Wish List: Next Generation Progressive

[Peter M. Eick]

Sure looks like a reason to stay with APS primers.

By the way, has anyone ever had an APS primer blow in a Pro2000? I have not heard of one ever.

Now back to the perfect press discussion....

 

[GW Staar]

Sure looks like a reason to stay with APS primers.

By the way, has anyone ever had an APS primer blow in a Pro2000? I have not heard of one ever.

Now back to the perfect press discussion....

Yes, I've heard of "one." The guy had a problem with the old primer not ejecting completely and caused the new one to go in sideways and kittywampus on top of the old one....then he forced it in with a lot of red neck enthusiasm. But only one went off....that's a little different than having a whole stack go off....and he wasn't holding it.

Because of that RCBS came up with the spring-loaded primer pin they sell to retrofit sizers if you want. Seems to me he just didn't get the pin mounted low enough and he lacked the patience to look and see why the blamed primer doesn't go in easy. Sometimes we are our own worst enemies.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

So someone finally blew a primer in an APS strip. Well you knew it was going to happen someday. Of course they were brute forcing it.

To bad but at least it was only one primer. Unlike a primer tube! One thing I will never allow on my bench is a primer tube! Too dangerous for me.

 

[codefour]

Unlike a primer tube! One thing I will never allow on my bench is a primer tube! Too dangerous for me.

Yeah I agree with ya Peter with one exception. The new Redding presses come with a blast tube that goes over the primer tube and it is pretty hefty. I still do occasionally load rifle rounds on my Redding Big Boss II or my T-7 turret press. I have not gotten around to getting a shell plate for rounds like .30-30 and .30 carbine. I seem to forget to add it to the cart when I place a MidwayUSA order.

I also think seven stations would be ideal. The stations could go as such:

1. size/deprime, 2. bell/powder, 3. powder check/lock out die, 4. bullet feeder, 5. seat, 6. crimp.

I prefer to seat and crimp in seperate stations. I seem to have better luck doing seat and crimp seperately.

An extra seventh station would be nice if the need ever arose. Nine stations? I think that would be a bit too many moving parts and the shell plate assembly would be gigantic.

Now, is RCBS paying attention to this thread.? Or any other reloading company? I think there would be a market for a good seven station press that is simpler than the Super 1050. I have heard the caliber conversions on those are a real pain. The simplicity of the Pro 2000 caliber conversions would have to be retained.

 

[helotaxi]

The 1050B is meant to be set up for production level quantities and left that way, not switched back and forth. The more different operations that you put on the single press, the more complicated and expensive it becomes to swap cartridges. That's one of my favorite things about the 550B. The dies are often the most expensive thing about the conversion and it takes 10 min at the outside, and that's on a change that requires a different toolhead, shell plate and a different primer size.

 

[codefour]

Yeah, If I ever got into serious USPSA or IDPA shooting, I would probably get a 1050 if another press does not come out with our beloved seven or nine stations.!

 

[DaveInFloweryBranchGA]

For those looking at the RCBS lube/depriming die, I just recently used one to lube and deprime 4000 brass. Am very happy with the product, though the lube hole is a waste of time. Just turn the die upside down and squirt the lube directly on the felt. Let the felt soak up the lube for a few minutes, then go to sizing/depriming. Very convenient.

Lube tumbled off easily after I swaged the brass in a Dillon 600 swager, but was light enough I could leave it on while swaging without excessive mess. Did have to wash the plastic Akro W.I.P. bins though.

On the subject of ideal presses. After using the Dillons, the Hornady LnL and the RCBS Pro 2000, here is what I would like:

1. Lots of die stations (6 or 7 would be good) with Hornady LnL style bushings to provide maximum flexibility in changing dies/operations. The toolheads/die plates are "ok," but lack the maximum flexibility of the Hornady. As a side bonus, the dies are easier to store and just as quick or quicker to change calibers.

2. The simplicity of the RCBS Pro 2000 auto advance system with the half steps of the Hornady LnL advance system. Not sure that one could be done, but a larger shell plate to hold more brass while placing the auto advance "holes" closer to make smaller or half steps would be a good thing. If the half step is possible, one can prime and do other operations on a half step, allowing other operations at the die stations.

3. Powder measures with as large a capacity as possible, with the current Hornady and Dillon reservoirs being the minimum size. Also, including at least two sizes of powder cylinders or bars and and micrometers right out of the box.

4. An improved version of the RCBS APS strip system with a primer feed stop and a primer punch block/stop.

5. If the press requires loading primers into a feeding system, include the primer loader with the press.

6. Offer a stripped down version as well as a luxury version of the press. One "as it should be" and one with all the niceties stripped out to make it more affordable to newer reloaders on a tight budget.

7. RCBS style ejection and case retention. I.E. an adjustable L shaped wire for ejection (very simple) and spring steel springs mounted on a bracket for case retention. Eliminates the easy to lose/drop Dillon buttons and the easy to bang up Hornady Spring while making the system simpler as whole.

 

[GW Staar]

Dave's post is pretty close to my take on the concept too.

He knows I don't agree on the stationary head with bushings vs. removeable tool heads, but that's a matter of taste. I find the storage of tool heads full of dies a convenience...he doesn't.

I have a couple of observations:

Can't comment on the Lube Die (don't have one), but based on what he has experienced, I will probably try one this year.

One of the real design limitations with any progressive is the diameter of the dies that go into the heads. That limits how close the auto-advance holes can be to each other. I'd be interested to know how close the holes are in the shell plates of the Hornady vs. RCBS/Dillon.

Having never been close to a Hornady for more than a few minutes, I'm not one to know anything about the press. But I'm wondering: If perchance the holes are farther apart due to the bushings (I mean you have to have a certain amount of metal between for strength), then Hornady may have had an incentive to develop their "half step" strokes, because a full step would be even farther than the competition.

That said, improving the jerk at the end of auto-advance in Dillon and RCBS presses would be great. The lighter spring I use is adequate, and Dillon people have their fixes as well, but they could be improved.

Powder capacity is another thing. RCBS says their capacity is based on what's a "safe" capacity. Ditto for Hornady and Dillon. All warn about increasing their designed capacity.....obviously they don't agree what's safe.

BTW, Sinclair has replacement bottles, some with larger capacities for the Uniflow.

As you know, I agree about the "improved" APS primer system. As well as the advantages of the simplicity of the RCBS press, doing the same job with fewer moving parts.

The rest of the post.....also ditto.

 

[DaveInFloweryBranchGA]

GW,

I picked a couple of things up out of your post I wanted to respond to and commented in red below them.

"He knows I don't agree on the stationary head with bushings vs. removeable tool heads, but that's a matter of taste. I find the storage of tool heads full of dies a convenience...he doesn't."

I think the biggest difference there is I've owned and used both. There's are some things that stand out for me:

1. With the LnL bushings, you don't get the die plate/tool head "slop." By that I mean the toolheads/die plates tend to move during press operation, because they have a certain amount of built in tolerances to allow for moving the toolhead/die plate in and out of the press. The Hornady LnL bushings twist in and out and "lock" in place, giving you a much more positive location for your dies. Much more like a single stage.

2. The flexibility of the the LnL bushings is much higher than with the toolhead/die plate. If you're loading using a FL sizing die, you can instantly replace the FL sizing die with a completely adjusted, ready to use, Neck sizing die instantly. This is very convenient and I've missed this capability very much since I sold my LnL.

3. Convenience of storage. I stored my dies with LnL bushings installed in an MTM case, which held four sets of dies at a time. Two of these boxes held most all the common caliber dies I had. A third held the rest. One can also use the Hornady die boxes to store the dies with the die bushings. Other brands of boxes sort of fit, but are tight.

These three items may sound trivial when listed, but become a pretty significant deal when you actually use both types of presses.


"That limits how close the auto-advance holes can be to each other. I'd be interested to know how close the holes are in the shell plates of the Hornady vs. RCBS/Dillon."

The Hornady is slightly more spread out, but not a lot. I still have some Hornady shell plates and I'll try to get a picture for comparison.

"Having never been close to a Hornady for more than a few minutes, I'm not one to know anything about the press. But I'm wondering: If perchance the holes are farther apart due to the bushings (I mean you have to have a certain amount of metal between for strength), then Hornady may have had an incentive to develop their "half step" strokes, because a full step would be even farther than the competition."

Oddly enough, the egg came before the chicken. Hornady used the half-step advance with their earlier Hornady Projector, which did not have lock n load bushings. It required you screw in the dies.

"Powder capacity is another thing. RCBS says their capacity is based on what's a "safe" capacity. Ditto for Hornady and Dillon. All warn about increasing their designed capacity.....obviously they don't agree what's safe.

BTW, Sinclair has replacement bottles, some with larger capacities for the Uniflow."

Evidentally RCBS safe capacity may have changed. They now offer a larger capacity Uniflow for "large calibers." I suspect all of the "safe" capacity jargon may be slang for: "We designed it with this capacity, have thousands of these reservoirs in manufacture at the present and really don't want to change."

I suspect if enough pressure is put on the manufacturers, they will increase the capacity. That said, the Hornady and Dillon measures seem more designed for progressives, while the current Uniflow was designed for a single stage. RCBS has recently added a very large capacity powder measure for "large calibers" I called and got them to send me a couple of the reservoirs.

They are huge, bigger than either the Dillon or Hornady reservoirs. Unfortunately, they don't fit a standard Uniflow. But they do show RCBS can provide larger capacity reservoirs if they choose to.

 

[Shrinkmd]

I wonder why Redding has not entered the progressive press market.

I'm a big fan of the Hornady LNL, but I wish they could add another station (think Lyman M die) and also the primer pocket swage and seating on the downstroke that the Dillon 1050 has. The case retainer springs are convenient, even if they die after a while.

Every now and then I dream about the 1050, but I load too many calibers, and I'm not sure I'm ready to commit to an expensive dedicated machine just for one. I would probably get better mileage out of several Hornady machines set up for what I shoot, so I can replenish my pet loads and still have a press "free" to tinker with.

I find that it takes almost an hour to change over the press to a different caliber, as well as getting the powder measure exactly on target. I've been finishing up a batch run of 44 mag, and it is such a pleasure to just dump in powder and primers, check the measure after 10 or 20 throws to settle it, and start cranking out rounds.

 

[buckbrush]

if Redding does come out with a Progressive press, it will be a great one if it is up to the quality of the rest of their products.

 

[GW Staar]

GW,

I think the biggest difference there is I've owned and used both. There's are some things that stand out for me:

The biggest difference is we are different people with different likes.

1. With the LnL bushings, you don't get the die plate/tool head "slop." By that I mean the toolheads/die plates tend to move during press operation, because they have a certain amount of built in tolerances to allow for moving the toolhead/die plate in and out of the press. The Hornady LnL bushings twist in and out and "lock" in place, giving you a much more positive location for your dies. Much more like a single stage.

Dave, I like the slop. It makes things line up so I don't pull case out of align. 40 years ago I was taught by the "masters" at Handloader Magazine to "create" slop in Rock Chucker shell holders for the same purpose. It was simple really, you just loosen the spring holding the shell holder to the ram, so that it just holds...barely. I know you think Hornady does alignment best....I just don't agree. Depends how you use the press. Too fast with the handle makes less straight ammo with the Pro 2000 or the Dillons. With the Hornady you are totally dependent on Hornady for a perfect casting. You of all people know how fast that can go south. Judging from the many Hornady posts I've read over the last 3 years, Hornady isn't immune, nor do they outshine the other manufacturers in that dept.

2. The flexibility of the the LnL bushings is much higher than with the toolhead/die plate. If you're loading using a FL sizing die, you can instantly replace the FL sizing die with a completely adjusted, ready to use, Neck sizing die instantly. This is very convenient and I've missed this capability very much since I sold my LnL.

"Much higher".........maybe a little higher maybe 40 seconds. All my dies are pre-adjusted too, you just have to unscrew and rescrew.....but since I NEVER use neck sizers I don't care. Again the difference is in the humans.

3. Convenience of storage. I stored my dies with LnL bushings installed in an MTM case, which held four sets of dies at a time. Two of these boxes held most all the common caliber dies I had. A third held the rest. One can also use the Hornady die boxes to store the dies with the die bushings. Other brands of boxes sort of fit, but are tight.

Again different humans. I store may die heads in clear soft plastic index boxes, lined up neatly on their own 8" high x *" deep shelf at sitting eye level. Each die head has not only the normal dies mounted (preadjusted), but in the case of pistol dies, a bullet feeder die, and a Uniflow Powder through expander. In my mind (my mind) there's nothing faster or simpler.

We are just going to have to agree to disagree. Thankfully in this country we can.....so far.

Evidentally RCBS safe capacity may have changed. They now offer a larger capacity Uniflow for "large calibers." I suspect all of the "safe" capacity jargon may be slang for: "We designed it with this capacity, have thousands of these reservoirs in manufacture at the present and really don't want to change."

I suspect if enough pressure is put on the manufacturers, they will increase the capacity. That said, the Hornady and Dillon measures seem more designed for progressives, while the current Uniflow was designed for a single stage. RCBS has recently added a very large capacity powder measure for "large calibers" I called and got them to send me a couple of the reservoirs.

They are huge, bigger than either the Dillon or Hornady reservoirs. Unfortunately, they don't fit a standard Uniflow. But they do show RCBS can provide larger capacity reservoirs if they choose to.

Don't disagree with the powder volume issue, and, I have to say....I don't much like Sinclair's "fix" either. Where's the after market companies when you need them.

 

[joed]

I once looked at a box of primers and they exploded! That's pretty much on par with the calguns thread. There is much more to that 550 story then has been told. When something sounds unbelievable it usually is.

If you want to believe the static electricity theory look at where the primer was in the tube. It was in the middle of the tube. The story teller is leaving something out.

 

[GW Staar]

I once looked at a box of primers and they exploded! That's pretty much on par with the calguns thread. There is much more to that 550 story then has been told. When something sounds unbelievable it usually is.

If you want to believe the static electricity theory look at where the primer was in the tube. It was in the middle of the tube. The story teller is leaving something out.

Maybe so.....and then again maybe not.
Not sure what he has to gain by hiding the truth ot it. What he actually said was....he pulled the pin on the tube and it went off. Last I knew, when you pull the pin, the whole stack drops at the same time. That means detonation could happen anywhere along the tube where there was movement.

Scientifically why it went off is for the scientists....others came up with the static theory....the victim, only repeated the theory. (it wasn't my theory either, but rather than call the man a liar hiding the "real" truth, I thought (and still think) it perfectly plausible, having experienced personal jolts of a 1000 volts of static quite often in this dry as a bone part of the country. But believe what you want...

The point isn't why it went off, anyway....the point is it went off! There's plenty of real evidence of that part. 25, 50, or 100 primers stacked in a tube is the problem. Remember the point of this thread.....on the next generation presses, do we want the same old primer-stacked primer tubes that hurt people, or do we want the manufacturers to get off their duffs and make a better system.

If Dillon had invented APS it would be hailed from the rooftops. But they didn't. RCBS did...it's a safer, faster way to reload, and I'm hoping that all manufacturers will either use it someday or invent their own version of a modern, safer primer system. Come on folks, people have been blowing holes in things for 50 years with primer tubes.....it's time we insist on something better than a blast tube bandaid.

 

[joed]

I'm not saying the man in the story is a liar. What I'm saying is he hasn't given all the information. Something is missing, but I don't know what. I just don't buy into the static electricity belief.

I've never worked with APS primers so have no opinion about them. I have used the current system for 35 years with no mishaps.