JeffG
Member
Llama Bob, you started with an amazing cartridge, waiting for future posts. 
Getting My New .264 Winchester Magnum Ready For Elk Season
- Thread starter Llama Bob
- Start date
- Status
mpd61
Member
As a 6.5x55 Freak, I always thought the .264 Win was cool. Good to see you doing this Llama Bob! So sick of everything being Creedmoor.
BTW, with the .264 Win mag, does anybody really need .260 Nosler?
BTW, with the .264 Win mag, does anybody really need .260 Nosler?
OP
OP
Llama Bob
member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2016
- Messages
- 2,258
Not really - other than being fast twist, the .26 Nosler case is so big that it's hard to find a powder slow enough to fill it up with the heaviest bullets. It falls off the end of the burn rate chart. With lighter bullets it's a barnstormer. But for this bullet, it would move me from Retumbo to H-50BMG, and I'd gain a whopping 35 ft/s.
cdb1
Member
Norma Oryx 156 grain.
OP
OP
Llama Bob
member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2016
- Messages
- 2,258
That does look like an option, although the .348 BC doesn't make it a very exciting one.
OP
OP
Llama Bob
member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2016
- Messages
- 2,258
Tried it - didn't shoot very well.
SMKs and other frangible bullets are definitely not suitable for elk. Also probably not legal if Parks & Wildlife wants to make an issue of it. I can't find a length for that bullet anywhere, but stability in a 1:9 seems unlikely anyways.
cdb1
Member
I’ve read, emphasis on read, not experienced, that the Oryx is an excellent bullet on elk. Granted the BC is nothing to get excited about. I think Dave Petzal is a fan of them. I contemplated trying some in my 6.5x55 but wound up not doing it as the bullet I’m using is super accurate and great on Texas deer - Berger 130 grain Hunting VLD.
Agreed SMK’s are a horrible choice.
Gtscotty
Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2007
- Messages
- 3,635
Pretty much guaranteed to be unstable in a 9 twist, Sierra recommends at least 7.5. It seems some folks have decent results from that bullet in an 8 twist, but many do not.
Regardless, I'd agree, there is absolutely no reason to shoe-horn a target bullet of any kind into the large game hunting role when there are so very many excellent, purpose built Hunting Bullets available.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Llama Bob
member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2016
- Messages
- 2,258
Three developments.
The first is that I ordered a set of Whidden dies and sent in fired cases. I got the micrometer seater and their click adjustable neck sizer. Should be very nice. Now I'm committed to this caliber - if this barrel won't shoot, I'll have to get another one to justify these swank dies
The second is that I decided during yesterday's shooting that the trigger is simply adjusted too heavy. It felt like about 6lbs. No big deal since I haven't shot for groups yet, but I'll measure and adjust it tomorrow.
The third is that I've set up a more detailed velocity ladder to try to identify an accurate charge weight. The idea is that you shoot loads in about 0.5% charge weight increments, two shots per increment, and measure the velocities and spreads. What you're looking for is a point where the velocity stays flat(ish) across 3 charge weights, and at least the middle one has a low spread between the two shots and a velocity below what's predicted by linear regression. This indicates a charge weight where the behavior is very insensitive to changes in charge weight (and presumably thus brass weight, neck tension, primer brisance etc.). Here's a chart from my CZ 550 7mag, where I've already been down this road successfully with almost the same bullet (just .284 diameter).
Now you may wonder why I'm looking for an accurate load with a chrono rather than shooting groups. The answer is
a) it usually works (worked GREAT for the CZ)
and
b) it takes a lot less shots than doing combined velocity/seating depth ladders
and
c) it decouples charge weight and seating depth, so you know what to blame
and
d) it's not sensitive to pulling one or two shots completely changing the results
The second point is especially valuable on a rifle like this where barrel life is at a premium. My goal is to have a sub-MOA load in hand in less than 35 shots. Doing a full charge weight/seating depth check with 5 shots per data point could easily use up 200 shots - 20% of the barrel life. I've taken 10 shots so far in the safety ladder, of which 6 are going to be-used in the new velocity/accuracy ladder. Here's the new table:
An interesting question is what the physics of the "flat spots" is. At some level it doesn't matter - people have observed that accurate (and perhaps more importantly, resilient to small changes) loads are found in the middle of the flat spots. But it's still interesting to think about what's happening. You add more powder (and thus more gas and more pressure) and don't get more velocity. How is that possible? Clearly something is applying an opposite force on the bullet, and the only available candidate is the barrel.
The best theory I've seen is that during the shot barrels have an oscillatory mode where they "breathe" with the bore becoming bigger and smaller as the bullet travels down the barrel. The speed of sound in steel is very, very fast compared to the bullet so this happens many times as the bullet travels down the barrel. The theory is that you want the bullet to exit a small muzzle. The alternative, where the bullet is swaged down by barrel contraction as it travels down the bore, only to exit an expanded muzzle, introduces substantial inaccuracy. The problem is worse with light barreled rifles since the barrel walls are thinner and they breathe more. This is the primary reason why heavy barrel rifles shoot better.
The slow spots in the velocity ladder correspond to exits from tighter bores, and are thus more inherently accurate or so the theory goes.
Now the above may be bull pucky. Although I've heard claims that one euro manufacturer actually has high speed video of it, including showing a bullet leaving an expanded bore and being deflected by gas blow-by on one side. But I've never seen the video. Still, it makes more sense than any other explanation I've heard. Tomorrow we'll be one step closer to testing it out.
The first is that I ordered a set of Whidden dies and sent in fired cases. I got the micrometer seater and their click adjustable neck sizer. Should be very nice. Now I'm committed to this caliber - if this barrel won't shoot, I'll have to get another one to justify these swank dies
The second is that I decided during yesterday's shooting that the trigger is simply adjusted too heavy. It felt like about 6lbs. No big deal since I haven't shot for groups yet, but I'll measure and adjust it tomorrow.
The third is that I've set up a more detailed velocity ladder to try to identify an accurate charge weight. The idea is that you shoot loads in about 0.5% charge weight increments, two shots per increment, and measure the velocities and spreads. What you're looking for is a point where the velocity stays flat(ish) across 3 charge weights, and at least the middle one has a low spread between the two shots and a velocity below what's predicted by linear regression. This indicates a charge weight where the behavior is very insensitive to changes in charge weight (and presumably thus brass weight, neck tension, primer brisance etc.). Here's a chart from my CZ 550 7mag, where I've already been down this road successfully with almost the same bullet (just .284 diameter).
Now you may wonder why I'm looking for an accurate load with a chrono rather than shooting groups. The answer is
a) it usually works (worked GREAT for the CZ)
and
b) it takes a lot less shots than doing combined velocity/seating depth ladders
and
c) it decouples charge weight and seating depth, so you know what to blame
and
d) it's not sensitive to pulling one or two shots completely changing the results
The second point is especially valuable on a rifle like this where barrel life is at a premium. My goal is to have a sub-MOA load in hand in less than 35 shots. Doing a full charge weight/seating depth check with 5 shots per data point could easily use up 200 shots - 20% of the barrel life. I've taken 10 shots so far in the safety ladder, of which 6 are going to be-used in the new velocity/accuracy ladder. Here's the new table:
An interesting question is what the physics of the "flat spots" is. At some level it doesn't matter - people have observed that accurate (and perhaps more importantly, resilient to small changes) loads are found in the middle of the flat spots. But it's still interesting to think about what's happening. You add more powder (and thus more gas and more pressure) and don't get more velocity. How is that possible? Clearly something is applying an opposite force on the bullet, and the only available candidate is the barrel.
The best theory I've seen is that during the shot barrels have an oscillatory mode where they "breathe" with the bore becoming bigger and smaller as the bullet travels down the barrel. The speed of sound in steel is very, very fast compared to the bullet so this happens many times as the bullet travels down the barrel. The theory is that you want the bullet to exit a small muzzle. The alternative, where the bullet is swaged down by barrel contraction as it travels down the bore, only to exit an expanded muzzle, introduces substantial inaccuracy. The problem is worse with light barreled rifles since the barrel walls are thinner and they breathe more. This is the primary reason why heavy barrel rifles shoot better.
The slow spots in the velocity ladder correspond to exits from tighter bores, and are thus more inherently accurate or so the theory goes.
Now the above may be bull pucky. Although I've heard claims that one euro manufacturer actually has high speed video of it, including showing a bullet leaving an expanded bore and being deflected by gas blow-by on one side. But I've never seen the video. Still, it makes more sense than any other explanation I've heard. Tomorrow we'll be one step closer to testing it out.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Llama Bob
member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2016
- Messages
- 2,258
Here's the data from the 1/2% velocity ladder:
Two of the shots didn't register on the chrono.
I also figured I'd shoot at paper just for the heck of it while doing this. There's not too much to be gleaned from shooting with a magnetospeed on since it certainly changes POI and may change barrel harmonics, but it's fin. Also, I didn't wait enough time between shots to keep the barrel very cool, which on a featherweight like this isn't conducive to accuracy. That said, if you match the group # in the table up to the target, you can see how everything shot (50y target).
All points of aim were the center of the respective diamonds/circles. I fell like certainly by group 4 I was shooting well and there's not much user error in these which is good. This rifle shoots very comfortably for a magnum featherweight rifle. It's never bruised my shoulder.
Based on this data, I'm comfortable using 64.5 or 64.8 as my charge weight. For a first try I'll split the difference and try 64.6. They're in the middle of a flat spot, have reasonably low spread (especially 64.5) and grouped OKish. I also like that the group moves down as velocity increases, because that's self-compensating at range. The other way is bad. Of course it may not still do that when I take the magnetospeed off. Group 6 (65.4) is an example of something with a small spread and tight 2-shot group, but which the velocity ladder shows is going to be nothing but trouble as it's in the middle of a sharp increase in velocity and spreads.
My first load to shoot for accuracy is going to be 64.6gr, and I'm going to increase the jump to the lands to .030 based on the fact that that was the best jump for the .284 version of this bullet. Next step is to make 10 round of that and see how it shoots.
Two of the shots didn't register on the chrono.
I also figured I'd shoot at paper just for the heck of it while doing this. There's not too much to be gleaned from shooting with a magnetospeed on since it certainly changes POI and may change barrel harmonics, but it's fin. Also, I didn't wait enough time between shots to keep the barrel very cool, which on a featherweight like this isn't conducive to accuracy. That said, if you match the group # in the table up to the target, you can see how everything shot (50y target).
All points of aim were the center of the respective diamonds/circles. I fell like certainly by group 4 I was shooting well and there's not much user error in these which is good. This rifle shoots very comfortably for a magnum featherweight rifle. It's never bruised my shoulder.
Based on this data, I'm comfortable using 64.5 or 64.8 as my charge weight. For a first try I'll split the difference and try 64.6. They're in the middle of a flat spot, have reasonably low spread (especially 64.5) and grouped OKish. I also like that the group moves down as velocity increases, because that's self-compensating at range. The other way is bad. Of course it may not still do that when I take the magnetospeed off. Group 6 (65.4) is an example of something with a small spread and tight 2-shot group, but which the velocity ladder shows is going to be nothing but trouble as it's in the middle of a sharp increase in velocity and spreads.
My first load to shoot for accuracy is going to be 64.6gr, and I'm going to increase the jump to the lands to .030 based on the fact that that was the best jump for the .284 version of this bullet. Next step is to make 10 round of that and see how it shoots.
Nice work! I'm liking your method, I'm about to start on working on a new load for my 7 I think I'll try this.
OP
OP
Llama Bob
member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2016
- Messages
- 2,258
A Histogram In Brass
Out of curiosity, I wanted to see how consistent the weight of the brass I'm getting from Nosler is. So I weighed a box, and made a little histogram out of brass:
The column with the upside down case at the top is 212.5 grains. Columns to the left have lower weights, in 0.1gr increments, and columns to the right are higher.
The first observation is that this is a pretty compact distribution. Everything was within 1.1gr. There were no big outliers.
The obvious next question is whether a 1.1gr difference in brass weight matters. The density of brass is 8.7 grams/cm^3, or 8.7x the density of water. The general logic of brass weight is that during firing, the brass always expands to fill the same size chamber, so everything in the chamber is either combustion gas or brass. This isn't exactly true - there's some dead space in the extractor groove. But it's close to true. What this means is that every 8.7gr of brass costs us 1 grain of H2O worth of case capacity during firing. Or put another way, the capacity during firing of the lightest and heaviest cases here should vary by 1.1/8.7 = 0.126 grains H20. A QuickLoad run shows that changing case capacity by 0.126 grains H20 results in a 2 ft/s velocity difference. In other words, these cases are similar enough that sorting/binning them would accomplish nothing. They're going to get used as-is.
Sometimes binning can be valuable with very bad brass (military etc.) especially in smaller cartridges where a small change in case capacity matters more.
Out of curiosity, I wanted to see how consistent the weight of the brass I'm getting from Nosler is. So I weighed a box, and made a little histogram out of brass:
The column with the upside down case at the top is 212.5 grains. Columns to the left have lower weights, in 0.1gr increments, and columns to the right are higher.
The first observation is that this is a pretty compact distribution. Everything was within 1.1gr. There were no big outliers.
The obvious next question is whether a 1.1gr difference in brass weight matters. The density of brass is 8.7 grams/cm^3, or 8.7x the density of water. The general logic of brass weight is that during firing, the brass always expands to fill the same size chamber, so everything in the chamber is either combustion gas or brass. This isn't exactly true - there's some dead space in the extractor groove. But it's close to true. What this means is that every 8.7gr of brass costs us 1 grain of H2O worth of case capacity during firing. Or put another way, the capacity during firing of the lightest and heaviest cases here should vary by 1.1/8.7 = 0.126 grains H20. A QuickLoad run shows that changing case capacity by 0.126 grains H20 results in a 2 ft/s velocity difference. In other words, these cases are similar enough that sorting/binning them would accomplish nothing. They're going to get used as-is.
Sometimes binning can be valuable with very bad brass (military etc.) especially in smaller cartridges where a small change in case capacity matters more.
Last edited:
Jim Watson
Member
Old NRA rule of thumb from the .30-06 era was that 11 grains of difference in brass weight corresponded to one grain of powder when going from commercial to GI brass.
OP
OP
Llama Bob
member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2016
- Messages
- 2,258
That sounds about right - one grain of powder has somewhat more impact than one grain h20 of case capacity., so I'd expect the ratio to be a little higher than 8.7:1.
Gordon
Member
Wow ! As an old school .264 guy I would just call it good with a 140 grain Nosler Partition with 63+- grains of H4831 which in a 26" barrel gets about 3000FPS or a 100 fps less in a 22" featherweight barrel. I used a lot of H870 back in the day under Sierra BT bullets but the Partition 140 was my go to for elk , and it worked on everyone shot at. (3) , I used 120 type grain bullets on Antelope out to 600 yards with complete satisfaction. I still have a pristine Featherweight .264 and an original Westerner which I have full lenth pressure bedded and sanded the stock down and Tung oiled it. I like Warne Maxi Mounts and rings and Zeiss HD 5 3-15 600 plex scopes on them which I got cheap at a store which recently went under. With the Warne Mounts it was easy to swap them from the Leupolds Vx3 3-9x50 AOs they wore for many years and the Zeiss scopes are much brighter. The Westerner has about 1500 rounds thru it , I think , in the 30 years I've had it and it was like new when I got it. It has the rare blackened Stainless Barrel. It still shoots around MOA since I pressure bedded it in an Az. class a dozen years back . Both factory triggers are adjusted down to 3.5 pounds FWIW. I fooled with 7mm Rem mag about a decade in the 80s early 90s , side lining the .264. I also had a long time affair with the .300 Weatherby on bigger game like Elk , but this year I am using the . like new pre 64 264 Feather weight for my elk and my son using the Westerner , which I am giving him after the hunt. I will sell the Feather weight next year. Any way H 4931 works well with 140 Grain Nosler Partitions on Elk at any range you can accurately place them. The recoil is similar to a .308 or .270 IMHO . I think the original pre 64 Model 70s have 8.5-1 twists.
cdb1
Member
Winchester is now selling rifles in 6.5 Creedmoor. They have a 1:8 twist. The 264 WinMag has a 1:9. If the .264 had a 1:8 twist I’d start saving for one.
OP
OP
Llama Bob
member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2016
- Messages
- 2,258
I've got one - a 28" octagonal barrel 1885. Should be fun to mess with.
I'm actually not too upset about the 1:9 twist. Every hunting bullet I've looked at appears to be fully stable down to below freezing at sea level. There are some VLD type match bullets where that might not be true, but for a hunting rifle those aren't on the agenda.
Nature Boy
Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2015
- Messages
- 8,277
The first is that I ordered a set of Whidden dies and sent in fired cases. I got the micrometer seater and their click adjustable neck sizer. Should be very nice. Now I'm committed to this caliber - if this barrel won't shoot, I'll have to get another one to justify these swank dies
You’ll like those Widden dies. I have 2 sets now, one for .308 and one for 6BRA. Runout is constantly within .001
cdb1
Member
I like 140 grain VLD hunting bullets for deer and my 6.5x55 with a 1:9 twist would not stabilize them. It does great with 130 grain Berger Hunting VLDs so that is what I use.
I’ll also say that if I’d kept experimenting I might have found an accurate load. The rifle didn’t do well with 140 grain GameKings either so it may just be that the rifle shoots better with lighter bullets and the twist rate is not a factor.
I also confess to not being the worlds greatest hand loader. For anything I hunt in Texas the 130 grain VLDs are more than adequate.
Still if I were to have a .264 WinMag I’d want a 1:8 twist to be safe.
I’ll also say that if I’d kept experimenting I might have found an accurate load. The rifle didn’t do well with 140 grain GameKings either so it may just be that the rifle shoots better with lighter bullets and the twist rate is not a factor.
I also confess to not being the worlds greatest hand loader. For anything I hunt in Texas the 130 grain VLDs are more than adequate.
Still if I were to have a .264 WinMag I’d want a 1:8 twist to be safe.
OP
OP
Llama Bob
member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2016
- Messages
- 2,258
So it's time to resurrect this thread. The elk trip first got moved from the Sierras to good ol' unit 4 or 5 in CO (home of every jackass with an orange vest in the whole state) and then canceled due to 2/3 of the party backing out
I also moved and had to tear down my reloading setup, but now it's back in action.
I shot the first attempt at an accuracy group yesterday (100 yards):
IMO that's not a bad starting point. So far I've fired 27 rounds starting from no load data at all and I've got full velocity and almost MOA grouping. I've got several things working against me here though:
I'm definitely using a slightly heavier scope with better optics. This lightweight Leupold is for the birds. I have a Nightforce 2.5-10 NSX compact with illumination that I may try first.
Last I can do a seating depth ladder to shrink group size if need be but I suspect the above changes will get me well under an MOA.
I also moved and had to tear down my reloading setup, but now it's back in action.
I shot the first attempt at an accuracy group yesterday (100 yards):
IMO that's not a bad starting point. So far I've fired 27 rounds starting from no load data at all and I've got full velocity and almost MOA grouping. I've got several things working against me here though:
- non-fire-formed cases that are headspacing on the belt rather than the shoulder and possibly runout in the cases.
- dies with lots of runout (I used my RCBS dies for this before I got the new Whidden ones)
- a non-match bullet
- a light featherweight rifle (the reason I shot a 3-shot group - I do not expect good hot barrel performance and want to keep round count down)
- a stock with no pillars and limited factory skim bedding
- a Leupold 3-9 lightweight scope that I discovered I did not like much at all
I'm definitely using a slightly heavier scope with better optics. This lightweight Leupold is for the birds. I have a Nightforce 2.5-10 NSX compact with illumination that I may try first.
Last I can do a seating depth ladder to shrink group size if need be but I suspect the above changes will get me well under an MOA.
Bbear
Member
Llama Bob, thanks for the updates. I too have a Model 70 FW but w/ a 26" barrel. I chose RL33 for it and went through much the same scenario you listed here, save with the 142 gr ABLR. The 1-9" twist and 3200 fps speed stabilize it out to 600. Groups under an inch consistently. Penetration on my elk was through both shoulders. I'm pleased with the results.
The 264 seems to be forgotten by many in their quest for either the 'latest and greatest' (Creedmoor) {though the creedmoor is actually over a decade old} or more speed (a la the 26 Nosler et al). I'm perfectly happy with my stable of 3 6.5's - 6.5x55 SE, 264 WM and the one I'll be working on this spring/summer - 256 Newton.
Thanks for all of the information and the 'steps' you took to obtain your working load.
The 264 seems to be forgotten by many in their quest for either the 'latest and greatest' (Creedmoor) {though the creedmoor is actually over a decade old} or more speed (a la the 26 Nosler et al). I'm perfectly happy with my stable of 3 6.5's - 6.5x55 SE, 264 WM and the one I'll be working on this spring/summer - 256 Newton.
Thanks for all of the information and the 'steps' you took to obtain your working load.
OP
OP
Llama Bob
member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2016
- Messages
- 2,258
After everything going smoothly to this point, I've hit a snag.
The Whidden full length bushing sizer die was machined based on the fired cases I provided. After resizing to a .002" shoulder bump, it leaves the shoulder diameter at about .491" (this is a difficult measurement). That's exactly SAAMI max. However, I've found I've got at least 2 accessories that the resulting cases do not fit in at the shoulder. One is a World's Finest Trimmer. That's largely irrelevant at the moment as my brass shrunk length-wise in the first firing, so I won't be trimming yes (ever?). The other is my lee factory crimp die. That's a big problem, because my charge weight was chosen with the crimp in place, and I'd have to re-do the velocity ladder in order to go without. This is really not a problem I was expecting (since I was in-spec) but I'll be contacting Lee and Little Crow on Monday to figure out what to do about it.
I also have been working on improving my measurement capabilities for ogive length and shoulder position. Part of this is a new pair of Mitutoyo calipers, along with some better gauges. One thing I discovered in this process was that the previous attempt at quasi-accuracy loads was set up about 0.035" off the lands, when 0.020" was my objective.
So here's the new plan:
I've put a new scope on the rifle (Leupold 4.5-14 side focus CDS)
I loaded 10 rounds on new cases with the new dies, 64.8 charge weight (more on this in a subsequent post), and the adjusted OAL.
I'm going to shoot these, see how they do, and use cases from them to sent to Lee and Little Crow since I'm sure that's where this is headed. I could use some of my older fired cases, but they've all been primed and I don't want to ship them primed or deprime a live case.
After firing the rounds above, my plan is to take the rifle to my gunsmith for pillar and skim bedding. So it may be a while before more progress is made.
The Whidden full length bushing sizer die was machined based on the fired cases I provided. After resizing to a .002" shoulder bump, it leaves the shoulder diameter at about .491" (this is a difficult measurement). That's exactly SAAMI max. However, I've found I've got at least 2 accessories that the resulting cases do not fit in at the shoulder. One is a World's Finest Trimmer. That's largely irrelevant at the moment as my brass shrunk length-wise in the first firing, so I won't be trimming yes (ever?). The other is my lee factory crimp die. That's a big problem, because my charge weight was chosen with the crimp in place, and I'd have to re-do the velocity ladder in order to go without. This is really not a problem I was expecting (since I was in-spec) but I'll be contacting Lee and Little Crow on Monday to figure out what to do about it.
I also have been working on improving my measurement capabilities for ogive length and shoulder position. Part of this is a new pair of Mitutoyo calipers, along with some better gauges. One thing I discovered in this process was that the previous attempt at quasi-accuracy loads was set up about 0.035" off the lands, when 0.020" was my objective.
So here's the new plan:
I've put a new scope on the rifle (Leupold 4.5-14 side focus CDS)
I loaded 10 rounds on new cases with the new dies, 64.8 charge weight (more on this in a subsequent post), and the adjusted OAL.
I'm going to shoot these, see how they do, and use cases from them to sent to Lee and Little Crow since I'm sure that's where this is headed. I could use some of my older fired cases, but they've all been primed and I don't want to ship them primed or deprime a live case.
After firing the rounds above, my plan is to take the rifle to my gunsmith for pillar and skim bedding. So it may be a while before more progress is made.
Last edited:
redneck2
Member
Do you have a Hornady tool? Used to be Stoney Point. I use one to check length to ogive on everything I load. Quick, easy, appears accurate
OP
OP
Llama Bob
member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2016
- Messages
- 2,258
I have both their ogive and shoulder tools as well as their system for measuring the chamber. They seem to work reasonably well with the new calipers but I'm a little disturbed the results are as far off of the previous attempt as they are. I don't really understand why.
Nature Boy
Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2015
- Messages
- 8,277
I had the same issue with my Widden die made off of the brass fired from my custom .308.
I called Little Crow and they said send them the trimmer with 3 fired case and they would ream it to match for free plus return postage.
The WFT is made to SAAMI specs. The owner (can’t recall his name) said that the WFT also has problems when trying to trim neck sized brass too.
- Status
