David Wile
Member
Hey SPW,
I would like to take a little bit of issue with what you said about the L&L AP "getting steadily better over the years..." I bought an L&L AP when the first came on the market nearly fifteen years ago, and mine has been working just fine right from the start. Other than using a wood dowel in the primer feed to let me know when I get near the end of the primers, I have never had a problem with it feeding primers properly. I do keep the press clean and the primer slide lubed with powdered graphite, but that is all I do. In the first weeks of using it, I did adjust one of the timeing pawls ever so slightly, and I have not had to make any changes since.
I know the new units have a different whatever it is to facilitate an automatic case feeder, but I have never wanted a case feeder. I have a friend who has a Dillon 650 with a case feeder, and I hate the noise it makes. I know they are also changing something with the shell plates and spring kicker because some folks are having a problem with cases not kicking out properly. I don't know what the problem is because I have not had any such problem with mine.
Other than those things, I don't know what Hornady has done to make it better. I think they started out hitting a home run with the L&L AP from the time it first came out. Is it better than the Dillon 650? I wouldn't say that it is better. I like mine better than I like my friend's 650, but I wouldn't say it is better. I know my friend likes his 650 better than my L&L, but I don't think he would say his is better either. They are both good machines, and it depends on what features you like.
For those folks who try to compare the L&L with the Dillon 550, they simply do not know what they are talking about. They are not comparing comparable machines.
You also mentioned the Dillon 650 was a "somewhat dated design," and I would point out that the Hornady L&L is almost as dated as the 650. In neither case, however, would I consider either of them dated. Hornady is still making the 366 progressive shotshell loader (which was made for many earlier years as the Pacific 366), and while it is truly a dated machine, it still is a heck of a machine that is still being snapped up by new loaders every year. I suspect the only way Hornady will make a major change in their progressive loader is if the new RCBS proves to be a much better design.
In any case, the L&L and the 650 will be around for a long time to come, and they are both excellent machines.
Best wishes,
Dave Wile
I would like to take a little bit of issue with what you said about the L&L AP "getting steadily better over the years..." I bought an L&L AP when the first came on the market nearly fifteen years ago, and mine has been working just fine right from the start. Other than using a wood dowel in the primer feed to let me know when I get near the end of the primers, I have never had a problem with it feeding primers properly. I do keep the press clean and the primer slide lubed with powdered graphite, but that is all I do. In the first weeks of using it, I did adjust one of the timeing pawls ever so slightly, and I have not had to make any changes since.
I know the new units have a different whatever it is to facilitate an automatic case feeder, but I have never wanted a case feeder. I have a friend who has a Dillon 650 with a case feeder, and I hate the noise it makes. I know they are also changing something with the shell plates and spring kicker because some folks are having a problem with cases not kicking out properly. I don't know what the problem is because I have not had any such problem with mine.
Other than those things, I don't know what Hornady has done to make it better. I think they started out hitting a home run with the L&L AP from the time it first came out. Is it better than the Dillon 650? I wouldn't say that it is better. I like mine better than I like my friend's 650, but I wouldn't say it is better. I know my friend likes his 650 better than my L&L, but I don't think he would say his is better either. They are both good machines, and it depends on what features you like.
For those folks who try to compare the L&L with the Dillon 550, they simply do not know what they are talking about. They are not comparing comparable machines.
You also mentioned the Dillon 650 was a "somewhat dated design," and I would point out that the Hornady L&L is almost as dated as the 650. In neither case, however, would I consider either of them dated. Hornady is still making the 366 progressive shotshell loader (which was made for many earlier years as the Pacific 366), and while it is truly a dated machine, it still is a heck of a machine that is still being snapped up by new loaders every year. I suspect the only way Hornady will make a major change in their progressive loader is if the new RCBS proves to be a much better design.
In any case, the L&L and the 650 will be around for a long time to come, and they are both excellent machines.
Best wishes,
Dave Wile
I do however consider the case feeder, the new ejection system, etc. as improvements over the older presses and as "general" rule they seem to have less functional problems than "some" of the older ones did.
