Primer Pocket swage?

I tried these on a whim, the price is right and they do work:

https://www.harborfreight.com/3-in-1-hex-bit-countersink-tool-68535.html

I use rcbs swager. I haven't used other commercial tools. I have also just reamed it w a drill bit, but that leaves quite a bit of unsupported primer. Kinda scary, but I've never had issues like that.

I'm sorry, that was pretty vague. Rcbs part # 9481. It gives a decent production rate & a very sweet-seating pocket. I prefer to just use commercial brass, but I have amassed so much milsurp I had to get one. It is pretty easy to use, I think. Definately better then the drill bit method, but not quite as fast.

Walkalong said:

Me too, in a hobby lathe.

Click to expand...

Can someone help me with the product number, say at Brownell's? I went on the RCBS website and could not find the right one.

To the original poster , I feel your pain. I still cannot find the "right" or best solution to the military crimp problem.

Sorry just saw the post above mine with the number.

Rcbs part # 9481 is inferior to the Dillon Super Swage 600.

The Dillon takes 1/10 the strength to use, and is at least 5 times faster.

Sometimes with the rcbs I still had to ream the pocket, I have never had to ream after swaging with the dillon.

The Dillon also returns the rim to flat and square if it has been mangled by an enthusiast extraction in a semi or full auto. The RCBS relys on pulling on the rim (possibly making the rim worse) to remove the case from the swager, while the Dillon pushes the case off which squares the rim up during the swage AND swage removal.

After using the RCBS model for ~ 25 years I tried the Dillon, and bought one that very afternoon.

I have only been disappointed by RCBS in 45 years with 2 things, the swager and the motor in their vibratory case tumbler. (they replaced the tumbler twice, and after that sent 4(!) motors in the span of ~5 years ( for free) before I gave up on them.

Everything else on my bench is green.

I have only used the RCBS press mounted swager. It works just fine on my RCBS RC2. I picked it up used at a gun show about 20 years ago. I don't recall the exact price, but I think it was $5 or thereabouts. It came in an old die box, but all the parts were there. I remember using it on a large batch of military .223/5.56 brass years ago. It did get a little tedious, but worked just fine. I don't seem to need it very often, and for occasional use it works for me.

kmw1954 said:

Seriously? Comparing the #9481 to the Dillon Super 600. They are not even in the same class tool. Why not compare it to the more direct model #9474 Bench Mount. Your comparison is like comparing a Progressive press to a turret press and saying they are the same thing.

Click to expand...

They both have the same intended use and were both brought up as viable options. It's a valid comparison when people are considering both.

Others do read these threads, and I know that when I was looking, I appreciated the different perspectives on what I was thinking about going with.

You asked someone which one and it came up.

Just some good discussion...

kmw1954 said:

So please describe how the Dillon Bench mount and the RCBS press mount compare against each other other than they perform a certain job.

Click to expand...

Both meet your requirement of being "more user friendly and efficient" than reaming by hand. Both are "better, easier, and more consistent" as well.

The Dillon does a better job and is quicker. The RCBS takes up less real estate and is cheaper.

kmw1954 said:

So please describe how the Dillon Bench mount and the RCBS press mount compare against each other other than they perform a certain job. .

Click to expand...

KMW-

You seem to be a proponent of the Dillon table swager. I am under the impression that the tool has to be set up and then modified for each headstamp due to OAL differences . To be specific if I am swaging the military crimp out of a 223 there will always be a variation in the OAL, of say five thousands in a batch of 100.

When you set up the length of the plunger/reamer will that difference in OAL cause some of the military crimp to remain? Enough to negate the process?

Not trying to create an argument, but right now I am frustrated looking for a satisfactory method of removing the military crimp. I do not want to bash any specific products but 2 dirrerent swaging tools just crushed the cases and I had to return them. Also the shaving method worked fine until the cutter got dull, way too fast in my opinion. So I am searching.............

I am ready to drop $ 150 on the Dillon if I could be convinced that I was getting something that worked and that I did not have to continually adjust due to OAL differences.

The Dillon or RCBS bench-mounted swagers work about the same.....only the footprint and motion is different. The RCBS one doesn't require bench edge real estate. As this very amateur video demonstrates.
I too like to use a trim mate with the swager to make running it in the progressive trouble free....meaning primer pocket depth is controlled using the "uniformer"...

As the video also demonstrates....it doesn't work well when you leave a primer in....nobody's perfect...

I bought a Lee APP to try too. That tool does a lot of interesting things and if you follow the directions (I didn't do that well at first) it swages well......and the only one with a case feeder

kmw1954 said:

Seriously? Comparing the #9481 to the Dillon Super 600. They are not even in the same class tool. Why not compare it to the more direct model #9474 Bench Mount. Your comparison is like comparing a Progressive press to a turret press and saying they are the same thing.

Click to expand...

That was my point. The two different tools are not even compatible.

I did not know about RCBS #9474, it would be interesting to see a comparison between it and the Dillon offering.

I have had so many good experiences with RCBS customer service over the years that I will go with RCBS if the offerings are similar between manufactures, but the Dillon swage tool was so superior to RCBS 9421 that I was more than willing to mess up the color scheme on my bench.

I've used both the Dillon and the RCBS #9481 press mounted system. IMO the Dillon is the Cadillac but the RCBS works too. The problem I have with the RCBS is that pulling the swage out of the primer pocket is a fairly violent action. My Rockchucker is set up on a free standing bench with a shelf and I was knocking stuff off of the shelf when using the dies. Lubing the swage gave temporary relief but is a pain to have to keep doing every couple of rounds. I have a press set up in my garage that was used to swage rims off of .22 brass to make bullet jackets (another violent action) that I use with the RCBS now.

I had a chance to buy a Dillon for $50 several years ago but passed on it because I could borrow one from a buddy for free. Unfortunately that option no longer exists and I consider my failure to buy the Dillon one of my top 10 reloading mistakes.

gifbohane said:

I am under the impression that the tool has to be set up and then modified for each headstamp due to OAL differences

Click to expand...

It's differences in web thickness that require adjustment for both systems. My experience is that they don't vary much for LC 5.56 brass. Federal crimped brass usually have thinner webs than LC and will require adjustment. I don't waste my time removing crimps from Federal brass so that is a non-issue for me.

gifbohane said:

I am under the impression that the tool has to be set up and then modified for each headstamp due to OAL differences

Click to expand...

I do believe that the instructions state that fact, however in my use, I have not had to adjust it.......yet.
Everything goes thru the Swager, crimped or not.
LC, Federal, PMC, Top Brass......all have swaged properly without adjustment.......for me.
Just another $.02 from me...

Being a guy who has used both the Dillon and the RCBS bench tools you can not go wrong with either one. I run the RCBS as it took up less space on the bench however due to the shorter handle your leverage is reduced requiring more muscle than the Dillon unit. The other piece of the puzzle is muscles that get used are different between the two units. They both get the job done and are simple to use. I am young enough the additional strength needed to run the RCBS unit does not bother me and I much prefer having space on my bench.

@kmw1954 .....Did you decide on a swaging unit...?