STICKY - Good/Bad brass list converting 5.56->300blk

Moderators: gds, bakerjw, renegade, bamachem

heckofagator
New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2018 6:42 pm

Re: STICKY - Good/Bad brass list converting 5.56->300blk

Post by heckofagator »

hi, I am new to 300BLK and to reloading in general.

I just wanted to ask....this data is just for 5.56 cases chopped off for 300BLK, right? If I have some factory ammo (Sellior and Bellot) that I bought as 300BLK initially, it should generally be ok to use? Even though S&B is on the "bad" list?
20X11
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1560
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 11:43 pm
Location: Aurora, CO

Re: STICKY - Good/Bad brass list converting 5.56->300blk

Post by 20X11 »

You are correct. This list applies to converting 223/556 bras to 300blk.
dieselrealtor
New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2019 1:55 pm

Re: STICKY - Good/Bad brass list converting 5.56->300blk

Post by dieselrealtor »

Good afternoon, been lurking here for a bit getting ready to form some brass.

Does anyone have experience with .223 in UMC?

I have a fair amount with that headstamp but can't find any results in my googlefoo for neck thickness after forming.
Jurgen-m
New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:28 am
Location: Kiyiv, Ukraine

Re: STICKY - Good/Bad brass list converting 5.56->300blk

Post by Jurgen-m »

Thank you for this useful topic! Unfortunately, I did not find this information on time, and I processed more than one hundred GECO cartridges. They turned out to be unsuitable for working with a .308 diameter bullet. Stupid job :)
Most of the listed "good" brass can not be found in Ukraine, but here there are some 5.56 mm cartridges produced by GGG from Lithuania http://www.ggg-ammo.lt/en/ggg-223-rem-design-gpr11
This cartridge is made according to NATO standards and the brass is similar to the M193 brass. The neck is 0.012 "-0.013" thick. So, these brass is convertible at 300 blk. Perhaps this information will be useful for participants from Europe.
And I will look for the Hornady brass - that is best converted into 300 blk…

Sorry for my imperfect English :(((((
Sig220
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 532
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 10:11 pm
Location: SE TX

Re: STICKY - Good/Bad brass list converting 5.56->300blk

Post by Sig220 »

dieselrealtor wrote:Good afternoon, been lurking here for a bit getting ready to form some brass.

Does anyone have experience with .223 in UMC?

I have a fair amount with that headstamp but can't find any results in my googlefoo for neck thickness after forming.
Welcome Aboard!

UMC used to be the same as Remington. You could cut one and then measure it with calipers and post the results for others!

Good Luck!
rlandry6
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 487
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2018 7:39 pm

Re: STICKY - Good/Bad brass list converting 5.56->300blk

Post by rlandry6 »

I think it would be prudent to measure neck thickness on any commercially loaded 300 brass before reloading. There is no guarantee that it was made to SAAMI specs and you never know what steps were taken during the manufacturing process. It might save you a little time at the end of the day.
Bitter Gun Owner
Bitter Clinger
ArmedInfidel
Sig220
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 532
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 10:11 pm
Location: SE TX

Re: STICKY - Good/Bad brass list converting 5.56->300blk

Post by Sig220 »

rlandry6 wrote:I think it would be prudent to measure neck thickness on any commercially loaded 300 brass before reloading. There is no guarantee that it was made to SAAMI specs and you never know what steps were taken during the manufacturing process. It might save you a little time at the end of the day.
Can you be a little clearer in what you are saying? Will the brass in the neck area grow after firing.....or what manufacturing steps are you looking for?

Do you measure factory loaded Barnes brass for before reloading and if so what are you measuring?
User avatar
dellet
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 6967
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: STICKY - Good/Bad brass list converting 5.56->300blk

Post by dellet »

rlandry6 wrote:I think it would be prudent to measure neck thickness on any commercially loaded 300 brass before reloading. There is no guarantee that it was made to SAAMI specs and you never know what steps were taken during the manufacturing process. It might save you a little time at the end of the day.
If you are talking 300 Blackout headstamped brass, the guarantee is 100's of millions in dollars of liability.

If you're talking converted brass, sold as remanufactured, it's not a bad idea if you don't know the headstamp.
300 Blackout, not just for sub-sonics.
User avatar
Omega
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 510
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 10:28 am
Location: Clarksville, Tn

Re: STICKY - Good/Bad brass list converting 5.56->300blk

Post by Omega »

Jurgen-m wrote:Thank you for this useful topic! Unfortunately, I did not find this information on time, and I processed more than one hundred GECO cartridges. They turned out to be unsuitable for working with a .308 diameter bullet. Stupid job :)
Most of the listed "good" brass can not be found in Ukraine, but here there are some 5.56 mm cartridges produced by GGG from Lithuania http://www.ggg-ammo.lt/en/ggg-223-rem-design-gpr11
This cartridge is made according to NATO standards and the brass is similar to the M193 brass. The neck is 0.012 "-0.013" thick. So, these brass is convertible at 300 blk. Perhaps this information will be useful for participants from Europe.
And I will look for the Hornady brass - that is best converted into 300 blk…

Sorry for my imperfect English :(((((
In your case, a good neck turning tool would help you out.
"Freedom is the sure possession of those alone who have the courage to defend it."
~Pericles~
brugmanncues
New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2019 12:38 am

Re: STICKY - Good/Bad brass list converting 5.56->300blk

Post by brugmanncues »

Just wanted to add a head stamp I've been finding a lot lately. It is just a capital "T" @ 12:00 with "5.56x45" @ 6:00 & has 3 crimp primer pockets.
I took 5 random pieces, chopped it, chamfered & debured, then measured. 4 of the 5 was at 0.0145", the 5th was at 0.015" so I guess put it to the bad list.
Image
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot], Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 86 guests