Home Forums Reloading Big Game Rifles Basic vs formed brass

When does one use "basic" brass? For example, Hornady offers formed .375 Ruger brass and .375 Ruger basic. I know the basic brass is normally just a straight cylinder with no shoulder or neck.

So, say if I wanted to make a version of a .264 Winchester Mag based on the .375 Ruger case, do I want to use .375 Ruger formed brass or .375 Ruger basic?

I would be keeping all the dimensions of the .264 Win. Mag, just getting rid of the belted case.

You might have to use more than one forming die if you went stright wall to bottle neck. I would go with the formed brass. You still may have to downsize the neck more than once from .375 to .264

That could be interesting.

My experience with basic has been with BP. where little change in the neck is required. I know if sized down to quicklt wrinkles appear in the brass at the neck/shoulder junction. Those turn into neck splits in as many as one firing.

Any other options?

Thanks for the reply, CGPAUL. Yes, I do understand and realize that more that one from die will be needed going from .375 down to .264 plus necks and shoulders will need to be annealed before forming as well. Probably have to ream the necks considering such a drastic caliber reduction.

But I have seen other basic types of brass; .30-06 basic, .404 basic, .375 H&H cylindrical...I think I saw even a .280 Ross basic at one time.

Anyone know what the reason for the existance of basic brass is for?

Anchorage99,

Welcome to the forum.

While I don't have all the dimensions of the new 375 Ruger case I do see this one on line and it shows a body diameter near the base of .5320" for the .375 Ruger.

The body diameter of a 264 WM just ahead of its belt is only .513" therefor its not going to be possible or desireable to size a 375 Ruger down that far with ordinary loading tools.

Here is a link to the 375 Ruger dimensions and the 375 H&H which is similar to the 264 WM just above its belt.

http://www.realguns.com/archives/143.htm

Hey Savage_99,

Thanks for the case drawing and advice. However, I am not trying to size the base of the .375 Ruger case down to .513 diameter.

Why can't I come off of the .532 base diameter of the Ruger cartridge and carry the sides of the case up to the .491 shoulder diameter of the .264 Win mag.

I don't think that the die has the ability to reduce the .532" diameter of a 375 Ruger case near its base to the .513" diameter of a .264 Win. case just above its belt. Thats about .015" on a side which is a lot of force and metal moving where the case is very thick.

Now my opinion is just that, an opinion. If you can do it then its proof it can be done.

I don't think he is trying to take the beltless .375 ruger case and turn it into a belted case...I think he is talking about creating a wildcat based on the .375 Ruger case and is questioning whether he should neck down formed .375 Ruger cases, or start fresh and completely form .375 Ruger Basic brass to the dimensions he desires...

Is this correct Anchorage99?

He wrote:

"I would be keeping all the dimensions of the .264 Win. Mag, just getting rid of the belted case."

I know its kinda gettin off the trail but if you want to make 264 WM brass why not use 7mm Rem mag brass and then all you really have to deal with is changing the neck down to proper diameter and 7mm mag brass is easy to come by...........

The sentence before that says "a version of."

It could be interpreted either way which is why I asked what he meant.

IMHO the existance of basic is to do exactly what you are trying to do. It can be done, it just will not be easy, or cheap. You may want to look at an existing case close to what you want in a wilcat.
Basic .45 cal black powder brass is a point..it can be trimed down to any .45 cal one may want.
I have not seen basic smokless brass...stright walled, but don`t say it`s not out there. You must have seen it somewhere. Usually a wildcat can be formed by using some existing, or parent case, as was suggested by a few responders.

Hey guys,

Thanks for all the input on this. I should clarify some things:

1. War_Eagle is correct in saying that my idea was to create a wildcat ctg. I would be getting away from the traditional mag case with the .532 rim and belt diameter. All of the dimensions would be the same (neck length, shoulder angle, shoulder diameter, body length) except the .513 dimension in front of the belt.

2. I was using the .264 Win mag. .375 Ruger more as an example for the question "when does one use a basic brass vs. a 100% formed case?" In this example of creating a beltless .264 Win Mag. begs the question "Why would you want to?" Any gains ballisticly would be zero to slight, I think. There may be some debatable points about better feeding from a true rimless case vs. a belted case, but that's another post.

3. In coyo's point, "why not just use 7mm Rem Mag. brass to form .264's" Yes, I could not agree with you more. If I was trying to form .264's that is exactly what I would do. 7mm Rem. Mag. brass is much more plentiful and cheaper than .375 Ruger brass.

Anyway, good discussion and input form all!

I see basic cases as good for forming brass like the Gibbs cartridge line where the shoulder of the parent case is moved forward. The basic case could be sized to the correct demensions with out fire forming. In the case of forming a 6.5 of similar dementions as the 264 mag. I would think the already formed case would be best to start with. Unfortunatly looking at case drawings either way you go it may require an expensive set of forming dies to get there with either the formed or unformed case.

You probably already know this, but if you keep the same shoulder diameter of the stock .264. WM case, the body taper is going to be different (steeper) on your new case than on the original .264 case.

If you stayed with the same shoulder diameter and case taper of the .375 Ruger, you would have less brass to move when forming. You would gain some case capacity over the stock .264, but whether you would actually want it or even need it is another question. You might gain a 100-200 fps, if you had a use for the extra speed. If not, then you could get .264 speeds with less pressure.

I have been giving some thought to doing about the same thing, except in 7 mm. Necking the .375 case down to 7 mm with no other changes. Sounds like a lot of fun, but with the heart condition I have, I may not have enough time to carry it through.

Yes, I do realize that the case taper will be steeper. Which, in my opinion, is not a bad thing. In reality, I would probably not do a 6,5/.264 caliber. Like you, I was actually thinking more on the lines of a .284,.308 or a .358 caliber.

Best of luck on that heart condition thing. If I were you, you go ahead and you do your 7mm cartridge project. Even if you don't get to complete it, it's the effort that makes it worth it. We are only here once.

I have never seen any advantage to basic brass unless as a last resort or perhaps for the 458 calibers.

BTW, it is much easier and does a nicer job to neck up than it does to neck something down..

You might want to take a look at outdoorsdirectory.com in the handloading section. The moderator, Murphy, created a .358-.375 Ruger and called it the .358 Nukalpiaq. He probably has a wealth of information about necking down the 375 Ruger.

Anchorage99:

Thanks for the kind words. That case in .35 caliber sounds awesome.

I have always wondered why the .35 caliber was no more popular that it is. It appears to me that anything a .338 could do, a .358 on the same case could do a lot better. I am talking about for the larger animals, such as bear or moose and elk.

Atkinson:

I agree about the necking up. From what little experience I have on necking up and down, you don't have to worry about neck thickening when you neck up.

Brass seems to stretch easier than it compresses.

Maybe, if I have time, after my 7 mm project, I will look into starting the .358 project.

Anchorage99,

For what it's worth. My .224 MBOC necks the .264 down to .224. It requires five forming dies. Maybe I could get by with less, but Hornady suggested them so that is what I use.

Also Lonny at Hornady discovered longer necked cartridges show MUCH longer barrel accracy life. He shoot 1000 yards for them as a laboratory experminter.