Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters What the blankety blank is RCBS Thinking? 17 Fireball Seating Die With Crimp???

Ted,

The ram doesn't just lightly touch the die at the top of it's stroke. It is jammed up against the bottom of the die which is, presumably, held firmly in place in the top of the very rigid press. That is well below the top of the stroke and therefore you will achieve much better consistency in seating depth than counting on the top of the stroke of the ram to be consistent in height.

It's a method of eliminating the ram as a controlling agent in seating depth. Rams on loading presses are designed for strengh and rigidity and proper leverage. They aren't designed to produce constant seating depths and are a poor tool for that.

$bob$

LDHunter, good try at insulting me but it was wasted words. It was not just my questions it was all that were asked by other posters. Your last post to Rocky was your second attempt and you still haven't completely answered his question. If you will go back and read all the posts, I realize it may be too much for your busy schedule, you should be able to get a grip on what has been asked. I really don't care if you answer my former questions or not. You have provided enough of an answer to your technique for me to know your complaint about the lack of consistency of the seating die is not based on a good measuring system. Guess you never mastered the comparator and rely on one of the least accurate methods to base your knowledge.
You live in a dream world if you expect folks to accept that kind of theory.Rick.

No flaming here, LD. I'm honestly interested in your claims.

It seems to me that measuring to the bullet tip is flawed, because the tip dimensions (from bore-diameter on the ogive to the physical tip) varies much more than the distance from the cartridge base to the ogive diameter ring on the bullet (which is what a comparator is supposed to measure).

So, if the base to ogive ring distance didn't vary much (I think that's what you were saying) then the true seating depth -and thus bullet to lands distance- wasn't varying much, either.

All this interest on my part because I've written about what I think is the best way to set proper seating depth. If the press does in fact have a degree of control on that beyond the die setting, then I'm curious. From what you've written so far, I can see where there MIGHT be a valid concern related to ram stroke travel. I'll think further on it, but I'm beginning to comprehend what you're saying - and it just might be at least partly correct.

I'm thinking that the resistance of the bullet being pushed into the cartridge itself is in effect a "stop", taking out any play in the machanism, unless the press has consisderable wear to it.

As far as ogive to base measurements even the veneraable Siearra Match King has been proven to have varience from lot ot lot.

Custom bullets, as they generally are held to closer standard and it certain cases made from the same die, from one of the makers of BR bullets may prove my theory wrong but I don't think so.

If there can be any useful purpose to any of the internet squabble, perhaps getting off one's theorizing behind and seeing might be it.

Anyway, in the interest of seeing for myself whether one can measure or not, I went and open my last batch of ammo, some 218 stuff to measure OAL and see if my usual technique - which works well enough for me (not a paper puncher) has holes in it. Now I know I did fiddle with the die just a bit during the processing of that small batch (to make sure I got those little 40 grain boattails inside the case far enough so I won't find powder in my pockets.) Anyway, using the ram-all-the-way-up technique, I had three distinct, but spot on OAL measurements (to the single one thousandth) using a dial caliper (from MidwayCHINA).

Not knowing for sure why they varied and by three distinct amounts, I made up a few more rounds using the same Lee die that was in the RCBS Partner press. Half (5/10) came out within one /one-thousandth of each other. The others were off by a few thousandths more one way or the other.

Well, what about those bullets? I measured a small sample: ten. They were all within one/one-thousandth in OAL (40 V-Max.

Okay, let's give the suggested shellholder to die method a try. I screwed the die down with a loaded case in the press. (Typically I set the seating die less than a tenth of and inch from the shellholder so I didn't have far to go.) I barely started before hitting the case shoulder with the die - and the die was still a considerable distance from the shellholder.

I'm with you Rocky.
I just measure a few Berger 6mm 68gr hp- PN#24011,lot # 0006670.

base to tip 1. .842.....base to ogive .377
2. .847.....base to ogive .377
3. .846.....base t0 ogive .378
4. .850.....base to ogive .377
5. ..849...................378

The old beater Rockchucker doesn't know it won't work with the Redding seater.

Over all length don't tell a man much but I'll agree it is easy.

Mike

If you set it below the top of the stroke, then it doesn't matter if the press can cam over at the top of it's stroke. So much BS.Rick.

Rocky,

That wasn't me that mentioned flaming... Somebody else.

I have the ultimate respect for you and your opinions and experience. I've been a fan of yours for YEARS and have read a BUNCH of your articles.

You might notice that I didn't defend my selection of the bullet tip rather than the ogive. I preferred expediency to ogive measurments since they seemed to be so close anyway.

Remember that I didn't invent all this stuff myself. Call some of the people I've called. Spend a few years on the benchrest lists and forums. That's where I got most of the ideas and most of what I actually experienced was what I'd already read about.

Redding, Forester, Wilson, etal. make a small fortune selling micrometer controlled seating dies. There must be a reason for that other than crazy $bob$ and his wacky ideas... <silly grin>

I finally settled on seating my bullets back about .010 from the lands on my long range varmint rifles and those that I like to fiddle with at the range and that have a chance of actually appreciating my extra efforts to uniform my seating depths on.

Some rifles like the bullets closer to the lands some further but being .010" from the lands can pretty much compensate for poorly aligned chambers, run out and other maladies and vagarities of pressure resulting from being too close to the lands but not uniformly so seem to be minimzed.

Hunting bullets often are seated either .030" from the lands or to slightly less than magazine length whichever is shorter. Then small variations in seating depths are largely insignificant.

It's certainly not a do all end all but it's worked for me.

I sure hope that Smith fella is happy now... <snicker>

$bob$

(For all the rest of you, LD and I spoke at length on the phone today. Here's yet another wrinkle in the flags we're all waving...)

How often have you seated bullets and noted a bright ring -or even a small sharp groove!- left in the bullet by the lip of the bullet seater stem? That's prima facie evidence that the seater stem is gripping the bullet to some degree. So what's happening when the press ram reaches top center, goes past it a fraction and then come back across top center as you lower the loaded round out of the die? Is it possible that the bullet (gripped by that pesky stem) is getting the double shuffle - getting ever so slightly pulled back OUT of its seating depth not once but TWICE? Could that explain inconsistent seating depth happening on SOME press/die combos. I think just maybe it might.

Stopping the ram at a point shy of TDC by virtue of hitting the shellholder against the die just MIGHT eliminate exactly half of that double shuffle. Yes, a single shuffle isn't good, but surely the double shuffle is twice as bad. So maybe, just maybe, ldhunter has a valid point.

Pushing the bullet INTO the case a precisely measured amount is good. But if there's any tendency for the stem to pull the bullet back OUT again -with little or no pattern or consistency- then the most precise seating die/press/shellholder system is compromised a bit. No?

In the immortal words of Bugs Bunny: What an embezzle

FWIW - Redding competition seaters state that you must not bump the ram against the die, as to do so could damage the die. <sarcasm> And we all know that Redding makes crap </sarcasm>

Regards,
Scott

The Remington Fireball ammo I have seen is crimped; the pictures of it in the magazines clearly show what appears to be a 4 point crimp. I am sure Remington did not add any operations that increased cost with out providing some value. My guess is consistent bullet pull to optimize the new powder they are using. The results speak for themselves - they shoot great. I also doubt that RCBS put any extra cost (controlling that characteristic would be a timely machine set-up and sensitive to tool wear) so they are providing what is best for the round as intended by the 'new' caliber's manufacturer which is intended for the masses and not a bunch of anal gun nuts like us. And I say that with pride :-)

I have checked hundreds of bullets (mostly 17 cal, some .223, and some .8mm) and depending on their manufacturer (Barnes TSX, Hornady, Berger, Woodchuck Den, Combined Tech �Nosler- and Sierra) and style (HPFB, VMax, HPBT, and SP) the base to tip ALWAYS varies at least .003 - .015, avg .005 which is significantly more than the ogive to base (.000 - .003 avg .002) as measured with a Stoney Point (or now Hornady) comparator. Sinclair�s is best - it is stainless steel instead of aluminum.

I have also measured hundreds of assembled 17 MachIV�s using both Redding and RCBS dies. They do not crimp, but they were intended for wildcatters. The variation between seated bullets (.002 - .006 avg .003), using the Stoney Point, is slightly more than the variation between the base and ogive, but never near the variation from base to tip. Measuring to the tip just does not work.

On every set of seating dies used and tried (which included a LEE) on any cartridge I have loaded (17, .223, 8mm) I found the seater does not hit the ogive but finds another diameter much further toward the tip. The geometry variation is what causes the additional seating variation. I have not yet tried meplat uniforming which should reduce the variation from ogive to tip depending on how accurately the tool locates on the bullet.

Our favorite load for this is a 20gr Hornady VMax over 16.6gr of H4198 that is giving 4100+fps with no perceivable recoil at all. Terminal ballistics seems better than the 25gr. No exit wounds and anchors them (skunks, feral felines, raccoons, opossums and crows) every time so far. I haven�t tried it on coyotes yet, I think it is too small for anything except a perfect boiler room or head shot on game that large. RCBS.Load says the round has a point blank range on a 1 inch target of 200yds with minimal wind influence up to that range. I love it, hold on and squeeze.

But as was wisely said numerous times in this post and others, God bless those who are good enough to see the difference. I do it just to remind myself that is the shooter, and not the equipment, making those targets look like they were hit with a shotgun.

.

Ricksmith's system has worked for me for fifty years. The cam over type RCBS press stays with in .002 or .003 in seating depth. You cannot see any noteable improvement in accuracy with more accurate seating depth in anything less than unlimited class benchrest. I shoot heavy varmint class benchrest, a few thousandths makes no difference in those rifles, so why does it make such a big thing in the average rifle?

It sounds like LDHunter is on Lee's payrole.

.

Rocky, if the bottom of the die is below the top of the ram's stroke as indicated by LDHunter then there is no cam over. Therefore, not going pass that position twice. I have seen the bright ring you speak of and have polished the inside of the seating stem to eliminate the ring. There are often several ways to eliminate possible problems and often easy to find if a little common sense is applied. Several posters indicated that they were not having the seating problem. If measurements are not taken in as precise a manner as possible then we are debating a moot point. Interesting speculation about the camover and seating stem but not really a problem.Rick.

If a seating stem is doing it one time per cycle, I would say that is 100% too much if one is seeking the finest precision and accuracy. That problem alone is far worse than the errors one will find in a "cam over" type press set-up. Besides, with a floating seating stem like Lee (or Hornady) it will only happen when the ram is significantly withdrawn, not on cam-over. I have felt a bullet stick in the seating stem from time to time and it seems to be related to bullets which fit the seating stem a certain "wrong" way; that and too much seating pressure is involved for some reason. Any of those conditions will be more deleterious to consistent and precise loading than using a method in which the ram simply stops at (or over) the naturally occurring top of the stroke.

In looking at various loading tool manufacturer's recommemdations on the use of the dies and presses (including Lee), I see nothing suggesting the use of the die base as the seating length guide. One set of Lee instructions says to screw the die into the press with an empty case extended fully into the press. When the die contacts the mouth of the case, then back the die off one-half turn, assuming no crimp is desired. Hornady says as little as three die threads are adequate for crimping. Sierra does suggest that a person might "square" any die in the press for greater precision by using a machined washer as opposed to a common stamped mild steel washer. This is accomplished by installing the die, then lowering the ran slightly and placing the washer between the shellholder and the die so that the ram will place pressure against the die to, presumably, hold it square with the ram while the locking nut is secured against the press. I would assume it might help to ditch the neoprene ring that comes on a Lee die when using this method. Hornady and RCBS both sell die locking rings which can replace it.

Oh man... After forty years of fat and happy handloading I find out that: 1. The ram on my old Pacific press doesn't hit TDC with enough consistency to load accurate ammunition 2. Backing off my RCBS dies so they don't crimp gives me too much variation in seating depth for accuracy and may even be causing dangerous pressure fluxuations on the calibers I seat close to the lands. Has anybody considered how inconsistencies in base-to-ogive (or base-to-tip, depending on where your seating depth is controlled from) dimensions affect actual, working case capacity? This may be another factor giving us inconsistent results.

LOL... You guys are too much... LOL...

http://www.redding-reloading.com/techlinepages/seatingdepth.htm

$bob$

Vince,

Almost all factory ammo is crimped, even for rifles. This is to prevent bullets being pushed deeper into cases by rough handling or pulled out by recoil. Factory ammo must be made for "the masses".

Another reason is that factory ammo is cranked out in volume that would stagger our imaginations and they simply can't afford the manpower to provide the kind of quality control the handloader can muster. With a "factory crimp" they can easily control this.

Despite some people's opinions I don't have any affiliation with Lee and own Redding dies as well for most of my rifles I expect serious accuracy out of.

It appears that some people here have their pride hooked and are yelling so loud to defend what they're "always known" that they can't hear what others are saying because they're afraid they'll learn something new. <grin>

There have been some great ideas and observations born in this thread but there has also been a bunch of "denial" going on.

I could post a bunch of technical info to support my "theories" but then I might destroy the fun I've been having on the sidelines watching some people defend the way they've always done things.

$bob$

LDHunter, Good info from Redding. You really need to read it. You might notice in the first paragraph that it suggest measuring with a comparator and not OAL. Also it says you may adjust the ram to "lightly" touch the bottom of the seating die not be jammed tight against the bottom.
You think some of the posters fail to grab your "idea" and run with it as the save all of seating depth consistancy. We are not open to new thoughts. Has it occured to you that road runs both ways? Just maybe we have found inconsistancies and developed a better way to solve the problem. You should contact all the die manufacturers and share your knowledge with them. They may come out with a whole new set of dies and name them after you. Strange that no one else here seems to have the problem you do.Rick.

You stated in an earlier post that you are 56, that is when my memory started to fade also.

rick,

Post for me where I said that using tip measurements was the best way. How about a quote? If you bother to go find that quote you'll find that I said I selected measuring from the tip for the sake of expediency and acknowledged that using a comparator <sp?> was the better technique.

Also... Did I say jam it hard? Jam is an expression that handloaders use to indicate making something touch something else. Like "jamming a bullet into the lands". That doesn't mean to get out the hammer or lean into the press handle hard. If you'd been in this game very long you'd already know that.

You seem intent on discrediting what people say but you can't get your facts straight.

As far as nobody else having "the problem I do" try going to benchrest central where the accuracy guys hang out. You might find out that some of these ideas that I've brought here came from guys that have won some pretty impressive matches. Try calling around and actually taling to ballisticians that develop loads for a living. I've done this many times and am on a first name basis with many of them.

I'm sure that I could post links to what ballisticians and benchrest champions have been saying for years and there will be a certain number of people that will be quick to dismiss what they say. That's the nature of the internet and the "high blood pressure types" that argue incessantly to support their beliefs, and I'm used to it so I now find it amusing and rarely argue with them anymore.

Have a nice day....

$bob$