Need 9mm and 357 Mag seating dies that seat via ogive, not meplat

There seems to be a lot more interest lately in OAL variations with 9mm handguns shooting "extreme precision" with commercial bullets. I think we have a total of three active threads, at least two WRT the Hornady HAP and +/- 0.001" seating depth. It might be nice to converge those threads and treat them as one "I can't shoot perfect groups with imperfect ammo" thread. It might be nice if we could solve all of these problems in one shot... so to speak.

JimGnitecki said:

I agree! Who and how can someone do that?

The Hornady HAP is a very popular bullet, and probably good enough in its consistency to be the right bullet to use as an example of how to achieve consistent base-to-ogive (versus merely consistent COAL, because we want accurate control of both combustion chamber size in the cartridge case AND the exact amount of bullet "jump" to, or jamming into, the rifling.

The other important complication is that most handgunners striving for accuracy and safety will nevertheless insist that any loading solution HAS to be based on using a progressive press, as single stage loading is just too slow for high volume ammo production. It has to be understood and accepted that this will degrade the consistency a bit, unless someone procues and sells a progressive press setup that is more rigid and repeatable than the current typical progressive presses.

Jim G

Click to expand...

It looks like @hso and @rust collector are currently moderating. You and (probably) the other posters discussing OAL and the HAP would need to write to them for suggestions.

JimGnitecki said:

And for guys shooting 9 Major, who have the strong firearms built to take that SAFELY (not just ANY 9mm handgun, even if high quality), this control of base-to-ogive is absolutely critical in achieving a SAFE 9 Major load.

Jim G

Click to expand...

Isn't @mcb a 9mm Major shooter? I haven't seen him on any of these threads so maybe the lack of moon clips is holding him back.

I got in an order of .45 ACP bullets last Friday, changing from plated to coated for economy and easy loading.
That required adjusting the seating dies - Hornady with MicroJust stems in the progressives - to the right OAL for that design. I am shooting USPSA and IDPA so great accuracy is not required, cheap bulk bullets are fine, but the right length for feeding in my Buzzard is critical.

I found that setting OAL was simple in the Rockchucker with old Lyman die, so as to get a correct sample and adjust what came off the Dillons longer than wanted. But it took more tinkering in the 550 and a LOT more tinkering in the 1050. So I think that one source of variance is slop in the progressives' shell plate and head plate.

Try doing final seating in a single stage and see if that cleans up some of the variation.

This is the run around scooter.

Near the end of my career I worked in a government office responsible for approving or rejecting the final proposed federal regulations from various agencies like defense, health agencies, transportation, and so forth. Some were very complex and politically fraught. Others simple and stupid.

At one meeting in 2000ish the boss and staff comprising economists, statisticians, and others discussed a proposed rule for whether to permit Medicare payments for something called the runaround scooter. Yes, no, never, of course, but maybe, but, but, but…it went on and on. No decision.

I went away on a one year detail to another office and came back as the boss. At my first staff meeting I asked each analyst about their outstanding pending regs. The runaround scooter was mentioned. I couldn’t believe it but maintained my new-found boss-like composure and simply said: “no, that one’s been cleared.” The analyst balked and said no it hasn’t, I have it right here! I’ve been working on it for more than a year.

My deputy, said you didn’t hear him, it’s been cleared.

There were muffled chuckles and a soft, oh, from the analyst.

Sorry, but to me, this discussion brings back bad memories like perfection being the enemy of the good. I know, it’s simple, it’s my problemo. I agree.

JimGnitecki said:

A decent suggestion. I would be concerned about the extra time needed to make a good sized batch of ammo, and also how do you handle the taper crimping? Do you still allow the crimping to occur on the progressive press and then just reseat the bullet deeper on the single stage press? Or, do you do both the reseating, and then the taper crimping, in 2 separate operations on the single stage press?

Jim G

Click to expand...

If you are of the school of thought that says the taper crimp should be "just enough to take out the flare" you could seat a bit long with crimp on the progressive and set to exact OAL on single stage to be ready to shoot.
If you want a substantial crimp, that is two operations off the Dillon.

There are more and more finicky shooters going "un progressive" with double handling or more to get just what they want.
Run a test batch and see if it makes a difference worth the extra time and work.

JimGnitecki said:

....but my very rare need for machining skills and a lathe, and the shortage of time to both learn the skills and do the work, make the acquisition of a lathe a non-starter for me.

Click to expand...

This is what everyone says until they get one !

Actually, I used my lathe for general home, auto and garden tool repair until the day I realized my love of Precision Delta JHP and Hornady XTP bullets called for totally all new seating anvils. Now I make up a new anvil for almost every new bullet, and I modify existing Dillon anvils to better fit "standard" bullets.


New anvil to fit a lead SWC from Missouri Bullet


Modified Dillon anvil to allow below-flush 38Spcl WC seating

You needn't buy a lathe. If you'll start asking around, someone at work or in your neighborhood is already a "hobby machinist" and would love to take on the project. If all else fails, possibly I could make it. Contact me via PM with details.

Hope this helps.

CQB45ACP said:

This is the run around scooter.

Near the end of my career I worked in a government office responsible for approving or rejecting the final proposed federal regulations from various agencies like defense, health agencies, transportation, and so forth. Some were very complex and politically fraught. Others simple and stupid.

At one meeting in 2000ish the boss and staff comprising economists, statisticians, and others discussed a proposed rule for whether to permit Medicare payments for something called the runaround scooter. Yes, no, never, of course, but maybe, but, but, but…it went on and on. No decision.

I went away on a one year detail to another office and came back as the boss. At my first staff meeting I asked each analyst about their outstanding pending regs. The runaround scooter was mentioned. I couldn’t believe it but maintained my new-found boss-like composure and simply said: “no, that one’s been cleared.” The analyst balked and said no it hasn’t, I have it right here! I’ve been working on it for more than a year.

My deputy, said you didn’t hear him, it’s been cleared.

There were muffled chuckles and a soft, oh, from the analyst.

Sorry, but to me, this discussion brings back bad memories like perfection being the enemy of the good. I know, it’s simple, it’s my problemo. I agree.

Click to expand...

When I was working lead on the F15 STOL /SuperEagle upgrade project we went through a dozen print changes in a week for one part because the engineers at Grumman and Northrop disagreed on the order of processing. They "lost" six or seven (we were never told exactly how many) to flaws in this one part so it was a big priority. As a sub-contractor, we had no say in the final design or process but our feet were being held to the fire to get a working pre-production sample to Northrop for testing. We did, eventually, by ignoring the feuding engineers and calling in an Air Force procurement engineer who said, in essence, "You're the machinists. You figure it out." We did, it worked, the entire team got HUGE bonuses and both of the primary engineers got promoted. Sometimes, life's just not fair.
It's a valid discussion, IMO, if you're one of those shooters who can put 10 rounds in the same hole at 100yds from a service pistol. There's fellers who can do that. I'm not one of them. But I have known one or two.

GeoDudeFlorida said:

When I was working lead on the F15 STOL /SuperEagle upgrade project we went through a dozen print changes in a week for one part because the engineers at Grumman and Northrop disagreed on the order of processing. They "lost" six or seven (we were never told exactly how many) to flaws in this one part so it was a big priority. As a sub-contractor, we had no say in the final design or process but our feet were being held to the fire to get a working pre-production sample to Northrop for testing. We did, eventually, by ignoring the feuding engineers and calling in an Air Force procurement engineer who said, in essence, "You're the machinists. You figure it out." We did, it worked, the entire team got HUGE bonuses and both of the primary engineers got promoted. Sometimes, life's just not fair.
It's a valid discussion, IMO, if you're one of those shooters who can put 10 rounds in the same hole at 100yds from a service pistol. There's fellers who can do that. I'm not one of them. But I have known one or two.

Click to expand...

My grandfather was a machinist—he could make anything.

I haven’t been to ophthalmologist in three years so just seeing the front sight is an accomplishment. Same hole at 3 & 4 yards is my routine warmup. OAL makes no difference.

JimGnitecki said:

I would be concerned about the extra time needed to make a good sized batch of ammo

Click to expand...

With all due respect, considering your demands and requirements, the time required is irrelevant. You want it right or you don't.

This is also similar to a “get me a rock” scenario. No, not that rock! Get me a different rock.

Late to the thread, read the OP and skimmed the rest so forgive me if I repeat something already said. My Dillon 9mm and 38/357 dies came with reversible seating stems to fit a variety of bullet shapes (the 38/357 came with two IIRC). It had ends for round nose, for semi-wad cutter and for full wad cutters. I even took one of my full wad cutter seating stems and machined it to fit the hemispheric round bullet I use loading 38/200 for my Webley.

More on point, I have found some 9mm bullets are "pointier" than others and this can cause issue seating. Depending on the particular 9mm bullet you can sometime take the Dillon round nose seating stem and drill the hole in the center out to a bigger size. This keeps the stem from pushing on then end of the pointier bullets if the particular bullet your using has a smaller tip radius than the seating stem. This move the contact ring down further on bullet ogive and can help make OAL more consistent.

Also make sure the shoulder bolt holding that the indexing shell-plate spins on is as tight as possible while still allowing smooth rotation of the plate. Make sure under the plate is clean and free of powder and other debris. Obviously make sure the die is tight and make sure you tool head does not have alot of play.

Also if you seating your bullet by pushing down on the ogive then you need to be measuring your OAL from that point too, if you want to have an accurate measure of your variance. If your seat by pressing down on the ogive but measure OAL with a pair of calipers over the end of the bullet your going to seem more variation than if you were seating by pressing on the end of the bullet.

Finally the quality of the bullet makes a difference. When I was using a lot of Montana Gold I could get OAL variant in the +/- 0.003 or better pretty easily. Precision Delta on the the other hand it was much harder and I was pretty happy with +/- .005.

-rambling

I won’t debate the SS vs progressive quality, especially with pistol ammo. I switched to a LNL, and more recently an 1100 and am satisfied with both. Many advocate a “twice round” approach with the progressive, to achieve a bit more consistency, but I enjoy having a finished round with every pull.

rfwobbly said:

This is the perfect opportunity for you to buy the metal lathe you've always wanted !! Your need is abundantly apparent. The spouse will immediately recognize your dire circumstances, and appropriate the necessary funds from the household budget to procure the appropriate machine and tooling.

Click to expand...

I tried that with my wife but my Jedi mind trick < waving hand across face > won't work with her. "What do you mean you now need a TIG welder just because you bought two aluminum salt water fishing boats?" I told her JB Weld won't work on Berkeley jet drive parts and I can't rivet or braze all the aluminum parts on the boats with alumaloy < Still not convinced look on wife's face >.

"Do you even know how to TIG weld?" ... Of course, I am a certified welder trained by a NASA contract welder who welded inside vacuum (For real, got certified at adult school after college). When I fabricated and welded gate ramp for landscape trailer that will be used to mount hard machine rest for pistol/carbine testing on tri-pod lift to provide around 1000 lb stable base, she was "mildly" surprised (Pic of trailer gate ramp at bottom of link) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/corn-cobb-bedding.910318/#post-12406491

CQB45ACP said:

This is also similar to a “get me a rock” scenario. No, not that rock! Get me a different rock.

Click to expand...

Go get me a left-handed wrench, a bucket of prop wash, and ten yards of flight line. On the double! Move it!

This is the first time I recall seeing anyone so fervently chase such precision with a progressive press. It may not be the die's fault.

Even Dillon doesn’t claim that the 750 will produce pistol rounds capable of one hole groups. Match grade is their claim.

Speed… precision… pick one.