Ammo Reloading Press...

Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:11 am by OldHorseman

.

- Ah, the political season... When I'm reminded of how evil/idiotic so many of the people, even in the Carolinas, are by the horrible, vile individuals they are willing to vote for. Makes me think I may wind up having to dispatch way too many zombies in the years to come, so thoughts turn to ammo supply...

- I discussed economical reloading in this thread, transferred here from old LATOC...

http://www.theoilage.com/poor-man-s-reloading-bench-t105.html

- Problem is that one caliber we use, the .40 S&W, doesn't have a Lee Classic Loader available. So I was thinking about getting a Lee Hand Press for it... But then I'd have to get a set of dies... And a primermajig of some sort... And... Hell, it was running up into money, so I figured "Screw it. May as well get a proper ammo press."

- It looked like most presses had the same problem. Nickle and diming you to death on accessories to make them halfway useful. But I noticed the Lee Pro 1000 progressive press package came with everything needed, including dies and shell plate for one caliber, for like $175. Looked like a deal...

- Fortunately, the Internet is great for product research. (Once you learn to ignore snobs who think their favorite brands are so great just because they cost so much more.) Turns out the Pro 1000 is a bit finicky, which is sort of the nature of progressive presses in general, being very complex. Also, it can't load larger rifle cases, and is suitable mostly for pistol ammo. Switching between calibers is a bit cumbersome, as you need not only additional dies (and preferably a turret plate dedicated to each caliber to avoid having to screw-around with reinstalling and adjusting all the dies with every switch), but also a shell plate for each caliber... (Basically this means an additional $15 per caliber.)

- So I looked closer at the Lee Turret Press value kit. Even throwing in the Safety Prime, powder feed riser, and a set of carbide dies, it cost slightly less than the Pro 1000 package deal. And it can load rifle cartridges. And it doesn't need shell plates. And, while not as fast as a progressive press in a sprint, it may win the marathon by not making me stop to clear hang-ups and reconjigger stuff so often. It also has a fourth turret position (the Pro 1000 has only three), so I can use a fancy final crimp die if I want to.

- So, unless I change my mind before I get this Midway order ready...

.

Sat Jan 28, 2012 8:59 pm by OldHorseman

.

- So I was talking it over with the wife. Told her I was half-tempted to get the "Lee Classic Turret Press" instead of the standard 4-hole turret press. (Oddly enough, the "Classic" is actually the newer model.) But I couldn't really justify it, as the basic model would do everything we really need just fine.

- She asked what the difference was. I told her the Classic can handle 30-06 in auto-index mode, while the basic has to be switched to manual... But mostly the Classic is made out of cast-iron, brass, and steel where the basic model is aluminum and plastic.

- She said to get the Classic, because she would probably break the aluminum one... It's true. I've been a big ol' sasquatch since I was a kid, so I'm actually accustomed to using a little finesse rather than brute force to keep from breaking things. The wife, being a woman of relatively normal stature, has no such inclination, and is way harder on stuff than I am!

.

Mon Jan 30, 2012 11:38 am by hutoftung

Yeah I know folks who swear by the Lee turret presses. Of course, you can get many of these used for much less than new. Friend of mine got a Lyman turret press for $30 the other day. Personally I like RCBS stuff because it works really well and is obviously built to last, but it can be pricey. Many of the old-timers I know prefer RCBS or Lyman to Lee. RCBS will certainly send out parts if you need 'em, in many cases for free. That's a really nice touch. Maybe Lee does, too.

Personally I think it's faster not to use a turret press and just batch process everything. Deprime/size all the cases, switch the die, expand them all, switch, prime/charge them all and then seat all the bullets. Without the turret there's less to go wrong and you're not relying on a fancy spinning gizmo to take all the force of resizing a .30-06. It'll also be somewhat more accurate because of the fewer moving parts.

If you don't already have a digital scale, think about getting even a used one. They make things go a lot faster than those old balance scales that aren't really as accurate as they claim.

Mon Jan 30, 2012 1:34 pm by OldHorseman

.

- The problem with most turret presses is that they are umbrella-shaped. The turret supported only by a central column, so when you drive cases up into the dies, the turret is bound to tilt back. The Lee turret locks into steel ring at the top, which is supported by three columns around the perimeter. Functionally, it's like an "O" press compared to a "C" press.

- You can also disconnect the auto index so the turret doesn't turn on its own. Then it's essentially a single-stage press with really easy to switch dies.

- I have a good beam scale, but only use it for envelope-pushing magnum revolver loads and high-precision rifle loads... And to figure out how much the Lee volume measures actually throw. They come with a chart stating how much powder each dipper/bushing/disk hole is supposed to throw, but that chart is usually way off, especially with Unique. But, once you figure out what charge the measure actually does throw, it's usually pretty consistent.

- For my own premium 30-06 rifle ammo, I'll probably stick with the old Lee Loader. Doesn't get any more precise than that. Also re-sizes the case-mouth only, so the case is left custom fire-formed to my rifle's chamber... Ordered some Interlock SST 180g bullets. Going to hit the local shop and see if they have the new Superformace rifle powder. Want to see if I can flatten-out the trajectory and tighten up groups way out yonder. But, for my regular, factory-grade '06 loads with H335, the turret should be cool.

.

Mon Jan 30, 2012 2:48 pm by hutoftung

Actually, all the ultra-precision rifle guys I know use presses, not Lee loaders. That's because you can control stuff better with a lever than with a mallet. :lol:

The reason I say that any turret press is by definition slightly less accurate than a true single-stage is that the turret by definition moves around. It spins. So it won't be as reliably co-axial to the ram. This might not make a lot of difference but if you're really trying to do the most accurate rifle loads, it might make a small difference. And the added complexity really does mean more parts to break and more reliance on fasteners as opposed to solid castings. Again this may not matter enough to make a difference.

You may want to think about the all-steel construction of the Rock Chucker as opposed to the some-brass of the Lee, because the brass may stretch more over time with your Herculean arms jamming the parts every which way. Though I think you'll be able to use finesse more than force.

Which beam scale do you have? From my experience even the RCBS/Ohaus 505 isn't accurate to .1 gr, it's more like .3. The amount of movement that .1 gr puts on the indicator is so small that you can mistake it for being at zero. Though I expect to have to load more rounds with the beam scale than the digital because electrical power will be too scarce for the digital one to work eventually.

Mon Jan 30, 2012 10:48 pm by OldHorseman

hutoftung wrote:Actually, all the ultra-precision rifle guys I know use presses, not Lee loaders. That's because you can control stuff better with a lever than with a mallet.

- You might be surprised... World records have been set with classic Lee Loader ammo.

The reason I say that any turret press is by definition slightly less accurate than a true single-stage is that the turret by definition moves around. It spins. So it won't be as reliably co-axial to the ram. This might not make a lot of difference but if you're really trying to do the most accurate rifle loads, it might make a small difference.

- True. But for cranking-out hundreds of rounds of auto pistol and general purpose ammo, it should be plenty precise enough.

And the added complexity really does mean more parts to break and more reliance on fasteners as opposed to solid castings.

- Yes. This is why I decided not to go with the progressive press I was originally considering. Fully automated assembly line system is fast as heck, but has Rube Goldberg level complexity...

- Pretty awesome when it works, but there is so very much to go wrong!

- The turret press takes a lot more user effort, but is mechanically more reliable...

- And, if the auto-index, safety prime, or disk powder measure break, you can still use the press without them.

You may want to think about the all-steel construction of the Rock Chucker as opposed to the some-brass of the Lee, because the brass may stretch more over time with your Herculean arms jamming the parts every which way. Though I think you'll be able to use finesse more than force.

- I'm pretty sure the Lee linkage is actually brass-plated steel.

Which beam scale do you have?

- The Lee beam scale. Not fancy, but will accurately measure tiny differences... Main drawback is it's limited to 100 grains, I think. Plenty for powder loads, but no good for verifying bullet weights, and certainly not for checking cartridge weights.

- Sheesh. Gotta get by the gun shop and get some small pistol primers for the .40. Everything else I load takes large primers.

.

Mon Jan 30, 2012 11:13 pm by hutoftung

I've seen some CBC shells with what looks like a cup designed to reduce the primer pocket size down from LP to SP.

Another question if you're going to go full-bore turret like in the video, is how far down the powder measure can go, accurately. Much more of a problem with .40, especially for reduced loads of potent powder like Universal. If you're in the 5 grain range, it may not be able to do it if it's also good for rifle charges in the 20-30 grain range.

Of course, using your dippers and using the turret as essentially a single-stage except for expanding and seating in sequence, you'll avoid that problem.

Tue Jan 31, 2012 12:33 am by OldHorseman

.

- The Lee disk powder measure is good for the small throws. (I'll probably use 7.2 Unique for the .40 under 155-165g bullets.) Problem is with the larger rifle cases, as its highest settings don't throw enough. Fortunately, the rifle powder die doesn't bell the case mouth like the pistol powder-through dies do, so I could just set the measure for 1/2 load and do a double-charge stroke without messing-up the case.

- They make a kit that allows the bushing disks to be double-stacked, allowing bigger throws. I'm waiting to see if the biggest bushing throws at least 23g of H335. Otherwise, doubling still wouldn't be enough for the '06.

.

Tue Jan 31, 2012 12:35 pm by hutoftung

Would you really do much damage by double-expanding the case mouth? Since it stays expanded after the first pass, it really shouldn't make a difference.

Remember that .40 is a high pressure cartridge with a tendency to lead if you're using cast projectiles.

Tue Jan 31, 2012 10:20 pm by OldHorseman

hutoftung wrote:Would you really do much damage by double-expanding the case mouth? Since it stays expanded after the first pass, it really shouldn't make a difference.

- Brass is slightly elastic, so it'd get stretched twice instead of once... But it's not an issue with rifle cases, since they don't usually get case-mouth die expansion at all.

Remember that .40 is a high pressure cartridge with a tendency to lead if you're using cast projectiles.

- I was going to try some lead bullets in the .40... Just because they're the only ones I could find with a round nose instead of the truncated cone design. But Midway ran out just before I was ready to order. Instead I'm going to be trying some plated bullets with the roundest nose I could find (still a small "flat" at the tip), and some Hornady XTP hollowpoints.

- In terms of ballistics, the .40 seemed like a winner for a 1911 Officer's type pistol. But feed-wise... Well, I see why so few were made. Flat-nosed bullet, steep feed ramp, long run from the magazine to the chamber, not a reliable combination. I figure I'll try more feed-friendly bullets, and seat them with as much run-out as will fit the chamber to get the overall cartridge length a bit longer. See if I can get the .40 reliability up a few more notches.

.

Ammo Reloading Press...

Ammo Reloading Press...

Re: Ammo Reloading Press...

Re: Ammo Reloading Press...

Re: Ammo Reloading Press...

Re: Ammo Reloading Press...

Re: Ammo Reloading Press...

Re: Ammo Reloading Press...

Re: Ammo Reloading Press...

Re: Ammo Reloading Press...

Re: Ammo Reloading Press...

Who is online