Chamfer or not.

mrawesome22 · April 13, 2007, 11:23 PM

I've been considering the usefulness of chamfering my .22-250Rem and .243Win case. I only shoot BT bullets and the more I think about it, chamfering just seems like a waste of time. In fact, it seems to me that not chamfering would lead to more accurate shells because if all were trimmed to the same length, they would all have the same neck tension. Chamfered cases however can't have the exact same chamfer unless you were to rig up something that would make the chamfer identical on every case. So I'm thinking chamfering is going down the drain. What do you guys think?

T. O'Heir · April 13, 2007, 11:33 PM

Chamfering has nothing to do with accuracy or neck tension. It's only done to ease bullet seating. Your BT's don't need it, but you'll still have to deburr the inside and outside of the case mouth, after trimming.

dgc940 · April 13, 2007, 11:58 PM

I chamfer all my cases but I also use the 30 degree in a Wilson lathe it puts them all exactly the same. have you never seated a bullet and felt it scrape copper on the way in? I started out like everyone with the cheep little hand tools and latter on found they are not for the person looking for extreme accuracy! I have switched die types three times now and now use competition bushing and seating dies by redding.
consistency consistency consistency! If you do anything to a case do them all identical!

mrawesome22 · April 14, 2007, 12:49 AM

That's what I mean dgc940. Unless I set the chamfer up in a drill press with a set stop, no chamfer will be exact to the last. So I'm thinking of not doing it. One less variable and with boat tails, I don't see the point of it anyway. And no I've never scraped copper off the bullet while seating. My dies have a sliding alignment sleeve which keeps the bullet very straight going into the case. Add to this the BT and chamfer and sheering is almost an impossibilty. But again, I'm starting to highly doubt the chamfers validity.

dgc940 · April 14, 2007, 10:01 AM

MR22 I guess you could try not doing it and see what happens?
I dont really know what shooting your after but for me most mine is 100yd along with 200 and 300 meter. The two things that helped me shrink groups the most in the last couple
months was going to a flat based bullet for quicker stabilization the next was to drop using the Hornadys and noslers in ballistic tips. I have started using Berger's for all my paper and small varmint needs and sense then groups have made a big improvement.
And I guess the two most important things I do for improvement are trim all to exact length , debur flash hole on inside and weight sort brass. You know getting from 1 inch down to half is pretty easy but man getting from half down to the 3's and 4's is hard mind bending work! LOL
but about two months ago I was thinking the same thing you are about chamfering not being the same from case to case that's when I got the Wilson to remove chamfering from the equation!

By the way the benchmark didn't work out for me! I went back to 4064

mrawesome22 · April 14, 2007, 01:54 PM

Thanks guys. And dgc940, I'm preping case just like you, except for the weight sorting part. I loaded some non-chamfered shells this morning and all went well so if it ever stops raining I'll take them to my range and report back. Sorry to here that Benchmark didn't work out for you. It's still working great for me. I did buy a can of H380 recently though and I'm going to see what it does. Maybe I'll get lucky and it'll produce that one tiny hole I'm after

dgc940 · April 14, 2007, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Maybe I'll get lucky and it'll produce that one tiny hole I'm after

AAHHHHH THE HOLY GRAIL OF SHOOTING!

cheygriz · April 14, 2007, 09:59 PM

I chamfer all of my rifle cases. But come to think of it, I'm not sure why.

Maybe it's just because the guy that taught me to reload 40+ years ago did it, and I always have ever since!

CrustyFN · April 15, 2007, 12:01 PM

I am only asking this because I am new to reloading rifle and I don't know myself. If you are afraid deburring the inside of the case will affect accuracy how much affect would different size burrs have. For example a case with a larger bur wouldn't release the bullet as easy as the one with almost no bur. It just seems to me that the bullet would release more consistent from the deburred case. Can somebody shed some light on this?
Rusty

rwilson452 · April 15, 2007, 12:22 PM

Having a bur on the outside of the neck can effect chambering the cartridge. burs on the inside of the neck can affect bullet seating including not getting it concentric which will affect accuracy. the small amount you remove will not have a noticable effect on accuracy. If your rifle has a very tight neck it might but with a standard size chamber I doubt it very much. I have found that triming to maintain a square neck can have a small effect. but only if is really out of square. I have gone to the trouble of just barely doing a chamfer to remove burs and doing a real deep chamfer and didn't see a difference. this was done on a 22-250. The 22-250 is known for being a picky eater.

mrawesome22 · April 15, 2007, 03:33 PM

Rusty, chamfering and removing burrs are two different things. A chamfer puts a bevel on the inside of the case. I deburr with a round file on the inside and flat file on the outside after trimming. It takes very little effort to knock 'em off.

**JohnKSa** · April 15, 2007, 03:42 PM

Are you saying that the chamfering operation wouldn't remove burrs?

mrawesome22 · April 15, 2007, 03:44 PM

No of course not. What I mean is you can remove burrs without chamfering.

**JohnKSa** · April 15, 2007, 04:20 PM

Why not take the "twofer"?

Surely even the imprecise hand chamfering is more precise than what's left after you remove the burrs freehand with a file.

mrawesome22 · April 15, 2007, 04:32 PM

The files just knock the burrs off. What's left is a trimmed, deburred, non-chamfered case. It works well.

**JohnKSa** · April 15, 2007, 07:27 PM

Quote:

The files just knock the burrs off.

Chamfering would do the same.

Quote:

What's left is a trimmed, deburred, non-chamfered case.

Why is that better than still doing only one step and ending up with a deburred AND chamfered case?

Now you're doing one step--deburring--and getting a deburred case that is NOT chamfered.

You could do one step--chamfering--and get a deburred case that IS chamfered.

I don't understand why you would pick the first option.

mrawesome22 · April 15, 2007, 10:26 PM

That's the whole point of this thread LOL. I don't want a chamfer.

**JohnKSa** · April 16, 2007, 12:22 AM

Your original premises were that it was:

Useless
A waste of time
Hurt accuracy because of inconsistency.

I don't see how it's useless since it performs the deburring function.

I don't see how it's a waste of time because if you leave it off, you'll spend roughly the same amount of time deburring--a step you can skip if you chamfer.

I don't see how freehanding the case mouth with a file to remove the burrs will result in more consistent neck tension than chamfering.

What am I missing here?

mrawesome22 · April 16, 2007, 12:56 AM

I never said it was useless. For flat based bullets it's a must isn't it? What I'm going for is more uniform cases. And I can't get consistent chamfers with the tools I have. Therefore the cases are not uniform. I have no idea if the non-chamfered will be anymore accurate or not. But I don't think they are going to be less accurate. Plus a lot of brass I have has never needed trimmed. But I chamfered it anyway thinking it was absolutely necessary. I have brass that I've reloaded 18 times and have never had to trim it. Did these cases really need chamfered?

dgc940 · April 16, 2007, 08:05 AM

MR22 dont you shoot a lot mainly like me for tight group at 100 and 200?

mrawesome22 · April 16, 2007, 01:57 PM

Yes, trying to get the smallest groups possible.

alan · April 16, 2007, 03:24 PM

mrawesome22:

Might I note the following: Chamfer lightly.

All you want to do is to remove the burrs left as a result of trimming.

dgc940 · April 16, 2007, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Yes, trying to get the smallest groups possible

MR22 I'm off on Mondays and a friend and I went to the range today were getting ready for a match coming up saturday and believe it or not out of four loads of IMR4064 everything being the same except for col My best was a
.337 and a.436 my worst was a ..817 and a 1.035 (dang flyer's) with a flat based bullet in 52 grain and all chamfered Identical! All would have been in the 3's if not for individual flyer's.
the boat tails dont fully stabilize till out to or past 300yds and the flat based are supposed to start stabilizing quickly so Ive been told and read.
I also know that after paying close detail to consistency my loaded rounds with powder primer case and bullet all weigh with in 1/2 grain and that's loaded! My headache is how to get rid of the 1 shot flyer's in a five shot group? but I do know that chamfering isn't causing it. with my set up chamfering is all cut same depth and all straight! I even go as far as weigh each charge on beam and then again on digital before a match (non official).
With this all being said I think one key problem is mine and your 22-250 is not the best of calibers for supreme accuracy!

Bullet94 · April 17, 2007, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Chamfer or not.

I vote chamfer. I use this only after I trim –

http://www.sinclairintl.com/cgi-bin/...WBR&type=store

alan · April 17, 2007, 10:42 PM

Re boat tail projectiles not stabilizing inside 300 yards, thereby contributing to larger groups, sounds about right, as the purpose of the boat tail projectile is to provide ballistic stability at longer ranges.

What constitutes "longer ranges" might vary somewhat depending on caliber, but the basic concept remains. Use Boat Tail projectiles a LONGER RANGES.

BTW, as I remember, and this goes back some number of years, Winchester came up with a Match Load intended for Palmer Match Shooting, 800, 900 and 1000 yards,ammunition that was loaded with FLAT BASE BULLETS. It did quite well too.

April 13, 2007, 11:23 PM	#1
mrawesome22 Senior Member Join Date: November 9, 2005 Location: Ohio, Appalachia's foothills. Posts: 3,779	Chamfer or not. I've been considering the usefulness of chamfering my .22-250Rem and .243Win case. I only shoot BT bullets and the more I think about it, chamfering just seems like a waste of time. In fact, it seems to me that not chamfering would lead to more accurate shells because if all were trimmed to the same length, they would all have the same neck tension. Chamfered cases however can't have the exact same chamfer unless you were to rig up something that would make the chamfer identical on every case. So I'm thinking chamfering is going down the drain. What do you guys think?

April 13, 2007, 11:58 PM	#3
dgc940 Senior Member Join Date: September 15, 2005 Location: Graham Texas Posts: 258	I chamfer all my cases but I also use the 30 degree in a Wilson lathe it puts them all exactly the same. have you never seated a bullet and felt it scrape copper on the way in? I started out like everyone with the cheep little hand tools and latter on found they are not for the person looking for extreme accuracy! I have switched die types three times now and now use competition bushing and seating dies by redding. consistency consistency consistency! If you do anything to a case do them all identical! __________________ Some people say what they think! Some say what they know! Then there's those that think they know what they are saying!

April 14, 2007, 10:01 AM	#5
dgc940 Senior Member Join Date: September 15, 2005 Location: Graham Texas Posts: 258	MR22 I guess you could try not doing it and see what happens? I dont really know what shooting your after but for me most mine is 100yd along with 200 and 300 meter. The two things that helped me shrink groups the most in the last couple months was going to a flat based bullet for quicker stabilization the next was to drop using the Hornadys and noslers in ballistic tips. I have started using Berger's for all my paper and small varmint needs and sense then groups have made a big improvement. And I guess the two most important things I do for improvement are trim all to exact length , debur flash hole on inside and weight sort brass. You know getting from 1 inch down to half is pretty easy but man getting from half down to the 3's and 4's is hard mind bending work! LOL but about two months ago I was thinking the same thing you are about chamfering not being the same from case to case that's when I got the Wilson to remove chamfering from the equation! By the way the benchmark didn't work out for me! I went back to 4064 __________________ Some people say what they think! Some say what they know! Then there's those that think they know what they are saying!

April 14, 2007, 09:59 PM	#8
cheygriz Senior Member Join Date: May 11, 2002 Location: high up in the rockies Posts: 2,289	I chamfer all of my rifle cases. But come to think of it, I'm not sure why. Maybe it's just because the guy that taught me to reload 40+ years ago did it, and I always have ever since! __________________ If you think a mighty military force is expensive, wait 'til you see what a weak one costs.

April 15, 2007, 12:01 PM	#9
CrustyFN Senior Member Join Date: June 4, 2006 Location: West Virginia Posts: 2,258	I am only asking this because I am new to reloading rifle and I don't know myself. If you are afraid deburring the inside of the case will affect accuracy how much affect would different size burrs have. For example a case with a larger bur wouldn't release the bullet as easy as the one with almost no bur. It just seems to me that the bullet would release more consistent from the deburred case. Can somebody shed some light on this? Rusty __________________ I don't ever remember being absent minded.

April 13, 2007, 11:33 PM	#2
T. O'Heir Senior Member Join Date: February 13, 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 12,453	Chamfering has nothing to do with accuracy or neck tension. It's only done to ease bullet seating. Your BT's don't need it, but you'll still have to deburr the inside and outside of the case mouth, after trimming.

April 14, 2007, 12:49 AM	#4
mrawesome22 Senior Member Join Date: November 9, 2005 Location: Ohio, Appalachia's foothills. Posts: 3,779	That's what I mean dgc940. Unless I set the chamfer up in a drill press with a set stop, no chamfer will be exact to the last. So I'm thinking of not doing it. One less variable and with boat tails, I don't see the point of it anyway. And no I've never scraped copper off the bullet while seating. My dies have a sliding alignment sleeve which keeps the bullet very straight going into the case. Add to this the BT and chamfer and sheering is almost an impossibilty. But again, I'm starting to highly doubt the chamfers validity.

April 14, 2007, 01:54 PM	#6
mrawesome22 Senior Member Join Date: November 9, 2005 Location: Ohio, Appalachia's foothills. Posts: 3,779	Thanks guys. And dgc940, I'm preping case just like you, except for the weight sorting part. I loaded some non-chamfered shells this morning and all went well so if it ever stops raining I'll take them to my range and report back. Sorry to here that Benchmark didn't work out for you. It's still working great for me. I did buy a can of H380 recently though and I'm going to see what it does. Maybe I'll get lucky and it'll produce that one tiny hole I'm after

April 15, 2007, 12:22 PM	#10
rwilson452 Senior Member Join Date: June 10, 2004 Location: Tioga co. PA Posts: 2,647	Having a bur on the outside of the neck can effect chambering the cartridge. burs on the inside of the neck can affect bullet seating including not getting it concentric which will affect accuracy. the small amount you remove will not have a noticable effect on accuracy. If your rifle has a very tight neck it might but with a standard size chamber I doubt it very much. I have found that triming to maintain a square neck can have a small effect. but only if is really out of square. I have gone to the trouble of just barely doing a chamfer to remove burs and doing a real deep chamfer and didn't see a difference. this was done on a 22-250. The 22-250 is known for being a picky eater.

April 15, 2007, 03:33 PM	#11
mrawesome22 Senior Member Join Date: November 9, 2005 Location: Ohio, Appalachia's foothills. Posts: 3,779	Rusty, chamfering and removing burrs are two different things. A chamfer puts a bevel on the inside of the case. I deburr with a round file on the inside and flat file on the outside after trimming. It takes very little effort to knock 'em off.

April 15, 2007, 03:42 PM	#12
JohnKSa Staff Join Date: February 12, 2001 Location: DFW Area Posts: 24,990	Are you saying that the chamfering operation wouldn't remove burrs? __________________ Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?

April 15, 2007, 03:44 PM	#13
mrawesome22 Senior Member Join Date: November 9, 2005 Location: Ohio, Appalachia's foothills. Posts: 3,779	No of course not. What I mean is you can remove burrs without chamfering.

April 15, 2007, 04:20 PM	#14
JohnKSa Staff Join Date: February 12, 2001 Location: DFW Area Posts: 24,990	Why not take the "twofer"? Surely even the imprecise hand chamfering is more precise than what's left after you remove the burrs freehand with a file. __________________ Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?

April 15, 2007, 04:32 PM	#15
mrawesome22 Senior Member Join Date: November 9, 2005 Location: Ohio, Appalachia's foothills. Posts: 3,779	The files just knock the burrs off. What's left is a trimmed, deburred, non-chamfered case. It works well.

April 15, 2007, 10:26 PM	#17
mrawesome22 Senior Member Join Date: November 9, 2005 Location: Ohio, Appalachia's foothills. Posts: 3,779	That's the whole point of this thread LOL. I don't want a chamfer.

April 16, 2007, 12:22 AM	#18
JohnKSa Staff Join Date: February 12, 2001 Location: DFW Area Posts: 24,990	Your original premises were that it was: Useless A waste of time Hurt accuracy because of inconsistency. I don't see how it's useless since it performs the deburring function. I don't see how it's a waste of time because if you leave it off, you'll spend roughly the same amount of time deburring--a step you can skip if you chamfer. I don't see how freehanding the case mouth with a file to remove the burrs will result in more consistent neck tension than chamfering. What am I missing here? __________________ Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?

April 16, 2007, 12:56 AM	#19
mrawesome22 Senior Member Join Date: November 9, 2005 Location: Ohio, Appalachia's foothills. Posts: 3,779	I never said it was useless. For flat based bullets it's a must isn't it? What I'm going for is more uniform cases. And I can't get consistent chamfers with the tools I have. Therefore the cases are not uniform. I have no idea if the non-chamfered will be anymore accurate or not. But I don't think they are going to be less accurate. Plus a lot of brass I have has never needed trimmed. But I chamfered it anyway thinking it was absolutely necessary. I have brass that I've reloaded 18 times and have never had to trim it. Did these cases really need chamfered?

April 16, 2007, 08:05 AM	#20
dgc940 Senior Member Join Date: September 15, 2005 Location: Graham Texas Posts: 258	MR22 dont you shoot a lot mainly like me for tight group at 100 and 200? __________________ Some people say what they think! Some say what they know! Then there's those that think they know what they are saying!

April 16, 2007, 01:57 PM	#21
mrawesome22 Senior Member Join Date: November 9, 2005 Location: Ohio, Appalachia's foothills. Posts: 3,779	Yes, trying to get the smallest groups possible.

April 16, 2007, 03:24 PM	#22
alan Senior Member Join Date: June 7, 1999 Posts: 3,847	mrawesome22: Might I note the following: Chamfer lightly. All you want to do is to remove the burrs left as a result of trimming.

April 17, 2007, 10:42 PM	#25
alan Senior Member Join Date: June 7, 1999 Posts: 3,847	Re boat tail projectiles not stabilizing inside 300 yards, thereby contributing to larger groups, sounds about right, as the purpose of the boat tail projectile is to provide ballistic stability at longer ranges. What constitutes "longer ranges" might vary somewhat depending on caliber, but the basic concept remains. Use Boat Tail projectiles a LONGER RANGES. BTW, as I remember, and this goes back some number of years, Winchester came up with a Match Load intended for Palmer Match Shooting, 800, 900 and 1000 yards,ammunition that was loaded with FLAT BASE BULLETS. It did quite well too.