gregintenn

I prefer Lee dies to other brands. I dislike needing an allen wrench to adjust a die, and Lee dies are the only brand I've yet to break a decapping pin in.   I didn't say anything about rolling in money, but we are more comfortable than when we first started out, as I expect most people would be.   As for the Dillon. I still have no desire for a progressive press. A single stage does exactly what I want.   I got my money's worth many times over out of that press. I was joking about "Cheap Lee stuff". Someone usually chimes it with it in any thread about Lee, and I just beat them to the punch. Lee makes inexpensive reloading equipment that just plain ole works. :up:

No, it was the metal piece that holds the linkage, ram, and handle together. I'm not sure of the proper name for it.   I believe they offer a 2 year warranty. The press frame is also very worn where the ram goes into it. It's just worn out all the way around, but it's sure given good service for a lot of years.

Well I just wanted all of you to know that I'm tickled with the deal and the effort you put into it. It sounds like everyone else is as well.   I was kidding about an AR10 receiver. I have no interest in one at all.

Cheap Lee stuff! :D It was about $35-$40, only lasted 20 years, and resized, reformed, and reloaded untold thousands of cases. I am upgrading to a Lee Classic Cast press this time instead of the cast aluminum one I'll sadly leave behind.   I feel I got my money's worth out of it. Oh, I know that if I'd bought an expensive press to begin with, it would likely still be working. At the time, we had just married, and money was tight. If it wasn't for Lee products, I would have missed out on several years of reloading and shooting, waiting until I could afford the pricier stuff. The rest of the Anniversary kit I bought at that time, though well worn, is still in operation.

                                  http://www.aimsurplus.com/product.aspx?item=a76239yugo Yugo surplus. Should be good stuff. Yes. It is corrosive.   It is made by PPU.   Was there more? Where'd ya get it?

I'm leaning toward trying this this year. I usually get forms at our local library, but it's been closed for a while dut to remodeling.   So you haven't had any issues with it?   Update: I used this, and so far I like it. Unless there are unforeseen issues with it later, I'll use it again next year. Fill in the blanks, hit the "do the math" icon, save it, print yourself a copy, and hit the e-file now icon and you're set. Easier than mailing one in, and my favorite part...FREE! No income limits, and all the forms and publications you'll need right there.

So where's #1? Did David get it, or is it in a display case at Cross Machine?

169. That is a pretty good lot of them. It's a shame that everyone who said they wanted one didn't follow through.

Looks better than the Mossberg tactical lever rifle.

That was my school bus number when I was a kid.

Thanks for your help.

Mine is #30.   Anybody got one higher than 152?   Surely Cross Machine would have a record of how many there are.

Did anybody get a difinitive count on the number produced?   That was a very cool project, and I would like to thank everyone involved again for making it possible. I now have what I would consider to be a high quality AR rifle, and would never have owned one if not for TGO. :up:     Is there an AR10 TGO receiver in our future? :cool:

I can drop a fired 2 3/4" shell into the chamber and close the action with no pressure necessary. I also picked up a box of 3" shells today, and they will also chamber and close with no problems. Would you be satisfied with that, or do you think I should go further in checking? It sure is a dainty little double, and I would hate to break it by firing the wrong stuff in it. From what I read, 2 3/4" was an option at the time it was produced, but not a popular option yet. Maybe it is, or perhaps someone opened up the chambers later. I think I'll stick with light loads either way. I sure wish they would have marked them as they do today. [url=http://s612.photobucket.com/user/gregintenn/media/IMG_2276_zpsd6bac1e6.jpg.html][/URL] I don't have scales handy, but I don't think it would weigh in anywhere near five pounds. It's tiny, and feels more like a 28 or a 410.

I'm not sure I understand your post. I can't see any evidence that either of these guys were "law abiding", and the seller at least, was punished to the fullest extent of the law.

Poor aerodynamics would be the only downfall I can see with this. Since you are shooting at subsonic speeds, I assume that isn't a big concern. How would a properly sized hollow base wadcutter work in a rifle round? It seems like it would accomplish the same weight forward property you are wanting. Does anyone make a mold for a hollow base round nose? That might feed in a semi.

A 2-3/4" shell will chamber and fire in this shotgun. It is my understanding that a 2 1/2" chambered shotgun will chamber and fire a 2 3/4" shell, and therein lies the danger.

Now owning George's guitar, or some fancy suit he wore on tour would be awesome. Just not a commemerative gun.   Heck, I'd like to have the John Deere he got a dui while driving!

LOL! Now all I have to do is come up with a 3" 20 gauge shell. My sister in law is right....I AM a bum. :rofl:

That's quite professional.

The hell it doesn't??!!? I believe it's English.

Whitewolf, if that's yours, I'm sure interested in hearing abit more about it.

I'm still using the #2 pencil. :D Haven't picked up the forms and publications yet, however.

Now this I could live with! :up:

$1895 will buy you a Colt Single Action Army, and a bunch of ammo to boot. Investment wise, it will be miles ahead of that gaudy Uberti copy, both now and forever. Heck, it wouldn't take much more than that to get a second generation Colt unfired in the box.   I'm not a fan of commerative guns, and haven't yet seen one that would hold it's value compared to a regular production, high quality farearm.