njl
-
Posts
1,337 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Profiles
Events
Store
Posts posted by njl
-
-
It didn't occur to me to check the flash hole, but I was reloading 9mm last night and ran into 2 cases (both Norma) that just absolutely refused to go into the Dillon sizing die. It felt like I was going to break my RL550B if I tried any harder. I tossed both into the spent primer bin...but now I may dig them out and try examining the flash hole.
-
On 5/6/2023 at 6:06 PM, OptimiStick said:
Precision Bullets is - or was - local to me. I picked up a few cases about a month back or so and had a long talk with Dave as he was winding it down. Material - lead, was getting very difficult to source- and he commented that several of the chemicals he used in the process shot up in price dramatically and were tough to get. To the point of unprofitability. He was going to make and sell what he could with remaining materials, and ride off into the sunset.
I don't think any of these smaller coated bullet manufacturers are making much - if any right now with current market conditions. And that won't be a good thing for us (the consumers) in the long run.
Did he ever "modernize" the coating he used? Precision was one of the original coated bullet makers, but in my experience, his coating smoked significantly more than hi-tek coated bullets. I think I still have a few thousand each of his .230gr .45 and 147gr 9mm, after buying them by the case and then makers using hi-tek came along, and I switched to those. Accuracy in my Glocks was great, but I wasn't a fan of the smoke screen.
-
1 hour ago, ysrracer said:
Never heard of them.
They were big back in the days of waxed lead. I still have some of theirs for loading .38spl. They shut down just as coated bullets were getting popular, but seem to have recently started the business back up.
-
On 4/17/2023 at 2:41 PM, Farmer said:
@njlI do the same but I use Imperial sizing die wax. Since I switched I’ve never stuck a case even in non carbide dies while re-forming rifle brass. Just wipe some on your index finger and thumb and roll it on the case. Just a dab will do ya!
Do you do anything to remove it, or are you using so little on pistol cases that there's no need?
-
12 hours ago, Farmer said:
Lube lube lube lube lube lube lube lube lube lube
Lube lube lube lube lube lube lube lube lube lubeLube lube lube lube lube lube lube lube lube lube.
Unless there's something wrong/broken on my RL550B, I think using lube was actually the issue. For loading pistol ammo, I've been using lube for years. What I use is Lansinoh lanolin cream. I rub a little between my first finger and thumb and as I'm handling cases on their way into the press, they get lubed. I usually end up with too much, and wipe off the excess on a folded paper towel that sits next to the press. Often, rather than dispense from the tube, I can just pick up some of this excess, rub it between my fingers, and go. I don't know if lanolin can get too old (and what's in the tube goes bad?), dry out sitting on a paper towel, or maybe what was on the towel collected some "decapping crud", but I'm guessing something about that lube caused my problem. What I don't get is, I haven't changed anything about how I load, and I've been doing this for years (low tens of thousands of rounds). My largest tube is left over from when the one of the kids was a baby...so it's got to be at least 16 years old.
I'm going to stop using old lanolin that's been sitting on a paper towel, but if it still happens again, I may need to change lubes or buy a fresh tube of Lansinoh.
-
On 4/12/2023 at 10:57 PM, 67isb said:
What is the headstamp of the brass? I had some stuck cases when I tried to size stepped cases. Now, I'm more careful and make sure those stepped cases go into the recycle bin.
If you don't already have one.. Get something like this.
I ordered one of those, but ended up not needing/using it. I got over to my friend's house and we used a machinist's vise to hold the dies and a scrap of round bar steel as a punch and a hammer to tap the cases out. I cleaned the dies with brake cleaner and then isopropyl alcohol, put the Lee away, and the Dillon back on my press. I haven't loaded any ammo yet, but I did size a couple dozen cases and though a few felt like they wanted to stick, none did.
-
On 4/12/2023 at 10:57 PM, 67isb said:
What is the headstamp of the brass? I had some stuck cases when I tried to size stepped cases. Now, I'm more careful and make sure those stepped cases go into the recycle bin.
If you don't already have one.. Get something like this.
The one in my Dillon die is FC. The one in the Lee die is IMI.
-
Unable to get over to a friend's house for the next several days (to use his vise), I went ahead and just ordered a "spare" Lee 9mm carbide sizing die, figuring it wouldn't hurt to have a spare. It arrived today, and I installed it tonight. Second round through it, the decapping pin pushed up. So, I had to take the die off the press to reset that. Two rounds later, I rip the edges off the head of another stuck case!?! So, now I've got 2 9mm sizing dies with stuck cases.
I've been loading on this press (and the Dillon dies) for 15 years...tens of thousands of rounds of 9mm, and never had this happen before Monday.
-
On 11/21/2019 at 11:17 PM, GregInAtl said:
I thought about spraying silicone or some kind of lubricant on it but I don't want to contaminate the rounds
I've run into exactly the same issue tonight while loading some 9mm. I tried doing that except using slip joint pliers on the case head and a crescent wrench on the top of the die. All I managed to do is rip up more of the case head. I'll contact Dillon tomorrow to see what they advise...but figuring I'm not going to get this fixed fast, I just ordered a Lee carbide sizing die. I figure I can use that until my Dillon is back in business.
I even tried letting it soak in some BlasterPB, figuring I can always wash it with alcohol later...this FC case does not want to leave. I tried pounding it out (off the press) and got nowhere. I've got some ideas involving tools I don't have...and don't have time now or in the next few days to go to a friend's house/shop and do more battle with this thing.
-
I've shot a lot of brands of coated bullets. Brazos Precision 135gr has been my favorite for the past few years, but they've raised prices, and it looks like I may be going back to Ibejiheads 138gr when I run out of Brazos.
-
Yeah...it does get louder when its tumbling just brass. IIRC, it came with 2 plugs for the autoflow. I'm into my second one now, as the first eventually deteriorated (or maybe I killed it with media additives back when I experimented with that).
-
I'm curious if anyone has figured out / built a setup to solve the problems inherent in Lyman's autoflow tumblers. I've been using their Pro Magnum 2500 AutoFlow for years, and have struggled with the autoflow feature (remove a plug in the bottom of the bowl, run the tumbler, and it lets the media drain out, separating it from your brass for you.
The issues are:
- The catch pan the tumbler comes with is comically too small.
- The geometry of the tumbler and any catch dish is such that it's very difficult to actually catch all the falling media.
- Media falling into the edge of the catch pan has a tendency to pile up and overflow the catch pan rather than spread out in the catch pan.
- The tumbler sometimes walks around as its draining.
I thought I'd solved most of this using some pavers and 1x2 wood scrap to prop up the side of the catch pan catching the media and to pin the catch pan in place...but I just had to clean up a bunch of spilled media. I'm wondering if it's worth trying to build a platform to raise and secure the tumbler and hold the catch dish under the tumbler such that the media flow lands more toward the center of the catch pan? What I've been using for a catch pan for most of the decade+ I've been running this tumbler is a Little Giant HP8 2 gallon feed pan. I found it a local feed store, and it seemed like it'd do the job.
-
On 5/2/2022 at 11:54 AM, ddc said:
I don't get what you are trying to say. Your diagram is not an uncommon stage design as far as I can tell.
You have to move to one side or the other of the wall to get into position to shoot the targets under either rule book.
Let's say that the first set of diagonal lines next to the POC wall are the physical fault lines and are 3 feet long. The other diagonals are the imaginary extensions and each one is also 3 feet long.
Under the old rule book you could "wander" directly left or right from the SP and as long as you were within the imaginary extensions were free to engage.
Under the new rule book you have to move down range until you are "within" the range of cover defined by the diagonals closest to the wall.
I think you just agreed with my earlier speculation as to why the rule about fault lines extending to the stage boundary was changed. Under the old rules:
"3.5.2 When cover is available it must be used, while engaging targets, unless the shooter is “in the open” and must engage targets “in the open.” Shooters may not cross or enter any openings (doorways, open spaces, etc.) without first engaging targets visible from those locations."
Under the old rules, SP is technically behind cover. Under the new rules, it's not.
-
On 4/28/2022 at 10:28 AM, Thomas H said:
That position of cover is related to specific targets. If you are behind the cover lines, you are covered from specific threats, not all possible threats.
T1 through T4 are not those threats. "Cover" is not "cover for everything on the stage" and we have never treated it that way. (Look at any stage and you'll see situations in which later positions of cover are in view from earlier targets.)
You're applying logic rather than the rule book to support your position. What if the stage were:
T1 T2 T3
_________
/ POC \
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
___SP___
At SP, you're not exposed to any of the targets, but if you wander just a bit to either side, you can be exposed to / get a clear shot at least at T1 and T3 while still remaining inside the POC fault lines, which have been exaggerated to demonstrate the "extends to the stage boundary" old rule.
-
21 hours ago, Thomas H said:
At SP, you are not behind cover for T1 through T4. You are for T5, but that's a completely different thing. Old rules or new rules, either way, it doesn't change anything for T1 through T4, if I am understanding your disgram correctly.
You do not need to "slice the pie" for T1 through T4. (Nor could you, since there is no cover there.)
What, in the old rule book, would determine that SP is not behind cover (since it is behind a POC and within that POC’s fault lines which, according to 6.3E, extend to the stage boundary?
-
15 minutes ago, Cuz said:
I haven’t tried those. The good news is there’s at least 8 different coated bullet manufacturers out there. It’s interesting to read in some of the other posts why people choose one over the other. During covid I was more willing to try whatever I could get my hands on. Now, I’m less likely to buy a case of a different brand just to try them out as long as I know I can get a brand I already know works well for me. I didn’t care for that “experimental phase” and don’t want to go through it again.
The truth is I’m sure every brand is plenty good enough for most of the games we play.There's a lot more than 8 sources for coated bullets. I think I may have used at least 8 already...some of which are no longer in business. From memory, the brands I've tried (in roughly chronological order):
Precision
BBI
Bayou
Black and Blue
Missouri Bullet Company
H&S
Slugfest
Ibejiheads
Brazos
Check out https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/coated-bullet-sources-any-chance-we-can-sticky-this.1660507/ for a longer list.
-
24 minutes ago, ddc said:
Yeah, either that or revert to the way it was in the previous rulebook.
It certainly isn't obvious to me why this change was considered necessary.
If it ain't broke... sigh...IDPA... sigh...
Consider a stage where the farthest downrange targets have a POC with fault lines:
T5
| |
| |
| _________ |
/ POC \
T1 T2 T3 T4
___SP___
I don't know if this is going to "work" for varying fonts, but suppose you start out "in the open", where you have a few targets to engage. Under the old rules, that downrange wall with fault lines means you're technically behind cover at SP, and will remain behind cover unless you were to stray far enough to either side to cross the imaginary infinite fault lines. That changes things like the order in which T1-T4 can be engaged. You'd likely want to shoot T1-T4 in a sweeping motion either in order from T1->T4 or the other way around...but as you're technically behind cover, you'd have to slice the pie. I'm guessing this is the sort of scenario they were trying to fix.
-
As with almost everything, it depends. If you look at load data, jacketed bullets require more powder than coated to make the same velocity. That means, not only are jacketed generally more expensive to buy than coated, but you're going to use more powder with them.
Jacketed are easier to reload / harder to screw up. I recommend anyone just getting started with reloading start with jacketed, then once they're comfortable with the process, consider coated.
Coated bullets, when they work well, leave less fouling in a barrel than jacketed and what they do leave is easier to clean. Coated bullets that don't work well in a particular barrel can result in leading (leaving lead behind in the rifling of the barrel).
I started experimenting with coated bullets a decade or so ago (back when Precision and BBI were pretty much the only commercial sources) due to local range rules (prohibiting jacketed bullets on steel targets). Coated is pretty much all I buy now for loading pistol ammo.
-
On 4/21/2022 at 9:20 PM, RangerTrace said:
Or just save some time, money, frustration and stick with irons.......
There's at least two types shooting CO. Some just want to go faster, and figure optics will help them do that.
Some have gotten to the age where they can no longer focus on the front sight and CO is a way to keep playing the game without embarrassing inaccuracy.
-
On 3/30/2022 at 2:50 PM, Jim Watson said:
3.6.4.2 Fault Lines used to delineate cover must start at the cover object (e.g., wall, barrel, etc.) and extend back away from cover in the up-range direction. The object used to mark the line must extend back away from the cover object at least 3 feet but not more than 8 feet.
I figure that they wanted to eliminate stages in which the shooter could hang way out on the prolongation of the fault line to the border and be legit but not actually behind or even near the cover.
The old rule also complicated stage design, because for some stages, it could be argued that you're always behind cover if there's a POC way down-range and you happen to be behind its infinite fault line(s).
-
1 hour ago, Sorpe said:
I saw that and got a laugh out of it. It's a modern world!
As to fault lines ending, exactly how or where? Is there an imaginary line running parallel to the back berm that intersects with the end of the physical fault line and that defines the end of the line or the limit of the cover area? If so, what a judgment call it will be if someone is shooting from the end of the physical fault line marker. Of course there was already that judgment call when the lines were considered to extend to the stage boundaries so I guess nothing has changed except changing the nature of the judgment of whether someone is inside the appropriate boundary. As the French say, the more things change the more they stay the same.
Some years ago, there was some uproar about a "cross dresser" shooting GSSF as a woman (and winning). I guess the Wilson's are old fashioned and won't be having anything like that in their game.
-
My opinion may change after shooting a few matches under the new rules, but I agree with the previous post that part of IDPA is honing skills like reloading. If I were in charge, I think I would have set all the pistol divisions at 10 rounds per mag. Lots of BUG sized guns can do 10...so why keep it at 6? If someone wants to shoot their old slim pocket 9 with lower capacity, let them, but people shooting Glock 26 or any of the newer high capacity pocket 9s can fill them up to 10.
-
12 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:
Think that one out. 6-9 targets, and 3 tenths per. That's 1.8-2.7 seconds per stage that you're giving to someone who can shoot quickly and accurately. A good run in IDPA is going to be -0 to -1 with the only make up shots being ones you planned for round dumping purposes.
Now as you move down in the standings you'll probably find this strategy will work. But at some point along the way it'll be holding you back.
Well, I'm already not terribly fast, but tend to do really well in the points down department, so this could help me be even not faster with even fewer points down. That's a win win, no?
-
So, in SSP, with 50% more ammo in each mag, will anyone adjust their strategy (shoot a little faster and more extra shots)?
I can’t look for the holes and decide if a make up shot is called for quick enough for it to make sense, but I can spend an extra .3s or so per target on insurance…probably just the longer shots. Still not sure how that’ll work out.
Norma 9mm Brass
in 9mm/38 Caliber
Posted
If you can't decap them by normal means, why bother? I did dig one out of my primer bin last night, and sure enough, it's got a tiny pin hole of a flash hole.