Military vs. Factory Brass???

[Lawful Larry]

I know that military brass is supposed to be thicker then factory brass, but does it really make a difference in the way we reload?  Some people say we should reduce a reload by one or two grains.  They say that there is a difference in pressures between the two. 

What is the right answer to this question?  How much, if any, should we reduce our loads when reloading militar brass?

I personally like the idea of a thicker walled shell.  I would think it would last longer and hold up better then the factory brass.  That is why I lean towards military brass when I have a choice.  But also, will the ideal load for "our" favorite cartridge reciepe be different for the military then the factory brass?  Will I get different results if I use military brass and down load the powder by a grain or two?  I never gave this question much thought till a bunch of my friends got into a long and heavy discussion about it. 

What are your thoughts???     

[Siskiyou]

I follow the old rule of thumb, change components, start low and work-up to the wanted results.  I first started using plentiful military brass back in the 1960’s to form .270 Winchester brass.  I was able to work up to the same load I used in commercial brass without a problem.

When I inherited a 30-06 I loaded both commercial and military brass.  Again I had no problem.  A lot of the hunters in my area reloaded military brass years back.

My next adventure and most satisfying was buying bulk 7.62 NATO brass.  I wanted to generate a large supply of .300 Savage brass.  After de-capping and removing the primer crimp, I made a pass in a 30-06 resizing die.  My thoughts are that it reduces the body size without the stress of setting back the shoulder at the same time.  The next pass is with the RCBS Small Base .300 Savage re-sizing die.  I then trim to the proper length.

The resulting .300 Savage brass is great.  Thirty years ago I was concerned that the day may come that I would have a hard time finding .300 Savage brass but that is no longer a concern with the surplus military brass and the bulk factory brass.  The key with the military brass is that I can find it anytime and not dependent of factory ammunition.

After doing my load development work, I normal load a hundred or more rounds in the same lot.  I feel this is a more efficient use of time and it gives me a good supply of ammunition for those times that I do not have time to reload.

[Don Fischer]

I think that the debate over military vrs commericial cases is much to do about nothing. I use a lot of military cases, always have. Heavier, yep. Just start over with pressure loads. You'll find that just about anything possible with commerical cases is possible with military cases. If your cronograph tell's you your getting 50fps less  with one that the other, turn off your cronograph and continue as if nothing is wrong, it's not!

[PaulS]

MIlitary cases excluding the .223 cases are heavier than the same case from commercial brass. The walls are thicker, and there is less room for powder that there is in commercial cases. I was loading for my 308 and got a chance to get some military brass real cheap - That brass would not even hold the powder charge that I was loading in my Winchester cases. I had been loading a moderate charge of 4064 - it overflowed the case.
You can tell how much less room you have by full length sizing the cases that you were using and trimming to length and do the same with the military brass. The added weight of the military brass is on the inside - and it means you have less room for powder. For every 6 grains of brass it replaces 1 full grain of powder. (if you are using double base rifle powder) Single base powder weighs less for the same volume so it would be more powder for each 6 grains of brass. There is also a wider range of specific gravity in single base powders than there is in double base powders.
So, if you are going to switch to military brass weigh it and compare that weight to what you previous cases weigh. Reduce the powder charge and start low. Work your way up to an accurate load knowing that your maximum load is less than the listed load in the manual.

[iiranger]

In the Rifleman many years ago, a match shooter did an article on brass. C. Audet I think. Commercial and "match" military brass was about equal. Comparable. Range run mil. surplus brass was of less consistency.

I pondered that until I had a dear friend who had trained as a WW II aircraft gunner tell me about it. He said that the trainers said they wanted dispersion, like a shotgun firing pellets. It was unavoidable in a reasonable weight gun so they used it. Called it "cone of fire." Point is that the barrel will not be in exactly the same place each time a bullet leaves the muzzle. So a "burst" will spread like a shotgun pattern. I came to wonder if the inconsistency in standard military ammo might also be influenced by this. No doubt, it is also cheaper to produce to this lower standard.

ii). Obviously, the slamming of full auto is also harder on the brass and a reason for a "sturdier" case.

#2). If you are "working up a load" safely, what does it matter. You start lower and seek accuracy or prohibitive pressures...

Retired gunsmith friend had a story about the .243 Rockchucker (like .244 Remington but more shoulder angle)... He got his best accuracy from reformed mil surplus brass which held about the same charge of powder as a .243 WCF which became factory. So he gave up on the wildcat and got a .243... Your bucks, YOUR RISK, your call... luck...