Is precision reloads on a progressive press possible?

[iraiam]

Is precision reloads on a progressive press possible?

Absolutely, a progressive press uses the same process as a single stage, it's just faster. A proper set up is a must, but this is just as important on a single stage.

I take my ammunition very seriously and will put it up against any commercial round on the planet. I'll give a couple small examples, my Dillon 550 used to make a tiny mark on the primer when it was inserted into the primer pocket. I manufactured my own stud that seats the primer to avoid this mark.

When setting up I'll weigh 10 consecutive charges, ex. 25.4 grains X10 = 254 grains, this is my final adjustment for powder, I get within the tolerance of my scale over 10 charges (.001 grain). It takes very small adjustments to get this dialed in.

[Eppie]

It seems that many precision reloaders use Dillon progressive presses. A friend loaned me a David Tubb precision reloading video and guess what he uses?

[4runnerman]

IMHO--not happening.

[reynolds357]

It is ironic how this thread has evolved. It started as "are precision reloads possible on a progressive press?". It has evolved into "are good reloads possible on a progressive press?". I guess it all depends on how one chooses to define "precision." To me, "precision"in a rifle cartridge is a load you can take to the bench rest match and place with. Sub minute is not precision, its possibly "Factory equal." There is some factory ammo turned out that is better than sub moa.

[iraiam]

It is ironic how this thread has evolved. It started as "are precision reloads possible on a progressive press?". It has evolved into "are good reloads possible on a progressive press?". I guess it all depends on how one chooses to define "precision." To me, "precision"in a rifle cartridge is a load you can take to the bench rest match and place with. Sub minute is not precision, its possibly "Factory equal." There is some factory ammo turned out that is better than sub moa.

You are correct, but I submit that making a match capable sub-moa round has very little to do with what kind of press it was loaded on.

I regularly load match capable ammo on a progressive press, but there is much more work and prep that goes into these rounds that has absolutely nothing to do with a loading press.

For example, When I load my 5.56 match recipe, the brass is already FL sized, trimmed, sorted...etc. I use a custom die that only sizes the neck which gives me the neck tension I want. I also use a custom insert for my seating die that I made to fit the ogive of the bullet perfectly so it doesn't leave any mark on the jacket. So lets talk precision shall we?

[tobnpr]

Here's my take, because I do (or try to..) exactly that.

I went with the LNL AP from the git-go for my first machine as I was handloading not just for myself, but my two sons as well. 300-400 centerfire rounds for each range outing. Wasn't going to happen on anything but a progressive if I were to keep my sanity (or have a life outside the reloading bench).

Within a year of shooting at 100-200 it got boring, better words would be we wanted the challenge of long-range so began making the trek nearly two hours each way to shoot up to 1K yards. Still- the same facts remained. 300+ rounds, but now reloading precision really matters.

As others have stated, the processes- with the exception of the powder drop- are the same.

What I REALLY liked about the AP when I started- and what sets it apart from the "blue"- is the absolute ease in using it as a single-stage press. You can load one case, run it around the press taking it out easily at each stage because of the spring-loaded shellplate to check if you want.

It's critical to have the press mounted on as sturdy a bench as you can to absolutely minimize vibration. The powder drop meters by volume, not weight- and as mentioned, extruded stick powders meter far worse than ball. Natch, many of us use Varget and H4350 so this doesn't help.

But if you have the press solidly mounted so that the powder drop doesn't shake around when running the press handle, the metering will be much more consistent than if it's mounted on a shaky tabletop bouncing around.

I'm considering rigging up an arrangement whereby I can use an electronic dispenser to meter charges into the case in lieu of the powder drop at that station to tighten up the variance in charges.

But at the end of the day, I've found that a couple of tenths of a grain variation in a 45 grain charge doesn't make for a very significant velocity spread through a chrono.

At 1000 yards, the wind is SO much more a factor, than a tiny bit of vertical spread. Not saying it doesn't matter, just saying that I think a lot of us more "amateurish" LR guys overthink and worry about more than we need to when gaining experience.

I feel I'm far better served getting 100 rounds downrange- albeit that they may be a tiny bit less "precise"- to get the experience doping than 25 rounds that are precise to a gnat's azz....

[Eppie]

I regularly load match capable ammo on a progressive press, but there is much more work and prep that goes into these rounds that has absolutely nothing to do with a loading press.

iraiam, I understand where you're coming from, and I think we all agree, that case prep is essential to precision reloads. However, like my geometry teacher used say "I line can be broken in infinite places." The same applies to precision reloading. Every step builds on the previous step, so each step affects the final result.

But to say that the result has nothing to do with the press is inaccurate. Actually my tentative conclusion from this thread is that I may have the wrong press. As I discovered with the Hornady Case Prep Center, it is a good tool but not a precision tool. I suspect that my Lock n Load AP press is a good press, but not a precision one. I'm not sure how to test and measure that hypothesis, but I'm going think about it.

tobnpr I'm with you a 100%. I am committed to make it work on progressive press. Single stage is not for me.
Thank you all for sharing your experience and knowledge.

[wogpotter]

I'm not sure how to test and measure that hypothesis, but I'm going think about it.

Here's how I tested before deciding, maybe this will help you to decide.

Make a lot of at least 20 rounds of your "best match grade" reloads on your preferred single stage press. Call them lot "A".

Make a lot of the same head count using the same techniques, but modified for the operation of the preferred progressive press. Call them lot "B"

Keep materials & load density the same for both lots to eliminate all but technique & equipment as variables.

Shoot for group with 3X5-round groups, preferably at 200yds or more so you can really evaluate the performance. Average the groups for a real set of data. Compare the group size & shape from "A" with "B". Which (if either) is better overall?

Run the remaining 5 from each group over a chronograph so you can get variability information to compare as well.

Then you have actual hard data not just opinions.

[4runnerman]

^^^^^^^^^^ what he said

[F. Guffey]

And then? and then? Along came John. Who verifies? A shooter/reloader got so upset he scorned the day he purchases his Dillon 550B, he could not pull the trigger on his Model 66 S&W, he could not pull the hammer back and! he could not rotate the cylinder, then there was that thing about the cylinder that would not allow him to swing the cylinder out. We cleared the barrel by driving the bullet back into the case, after clearing his barrel he assumed he was going to continue shooting like nothing had happened, ‘VERIFY!” he was not a fan, he was an assumer. We offered him all the ammo he could shoot, we offered to help him with his reloading, we offered to bring our scales then he began to scorn his decision to go to the range and pick a shooting table between a very disciplined reloader and me.

Precision reloading on a progressive press. No one measures the weight of the bullets, all of them, no one measures the weight of the cases, all of them, then there is the powder, every charge. Let us not forget the primer, it takes up space and has weight, so it matters.

After loading 250 rounds of precision reloads on a progressive press, how would a reloader know if the reloads were ‘precision’, no one measures before and again after, it is assumed the reloads were precision, had the reloader weighed the components and all the components weighed the same the reloader could weigh the finish product to determine if all the finished rounds were loaded with precession. If one round differs in weight the reloader can pull the one round apart to determine what component caused the anomaly.

So, I can not answer the question, I do not know now many bad habits the reloader exhibits when reloading, I know it is possible to determine if the ammo loaded on a progressive press is precision.

F. Guffey

[Bart B.]

Wogpotter, the accuracy of each 20-round set of ammo would be much better assesed by shooting all 20 into one group for each set.

If you're comparing accuracy, forget about muzzle velocity.

[iraiam]

Actually my tentative conclusion from this thread is that I may have the wrong press. As I discovered with the Hornady Case Prep Center, it is a good tool but not a precision tool. I suspect that my Lock n Load AP press is a good press, but not a precision one. I'm not sure how to test and measure that hypothesis, but I'm going think about it.

I can't really speak for that press the Dillon is the only progressive I have ever had.

Precision reloading on a progressive press. No one measures the weight of the bullets, all of them, no one measures the weight of the cases, all of them, then there is the powder, every charge.

Not so, I do sort cases and bullets by weight, if it's a powder that doesn't meter well, I have the ability to pre-weigh up to 50 charge lots, but most of the powders I use meter very well, I can throw charges all day long that are within the tolerance of any of my scales, and have verified this countless times.

I do weigh the final rounds, any that are abnormal get disassembled, but those are usually very few, because I weigh and sort all components before hand.

It's just a matter of how precise one wants to get, just because it's a progressive press doesn't mean you have to just throw components at it and slap ammunition together.

[wogpotter]

its possibly "Factory equal."

Not really. I tested the "accuracy loads of mine against a premium factory brand that used the same bullet. My group sizes were about 1/2 of the factories. Then I compared variation shot-to-shot & mine were coinciderably lower at 15, Vs the premium factorey's spread of almost 47.

What velocity? I said:

variability information

Precision reloading on a progressive press. No one measures the weight of the bullets, all of them, no one measures the weight of the cases, all of them,

You sure?
That's another preperation step independant of the press.

brand	weight	volume	average	min	max	range	
S&B	183.7	57.1	180.62	166.3	184.6	18.3	case
S&B	184	56.3					
S&B	184.6	56.8					
S&B	184.5	53.2					
S&B	166.3	56.5	55.98	53.2	57.1	3.9	volume
							
PPU	181	55.6	182.38	180.3	184.4	4.1	case
PPU	183.1	56.5					
PPU	184.4	56.1					
PPU	183.1	56.1					
PPU	180.3	53.4	55.54	53.4	56.5	3.1	volume
							
DIFFERENCES							
CASE WEIGHT							
-1.76							
			
VOL (H2o)			
0.44

or theres this:

.303 British. Custom Vs. Std load cases			
	custom loaded.		
	WEIGHT		runout
1	392.7		0.0030
2	392.5		0.0030
3	392.3		0.0020
4	392.9		0.0020
5	392.7		0.0010
6	392.8		0.0025
7	392.7		0.0010
8	392.8		0.0020
9	392.5		0.0015
10	392.7		0.0030
AVERAGE=	392.7		0.0021
			
	bulk loaded.		
	WEIGHT		runout
1	392.5		0.0045
2	392.8		0.0030
3	392.7		0.0040
4	390.5		0.0040
5	393.2		0.0030
6	393.0		0.0020
7	392.1		0.0030
8	390.1		0.0020
9	393.0		0.0045
10	390.9		0.0040
AVERAGE=	392.1		0.0034

Again its technique here, not equipment. Look at these data sets:

											
			BULLET								
CALIBER	CASE	PRIMER	Mfr.		TYPE	Gr.	POWDER		GRAINS		NOTES
.303 Brit	PPU	cci 200	Hornady		FMJBT	174	3031		35.5		Development from earlier 34.0Gr. Load. Aiming for 2250FPS
DATE	STRING	SHOT	VEL.	LOW	HIGH	AVG.	E.S.	S.D.	A.D.	GROUP	
03/20/10	1	1	2237	2181	2238	2217	57	20.6	16.0	1.5" (5)	
03/20/10	1	2	2229	NOTES							
03/20/10	1	3	2181	These are the "match" loads. Primer pockets uniformed, flash holes reamed, cases & bullets weight matched, Powder trickled.							
03/20/10	1	4	2183								
03/20/10	1	5	2208								
03/20/10	1	6	2223								
03/20/10	1	7	2238								
03/20/10	1	8	2223								
03/20/10	1	9	2221								
03/20/10	1	10	2234								

											
			BULLET								
CALIBER	CASE	PRIMER	Mfr.		TYPE	Gr.	POWDER		GRAINS		NOTES
.303 Brit	PPU	cci 200	Hornady		FMJBT	174	3031		35.5		Development from earlier 34.0Gr. Load. Aiming for 2250FPS
DATE	STRING	SHOT	VEL.	LOW	HIGH	AVG.	E.S.	S.D.	A.D.	GROUP	
03/20/10	1	1	2186	36	2267	2219	81	29.7	23.3	5" (5)	
03/20/10	1	2	2235	NOTES							
03/20/10	1	3	2190	These are the "Standard" loads. Batch loaded on Dillon. Misc cases, misc bullets, primer pockets cleaned only, charges dropped from measure.							
03/20/10	1	4	2213								
03/20/10	1	5	2212								
03/20/10	1	6	2186								
03/20/10	1	7	2213								
03/20/10	1	8	2217								
03/20/10	1	9	2226								
03/20/10	1	10	2266

The variable here was operator technique, all else was the same.

[BuckRub]

NO, close but no cigar !

[jmorris]

I think I see the problem with this thread, what do you mean when you say "precision"?

If MOA or better @ 100 yds = precision, then yes progressives do that all of the time.

If precision means you need a scrolling paper behind the target so you can tell how many bullets went through the same hole, they might not be the best choice.

[Bart B.]

Mr. Morris, you put all the right words in the right order. Bless you.

[Jim243]

But since my goal is long range, I can't help but wonder, is it the right tool?

There are so many factors involved in long range shooting, I am not sure that your question can be actually answered. Weather, barrel length, trigger pull weight, scopes, amount of wind, etc... Reloading is only one of the factors involved with this sport.

The objective is to remove all variables involved with the ammo so that you can concentrate on the shooting aspect. Will a progressive press do this, that will depend on the press, it's age, it's condition and the amount of play in the shell holder. Seating the bullet to the exact same OAL will make a large difference in the rounds going into the production of small groups at long range.

Can it be done, yes. Should you do it, I personally don't think so. But that is just a personal opinion. For rifle rounds, I use a single stage RCBS Rockchucker for loading. Since full length resizing is only ONE step in preparation of the case before trimming, doing the neck, cleaning the flash hole, tumbling the lube off the case and then another inspection, it makes no sense to use a progressive press just to prime, powder and seat the bullet.

To insure that each bullet will leave the barrel at exactly the same point in time of the muzzle whip, the powder charge must be EXACTLY the same. While there are some very good powder measures out there, I do not have the confidence that EACH round will be within less than 1/10 of a grain of powder with them. (it can be done.) So I use a RCBS ChargeMaster and each charge of powder is measured and weighed EXACTLY as the next.

When I am finished reloading, I can go to the range and KNOW that each round is EXACTLY the same as the next one. Now all I have to do is make sure that I can do my job on putting the bullet on target and not have to worry as to the quality of my ammunition.

So i would say, no, get yourself a single stage press just for producing these types of rounds.

Just a personal opinion.
Jim

[Jimro]

For High Power competition, a progressive reloader is not unusual, and single stage press reloaders usually envy the progressive reloader owners.

High power shooters get to use a sling and a shooting coat, so the accuracy of the ammunition/rifle combination needs to hold tighter than the shooter. Most shooters are 2 MOA at best (world class shooters are better) using the square formula, 1 MOA ammo plus a 2 MOA shooter gives us around 2.234 MOA of expected accuracy, which is well within the 10 ring of a High Power target. High power shooters get better faster by becoming better shooters, not making better ammo.

For benchrest, not so much, as the group sizes are expected to be less than the caliber diameter at short distances.

Jimro

[Bart B.]

Most shooters are 2 MOA at best (world class shooters are better) using the square formula, 1 MOA ammo plus a 2 MOA shooter gives us around 2.234 MOA of expected accuracy, which is well within the 10 ring of a High Power target.

Note that "expected accuracy" is the average attained; not the worst nor best.

The NRA high power target's 10 ring subtends.....

3.50 MOA at 200 yards; used for slow fire standing and rapid fire sitting.

2.33 MOA at 300 yards; used for rapid fire prone.

2.00 MOA at 600 and 1000 yards; used for slow fire prone.

To shoot match winning and record setting scores in high power match rifle competition, your stuff has to shoot just as accurate as benchrest rifles at the same ranges. That's 1/4 MOA at 100 yards, 1/3 MOA at 300, 1/2 at 600 and 3/4 at 1000. The best high power match rifles and ammo that are used to win matches and set records shoot that well. But nobody handholding a rifle in any way against their shoulder without artificial support will do that.

[wogpotter]

The point has been brought up (privately) of slight discrepencies in obtained data.

Thats great, but on-one else has commented on (or maybe noticed) the differences.

This leads me to wonder who else has actually posted hard data, or actually reviewed the data, as opposed to stating an opinion. It also begs the question who else has actually read the data?

There is a discrepancy. It is real. Its something other than shooting (directly) related & there's a couple of us working on what exactly it is. If you push the exact same data set into a computer & get 2 (slightly) differing answers from 2 different software packages there's an immediate concern, who is getting GIGO & who isn't?

Just something to think about.

[Unclenick]

One bit of trivia is that the Highpower targets are sized for a true 30 caliber (0.3") bullet. If you start splitting decimal places you have the MR-1 (600 yard) 10-ring at 12" (1.91 moa) and the X-ring at 6 inches (0.955 moa). But because the scoring counts a scratched scoring ring, you actually have half a bullet diameter all around each scoring ring for the center of your bullet to impact, or a POI area one additional bullet diameter to that of each scoring ring. So, if you are shooting a true .30 caliber bullet at 600 yards, you actually have to hit a point of impact that is a 12.3" (1.96 moa) circle to score a 10, and one that is 6.3" (1.00 moa) to score an X.

When you then look at reduced targets, knowing a 0.3 inch bullet was the design criteria, you see how they arrived at the reduced scoring ring sizes. The 100 yard MR-31 has a 1.75" (1.67 moa) 10-ring and a 0.75" (0.716 moa) X-ring, which might leave you scratching your head until you remembered to add the 0.3" bullet diameter to each. This gives you a 10-ring that's 2.05" (1.96 moa) and a X-ring that's 1.05" (1.00 moa), same moa's as on the MR-1. So it's a .30 caliber match to the 600 yard target in POI moa, even though wind and other drift contributions increase over each additional 100 yards of bullet flight, making the 600 yard target harder to actually print the same score on. Think of the MR-31 as a hold and sight picture and trigger control trainer and a gun precision checker for the MR-1 target.

For the mouse gun using the MR-31, a 100 yard 10 has a 1.89 moa POI circle, and 100 yard X is a 0.93 moa POI circle, so it's probably a good thing the AR platform is easier to get mechanical accuracy from. At 600 yards the moa difference for the .224 is very small, being 1.95 moa and 0.99 moa for a 10 or an X, respectively.

To absolutely guarantee at least a tie, you'd have to hit all X's, and that's right about about 1 moa. Usually, folks can't do that. If they could, as started to happen with the V's in the old V targets (12" at 600, same as a MR-1 10-ring, IIRC), they'd make the scoring rings still smaller. Nonetheless, all X's is what you aim for in training. Better too much accuracy and precision than too little.

[iraiam]

I think I'm beyond caring about this thread, I can shoot my progressive press loaded ammo to 600 yards (22 cal), 1000 (30cal) yards with match capable accuracy, so I guess I'll leave it right there. The old saying, "the proof is in the pudding" comes to mind. Since the only person I aim to please is me, I'm out.

[reynolds357]

Iraiam, in my discussion of "precision", .223 Rem or 5.56 are not capable cartridges to enter the discussion.
6ppc, 6br, and .30br would be more discussion worthy.
I have custom dies for all of them. Custom F.L dies, Bushing neck dies, Custom body dies. I have a very nice progressive Hornaday press. It cant turn out the grade ammo my Redding single stage can. One major problem that is over looked in this discussion is that no progressive press that I am aware of can use the best designs of Bench rest seating die.

[Jim243]

I regularly load match capable ammo on a progressive press, but there is much more work and prep that goes into these rounds that has absolutely nothing to do with a loading press.

I suspect that my Lock n Load AP press is a good press, but not a precision one. I'm not sure how to test and measure that hypothesis, but I'm going think about it.

It's not the press, it is the process you use in making the ammo. You are the controlling factor. Loading match ammo is a mind set, the equipment are just tools.

Jim

[reynolds357]

Without the right tools, mindset is futile. I have a worn out lathe and a new lathe. With the same "mindset" I can turn out junk on one and precision on the other.