Miranda

I do like the post, Farmer. I wonder where the line is from needs more R&D to well defined product. for this press, I decided it will require tinkering. so yeah, more R&D is perhaps a task before Frankford Armory. I am hoping FA will find that an easily finished effort. This thread tells us, lets call it 6 presses that are past adjustability for any reason as compared to I have no idea how many made. If the press miss-functions on one in a hundred, then anyone spoiled by the Dillon 650 will state the press is lacking... I doubt the FA wants to be called 'the Lee of 10 station presses' and I am headed that way in my evaluation. Please keep in mind I think Lee presses are worth their price, most of the time. In a pointed assessment, Dillon's case trimming solution on a 650 is effective AND higher priced than I think reasonable for the items involved. The LEE APP is beginning to look like my primer pocket decrimp solution. miranda

well, this thread is about the consideration of what good or bad is in the press. so far, we have some who clearly got a bad press. The questions that come up when discussing those problems are rather similar to Dillon and Lee presses... Bearings going bad is what I'd consider a design flaw. There is a problem with making every thing adjustable, it means that everything is adjustable... I have not been able to settle on how hard the adjusting is nor, once set, if the adjustments hold. Thus far in this thread, we have new presses needing adjustments from factory new. and based on my Lee experience, I think that 'normal.' I did add (and add is important) a thrust bearing under the shell plate of my 650. So I am thinking that any press has a trial and adjustment phase to get everything running smoothly. I am not sure how to evaluate the "replace the bearings" trend I am seeing. it is good to know both that it may be needed and what parts to get. for a moment, lets call the press, a 10 station progressive kit. if we want to compare the kit to something... a mark7 is possible. Is that difference enough to make clear "what price glory?" miranda

because I want to sound smart n all... I thought the burn rates and follow on consistencies were pressure driven... with some powders spiking pressures from high pressure causing faster burning and some slowing as pressure rises during the burn... with that last one being a relative measure. I can think low volumes of spikey powder can cause inconsistencies... I can name such a powder. I can't name an opposite type of powder... HP-38 does pretty much fill the case. so you may be completely correct for that being the reason for consistencies. thanks miranda

hi farmer, yeah he is like that. I had decided he is a surgeon. I did not know he stitched up rockets. He'll likely jump in here with pictures of socks and primers to distract us from asking about spacesuit mechanic work. I hear it is easy, and the wrenches are priced outta this world. miranda

ok iffin I see the 244 powder available, I'll give it a go. The lower SD should translate to better accuracy. The reasons for using a given powder are attempts to bias the power available to take advantage of the weapon properties, barrel twist rates and popple holes etc. one reason I like HP38/w231 is how hard it is to double charge. everything else about this new (to me...) powder sounds like 'better.' miranda

ah the pot is finally bubbling. I run lead bullets... If any powder is better for 9mm than HP-38 or w231, I can state I have not seen it. forgive me for wanting to find fault with a powder that was designed for another service... so I'll skip that. what got me to stick with hp38/w231 is a level of performance more consistent than my shooting. To expand this a bit, I tried n320 (I hope I remembered that correctly) it seemed much the same and as it is harder to find and higher cost, I have not gone seeking it. (buuut I will buy it.) That comment is good for the other one I was told has merit. in that alternate powders got me much the same result. in terms of accuracy anyway... hp-38/w231 is a very good starting point and as you try other powders you can be confident in your results when comparing them. if you start chasing 9 major power factors or driving compensators then other powders may give you better results miranda

aaaand then what you find you end up doing.... cleaned brass, decapped, and then decrimped got inconsistent results? best being the rcbs die... and all the decrimp tests included a tool a lot like the lyman ream. that tool was used while making the test ammo. and it was there from then on cause some times brass has an opinion.

that crimp removal stationis the only part of that machine I would want over the 650. I bought a biig bag of range brass. 1/4 was wcc. ( 9mm and crimped) did not learn... got another bag cause cheap. been doing them one at a time... and range 223 is usually crimped since I have to size and trim as one pass in the 650, any one 223 case is always two press passes. the need to decrimp is a pass in another press hand fed... with the FX, I was hoping I could add the decrimp in that first pass and possibly add a mouth deburr contraption. that first pass option can be automated with few concerns about primer or powder safety. (think no computer needed.) miranda

RCBS 9481 is a die type swage... It is slower than I'd like... I have tried other options and they are no faster with the lee APP it may be a good option. miranda

the 650 has a triangle shaped ramp that moves the shell plate about a fifth of a turn. during the downstroke of the plate. On a drop head press like yours, I would think on the tool head rising. your vid shows it that way. I do assume you have a groove or ramp that advances the shell plate. And that is not much of an assumption. The question is can you adjust that item on your press... miranda

ok... may seem a little odd, if my 650 fails to index to the next station it will not pop forward as yours does. so what causes it to finish the index? I know it is what you are looking to see, but it is about half your problem. The first thing I'd look for is the positive index mechanism. it should push the shell pate a bit further... I can't measure it, but the move to proper position looks like about half the indexing ball (if that is a ball...) miranda

Hi GAMountains, 6 posts here. I did not notice that afore... welcome to the forum. From what we have in this thread, your lock-up is not common. I do not own one of these presses. I am pretty sure I could help, and that has me wondering how to give you any assistance. you state mangled primers and locked press. I can imagine that a stopped stroke to avoid setting off a primer could be a positive feature. Is the press mangling the primer first and then locking or are the two happening at once? ETA: I re-read your post... have any guesses for the primers getting flipped? I can't speak for FA. some get good customer service and some don't. If you decide the press is junk, can you return it and be done? I know the members of this forum are excellent puzzle solvers even if they tend to being cavalier on toes and feelings. try to get a photo or two of what you think is the problem... and see if some one notices a bent part or such. miranda

all auto indexing presses have quirks... hmmmm ok the FX press is competing with a mark 7. class leader on price. that has my attention. I have to stand up a puzzle? If the word quirky is a center of the road description for all the "tinker fun" found in a lee bullet feeder... I would say a 4 hole turret has quirks. that line is hard to see in the 650... so things like the operation of the powder drop is different from press to press. uh. I think this can be the answer Works as Intended... can be a quirk. ok so y'all had new press adjustments to make... and now, the settings are good and you like the ammo? did you need to add reinforcement plates? (bench or press) (walls, floors) traction tape? Have you sent out for more supplies? miranda

hi McHaggis, I had the same thought as your post. Please accept that I like your post and the next part is not intended as anything except my own thinking at that time. Some times it is clear a lot of strong emotion is intended as the only point. They can't yet post reasons. sad ain't it. In a few days he will be back and explain. I expect. nuttin... Now. You've reminded me and I appreciate that. lets evaluate GAMountains' review. Shall we? What is junk? I found I was trying to decide how bad can a press get to qualify as junk... Lee's four hole turret press is not junk... And there are, possibly, better ammo making presses. Some one has said the FX is better than a LnL. (I have to add I have not run the LnL so I don't know for sure what it may imply) There is a value component in the review. As the presses I have will keep up with my reloading needs. The FX is unlikely to be purchased soon, if ever. So I can't claim to know the value for anyone reloading that much. At the price of the FX, I would think it would mash, advance, and repeat. To be clear I believe the press did not operate as expected and as the only detail for why is "junk," at this point I have to use my definition. I find it hard to agree that the press is junk. On what I have heard otherwise stated, I have not seen a pattern of many fails. Yeah a failed bearing is a problem. I have also heard that was a QC problem and replacement bearings are available. Once FA stops supporting the press? Well, then we will revisit the topic. any one who has a an FX press and likes it? share some? anyone have an unresolved issue? (and will write a bit more...) miranda

I hear ballistic nylon will do that