Which Press/reloading system?

[flashhole]

A couple more questions:
Will a good turret press make rifle ammo as precisely as a single stage press?
Will a turret press make good rifle ammo more quickly than a single stage?

I say yes on both counts but I will caveat my answer by saying you have to learn to use your equipment properly regardless of whose you buy. I have experience on two turret presses - my first one was the Redding Model 25 (6 stations on the turret), my second turret press is the Lee Classic Cast. Both are fine presses in thier own right but have different designs. Both made excellent quality ammo that was both accurate and repeatable.

Of the two I give the edge to the Lee for the simple reason I did not like the tilt-back design of the Redding. The newer T-7 Redding has on the market has gotten away from that design in favor of a perpendicular design which is a lot more to my liking. Another thing I like about the Lee that seems to be more a happenstance than a design feature is the turret has a bit of play in it and the self-aligning feature can make up for minor errors in die adjustment. The turret is also supported around its entire periphery as opposed to an opposing side brace. Not sure this is a big deal but I do see I get very consistent ammo regardless of the cartridge I load on the LCT. You should also be aware the Lee presses do not have a cam over feature like the Redding or RCBS presses. I'm on the fence with this feature because I like to adjust my dies for a full throw of the handle. The Lee has a hard mechanical stop on the linkage that prevents camming over. The Redding does not.

My single stage presses are two Redding Ultramags and one Lee Classic Cast. The ergonomics are very different and I like both but if had to only have one I would keep the Ultamag. Again, you need to learn the strengths and weaknesses of different designs.

[Kevin Rohrer]

A couple more questions:
1. Will a good turret press make rifle ammo as precisely as a single stage press?
2. Will a turret press make good rifle ammo more quickly than a single stage?

1. YES, if it is well designed and is rigid enough to do the job. For example, the old Lyman All-American is a very well made *aluminum* press that will full-length resize most cartridges w/o a problem. But even though it has one die station capable of taking a 50BMG die, I don't think it is up to the task. On the other hand, an all-steel Hollywood Senior Turret or Universal Turret will handle .50BMG quite nicely, provided it has a turret that has the larger size die holes. I have one of each of them, but they both have the normal 7/8x14 holes. If I loaded 50BMG, I'd have a new turret machined.

2. Theoretically, YES, but w/ a couple large caveats:

A. Depending on what type of turret you have. If you have a fixed 4-station C-H 'H' press, it will get confusing as to what needs to be done at each station before cranking the handle.

B. If you have a rotary turret like the Lyman AA or Hollywood Senior Turret, you might want to screw down the top knot and tighten/install the tie rod that adds rigidity to the turret. And if you are FL resizing 50BMG, "might want to" becomes a "must". This turns the turret into a single-station press.

Interestingly enough, the various model Hollywood Universals don't have tie rods but members reload 50BMG w/o a problem.

Lyman AA showing the rear-mounted tie rod:


C-H 444 semi-progressive, turret 'H' press:


Hollywood Senior (11.75" tall), Universal Turret (taller), and Universal Super Turret (really tall):


Hollywood Senior Turret (13.5" tall) showing the front-mounted tie rod:


Of these presses, only the all-steel C-H is still in production, although an unreliable and unscrupulous, one-man company in Ca. is allegedly still making Hollywood presses w/o permission from the patent-holder.

[Wag]

Originally Posted by Lost Sheep

Wag, I too, thought your post #19 referring to and agreeing with Rifleman1776's post #13 was a bit dismissive of the produces you deemed inadequate.

As you note below, I posted my thoughts based on my opinions. They aren't bigoted as was stated and I also didn't think they were necessarily "dismissive" though I'm not entirely sure what you meant by that. In spite of being accused of product bigotry, the point was valid that I didn't necessarily qualify my statements so I proceeded to do so. Not sure what else can be said from my perspective.

More commentary below.

Originally Posted by Lost Sheep

I read (or at least scanned) all your other posts, and you seem a reasonable guy who writes well-considered posts. Product bashing is not your typical style.

I appreciate the compliment and you're right, I don't typically bash products. . .

. . .unless. . .

. . .I have a bad experience with said products. For something like reloading equipment, I should expect it to last pretty much forever and with some products out there, it seems like that is the case.

To be candid, though, I have to admit that I never gave Lee a chance to replace or warranty repair the product. As for the powder measure problem, it's a design flaw, pure and simple. More below.....

Originally Posted by Lost Sheep

When I see unsupported dislike of any product, as a rule, I discount the opinions as prejudiced.

And you're right to do so. Which is why I proceeded to clarify in order to correct my error. More than happy to take constructive criticism from others.

Originally Posted by Lost Sheep

The wooden ball that came off your handle. Some people appreciate that it is easy to remove.

Replacing the ball would be one thing. Of course, that should be doable. However, it just fell off one day and there was/is no way to attach it permanently, short of epoxying it in place, I imagine. Using the press after that was an exercise in managing the attachment of the ball on each stroke!

Originally Posted by Lost Sheep

The powder measure. Lee makes three different ones. There "Perfect" measure, the Auto-Disk and the Auto-Disk Pro. The Pro model has an elastomer "wiper" that aids in making the measure less leaky and more accurate, but the drawback is that it wears out and must be replaced occasionally (I hear).

"Less" leaky? Do powder measures generally have a tendency to leak?

I don't recall which one I had. It came with the anniversary starter kit I bought for about $100 several years ago. It was all made of plastic or nylon and after a while, it just started dumping gobs of powder all over my bench. Messy at best. Dangerous at worst.

The RCBS powder measure I bought to replace it is made of metal components and still shows no signs of wear, regardless of the fact that it has done a whole lot more charges than the Lee ever did.

Originally Posted by Lost Sheep

I don't know why your scale is wavering.

That was a mystery to me as well. Still, I had to keep re-zeroing it in order to keep it on track. Very strange.

Originally Posted by Lost Sheep

Lee's "Perfect Powder Scale" is the soul of simplicity. It is super-sensitive and I did not think much of the one I had until I acquired another one in a trade that came with instructions, which I read. From your other posts, I opine that you have sufficient mechanical skills to figure out your scale. But I do like my RCBS 10-10 a lot better than the Lee.

My RCBS is far superior so far. It hasn't given me any issues as of yet except that I have to be careful not to breathe on it.

Originally Posted by Lost Sheep

While flashole's use of the phrase "bigoted a$$ who likes to spout" was a bit over the top, I am sure you can relate to the sentiment.

No, not really. It wasn't necessary. As I said, I can take a little criticism from time to time. Some people won't engage in such criticism with common decency and I suppose that's to be expected.

Originally Posted by Lost Sheep

The reason I am posting this (instead of just sending a private message) is to share with the forum membership my belief that most mechanical devices (in good repair) can be made to function as designed, and most designs put forth by press makers are decent designs. Lee, Hornady, RCBS, Dillon, Lyman, Forster and many others.

Manufacturers who don't have good designs, well-executed, don't stay in business long.

Since I haven't used every product Lee makes, I can't make an unqualified comment that ALL of their stuff is crap, however, I'm not taking any more chances with the experience I had.

To be fair, I do have a couple of products I still use which were made by Lee. If they fail, I'll replace them and write off the cost to personal education. It happens.

Right after I started loading, someone gave me an OLD (and I mean VERY old!) Lee 3-hole turret press. Shortly after the ball fell off the other one, I put this one into service and still use it. It's all metal. No plastic. No wood attachments. Just simplicity in design and function. (It may be missing a part 'cause it likes to pitch dead primers on the floor when resizing/decapping!) I like that crazy press, for what it's worth and I only use it as a single-stage press. I still have a couple of Lee die sets I originally bought that I still use. No problems to date with those.

I no longer use the Lee case trimmer sets I originally bought because they are the little hand-held trimmers. They worked fine for the most part. After I started loading many more rounds, I did buy a hand operated trimmer. But I bought an RCBS, just in case. Again, just not willing to take a chance on the Lee product.

People say they love Lee products and that's fine. I have no beef with that, necessarily. I told my experience as a way to give another dimension to the discussion, not to say that people who use Lee products are somehow demented.

To answer another question someone asked, "Did it make good ammo?"

No. *I* made good ammo using that Lee equipment. However, it was eventually enough of a pain that I had to replace the Lee equipment which then made it *easier* to make equally good ammo.

So, that's basically my defense of my position. It's true that my initial post should have included my reasons but, as you noted, I put them up when asked, albeit rudely. In the future, I'll include qualifications for such opinions in the initial reply.

Fair enough?



--Wag--