. This occurs regardless of the caliber. The appearance of an expansion ring after firing is indicative of the fit of the chamber and case.
My II** Ross target rifle has a "tight" chamber and fired cases show negligible expansion rings. Similarly my .260 precision rifle with a minimum chamber reamed with a Manson reamer produces fired brass with negligible expansion rings. With these rifles, it doesn't matter if the ammunition is factory or handloaded; the appearance is the same.
Dimensions are what determine the appearance of the expansion ring.

Measure the diameter of some of the Herter's brass just in front of the rim. See how it compares with other manufacturer's products. That will probably explain the insignificant expansion rings you are observing with the Herter's.

Agree fully with this. I have a custom 308 Nora magnum that is tight chambered allowing me to get over ten reloads out of a case. Also I full length resize them dies and chamber matching almost perfect.
303 dies are I believe are also made on the small side so full length resizing helps to shorten case life. Would larger dies help, yes but the problem is there is so many different chamber dimensions through various manufacturers over the years. North American cases are made small at the head and thinner. PPU are the best cases that I have, they last the longest with cast or jacketed loads. Current Herters brass I don’t find any better than PPU brass.
Another case I find with wrong dimensions is 6.5x55. North American brass is 30-06 head size and European brass is as large as 0.480 instead or 0.473. I am getting more reloads out of older Norma brass than current NA brass.
The better your cases fit your chamber , the less problems your going to have.

 

[Potashminer]

Another issue that I discovered about 6.5x55 - again a cartridge being produced in mid 1890's - so like 30 year's prior to SAAMI existing. Regimental Armourer gauges for headspace used by Swede Armourers, were LONGER than SAAMI spells out - so if you use a USA SAAMI headspace gauge set, a brand new made-in-Sweden at Carl Gustaf armoury m94 or m96 will fail SAAMI headspace check. Was written that there were a lot of gunsmiths got busy to "fix" headspace (using SAAMI gauges), when the things showed up in USA. Is probably merit to that, if using SAAMI compliant ammo?

About drives home guy like me to be nuts to use SAAMI gauges and swap out Swede barrels and bolts and try to get "headspace" to be "correct". That led me to believe is more important to re-size the case to fit the chamber - and not so worried about some "arbitrary" number from either CIP or from SAAMI regarding "headspace". In the case of my 9.3x57, I could not find three sources to agree on what the "correct" dimension should be - even if I could measure to that - so long as the brass that I make fits to my rifle chamber, I think I am okay. I really do not care if my reloads fit into someone else's rifle, and I have never seen 9.3x57 ammo to buy at retail stores that I go to.

 

[tiriaq]

Another issue that I discovered about 6.5x55 - again a cartridge being produced in mid 1890's - so like 30 year's prior to SAAMI existing. Regimental Armourer gauges for headspace used by Swede Armourers, were LONGER than SAAMI spells out - so if you use a USA SAAMI headspace gauge set, a brand new made-in-Sweden M94 or m96 will fail headspace check. Was written that there were a lot of gunsmiths got busy to "fix" headspace (using SAAMI gauges), when the things showed up in USA. Is probably merit to that, if using SAAMI compliant ammo?

About drives home guy like me to be nuts to use SAAMI gauges and swap out Swede barrels and bolts and try to get "headspace" to be "correct".

I tried my SAAMI gauges in a lot of Mausers. Only one on which the bolt would not close on the No Go was one of the Danish M98 target conversions.
I don't have a 6.5x55 Field gauge. If a bolt closes on a Field gauge, there may be problems. Closing on a No Go isn't a big deal. Truth be known a bit of excess headspace isn't a big deal, with the possible exception of reloading the fired cases.
Headspacing in many Lee Enfield rifles is interesting. Theoretically rim thickness should be 60 thou. Go is .064, Saami No Go .068, Military, .074. Apparently there was even an emergency use standard of .078.
.060 to .074 can be seen easily with the naked eye. These are all elderly rifles now, some quite worn. Some brass can have rims less than .060. There can be lots of wiggle room. And then there are the chamber dimensions, which are unrelated to headspace.

 

[steelgray]

I think there is a really important distinction to be made here. A conventional expansion ring - which may occur in well designed cartridge cases - doesn't have any association with an internal wound that opens up inside the case behind the expansion ring.

Such a wound does occur in the case of cheap, under-designed US commercial 303 British brass because there's nothing to impede it from occurring (that is, because there's no web on the inside of the case). That internal wound effectively causes a lot of the stretching tension in the case head to abruptly be released - causing the case to actually extend out-out and stay butted against the bolt face - with zero remaining headspace. As shown in this illustration.

That significant, sudden internal releasing of tension sends a shockwave in both directions from the wound, but the effect of the shockwave is more pronounced in the direction toward the neck - because the metal is thinner there. A few milliseconds after the wound opens-up, the metal immediately in front of the wound is subjected to a rapid reversal of the direction of forces from tension to compression, whereas - further up the length of the case - the metal is still experiencing residual tension. So it is that, roughly half an inch forward of the wound, you have two opposing forces collide and that fractures the case in the area that ends-up being the point of head separation.

It's easy to see how 303 British cases respond differently in this respect from better designed cases. Just get that dental probe inside and you will definitely feel the internal wound behind the expansion ring within a fired in 303 British case. Not so with other calibers.

When a cartridge is fired, the brass expands to meet the chamber walls, sealing the breech. In a cartridge case there is a solid head (which doesn't expand unless pressures are truly excessive) and thinner sidewalls which do expand. There is obviously a transition zone between the solid head and the sidewalls. It is in this transition zone that the pressure ring forms. If the diameter of cartridge case is a close fit to the chamber, the expansion ring will be negligible. If the chamber diameter is significantly larger than the cartridge diameter, the expansion ring will be pronounced. This occurs regardless of the caliber. The appearance of an expansion ring after firing is indicative of the fit of the chamber and case.

My II** Ross target rifle has a "tight" chamber and fired cases show negligible expansion rings. Similarly my .260 precision rifle with a minimum chamber reamed with a Manson reamer produces fired brass with negligible expansion rings. With these rifles, it doesn't matter if the ammunition is factory or handloaded; the appearance is the same.
Dimensions are what determine the appearance of the expansion ring.

Measure the diameter of some of the Herter's brass just in front of the rim. See how it compares with other manufacturer's products. That will probably explain the insignificant expansion rings you are observing with the Herter's.

 

[Potashminer]

steelgray - you can make such a "wound" occur in any case that is "headspaced" at the rear - excessively shorten belted magnum cases and you can get the same "incipient head separation" "wound" - is not common, but is why many reloaders were advising to transfer "head spacing" to the shoulder of the case - not the rear end. But that likely means for most of us to segregate brass for individual rifles. Typically not an issue if you only have one rifle in that chambering - but can become an issue if you have half dozen of them, and some are chambered different than others.

British military that designed 303 case did not reload - they apparently fired the case "once", then it was discarded. So what "might" happen on subsequent reloadings was not of concern to them, I think? So long as the thing did not burst or split or separate the head on first firing - most of the time.

 

[steelgray]

This has come up before. That is, the suggestion that military cases were never really designed to be reloadable. I'm sure that is true.

I think that the same thing can be said for the cheap US commercial 303 British brass that is failing for everyone after a few firings. If people at Winchester, Remington etc. were honest, they’d probably say that their 303 British ammo products were designed and built to a price and would say that it was cheaper to leave-out the web and - as long as the case lasted for the first firing - that was all they cared about.

This US commercial brass was really just one of the early instances of COMMERCIAL of people selling what was intended to be ammo featuring a one-use, disposable case. Obviously, as noted, most military ammo was designed for one use from the get-go (especially the berdan primed stuff and the steel cased stuff). Now we also have other commercial stuff not really intended for reloading - like blazer aluminum cased pistol ammo, etc.

I said IF they were honest the US commercial ammo vendors would admit that their cases were never really designed to be reloadable BUT honesty probably isn’t in their nature. Instead, it is proved to be a lot more fun to spread the stupid myth that there’s nothing wrong with cheap US commercial brass and that the problem is with your gun - and its headspacing. One generation after another has bought-into that nonsense.

How come all of my six 303 British guns seem to have headspacing problems when I shoot mixed commercial brass and none of them exhibit any "headspacing problems" when I shoot the Herters brass?

People who created that stupid myth are probably still laughing about it, in their graves.

steelgray - you can make such a "wound" occur in any case that is "headspaced" at the rear - excessively shorten belted magnum cases and you can get the same "incipient head separation" "wound" - is not common, but is why many reloaders were advising to transfer "head spacing" to the shoulder of the case - not the rear end. But that likely means for most of us to segregate brass for individual rifles. Typically not an issue if you only have one rifle in that chambering - but can become an issue if you have half dozen of them, and some are chambered different than others.

British military that designed 303 case did not reload - they apparently fired the case "once", then it was discarded. So what "might" happen on subsequent reloadings was not of concern to them, I think? So long as the thing did not burst or split or separate the head on first firing - most of the time.

 

[Potashminer]

Is no doubt some "game" going on among the makers / sellers - one would think that brass sold in bulk - specifically for reloading - would be "okay" - yet if anyone is old enough, they will notice significant difference between older "blue label" bags of W-W brass versus newer "red and black" labels of same W-W brass. I happen to have both types on hand - not going to convince me that they are the "same". As if makers counting on memories to fade - new buyers will only know what is available today, etc. So like a "race to the bottom" - who can produce the least expensive product that people will buy - so as to maximize "profits". Probably a good plan if you are a share holder, or your bonus is tied to stock price or net earnings - not so much if you are the customer / end-user, though.

 

[steelgray]

That's Okay, they can sell the newer deficient stuff to Cosmic, cause he doesn't care about case longevity - he cares about the consistency of size of primer holes and whether the cases have some unnecessary extractor groove rebate cut.

He probably even told them to go for the quality downgrade 'cause nobody cases about case longevity anyway, right?

Is no doubt some "game" going on among the makers / sellers - one would think that brass sold in bulk - specifically for reloading - would be "okay" - yet if anyone is old enough, they will notice significant difference between older "blue label" bags of W-W brass versus newer "red and black" labels of same W-W brass. I happen to have both types on hand - not going to convince me that they are the "same". As if makers counting on memories to fade - new buyers will only know what is available today, etc. So like a "race to the bottom" - who can produce the least expensive product that people will buy - so as to maximize "profits". Probably a good plan if you are a share holder, or your bonus is tied to stock price or net earnings - not so much if you are the customer / end-user, though.

 

[Snider shooter]

On the subject of older brass being better. Winchester blue bag is better quality than current stuff. Older Federal brass is definitely a lot better than current brass. Federal brass currently very soft. Primer pockets enlarge before any other case failures. Dominion brass in 38-55 out classes any other brass I have found in 38-55. Over 40 reloads with black powder. Cases do get mouth annealing.
A lot of newly manufactured brass is made thinner and softer than older brass. Over 30 years of reloading and I have noticed a reduced case life in many brands of brass.

 

[steelgray]

Or maybe you just have headsapcing problems, ... right?

On the subject of older brass being better. Winchester blue bag is better quality than current stuff. Older Federal brass is definitely a lot better than current brass. Federal brass currently very soft. Primer pockets enlarge before any other case failures. Dominion brass in 38-55 out classes any other brass I have found in 38-55. Over 40 reloads with black powder. Cases do get mouth annealing.
A lot of newly manufactured brass is made thinner and softer than older brass. Over 30 years of reloading and I have noticed a reduced case life in many brands of brass.

 

[tiriaq]

Here are some assorted cartridges, fired in different firearms.




I know the history of some of these, nothing about others.

,223 fired in law enforcement Colt Canada C8; .243 Lapua handload, chamber cut by Shilen; 6.5Creed, unknown rifle; 7.62x51 Norinco, C5 barrel; .308, unknown; 7.62x51 DA handload, blown primer pocket; .308 Imperial handload, incipient separation; .303 IVI Mk. VIII, No. 4; .32Spec. M94 post '64.
Note the unremarkable expansion rings except for the .32Spec., even when pressure was obviously excessive. Note the IVI .303 with negligible expansion ring.
I do not know the story behind the DA case with expanded primer pocket or the Imperial with incipient separation.
The presence of a pronounced expansion ring is unrelated to the make or quality of the casings. Fit of cartridge and chamber is the deciding factor.

 

[steelgray]

Below are a few pictures to provide some insights into the results of my not very scientific attempt to section a few cases. Part of the reason that this examination isn't terribly scientific is because the Herters case – consistently shown here on the far right – has been subjected to a total of 8 full power firings by me (about half in a Mohawk autoloader) and an unknown number of firings by the previous owner – while the three North American commercial cases to its right have only been fired once by me – and supposedly once by their owner, before that.

My cuts are not very clean and I haven’t accurately cut all cases exactly down the middle so it isn’t really practical to measure case wall thickness. The only measure that I could meaningfully be compared for all 4 is the measurement from the bottom of the primer pocket to the inside base of the case (i.e., effectively the length of the primer flash hole). This measurement was significantly greater for the Herters case 2.15mm versus 1.58mm for WW Super, 1.70mm for Imperial and also 1.70mm for FC.

While the pictures don’t show things terribly well inside, I can report that the FC shows a definite recess or “wound” inside corresponding to the area where the exterior expansion ring is. The are much less obvious signs of such a wound starting on the other two North American commercial cases (i.e., WW Super and Imperial). The Herters case doesn’t show any signs of an internal wound.

To my eyes, the web looks best on the WW Super and Imperial cases, inasmuch as there is a definite radius for both where the inside base meets the inside case wall. The Herters and FC don’t seem to have a real radius in this area, but rather the Herters and FC cases have the base and the sidewall meeting more or less at right angles. It is possible that the Herters case HAD a more pronounced web after it had only been fired twice (as with the others) – and the web has been kind of worked down from the many extra firings and full length resizings that the Herters has had – compared to the others.

The second picture here shows the back side of the cases and – in spite of the Herters case having been fired many more times – it is the only one of the four that shows no significant external expansion ring. Again, the contrast is easier to see in real life.

There could also be differences in the quality of the metals and how the cases have been metallurgically processed. Someone has said that the colour of the Herters brass is different, but my colour vision isn’t as good as many others – so I can't say.

This third picture just shows headstamps.

Interesting if not conclusive.

 

[tiriaq]

Got a file? A bit of file work and light deburring, and the burrs are gone and the cut surfaces can be seen much more clearly.

 

[steelgray]

On the advice of tiriaq, I found a file and cleaned-up the rough cuts from my case sectioning work. This gave me a better chance to evaluate what is going on. I found that, once I removed a burr, my measurement of the flash hole depth of the FC case had to be corrected. The real value is 1.70 – the same as the Imperial case. I’ve edited my earlier post to reflect this new data.

With other burrs gone I was also able to get a rough measurement of the wall thickness – measured from the area I have removed, forward toward the neck. This suggested that the case wall – measured at a point about 14mm forward from the rim, is as follows – Herters: 0.88mm, WW-Super: 0.68mm, Imperial: 0.72mm and FC: 0.78mm.

The Herters brass seems more gray and less orange that the others. Brass is an alloy of copper and zinc and the colour difference may suggest that there is more zinc in the alloy used to make Herters brass.

We tend to associate a nice honey-gold colour with classy new factory ammo, but that orange tinge may actually hint that the brass may be inferior to brass that has more of a gray hue. People above – like Snider shooter (in post 114) – who have reported that the newer brass is softer and less long lasting may be finding that because, in the “race to the bottom”, brass manufacturers are shifting to using a brass with less zinc in the alloy.

Here is a quote that may relate to this from Metal Alloy Comparison Guide: Copper, Brass, & Bronze (Click on LINK):

"The addition of zinc enhances the strength and ductility of the base copper material. The higher the concentration of zinc, the stronger and more pliable the alloy. High-strength brass contains ≥39% zinc."

Got a file? A bit of file work and light deburring, and the burrs are gone and the cut surfaces can be seen much more clearly.

 

[tiriaq]

Some of the very best .303 cartridges and cases ever made were manufactured by Defense Industries (DI headstamp, CIL operation) during the WW2. These cases have a noticeably different colour than most others.