I'm working with a friend's .243 M-700. This is a vintage 700 recently fitted with a SS take off 700 barrel, work done by a quality smith. The headspace is minimal. The gun works great with new cases, but FL sized cases thru a Lyman FL sizer close hard with fair amount of bolt resistance. I even used full cam effect with a Big Boss press to no avail. I then ground material off the bottom of the Lyman die until a FL sized case closed easily in the gun.

Not sure if anyone has seen that before. It was my first time in 50+ years of reloading.

DF

Had to cut the bottom off more than one set of dies for the very same reason.

Is the Lyman die squeezing more taper back onto the case body than is necessary for smooth chambering?

I have a few Hornady full length size dies, and for every one of those cartridges they reduce the body diameter and put on a heavier taper than my comparable Redding, Forster, Lee and RCBS dies. As a result of this heavier sizing/tapering of the case bodies, the shoulders get squeezed forward more. It follows that bumping them back then takes more force.

Is the Lyman die squeezing more taper back onto the case body than is necessary for smooth chambering?

I have a few Hornady full length size dies, and for every one of those cartridges they reduce the body diameter and put on a heavier taper than my comparable Redding, Forster, Lee and RCBS dies. As a result of this heavier sizing/tapering of the case bodies, the shoulders get squeezed forward more. It follows that bumping them back then takes more force.

Is the Lyman die squeezing more taper back onto the case body than is necessary for smooth chambering?

I have a few Hornady full length size dies, and for every one of those cartridges they reduce the body diameter and put on a heavier taper than my comparable Redding, Forster, Lee and RCBS dies. As a result of this heavier sizing/tapering of the case bodies, the shoulders get squeezed forward more. It follows that bumping them back then takes more force.

Is the Lyman die squeezing more taper back onto the case body than is necessary for smooth chambering?

I have a few Hornady full length size dies, and for every one of those cartridges they reduce the body diameter and put on a heavier taper than my comparable Redding, Forster, Lee and RCBS dies. As a result of this heavier sizing/tapering of the case bodies, the shoulders get squeezed forward more. It follows that bumping them back then takes more force.

Is the Lyman die squeezing more taper back onto the case body than is necessary for smooth chambering?

I have a few Hornady full length size dies, and for every one of those cartridges they reduce the body diameter and put on a heavier taper than my comparable Redding, Forster, Lee and RCBS dies. As a result of this heavier sizing/tapering of the case bodies, the shoulders get squeezed forward more. It follows that bumping them back then takes more force.

I find it WAY easier to take. .010-.013" off the top of a shellholder.
I always have a shaved #3 and #5 shellholder sitting by my press. I don't even like it when a press cams over.
Makes adjusting the die for hs quick and accurate if its not hitting the shellholder.

Seems to me it wasn't setting the shoulder back at all, not until I slightly and carefully shortened the die body. Then, it worked perfectly.

Just had never seen that before.

DF

I could have done that. Then, I'd have to keep that shell holder with that die set, meaning I'd have to buy others for general use.

To me, it was cheaper and easier to modify that die body and not the shell holder which is used for a number of .473" rim size rounds.

DF

Well....that's what you get for never buying any cheap lee dies and having extras coming out your ears....lol!
I'm just jealous....I can Bubba a shellholder...lathing a die is out of my tooling/knowledge realm!

It was Lyman, not Lee.

I didn't need a lathe, don't have one. I do have a very nice bench grinder, a Craftsman so old, it was made in the USA. Using the fine stone, I carefully ground the die base using the flat side of the wheel, carefully turning the die with light pressure, to retain a true 90* base. When I had removed enough material that fully sized cases would easily close in the rifle chamber, I then used 400 sand paper on a flat surface to polish the die base. It looks good and works great.

DF

He was just talking about all the extra Lees i have a pile of extra Lee shell holders as well. When I get in the same situation I'll mic a few and find one that allows a few thou more bump. When that doesn't work, it's time for more engineering...

My most recent issues were with two sets of RCBS in 257Wby and 270WSM.

Well...DF.....you done good w/what you had. Your method is how I do shellholders. Wouldn't a thunk it would work that well on a die bottom. The good thing about doing the shellholders is they now work w/ANY appropriate die. I think I got my oversupply of shellholders w/ my inventory of lee collet dies....who's mandrels usually need modifying too!

I've seen those Lee collections.

I prefer to have just a few shell holders and have the dies set up to work with them. Just seems like a simple approach, although the Lee collection works.

DF

have had to remove material from bottom several dies to move shoulder back.

Ed

Reduced shellholders is the way I go. Then just reset the other dies to work with the reduced shellholder.

Or keep that shellholder in the die box to use with that set of dies.

DF

That works too.

I am having the exact some problem with two of our custom 243s. You described exactly what I've been experiencing using redding FL dies/seater. What's the technique for grinding down the darn thing? How much?

Very thankful for having stumbled on this thread. Very frustrating to say the least.