Why did RCBS include a .127 die spacer in thier older, non carbide, .38/.357 die sets and not a .135

Status
Not open for further replies.
SARuger

SARuger

Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2016
Messages
655
Location
Virginia
This came up on another forum, maybe someone here knows the answer.

I have two sets of older (circa late 70's, early 80's) RCBS .38/.357 die sets that I bought used. Both sets had spacers in the box. The spacers are for swapping to .357 from .38 without adjusting the die. Both spacers were .127

I noticed this right off the bat and thought it to be odd. I shrugged it off thinking some mistake was made years ago. I chucked the spacers into a spare parts drawer and searched the WWW for a .135 spacer.

We all know that the difference in length between a .38spcl case and a.357mag case is .135.

Redding sells a .135 38/357 die spacer so i ordered two of them for my RCBS die sets.

It turns out that in the discussion on another forum that everyone that has an older RCBS 38/357 die set has the same .127 spacer!

It would seem that if you used that spacer and didn't readjust the seater/crimp die that your roll crimp would be tighter and the bullet seated deeper. Changing bullet seat depth is a non issue but having to readjust the die for crimp makes using the spacer useless.


There has to be a reason why RCBS did this, they are smart folks, make great products.

Anyone have an answer? I will try calling RCBS today if I get a chance
 
FROGO207 said:
If you call them they will send you a proper spacer for free.:thumbup: Never did ask why it was wrong in the first place as I thought mine was a mistake.
Click to expand...

Heck, don't need them now! I bought a half dozen of the Redding spacers. I just want to know what the thought process was. I know .010 isn't much, but with some variance in case length, it can be "too much" crimp.

Curiosity is getting me on this one
 
They have been reading the gunzines and gunboards which have for decades been telling us that the difference from .38 to .357 is "an eighth of an inch." Just be glad they didn't go by the ones that said the difference was "about a tenth of an inch."
 
SARuger! Thanks, you sent me straight to the basement for my old Lufkin micrometer and spacer ring. My dies were a late 1970's issue and the ring is .127" I also went straight to SAAMI and looked up the specs for both calibers. Yes they are 1.290" and 1.155" for a differeence of .135"
Maybe RCBS will send me a .008" shim??? :)
 
total recoil said:
SARuger! Thanks, you sent me straight to the basement for my old Lufkin micrometer and spacer ring. My dies were a late 1970's issue and the ring is .127" I also went straight to SAAMI and looked up the specs for both calibers. Yes they are 1.290" and 1.155" for a differeence of .135"
Maybe RCBS will send me a .008" shim??? :)
Click to expand...
Not a shim. But they will send you a new .135 ring.
 
ArchAngelCD said:
Since the dies were not bought new according to the OP maybe the seller mixed up the spacers when packing them for sale.
Click to expand...

I have two sets of RCBS 38/357 die sets, bought at separate times from different sellers. One set is a 1979 and the other a 1981. Both sets had .127 spacers in them.

I think RCBS messed up! Which does surprise me, they run a tight ship.
 
Or maybe RCBS only wanted to inventory one item.

I reloaded 38 Special/357 Magnum for decades using the RCBS spacer and the varying case length of my cases was probably greater than the .008" difference from the thinner spacer.:)
 
I would be really surprised if it was a mistake on RCBS's part. To sell thousands of die sets over a period of years and not hear of any recall or issues due to the "wrong" spacer?
 
I have a carbide set I bought in the early '80's. Mine mikes about .128. I never knew that it wasn't correct and have loaded both .38 and .357 without an issue.
 
SARuger said:
I have two sets of RCBS 38/357 die sets, bought at separate times from different sellers. One set is a 1979 and the other a 1981. Both sets had .127 spacers in them.

I think RCBS messed up! Which does surprise me, they run a tight ship.
Click to expand...
I think it surprises a lot of us because they do run a tight ship.
 
Does anybody have a RCBS .38-.357 spacer at .135"?
Maybe they make them all 1/8".
Might not be a bad thing, it would automatically apply a tighter crimp to Magnums than Specials.
 
If they are trying to influence your crimp I would call that interference with your reloading practices. That's none of their business or bad business??
I applied for the .135" spacer ring.
I will ask RCBS if the short spacer ring was a mistake or done on purpose. Waffling on the answer can only mean one thing. :)
 
RCBS sent me this reply:

"We only have one spacer ring and it is .125 thick. I would be happy to send you one if you like. Just let us know if you need one"

Hmmm. Mine mikes out at .127" I can't use a thinner one! Mighty friendly of the guy about offering to send me one though.
Guess I'll get my plastic shim stock out and make a jury rig fix for the old one.
 
SARuger said:
I think this might be one issue that RCBS doesn't have a handle on!
Click to expand...

Has anyone ever experienced a problem because of the missing 0.008"? I sure haven't. I adjust COL for different bullets to center the crimp in the groove but just use the ring (or not) depending on .38 or .357 and my crimps turn out fine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

RealGun
  • Locked
Using die spacers for magnums
Replies
1
Views
321
Walkalong
Walkalong
joneb
  • Locked
RCBS spacer ring ?
2
Replies
25
Views
4K
joneb
joneb
J
  • Locked
The folks at RCBS are great!
Replies
6
Views
464
rocketdoc
R
J
Does the 38 Special have a magnum case as described in the RCBS 3-die set instructions?
Replies
11
Views
567
.45Coltguy
.45Coltguy
Col. Harrumph
  • Locked
9mm: Luger vs. Largo
Replies
10
Views
818
Stumper
Stumper
Back
Top