Vanguard Casing Failures

c-fbmi said:
Your youth and inexperience are showing, perhaps you should listen and learn instead of posting you ignorance for all to witness.
No offence intended.

QUOTE
'Tis better to keep ones mouth closed and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt" William Shakespeare
Click to expand...

im rather intrested as to what exactly you are refering.

is it that i extend my depriming pin and back my full length sizing die to size 3/4 of my necks?

or

is it that small bases dies which is not my area at all, yet i figured an a possible solution might be helpful in determining this problem.

william shakespeare paraphase a biblical verse. go find that one.
 
c-fbmi said:
First several questions;

Do you always full length size when you reload, bump the shellholder against the die?
Is the photo of case from carbine a new lot of factory loads?
Do you reload for the carbine as well (unclear in op)?
Have you miked the case head and bulge diameters?
Were these bulges not showing up before in cabine?

I had the same problem with 243 when first started reloading, max chamber, min die. Back your die out 1 full turn from contact with shellholder size a case, probably won't chamber. If it does, back out another 1/2 turn and try again. Now turn die in 1/16 turn at a time, until case just chambers with resistance on the down turn of the bolt. If resistance is too great for your liking tweek die down just a hair so you can still feel resistance but light. You have now set your die for 0 head space and your brass will last a long time.
The bulge is likely a combination of min web dia on the brass and max chamber dia in rifle. (Ruger used to be famous for oversize chambers back in the 70's and 80's) If the rifle checks good as far as barrel extension (as suggested above) then your best bet is to buy a neck sizer die so you don't work the web area too much set up as described above and you should experience no more problems.
I have seen the web bulge many, many times and assuming the rifle is put together properly there is nothing short of rechambering you can do except as I have suggested above. I have found big differences in different makes or even lots of brass as far as web dia goes and even as far as headspace goes.
Factory loads are supposed to meet SAAMI specs but I have found most are short in the headspace. This is so the shell will chamber in a min or match chamber. Rifle manufacturers do the opposite for the same reason, wouldn't want to have a rifle out there that won't chamber brand X ammo, bad for image. And brand X wouldn't want to get reputation that their ammo won't chamber. And so we get bulges, more with some brand of brass than others.

Douglas
Click to expand...

why would it not chamber
 
probably won't chamber

It has been my experience that when a case bulges as shown in photos, when you run it up into the die, which will encompass the entire area ahead of the web where the bulge is, the case grows enough that GENERALLY it won't chamber. As you force the bulge back in line with the case body the brass has nowhere to go but forward, moving the entire body and shoulder forward. The case, fired in the chamber will only have .001-.003" memory from the firing and can be caused to grow, in sizing, as much as .010".
This even applies in partial sizing as you only back the die out maybe .075-.100" which still completely sizes the area of the bulge ahead of the web which generally lies .200-.300" from the case head.
I'm discussing standard dimension dies, without even considering SB dies, which will only aggrevate the above descibed situation.
That is why the case probably won't chamber.
Hence my advice to possibly purchase a neck sizing die so the brass doesn't get unnecessarily over worked at the web transition area (bulge)
 
Until the diameter of the fired cases is known no one can really comment accurately if the so called bulge is a problem or if it is simply under size brass in a correct chamber.
 
tylerjwitty said:
am i batty or what.

i have never had a casing not chamber due to the settings of a die.
whats the point of fire forming if every time you say you have to touch the shoulder which i never do.

im wondering about your dies. are they those same base ones that make casings smaller.. forget the name

almost seems like you have a big chamber or something weird in that aspect due to factory ammo bulging like that.
Click to expand...

These young guys crack me up :)
 
guntech said:
Have you measured the diameter of the 'bulge'?

Often brass is manufactured under size and when fired in a correctly sized chamber dimension a bulge will appear as pictured.

Lets have some diameter measurements... A fired case measuring .470" - .471" is perfectly normal and will look quite bulged if it measures .466" - .467" before firing. I have seen Winchester brass as small as .465".
Click to expand...

I think resolved the issue. I spoke to a Weatherby gunsmith and just as guntech and c-fbmi suggested, to measure the diameters of the fired casings at the bulge point. Also to take measurements at other points as well such as the shoulder and neck. They also suggested to take measurements on any other ammo I have (Remy) and to inspect those cases as well.

Lo and behold. The winchester unfired at the bulge area is 0.463" and fired is 0.469". The unfired case measures the same as the go gauge, however at the shoulder narrower at 0.452" unfired and 0.455 fired. The neck diameter is 0.343 fired.

Had to go digging, but found some Remy fired from that rifle. New in bulge area = 0.465" and fired is 0.468". The fired shoulder is about eh same as the winchester, but the neck is 0.346". That's 0.008" greater diameter. This means that the angle of the shoulder is greater on the win casings, therefore they will stretch further into the chamber when fired.

To verify this, I used a .38 special casing as my guide and inserted a GO, NOGO, win unfired, win fired and rem fired into the casing. Using that as my reference, I measured the overall length for each and was astounded. the Win new measured the same as the GO. The NOGO was 0.004" longer than the GO. Which was expected. The Remy fired was the same length as the NOGO. The win averaged 0.002" longer than the fired Remy length and the near ruptured case measured 0.004" longer than the Remy.

This means that the Win fired case (near split) stretched 0.008" overall.

The issue: at this time, I think is the ammo. Thin casing walls and smaller/shorter neck diameter means that these particular shells really are not matched well to the chamber and due to the greater angle of the shoulder, are allowed to stretch into my chamber in addition to the rearward stretching when fired. This kind of makes sense as to why the Remy casing or a few of my loaded casings did not show this kind of stress.

The rest of this ammo is destined to be shot out of the M14.

Thanks guys for your insights, rest assured, my rifle is fine. Besides, I started looking for a replacement and it was going to be hard.
 
intresting to know..
maybe ill just make my full legth sizing dies into neck sizing dies someday. fix that problem fer good.

c-fbmi said:
It has been my experience that when a case bulges as shown in photos, when you run it up into the die, which will encompass the entire area ahead of the web where the bulge is, the case grows enough that GENERALLY it won't chamber. As you force the bulge back in line with the case body the brass has nowhere to go but forward, moving the entire body and shoulder forward. The case, fired in the chamber will only have .001-.003" memory from the firing and can be caused to grow, in sizing, as much as .010".
This even applies in partial sizing as you only back the die out maybe .075-.100" which still completely sizes the area of the bulge ahead of the web which generally lies .200-.300" from the case head.
I'm discussing standard dimension dies, without even considering SB dies, which will only aggrevate the above descibed situation.
That is why the case probably won't chamber.
Hence my advice to possibly purchase a neck sizing die so the brass doesn't get unnecessarily over worked at the web transition area (bulge)
Click to expand...
 
If you only neck size, one day you will have to go through a full lenght resizing too, because your cases won't fit the chamber after many firings. So, either you partially resize with your FL sizer or you use a real neck sizer. But you will always need a FL die.

BTW, minimal (or close to) dimensions with W-W is not a rare thing. US manufacturers tend to make their brass on the small size, Remington being just behind Winchester in that manner.
 
Baribal said:
If you only neck size, one day you will have to go through a full lenght resizing too, because your cases won't fit the chamber after many firings. So, either you partially resize with your FL sizer or you use a real neck sizer. But you will always need a FL die.
Click to expand...

goos point. why change whats been work for 8 years :D i calculated it out to if i back out .100 if will work the casing .002 less on a regular 308 casing . every bit counts in brass life.

witty
 
An easy trick to partial resize is to use the Stoney Point (now Hornady) "Lock-And-Load Headspace Case Comparators" and push the shoulder back about .002" when resizing. This will make the brass easy to chamber and won't work it too much.
Note that these "gauges" won't "measure" chamber headspace, because the brass always springs back a couple of thou after stretching, and this will cause a false reading of actual chamber headspace. Headspace check is always better performed with the correct headspace gauges.

This Min case diemensions / Max chamber situation experienced by the OP illustrates quite well what I was referring to some time ago about reforming practices using '06 brass to make 9.3X62 or 6.5X55 cases.
 
Dies are available (custom made) that will not size the body but will 'bump' the shoulder... but it is way easier for the average loader to simply have a 3 die set, neck sizer, full length sizer and a seating die. That way you can neck size to extend brass life and occasionally full length size when a shoulder 'bump' is needed. If your chamber size and full length die size are close in dimension and not on the opposite manufacturing tolerances it's really no disadvantage to full length sizing if you only touch the shoulder enough to 'straighten it. Its when you have a maximum dimension chamber and a minimum dimension die screwed down all the way that brass life goes all to hell.
 
Neck sizing will certainly lenthen the life of the cases. I anneal mine after about 6 or 7 reloads too. I also learned first hand that one does not want to take the barrel off of a Vanguard if you ever plan to use that barrel again in the future. They don't come off! They have to be relieved in front of the shoulder to remove the collossal tension when they're cryogenically installed to the action.
They end up like this;
l.jpg
 
Unless the groove is way too deep, they can be reused with the correct thickness washer-like spacer.
 
Update

Had a gunsmith look at the rifle and the chamber is well with spec. The factory Winchester ammo (previous post) was also suspected.

I full length resized and loaded with 150 gr BT to spec. Only with the cases, I left between .003" and .005" of a gap from the base of the die to the press using my automotive gauges. The .006" casings were a little tight, but showed absolutely no signs of expansion (like those pictures). The .003" casings also showed no signs of expansion but shot incredibly tight (this with the tupperware stock on it. I did notice the group opening up if I let the barrel get warm.

The Verdict: I will not use Winchester factory brass in this rifle. The rifle is a keeper, and to use the .003" gap. Replace that damn stock. (any ideas anyone?)

Thank you all for your valuable input. Saved me from spending $800 on a new rifle.
 
Replace that damn stock. (any ideas anyone?)
Click to expand...


Ordered 4 stocks from Boyds a couple days ago to dress up the little herd of $325 Vanguards I got for the kids. At less than $100 each its hard to beat.'Course there's no particular reason not to put a McMillan or similar on.
 
The Weatherby website has a recall notice on it right now. Something about the bolts, check it out though. Good luck.
 
Interesting thread. In 1973 I bought a new model 70 that had a "loose" chamber spec. Then in 1974 bought a set of dies from RCBS that were for lack of a better term, "tight". I saw once and twice fired brass look just like yours. Then tried reloads from those dies in a friends gun with the same effect. Sent the dies back to RCBS with a few fired casings and voila, a new set of dies and all was good....until I shot that barrel out.

When "stack" of tolerances works against you, this might be what you see. When it works with you, you get what some guys call "match chambers".

Either way, approach with caution till you sort this out. Case head separation is not cool.
 
Joep17 said:
Interesting thread. In 1973 I bought a new model 70 that had a "loose" chamber spec. Then in 1974 bought a set of dies from RCBS that were for lack of a better term, "tight". I saw once and twice fired brass look just like yours. Then tried reloads from those dies in a friends gun with the same effect. Sent the dies back to RCBS with a few fired casings and voila, a new set of dies and all was good....until I shot that barrel out.

When "stack" of tolerances works against you, this might be what you see. When it works with you, you get what some guys call "match chambers".

Either way, approach with caution till you sort this out. Case head separation is not cool.
Click to expand...

Excellent comment Joe. I am not carefully recording the effects of the brass. In comparison with the chamber and my RCBS dies and the resized casings, it is the Winchester Super X ammo case lot which is really undersized (too small in both diameter and casehead to shoulder). The gunsmith pointed that out me. I should also mention that I cut a cross section from three of the badly marked casings and mic'd the wall thickness. all were good.

The resizing removed the bump. The reloaded shells did not have the bump re-occur. So that in itself was positive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom