I normally try and track on paper the history of my brass and how it has been loaded. I believe this is critical in one case because I have three different rifles in single caliber, one of which I load lighter for.
I also have some miscellaneous brass that I reload. This includes some pickup brass or brass given to me by others. I normally load this in practice ammunition.
I have a bunch of military (30-06) cases that I have loaded or are in the can ready to be loaded as .270 cases. I have loaded these in the past for practice ammunition, and low recoil ammunition when my son first started out.
Many times I make a note on the case with ink followed by a note in my load book.
Many years ago I purchased, trimmed, and re-sized 7.62 NATO brass into .300 Savage brass. I have kept records on this brass, and still have a loaded supply of it. Depending on the weather I have been resizing, and trimming a different supply of 7.62 NATO brass into .300 Savage. (Until lately in has been too cold in the garage.) In this case my general intention was to create a good supply of practice and coyote ammunition. I have kept good records for this rifle in my loaded book.
I would like to generate loads that visibly can be identified. I looked at three different .308 bullets in the box. First was the 130-grain Speer HP which is easily identified, the next was the 130-grain Hornady Spire point, that can visually be mixed up with the 150-grain Hornady bullets I have already loaded in that caliber. In the bottom of the box were one hundred green tipped Nosler 150-grain Ballistic Tip bullets. I have not loaded them because of the success I have had with the 165-grain bullets on deer, and the 150-grain Hornady and Speer hot core bullets.
My record keeping regarding loading for this rifle helped me make the decision on my future load. In the past I had did a lot of load development using AA2015BR, IMR4064, and IMR4320 powders. Based on my field-testing I dropped IMR4320 from consideration. The accuracy results with AA2015 were outstanding, based on testing on the range and published velocities I settled on IMR4064 for hunting loads. The testing on AA2015 was done before I had a Chrony. The records showed that my final loads were successful with brass from different manufactures.
Those Green Tip bullets got my attention and I ran some numbers in my ballistics program. Comparing the three bullets in the running the trajectory of the Green Tip bullet comes closes to my preferred deer-hunting bullet out to three hundred yards. The Green Tip bullet has a good reputation when it comes to accuracy, and the opinions on it as a deer round are all over the map. But I am loading for coyote and range practice.
The point here is that I will document the history of the brass in both my load binder and a copy in the box with the loads. A key factor in the history is that this brass was first fired in a machine gun. I then ran it into a full length 30-06 die, as stage one, stage two was to trim to length for .300 Savage, and stage three was full length resizing in a .300 Savage RCBS Small Base die. The next items to be documented are the components making up the load.
This all leads to addition tracking of the case history. At times I find the little time to setup the Chrony as a bother, but the data I get from it is important. If I record satisfactory velocity on the range, case expansion and stretching is acceptable I will have a good load. If anything appears to be abnormal I will record it for future reference.
The time will come to reload the brass a second or third time. The documented history tells be me the brass has been worked hard. The brass will not be worked as hard the second time around, but I might consider annealing it.
Last summer I came across some ammunition I reloaded over thirty-five years ago for the .270 Winchester. According to the notes on the box I had reloaded it four times. I noticed while in storage a few of the cases had developed a stretch mark the length of the case. I salvaged the powder and bullets then crushed the brass. I believe that the brass had been fired in two different chambers and over worked. If I had better records I would have a better idea of what happen to the case. I should note that in a couple of cases I have noted the same problem with old factory ammunition. Could loading the bullet into a very tight neck, and the bullet acting as a wedge have caused this? I was also shoting a lot in those days because I could practice a shot distance from the house. I may have loaded those cases more then four times. My over note taking became better with time.
I had five boxes of once fired .243 Winchester brass given to me by my wife’s uncle. While visiting he showed me a Mossberg rife, which he complained about leaking gas. The fit of the bolt felt very loose and I advised him to not fire the rifle and get it checked by a gunsmith. The information was good and when I returned home I closely inspected the cases knowing the history of the firearm. Inspection showed the head was starting to separate from the case. I crushed and disposed of all the cases.
Admittedly I keep imperfect records. Yesterday I was helping a relative with computer problems. While the computer was being updated on a slow dial-up connection I started transferring field notes from last summer on to my laptop. The notes had grown stale and some information I was carrying between my ears was lost. The notes represent a lot of time and expense. I was using new cases in the development of a hunting load for a rifle using two different powders. I need to follow up and record the case expansion from the different loads.
I believe records result in good economy. If I develop a load that works, I want to repeat it down the road years later. If I develop a load that does not work a second time around and the only difference is the brass I should note it. Many years ago I developed some loads for a 30-30 and even bought some new brass for it. The new brass is still unused because it is hard to beat Wal Mart sale prices.
