............................it would be repeated by others in controlled experiments, with repeatable results.
Not fireforming, but a firing or two after. I didn't anneal beforehand, might be a good idea.
Agree 100% that more data GENERATED UNDER IDENTICAL CONDITIONS is better than a single test of very limited sample size. I do think one test with 10-20 samples should be enough to get an idea of what is happening in general and should at least be enough to answer the OP's original question. The emphasized text in my first sentence is for a reason. If we're going to have multiple tests we better all do it the same way...
WITH EXPANDER | | WITHOUT EXPANDER | ||||||
CASE: | START: | END: | DELTA": | CASE: | START: | END: | DELTA": | |
1 | 1.7470 | 1.7080 | (0.0390) | 6 | 1.7470 | 1.7610 | 0.0140 | |
2 | 1.7470 | 1.7100 | (0.0370) | 7 | 1.7470 | 1.7560 | 0.0090 | |
3 | 1.7470 | 1.7170 | (0.0300) | 8 | 1.7470 | 1.7600 | 0.0130 | |
4 | 1.7470 | 1.7125 | (0.0345) | 9 | 1.7470 | 1.7590 | 0.0120 | |
5 | 1.7470 | 1.7100 | (0.0370) | 10 | 1.7470 | 1.7580 | 0.0110 | |
AVG.: | 1.7470 | 1.7115 | (0.0355) | AVG.: | 1.7470 | 1.7588 | 0.0118 | |
ES: | (0.0090) | ES: | 0.0050 |
That is exactly the process to generate data that I was thinking of. I think your test counts big time. I do have a question - what type of expander did you use, a stem type that sizes on insertion into the case mouth, or the expander ball type that you pull through on the exit stroke?
Next thing I'd try is knock the shoulder back with a .277 Wolverine die (no expander) then form the rest of the neck and shoulder with a .222 die...................................When pushing the shoulder back in stages, the length increase seemed a lot more dramatic.