Accuracy Potential: Lee Turret vs Single Stage

[Brian Pfleuger]

I've been loading 3 different rifle cartridges on my Lee Classic turret. 7mm-08, 204Ruger and .22-250. All three have achieved approximately 1/2 MOA accuracy with no particular effort on my part. I have used 3 different powders and at least 5 different bullets. All have produced sub-MOA accuracy in all instances in all guns.

Yet, I keep seeing statements like this:

It really depends on your needs. If you need a couple hundred rounds at one setting, then a turret will get you there. If you need 500 or better rounds per hour then you need a progressive. I have all three. {This would be single stage, turret and progressive} and use them all.My rifle stuff is all done on a single stage as I'm a bit of a accuracy nut when it comes to my rifles.

I started with a Lee Clasic Turret press 7 years ago and then went to a RCBS Rock Chucker for loading rifle. I too am an accruacy nut on rifle loads.

These are but samples of the statements, I am not meaning to pick out the actual authors of these two particular statements.

So, the question is, does a single stage really offer some level of accuracy potential over a Lee turret and, if so, at what level?

It seems unlikely to me that all of my first efforts would produce 1/2 MOA ammo but I would be unable to produce anything better. Next year, I will be crafting some truly customized ammo and I will see for sure what the limits are.

In the meantime, I wonder if anyone has shown conclusively that they are able to produce more accurate ammo on a single stage than on a turret, using otherwise identical equipment.

In case anyone thinks it matters, my setup is as follows:

Station One: Lee Collet Neck Die

Station Two: Redding Body/Shoulder Bump Die (almost never used)

Station Three: Charging (weighing is done on an RCBS ChargeMaster Combo)

Station Four: Seating

Case prep includes tumbling, trimming, debur/chamfer and primer pocket cleaning.

[Sevens]

Accuracy in your loads is going to come down to about a zillion different things... I think we can all agree.

If it's simply comparing press to press and stripping away the 59,999,996 other items that affect "accuracy" and ONLY sticking to comparing the presses, then any turret press at it's most basic has more moving parts and thus more chance for "give" or error or flex somewhere.

Enough to make a difference? I don't think so. But the kind of folks who compete at long range and bench rest competitions could probably address this question much better.

[rwilson452]

It's not that the press is that much more accurate. It is the other things that are done that get you from the .5 MOA down to .25 MOA or better. At that level you gain no speed advantage with a turret. When you do things like every case is trimmed and such all charges are trickle charged. Basically, you do every thing you can to make each round exactly like every other round.

[Brian Pfleuger]

It is the other things that are done that get you from the .5 MOA down to .25 MOA or better.

Speaking in terms of the average shooter with average off-the-shelf equipment, I've got to believe that the rifle and skill set are (far) more likely to limit your group size than the press.

Frankly, I was surprised that all my guns will shoot 1/2 MOA. Even my 15" Encore will do it.

Now that I know they will, I find it likely that they will do even better with a bit of tuning but they've got to be close to their limit. I mean, if I could shoot 1/4 MOA with a $400 Ruger M77 MkII then what would be the reasoning behind these multi-$1000 target rifles?

My assertion, admittedly unproven, is that short of a custom-made and tuned long range target gun and a shooter that can use it the choice of press makes an indistinguishable difference in accuracy.

[spacecoast]

Frankly, I was surprised that all my guns will shoot 1/2 MOA. Even my 15" Encore will do it.

Just curious, and not trying to divert the thread, but do you use a vibration damper on any of your rifles? If so, how much of a difference do you think it makes?

[Brian Pfleuger]

Just curious, and not trying to divert the thread, but do you use a vibration damper on any of your rifles? If so, how much of a difference do you think it makes?

Nope, one of them is a Ruger M77 in 204Ruger with a Jard Trigger, an Encore Pro Hunter in 7mm-08 with a EaBCo trigger job and a Remington 700 in .22-250 with a Timney trigger (not my gun actually, but I load for it). All parts except the triggers are bone stock on all guns.

Incidentally, they have scopes ranging from $175 to about $600 and there is no discernible difference in reliability or accuracy.

[wncchester]

It's clear that of all the things involved in producing accurate ammunition the press is one of the least, if not THE least, factor. I've been amused for years reading claims of one lofty group sneering against another for what press is "more accurate." Nonsense.

That said, I am a precision rifle shooting nut who only shoots small quanities of handgun ammo. I use a single station press because it suits my style, not because it is automatically more accurate. I don't even like to mention what press I use, nor dies either unless it's relivant, because my brand of press is my own choice and has no valid meaning to others. Fact is, given the same dies and components, I know I can make the same quality of ammo on any press made, from the Co-AX/Ultramag to Lee's little Reloader.

Someone who shoots like I do would be silly to purchase a progressive, anyone shooting competion would be silly to try to live with my single stage. Those who load moderately large quanities should try an auto-indexing turret. BR shooters are best served with a combonation of an arbor press and a small single stage. What I commonly see on the web are those single purpose advocates who loudly proclaim others should get what suits them rather than what the questioner actually needs. Foolish 'advice!'

The "your get what you pay for" crowd equates everything to price and that's a really poor measure of what should serve others well. Someone loading .223 for gound hog shooting really gets absolutely no advantage from a massive an costly cast iron press!

Saying "MY press will last a lifetime!" as it that's unique is pointless. Few, if any, presses wear out unless they are badly neglected. The simple and inexpensive turret press I started with is still on my bench and works great after some 45+ years of service!

So, they all work fine, IMHO. The choice of a press comes down to 1) how much someone needs to spend to feed his ego, 2) what volume he plans to produce, 3) might he want to do case reforming and 4) what user features appeal to him. Making good ammo is from skill, not the color of the press.

[flashhole]

I'm surprised someone didn't steer you to a concentricity gauge to evaluate your loads. If they are concentric you don't need to do anything more than you are already doing.

[Dave P]

Generally I agree that you won't see the difference on the target, no matter what press you use.

And for not too many $, you can prove that to yourself with a $30 wilson hand die (can't get much more precise - no press involved). Seating die is what I am thinking of.

And I spin most of my 308 loads on a concentricity tool. Makes me more confident, more than anything else!

[wncchester]

"I'm surprised someone didn't steer you to a concentricity gauge.."

My concentricity gage is what proved what I had suspected about the perfomance differences in different brands of both dies and presses. Specifically, it proved there ain't any consistant difference worth arguing over.

[Tex S]

Yup, the only way to find out for sure is by using a concentricity gauge. Even though I have the tools needed to do the testing, my attention span and the 100 degree heat in my garage do not allow for it.

I have a LCTP, and a Forster CO-AX. I use the turret press for semi auto handgun, and the Forster for larger bolt action rifle cartridges. I have used the Forster for pistol, but never the turret for rifle. I could tell no difference in the pistol loads... they all shot good.

I would be a bit apprehensive to load for my rifles on the LCTP, just because my Forster is so damn solid. I'm not saying the LCTP wouldn't make just as good ammo, but the feel of the Forster is so much smoother and lacks any discernable "slop". The LCTP definitely has its place on my bench, but it is certainly not a very refined tool. It requires alot of tweeking when loading tiny cartridges (380 auto anyone?), and is not made with the same amount of rigidity and precision as the Forster. I have not had a single problem with the Forster, but to be fair, it doesn't have anywhere near the same amount of moving parts. I think a big part of the problem with the LCTP is not with the actual press, but with the turret itself. I do not own a single turret that has all four holes perfectly square. Don't believe me? Take a square and see for yourself. This is not a problem with large pistol calibers, but it is a huge PITA with the smaller ones (32 auto anyone?). I can't help but think that this would also be a problem when attempting to limit the amount of case and/or bullet runout on bottleneck cartridges.

Maybe Forster should make an auto indexing turret press. I bet that would be sweet!!!

Take that for what its worth. I am far from a great shot, so I really feel that any equipment I have can produce a product that my shooting skills cant take full advantage of.

On the other hand, maybe I need to get another press!!!

[t45]

In my benchrest days a single stage was what we all used for ultimate accuracy. As said already you want every round as close to the same as possible.

[4runnerman]

Well said Steven. A turret press has moving parts(more of a chance for inconsistancys) a single stage(slower) but when the die is locked in for size,,,2000 rounds later they are still all the same size. I use a single stage and have found it to be more than fast enough. One day deprime 500,next day prime 500 next day or two just load.at end of night when loading leave die in press and next day continue on your way. There is alot to be said for turret presses if you are in a big hurry though.

[Jim243]

I started with a Lee Clasic Turret press 7 years ago and then went to a RCBS Rock Chucker for loading rifle. I too am an accruacy nut on rifle loads.

Yep that's me, I used my turret press for 2 years as a single stage for loading rifle (because of case prep, not ease of use). And then said the hell with it, it's time to get a single stage press and use the turret for what it does best. But that was my call because of the type of reloading I was doing (and still doing).

As many others have said, there are a zillion things involved in accuracy including free floating barrels, two stage triggers, good optics, beded stocks, tight screws (locktite), neck turning, annealing etc... Finding the sweet spot for your rifle and load is just one of them.

If your quest is for putting the second bullet throu the hole of your first bullet, you will go to any length to get those results. If not, then don't worry about it, because it will drive you mad. Me, I had to go out and buy a $300 powder dispenser and scale combo (RCBS Chargemaster 1500), others will only use Norma or Lupa brass and weigh each case and bullet and group them by weight for concistancy.

It just depends on how much time you have on your hands and how much money you want to spend.

Jim

[4runnerman]

I do weigh my bullets and brass everytime(but im insane too),My wife toldme that Ha hA... I keep my bullets to with in 1/10 of a grain of each other for comp and use the rest for plinking. i shoot 68 gn bullets(223) and have found 68.3 is the most common weight in that gn bullet (Hornady). I like the accuracy. I don't hunt so all my shooting is for accuracy only. I just enjoy the mornings at the range and having tight groups. But like said it all depends on what ya want to do and how well you want to do it

[highvel]

I've used both types and have these comments.

Accuracy was no different with either single or turret, period! The small amount of misalignment possible with the turret would be an issue if the shell holder was designed to hold the case rigid and the shell holder to ram connection was rigid! Otherwise with the self aligning clearance designed into all presses, I do not think you can prove on paper any discernible deference in accuracy potential, other than personal preference.
Think about it!

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by t45

In my benchrest days a single stage was what we all used for ultimate accuracy. As said already you want every round as close to the same as possible.

Originally Posted by 4runnerman

... A turret press has moving parts(more of a chance for inconsistancys) a single stage(slower) but when the die is locked in for size,,,2000 rounds later they are still all the same size.... There is alot to be said for turret presses if you are in a big hurry though.

Not to sound adversarial, gentlemen, but these are just the types of comments that caused me to start this thread.

Where is the evidence that every round won't be as close to the same as possible or that the turret press is essentially only for "if you are in a big hurry"?

I have posted pictures of 1/2 MOA groups from two different guns using ammo built on a Lee Classic turret. These groups are with untuned, essentially generic ammo with no special qualities except that it's created with great care. No effort has been made to shrink those groups at all. They are first effort groups.

Where is the evidence, not theories about potential problems but actual evidence, that a turret is not capable of achieving "benchrest" quality accurate ammo?

[flashhole]

killa - I'm in your camp on this, I get just as consistent ammo using my LCT as my single stage presses. I also pay a lot of attention to detail so as to make the best ammo I can with the equipment I have. I've not seen anyone offer diffinitive proof there is a difference in ammo made on any kind of press.

[4runnerman]

Peet. No one is in argument about this.1st- at what range are you shooting? At 100 and 200 yards you will not notice anything. Bullet speed varations of up to 200 ft per second will have no bearing at those ranges. Now shoot those same bullets at 400 and 600 yards,That is where the difference will come to play. I propose to you to do up say 100 bullets on your turret press,than grab the caliper and start checking COL. I would venture to say that you are going to have varations in there of up too .02 or .05 difference. This will matter at 500 yards or more. I shoot 500 to 1000 yards with a Savage custom built 223. 1/10 of a grain can throw my bullet off 3 inches at that range.Like has been said here many times.It all depends on what you want and how well you want to do it. At short ranges 100,200,300 yards this whole issue has no bearing.

Thanks

[flashhole]

If I need a qualifier on my last post it would be I don't shoot at the longer ranges. About 300 yards is as long a range as I have access to. I'm happy with my results inside that envelope.

[4runnerman]

Very Sorry Flashhole.Did not mean to offed anyone. I was just putting in my 2 cents. Yes i agree at 300 yards and less this is not an issue. You don't need a qualifier as we are all in agreement on what you and peet say. At a greater distance
one would have issues. I have just started this extreame long range stuff and so far it is a struggle and i must say very fun to do. Like i say i cull my bullets and my brass all have to be with in 1/10 of a gn of each other. Powder has to be right on the money

[wncchester]

"I propose to you to do up say 100 bullets on your turret press,than grab the caliper and start checking COL. I would venture to say that you are going to have varations in there of up too .02 or .05 difference."

I seriously doubt that difference. I'm no great fan of turret presses but such massive variation in seating depth would have to come from sloppy seating method, not the turret press itself. Especially so if the turret press is Peet's Lee CT; it has a head support design that limits lifting/spring quite well.

[flashhole]

runnerman - I wasn't offended, I thought you made a good point. I just don't have access to the longer range so I don't know if things would be different or not. Although I don't know what I'd do differently with my ammo if I were shooting longer ranges.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by 4runnerman

I would venture to say that you are going to have varations in there of up too .02 or .05 difference.

You're off by a solid factor of 10 on those seating variations. I don't have a reliable method for measuring from the bullet ogive but even measuring from the polymer tip my variances almost never exceed .003. Occasionally, I'll get one that's at .005 but it always turns out to be visible variance in the tip.

I can't argue with your assertion that none of this matters unless you're at 500 yards or more. My question is, how does anyone know that a LCT can not produce ammo of that quality.

I want to see a direct comparison. Somebody who says, "I loaded 100 rounds on a LCT and 100 rounds on XYZ single stage. I then fired all rounds under controlled conditions at a range of 500 yards and the rounds from the LCT consistently produce X MOA larger groups than did the rounds from the XYZ press."

Until someone who has done it can make a direct comparison, all we have is speculation.

Theoretically, there's more variance. Theoretically, honeybees can't fly. Sometimes theory doesn't translate well into reality.

[billcarey]

Peet. No one is in argument about this.1st- at what range are you shooting? At 100 and 200 yards you will not notice anything. Bullet speed varations of up to 200 ft per second will have no bearing at those ranges. Now shoot those same bullets at 400 and 600 yards,That is where the difference will come to play. I propose to you to do up say 100 bullets on your turret press,than grab the caliper and start checking COL. I would venture to say that you are going to have varations in there of up too .02 or .05 difference. This will matter at 500 yards or more. I shoot 500 to 1000 yards with a Savage custom built 223. 1/10 of a grain can throw my bullet off 3 inches at that range.Like has been said here many times.It all depends on what you want and how well you want to do it. At short ranges 100,200,300 yards this whole issue has no bearing.

+1 on that 4runnerman.