Picking a press to purchase

[dlm37015]

bless the usa where do you live i will give you the stuff you need to get started i got more than i can use

[dlm37015]

the most important part of the trimmer is the collets they use thr shoulder to measure for the trim its just a small 110 motor with a rubber drive shaft to the cutter trims very fast i tried everything i hate triming but this isnt to bad

[R_Bert]

if I'm reading this correctly, of the two die sets linked, the 2-die set crimps the bullet at the same time as seating it. So for the sake of options, I would want the 3-die set.

Pacesetter 2-Die Set 223 Remington Ackley Improved 40-Degree Shoulder

Pacesetter 3-Die Set 223 Remington

Just to comment (I will assume that you know, but newbies may not)- don't get Ackley dies unless your rifle chamber has been cut for it.

[mikegideon]

the most important part of the trimmer is the collets they use thr shoulder to measure for the trim its just a small 110 motor with a rubber drive shaft to the cutter trims very fast i tried everything i hate triming but this isnt to bad

I need something. I really would like to get the Giraud, but probably need something cheaper at this point. What does it cost to whip up a Gracey copy?

[Guest]

I found a solution to the swaging issue. Non-crimped brass for 2 cents more. Probably worth the time savings, really. Now I realize that in the future maybe I'll only be able to find crimped brass, and still have to deal with it. But at least for now, it's avoided :-)

And not that it's a huge deal, as I'll do what needs to be done, but is there a chance that with once-fired brass I'll get away without trimming alot of it the first time? Even if I have to trim it several firings down the road, being able to avoid that at first would be another bonus.

I'm going to order the Lee 1000, and get to work on some 9mm! Then the 223 once I learn more. Thanks for all the help you guys have given!

[Guest nicemac]

I need something. I really would like to get the Giraud, but probably need something cheaper at this point. What does it cost to whip up a Gracey copy?

I have been waffling on ordering the Giraud for months now. Finally, last week, I did. He said two weeks until it would ship. OK. I thought, at least maybe it will come in between Christmas and New Years… It shipped the same day and I got it Thursday.

Wow. Just wow. I trimmed almost 2,000 .223 cases Saturday. I randomly selected a few and mic'ed them. They were identical. This is as as good of a piece of equipment as I have ever purchased.

[mikegideon]

I have been waffling on ordering the Giraud for months now. Finally, last week, I did. He said two weeks until it would ship. OK. I thought, at least maybe it will come in between Christmas and New Years… It shipped the same day and I got it Thursday.

Wow. Just wow. I trimmed almost 2,000 .223 cases Saturday. I randomly selected a few and mic'ed them. They were identical. This is as as good of a piece of equipment as I have ever purchased.

I know it's the absolute best. I won't be loading near that much volume. I still need the best consistency I can get. That's why I've been holding out for the Giraud.

[Guest nicemac]

I know it's the absolute best. I won't be loading near that much volume. I still need the best consistency I can get. That's why I've been holding out for the Giraud.

It is precise for sure, but the cool thing is that it is as simple to use as a pencil sharpener. Takes about 2 seconds per cartridge. You can't over-trim. It is pricey, but it also seems like a lifetime tool–and it does have a lifetime warranty.

Edited December 19, 2011 by nicemac

[mikegideon]

It is precise for sure, but eh cool thing is that it is as simple to use as a pencil sharpener. Takes about 2 seconds per cartridge. You can't over-trim. It is pricey, but it also seems like a lifetime tool–and it does have a lifetime warranty.

Yep, I'm convinced on the Giraud. If I can get the consistency out of the Gracey, it will be good enough in terms of speed, and I'll have it quicker. I'll try to hook up with David and play with his.

[Guest]

I have the Lee 1000 in my cart ready to order. One last question. Is there any disadvantage (from an ammo reliability standpoint) to seating and crimping the bullet on the same station? Seems like if done properly there would be no real difference than using multiple stations?

The Lee Loadmaster is $80 more and has 5 stations, which would be great if I had a dillon trimmer. Maybe I'll just go with the 1000 for now and cross that bridge later.

Thanks!

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I found a solution to the swaging issue. Non-crimped brass for 2 cents more. Probably worth the time savings, really. Now I realize that in the future maybe I'll only be able to find crimped brass, and still have to deal with it. But at least for now, it's avoided :-)

And not that it's a huge deal, as I'll do what needs to be done, but is there a chance that with once-fired brass I'll get away without trimming alot of it the first time? Even if I have to trim it several firings down the road, being able to avoid that at first would be another bonus.

I'm going to order the Lee 1000, and get to work on some 9mm! Then the 223 once I learn more. Thanks for all the help you guys have given!

Hi BlessTheUSA

The RCBS primer pocket swager die set sells for about $30 IIRC. You can't use the gadget in a progressive according to RCBS. I think that is because of the way the Case Ejector works. Apparently once the swage goes up in the pocket, it takes some force to get the case off, and the little Ejector would not be compatible with a rotating progressive shellholder. I read one guy who claimed to be using the swager on a Lee hand press, which I've found also very useful for some other assorted tasks. With a Lee hand press I'm guessing it would take some elbow grease to swage. I read many reviews and folks seem very pleased with the tool except they say it is a little slow to operate and you have to be careful not to bend the rod on .223. However, you only have to swage a crimped case one time.

Lee sells a little trimmer system that would cost about $30 for one caliber, with a shell holder, inside depth gage rod, and rotary cutter bit. Lots of people attach them to drills, drill presses, case prep centers, etc, to speed it up though you can operate it as a hand tool.

I have the Lee 1000 in my cart ready to order. One last question. Is there any disadvantage (from an ammo reliability standpoint) to seating and crimping the bullet on the same station? Seems like if done properly there would be no real difference than using multiple stations?

The Lee Loadmaster is $80 more and has 5 stations, which would be great if I had a dillon trimmer. Maybe I'll just go with the 1000 for now and cross that bridge later.

I have never used a seating/crimp in one stage. Dunno if it is better/worse.

What jobs do you expect the four stations to do? Is the 1000 or Loadmaster "hardwired" for a particular sequence in the stations?

My dillon sdb is "hardwired" to some extent. You could fiddle with the loading order some, but not much.

-- 1: Resize and de-cap

-- 2: Primer seat, bell the case and powder charge. There is a belling die that sits under the powder measure so it bells as you charge powder. You can't move primer seating or powder charging to any other station, or at least it would be a lot of trouble to do so.

-- 3: Bullet seating. The seating die is also adjusted to take out all of the bell and make the case walls straight. But not crimp. If you take a bullet out of station 3 then it will probably be fine to fire for some calibers, unless you need a crimp to prevent setback.

-- 4: Crimp and eject.

So unless the Lee spreads out the tasks over more stations, and you don't have enough stations, I don't see why you wouldn't want to separately crimp. It just seems that the crimp would be easier to adjust as a separate die.

Lots of people brag about the Lee factory crimp die, which crimps and also does a final full-length sizing to take out any oddities in the case shape.

I was reading about the Hornady lock'n'load progressive which looks excellently built and designed. It looks like the Hornady powder measure is "self contained" in a way where you could probably use it on any station you want. But some of the presses you would have to jump thru some hoops to move the powder measure to another station. And in many presses priming has always gotta be on the pre-selected station.

Doesn't the Dillon electric trimmer share a spot with full-length sizing and decapping? If that is the case then assuming you could make it fit on the Lee, it would be on station 1?

Edited December 19, 2011 by Lester Weevils

[Guest]

I picked up a pound of Unique at Gander Mtn for 9mm. Other than Blue Dot, I think Unique was the only one they stocked that is also in my Hornady reloader's manual. $27.50 per pound with tax is high, but I guess once I find out if I like the stuff I can seek alternate sources.

Same for primers... They had CCI small pistol #500 for $3.99. Also Remington and Federal for the same price, but I was thinking (IIRC) CCI are normally the cheapest by mail-order so I'd try the CCI.

The press is supposed to be here tomorrow! Hopefully the brass and bullets aren't too much longer. Should I start from the very minimum charge and load up, or start a couple of charges lower than where I think I want to end up? I suppose I need to call the bullet manufacturer and find out at what velocity they perform best (to have a 'target' charge for reference) though actual performance will be the deciding factor.

Thanks

Edited December 20, 2011 by Guest

[Raoul]

I picked up a pound of Unique at Gander Mtn for 9mm. Other than Blue Dot, I think Unique was the only one they stocked that is also in my Hornady reloader's manual. $27.50 per pound with tax is high, but I guess once I find out if I like the stuff I can seek alternate sources.

Same for primers... They had CCI small pistol #500 for $3.99. Also Remington and Federal for the same price, but I was thinking (IIRC) CCI are normally the cheapest by mail-order so I'd try the CCI.

The press is supposed to be here tomorrow! Hopefully the brass and bullets aren't too much longer. Should I start from the very minimum charge and load up, or start a couple of charges lower than where I think I want to end up? I suppose I need to call the bullet manufacturer and find out at what velocity they perform best (to have a 'target' charge for reference) though actual performance will be the deciding factor.

Thanks

Did you pick up a caliper? You really need one to keep an eye on the OAL.

[Guest]

Did you pick up a caliper? You really need one to keep an eye on the OAL.

I have calipers and micrometers, etc. I don't want to permanently mount the press to anything just yet, so I'm going to build a stand for it similar to the "strong mount" style they sell, which can then be clamped to the bech.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

The books all advise starting at the minimum load and working up.

Make sure the OAL of your round is real close to what the book says. If it is much shorter than a published length, the pressure could be a lot higher than expected.

Don't have any high primers.

If you can't just shoot off the back steps and you have to make a trip to the range to test, for convenience you might load perhaps 10 or 20 rounds at minimum charge, and then load 10 or 20 rounds each stepping up the load in 0.1 grain increments to perhaps a little more than halfway to the max load. Mark all the loads with their weight.

If you have several guns to function test, might have to load a few more test rounds at each level so you can test in all the guns. Sometimes if the OAL needs slight adjustment for feeding or if the powder load is "borderline" for proper function, you might have to fire a few rounds before you notice feeding or ejection problems. For instance, maybe only 1 out of 10 would give you trouble in a borderline case.

Possibly the minimum charge won't be stiff enough to avoid stovepipes, properly chamber the next round, or lock the slide back when the mag is empty. An "almost strong enough" load might work just great except it doesn't drive the slide back far enough to lock open on empty.

For practice ammo, many folks want a round just strong enough to properly function and no stronger. Accuracy can be good with lower-velocity rounds, and it doesn't excessively beat up the gun or your wrist (though most 9mm pistols don't have much recoil anyway).

Examine the fired casings for signs of over pressure.

If you load less than the minimum it is possible it might not burn properly enough to push the bullet out of the barrel.

When setting the powder measure, I like throwing 10 rounds and dumping them all in the powder pan, weigh the sum and divide by 10. If the scale is supposed to be accurate to 0.1 gn then this approach gets the measurement more accurate approaching 0.01 gn (assuming the powder measure throws consistent charges). If a cheap scale is inconsistent and might have an error of +/- 0.1 gn (or worse), then this method adds a bit of failsafe to compensate for scale inaccuracy.

I don't fully trust my scale or powder measure (on general principles) so I do redundant weighing rather than taking the first measurement as gospel. I never intentionally load up to the max published weight. For instance, if the powder measure and powder happens to throw +/- 0.1 gn variance (or worse), then if loading to max, 50 percent of the loads would be over max. I'd like to measure the variance of my powder measure, but my scale isn't good enough to do a good job on it. The scale is not crap, but will measure any single small charge about +/- 0.1 gn, and can temperature drift +/- 0.1 gn or worse over time, so it just isn't feasible to measure the charge-to-charge accuracy variance of my powder measures at the moment. Anyway, that's why I stay a little below max loads.

[Guest]

Make sure the OAL of your round is real close to what the book says. If it is much shorter than a published length, the pressure could be a lot higher than expected.

I am using some bullets that look similar to Hornady 124gr HP-XTP 9mm. The Hornady book says for this bullet, the C.O.L. (max or min?) is 1.060". From there, I can adjust based on the different bullet length to yield the same volume behind the bullet, correct?I

can mic the length of my bullets when they arrive. However, I can't find the length of the hornady bullet on Hornady's website. Anyone know where I might obtain that info short of buying a box of them?

Don't have any high primers.

You mean make sure they are all fully seated, I believe a few thousandths below the rear of the case?

If you can't just shoot off the back steps and you have to make a trip to the range to test, for convenience you might load perhaps 10 or 20 rounds at minimum charge, and then load 10 or 20 rounds each stepping up the load in 0.1 grain increments to perhaps a little more than halfway to the max load. Mark all the loads with their weight.

That is my situation. And it's about 30-40 minute drive each way to the range. So I'm going to prepare the various charges and label each in a zip lock, only opening one zip-lock at a time. The minimum charge (based on the Hornady HP-XTP) is 4.0 grains for 900 FPS. Maximum is 5.0 grains for 1100 FPS. It looks like they load right on the maximum, as the completed rounds are advertised with 1110 FPS. I assume if I get to 1050 FPS that would be pretty similar in the grand scheme of things. I am using the ammo for target practice, but if it's going to be sitting there in an ammo can, I'd rather have it usable in a shtf scenario. Also the reason for the knockoff JHPs... they weren't appreciably much more than FMJ.

If you have several guns to function test, might have to load a few more test rounds at each level so you can test in all the guns. Sometimes if the OAL needs slight adjustment for feeding or if the powder load is "borderline" for proper function, you might have to fire a few rounds before you notice feeding or ejection problems. For instance, maybe only 1 out of 10 would give you trouble in a borderline case.

Possibly the minimum charge won't be stiff enough to avoid stovepipes, properly chamber the next round, or lock the slide back when the mag is empty. An "almost strong enough" load might work just great except it doesn't drive the slide back far enough to lock open on empty.

For practice ammo, many folks want a round just strong enough to properly function and no stronger. Accuracy can be good with lower-velocity rounds, and it doesn't excessively beat up the gun or your wrist (though most 9mm pistols don't have much recoil anyway).

Examine the fired casings for signs of over pressure.

The Hornady manual gives a couple descriptions of over pressure. As long as I don't see those, should I assume pressures are OK? If I find a charge I think is good to go and the COL seems to be working, I'll still load maube just 100 or so and test all those before cranking out a bunch.

If you load less than the minimum it is possible it might not burn properly enough to push the bullet out of the barrel.

Probably a question I should have learned the answer to before now, but if I take a ramrod of some sort, can I just push the bullet out of the barrel?

When setting the powder measure, I like throwing 10 rounds and dumping them all in the powder pan, weigh the sum and divide by 10. If the scale is supposed to be accurate to 0.1 gn then this approach gets the measurement more accurate approaching 0.01 gn (assuming the powder measure throws consistent charges). If a cheap scale is inconsistent and might have an error of +/- 0.1 gn (or worse), then this method adds a bit of failsafe to compensate for scale inaccuracy.

I don't fully trust my scale or powder measure (on general principles) so I do redundant weighing rather than taking the first measurement as gospel. I never intentionally load up to the max published weight. For instance, if the powder measure and powder happens to throw +/- 0.1 gn variance (or worse), then if loading to max, 50 percent of the loads would be over max. I'd like to measure the variance of my powder measure, but my scale isn't good enough to do a good job on it. The scale is not crap, but will measure any single small charge about +/- 0.1 gn, and can temperature drift +/- 0.1 gn or worse over time, so it just isn't feasible to measure the charge-to-charge accuracy variance of my powder measures at the moment. Anyway, that's why I stay a little below max loads.

I picked up one of the "budget" powder measures to start out. It claims +/- 0.1 grain accuracy. I'll use your method of verifying, thanks.

Thank you guys!

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Further beating a dead horse with the trivia stick--

Here is some (older) load data from Hornady for a load I was interested in--

9mm XTP HP 124 gn

primer: Win SP

Powder: WAP

start--4.2gr--900fps

4.6--950

5.0--1000

5.4--1050

maximum 5.8 gr.--1100fps

I don't know if all loads behave thataway, but that one approaches "near max" velocity way below the max safe pressure.

Energy is to the square of velocity, so the max 5.8 gn load only has about ten percent more energy than the 5.4 gn load. However. the max load has about fifty percent more energy than the min load.

Edit-- WAP is "identical" to Ramshot Sillhouette which is why the above table was of interest. Combined with a few other references for WAP and Silhouette loads. Anyway, I've loaded a bunch of that combination using 5.5 gr, which is still well below the max. They are at least as stiff as Federal or Winchester practice loads, and very close to the velocity of factory XTP ammo from my measurements.

Edited December 21, 2011 by Lester Weevils

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Many folks advise using a hardwood dowel to drive out a stuck bullet. I've never had a stuck bullet and don't carry a dowel or hammer, so would just have to pack up that gun and take it home if it ever happened.

I had 1100 XTP 124 gn bullets that had been sitting on the shelf for over a year, but finally got off my butt last week and loaded them all. Dang it. I could have measured one easy for you last week, but would now have to pull a bullet to do so.

Probably an OAL of 1.06 won't get you in too much trouble with those XTP lookalikes. That is a very short loading for 9mm but they work fine (with regular XTP's, which do look a lot like your bullet). One reason I like it, in a 124 gn bullet a whole bunch of the bullet goes into the case with that OAL, so there isn't a lot of extra empty space for the powder to rattle around in the case. At 1.06" the XTP's go down in the case ALMOST to the fill line using that Silhouette powder.

Edit: I have several 9mm pistols and the only one that doesn't like the 1.06 XTP load is a Taurus 9mm 1911. It doesn't like to feed that short of a cartridge with the cone shaped bullet. I have measured XTP factory rounds and they are also at the 1.06 OAL.

Some loading specs for that bullet use a longer OAL, but I figger Hornady ought to know how long its bullets should be loaded. I bought some Fiocchi ammo that is loaded with the XTP HP 124 gn, and Fiocchi uses a longer OAL than 1.06, so it isn't gospel carved in stone. OTOH those Fiocchi rounds are not as hot as advertised either. Can't recall the velocity, but it was slower than Hornady factory ammo.

Edited December 21, 2011 by Lester Weevils

[Guest]

My pistol brass that I purchased has been polished and roll-sized, but not decapped. Is there any reason I should remove the primers, then tumble to clean out the primer pockets, and then load? Or can I just go straight to loading?

I am using the crushed Walnut media from PetSmart.

Thanks.

[Guest nicemac]

My pistol brass that I purchased has been polished and roll-sized, but not decapped. Is there any reason I should remove the primers, then tumble to clean out the primer pockets, and then load? Or can I just go straight to loading?

I am using the crushed Walnut media from PetSmart.

Thanks.

Don't worry about re-tumbling after removing the primers.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Yep tumbling doesn't clean the pockets a bunch anyway.

As long as the primer pocket is about the right dimensions, a little residual burned stuff in the bottom doesn't keep from successfully priming, and it seems hardly anybody bothers cleaning primer pockets for pistol ammo.

I loaded a few thousand rounds in the past, full-progressive just cleaning, then size-decap-prime on the press. The vast majority primed just fine with assorted range pickup brass. My annoyance was that maybe 1 out of 100 would have a high primer, and some cases would seat the primer "real easy almost no resistance" and other cases would seat stiff and some cases would seat with a "bump" where there is initial resistance then they pop in "too quick". The result worked fine and shot fine with better-than-factory-ammo accuracy, but it was personally annoying and I hated having to pull the bullets on the 1 percent high primers and "waste" perfectly good primers.

Sorting the brass by headstamp or using a better-quality known brass might alleviate most all those problems.

It probably varies by year and lot, but some headstamps just prime smoother than others. Didn't know it until lately, but some 9mm might be crimped pockets same as military rifle.

From my experience with Federal primers (CCI or other primers might have different symptoms than I've noticed)-- Maybe different manufacturing lots would completely ruin my generalizations and make them worthless--

FC (Federal) and R-P (Remington) and Blazer and Star seem to prime real smooth without any prep.

Win primes good but wants to seat "with a bump". Speer primes good but is tight.

PMC and PPU (Prvi Partizan) seems to be pretty good brass but can be real tight priming.

SB (Sellior & Bellot) and WCC and some other assorted "obviously military looking" stuff is too much trouble to mess with unless you swage, ream, or uniform the primer pockets.

=====

So maybe I'm all wrong, but it might be least aggravating to sort the headstamps and use the easy stuff first, and save up the difficult stuff so it can be processed so that it will prime easier.

If you notice some headstamps working better than others, keep a record of what is good luck and cull the others for later processing? If you end up with more brass than you would ever need, maybe just trash the ones that are trouble rather than messing with them.

I had a few thousand 9mm cases saved over the years and lately have been going thru them investing too much labor on the primer pockets. With the idea of making them all uniformed one time, and then see if they all work "smooth as glass" in the progressive next time they get fired and need reloading.

Using the RCBS primer pocket uniformer bit (which mostly is only capable of cutting the bottom of the pocket), they usually take a little metal out of the bottom of FC and R-P. They don't usually remove much material from the bottom of Win, Speer.

Been having pretty good success just uniforming the FC, R-P, PMC. With the Speer, Win, PPU, they prime great if I uniform and also add a slight chamfer to the primer pocket opening.

S&B and anything that is too tight to uniform with finger pressure on the RCBS uniformer bit, I've been tossing into a separate jar for later processing. I can ream em out by chucking the RCBS uniformer bit in the lathe and a little shell-holder I made for the lathe sled, but it takes too much time. Am gonna get that RCBS pocket swage die and see if that works good to open up the tight cases. I'll deal with em after all the other "easy" brass has been reloaded.

[Guest]

The brass came today. Bullets didn't, so hopefully they are just in a separate package that will arrive tomorrow.

Here is a sample of the brass that I pulled out. It says it was polished, but after sifting around through it briefly my fingers had turned dark, so I'm thinking maybe I should tumble it with a little paint thinner or polish.

Does this much dirt in some of the primer pockets look normal?

Also, have the primer pockets been chamfered? Kind of dissapointing, as that was not advertised. Will it make any difference over the full life of the brass?

If I sort the brass to use the "easiest" cases at first for initial tests, should I worry about deviations in any of the cases causing problems due to internal volume or other problems? Once I get the first test runs worked out, I'd like to blaze through the rest of the bunch (of various headstamps) all in one operation.

[Guest]

On the plus side, the scale is accurate to .07% at 50 grams (50g check weight), assuming the check weight is perfect.. Not bad. If that accuracy is the same throughout the it's range, that would equate to .0035 grains on a 5gr charge.

[mikegideon]

On the plus side, the scale is accurate to .07% at 50 grams (50g check weight), assuming the check weight is perfect.. Not bad. If that accuracy is the same throughout the it's range, that would equate to .0035 grains on a 5gr charge.

I can't resolve better than 1/10 grain or so on any of my scales (maybe a little better on the beam scale). So, the percentage you can actually read gets bigger as the charge weight decreases.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Unless you are obsessive about ultra-shiny, the main thing is to have brass free of grit, which can scratch the dies and cause them to mark all your cases. I've also read the theory that fine grit might prematurely wear dies after thousands of rounds, dunno.

I've been getting new-shiny from walnut, followed by a second run of corncob + flitz tumbler additive. But even though they are real shiny with no grit, I get some black on my fingers after handling a bunch of cartridges. Some of it may be new oxidization that starts happening as soon as you pull it out of the cleaning media? No worry about a little black on the fingers.

Did you get an electronic scale? If so, they usually have a calibration button push combination that will put it spot-on against your calibration weight, with fingers crossed that an inexpensive calibration weight is pretty close. It should be in your manual. Some scales you put the weight on the scale then turn it on pressing the magic keys. Others you turn it on, press the magic key combination, then it asks you to put the weight on the scale. Maybe other methods are common, dunno.

Some of the scales ask for two or three different weights, or let you choose out of several choices what weight you want to calibrate against. I got an acculab (which weighs in a range inappropriate for reloading) that lets you select a cal weight either on the low end, the middle, or the max. If I had to guess, would guess that someone might want to calibrate against the typical weight range they are expecting to measure at that session, to optimize the linearity of that weight range.

edit-- If the scale supports both grams and grains, make sure you are in grains mode before weighing powder (duh).

Edited December 22, 2011 by Lester Weevils