TonyK

That "maple" ply in the picture is Red Oak by the way... No matter what the salesman or the guy who put it in your rig might have said. But I wouldn't stain it. Since you are only going to use it as a load bench it would be much simpler to just wipe it down with Watco oil. Watco will seal things up, it's simple to apply (wipe on, wipe off) and looks good as well. Easy to touch things up later too. If they don't sell Watco in your part of the country just ask about a Danish Oil. Fir/Hemlock legs and stretchers won't take finish the same way as the ply but will look fine just wiped down with the same oil. Red Oak looks really good with an oil finish and will get darker over time. Looks like you will have a nice stout bench to work on when your finished.

Buddy of mine uses tons of Xtreme 230 RN's, work well in his XD's and they have shot fine in my 1911's. Never used the Zero's myself but plated are probably much cheaper. Not sure if plated are included in the Do Not Use Lead issues with a Glock though. You may need to ask a Glock guy since I have heard you are not supposed to run straight lead in them and plated are not that different from straight lead.

Don't quite get the hatred of the stock knob, works just fine for me.... And it is still attached to my press...

Pretty much every manual I have lists data for Red Dot and Bullseye, Only place I have found trailboss data is the Hodgdon website. I have the Sierra and Hornaday books, and copies of data from Lyman, Speer, an old NRA manual, plus some old data I have come across. Strange how even with the same powder and bullet the data varies from one manual to the next. The data from Western Powders (Alliant and Ramshot) seems to have the best variety when it comes to brands of bullets if you have any of their products.

My alarm goes off as I am priming a case and after that one, it will prime 12 more cases before the tube and primer plate is completely empty.

Steve Is there a particular manual you prefer to use for your starting data?

I guess what is the most surprising to me is that 45 acp and the 1911 have been around for over 100 years yet when it comes to reloading no ones data is consistent. You would think by now that I could look up a bullet style and OAL, type of case, primer and powder and achieve results that are somewhat consistent. Or at the very least pretty close to published data. Yes I understand there are variables but ammunition makers can get consistent results year to year and they have to deal with the same variables that we do. How do they do it? And even with all the variables when following load guidelines and OAL to the letter why have the results always been slower than published data? On occasion wouldn't you expect some loads to come out faster?

I wouldn't pass up a cheap single stage either.... It would be nice to develop loads on a single stage but I have figured an easy way to do it on my 650.

Been looking at manuals lately till I am blue in the face. Finally found one that lists more than 5 or 7 powders and uses a real world OAL to start with! Hats off to Sierra Bullets. The data for 230 grain RN FMJ lists no less than 23 powder options. Pretty important in this current era of powder availability All data came from a 5" Colt 1911 too. Also they list a usable length of 1.27 for the OAL. While 1.20 may be Sammi minimum I have about as much use for 230 RN rounds that short as I do for data collected out of a pressure barrel that is twice the length of my 1911's. (Yes I know Hollow points and some other rounds take short OAL's and I have used them but I found what works for some of them on my own...) While it would not be practical to test all powders and every brand of bullet I believe Sierra provides a nice baseline of powder info. (Load data from Alliant/Western Powder/Ramshot seems to have the best variety of bullet types and brands but only for their powders) It is also the first time in writing I have found someone saying you have to adjust the powder charge if you change the OAL. While anyone who has reloaded for awhile already knows this as a new guy (me) all the manuals usually do is list minimums and maximums and tell me not to exceed max regardless of OAL. This is implied in a lot of places but Sierra comes out and says it. Sure wish I would have found the Sierra manual earlier... So not sure what manuals others may be using but it would be nice to know who's manual and why.... The point of this is not to pick on any one else's manual but to find out who is putting out really good data.

X-treme and Berry's both say to use mid range data for jacketed bullets and X-treme also says you can use high end lead loads. But since I already exceeded some max loads, the OAL and use of plated bullets would not account for such drastic differences in the fps. Plated will cost some fps but it should not lower it by so much. Is there a common percentage loss in fps compared to Lead? Fortunately just bought the Sierra load manual and all their 230 grain data is for an OAL of 1.27, so I am going to load up a bunch of test rounds and look for better numbers. Sierra even mentions altering powder charges based on OAL, doesn't say by how much but at least they talk about it...

Right now on my Dillon 650 there is a Dillon resize die and powder drop, a Hornady Powder Cop, an RCBS bullet feeder die and an RCBS combo taper crimp/seater die. As long as the thread size matches and the die does the job you need it too, brand pretty much doesn't matter... Read a lot and if you plan to load lots of rounds, skip the single stage and dive off the deep end for a progressive

No one I know of makes a Full Metal Jacket that is lead free, that's why they call them jackets... It has to wrap around something. And just so you don't worry about it, the lead free hunting law that California just passed does not take effect until 2019! So you and bullet manufacturers have time.... And since California has quite a few guns I do believe the manufacturers will make something that is legal. Silicone will be a waste of time on your HP's

Anyone else really know what depleted uranium means? "depleted" uranium is a byproduct of processing uranium for reactors and weapons use, "reactor depleted" uranium is uranium that has been used up making energy. Has to do with the isotopes that are in the stuff naturally and what you end up with after processing. As a side note, someone mentioned the density of Gold as being close to lead, not true it is actually much heavier than lead. A cubic foot of lead weighs around 700lbs, a cubic foot of gold weighs closer to 1200lbs. And no none of them are suitable for the OP's use....

How about just using the data from Alliant.... http://www.alliantpowder.com/reloaders/powderlist.aspx?type=1&powderid=2&cartridge=35 This should take you right to it....

Thanks for the advice Loaded up some test rounds at the ridiculously short length specified in my load manual. This should give me a better baseline to start tinkering with my powder charges. They will probably be the last rounds I load this short. But yes they are headed to a chronograph....

You can also run corn cob in a tumbler without the water, manages to do just fine with my 45 brass after just an hour. As for how much you can load, most rock tumblers are made to run 75 to 80% full or more. Load up the brass and media to that amount and you should be fine. As for count, that's about 250 45 rounds and corn cob in each of my 6 lb tumblers. My tumbler holds two drums so I can run about 500 rounds at a time. Just remember that rocks weigh a lot more than our brass but you need some room for the brass to tumble.... I have even thought about using a different media (maybe some walnut shells) in one of the tumblers to make it a two stage process It's a lot simpler to not have to dry out the brass.... But no, it doesn't come out as pretty as the stainless media and water trick.

Seems like most load data I have found for my 45 have the 230 grain rounds set at an OAL of 1.20. (Hodgdon, Speers, Hornady....) But I have also noticed that everyone says to use the length best suited to your gun.... So just how do I compensate the powder charge if my gun prefers 1.26 OAL? And not cause an overpressure or damage me or my gun. All the manuals say not to exceed max powder charges. And just why do most of the load manuals specify 1.20 and such? I haven't found a factory round even close to that. It may meet min spec chamber numbers but if you had such a gun you couldn't buy any factory rounds to feed it.... Just wondering what I need to do when I want to load a longer length than specified in the load data Thanks

Most toggle switches, even the ones you use in cars are rated for ac. Just have to read the switch volt ratings....

You will probably find that there is a reason that good wet tumblers are not cheap. Most of them are actually rock tumblers designed to run continuously for a week or more. I use a Lortone rock tumbler with dry media, works just fine and I don't have to worry about leaving it on. Bought it used from a rockhound friend of mine, cost me $100 worth of 45 rounds but that was half of a new one. And Harbor Freight is not known for quality... But I do have one of their 12 ton presses! I thought about going wet for my brass until I saw how much work it was to do compared to shaking out the dry media... But I will admit the wet tumbled stuff looks way nicer when it is done. Since I am only loading for a 45 I can live with what comes out of my tumbler But you might also check jewelry making supplies, they also sell stainless media and it seems to be way cheaper than gun based sources.

The only plastic is chunks of milk carton to make removing the brass locater pins easier while setting things up or checking powder drops etc, picked that one up from a buddy. But nope, nothing under the shell plate. Haven't had a problem with the snap issue with the powders I am using so far.

I am also guessing that there is a drastic difference in ballistics data from a universal receiver and what you would get out of my 1911's.... But what I got wasn't even close to speer data and they used a Sig if I remember correctly (I don't have a speer book I just have copies of the 45 data....) I am not looking to get crazy with overpowered loads, I am one of those guys who wants his training/range rounds to match my carry/defense loads which all run around 850 fps for the rounds I use. Not worried about Major/Minor at all. For the most part I am wondering how far I can push powder loads? Do I keep creeping up with the loads or do I need to find other powders? My main goal is to get close to factory loads of 830-850 fps. Even a consistent 800 fps would make me more than happy.

Steve - Hodgdon lists a 5" barrel for all their 45 data. Speers uses a 4.25 Sig if I remember correctly and some of their data is close to Hodgdons

Bit perplexed after I ran those 15 rounds over the chrono 3.5 grains of Titewad with an OAL of 1.24 only registered an average of 700 fps through two different 1911's But I was pleasantly surprised by the spread, low was 686 and high was 709 No signs of overpressure even though I pushed the load .2 over max Hodgdon's numbers say that 3.3 grains with an OAL of 1.20 should push a 230 LRN at 767.... Now if I can get it closer to 800 I would be happy....

A 550 would be cheaper but I bought a 650 and set it up with a manual bullet feeder and some other mods so I can load 150 rounds in about 15 minutes. And no I don't have a case collater or an electronic bullet feeder. Not the least bit sorry I spent the extra money for the 650. I only load 45 on it at this point but if I ever do decide to load other rounds it will be fairly easy to make the switch.

Bit of a conundrum. Did up some 45 test rounds in 3 Hodgdon powders (IMR 7625 is made by Hodgdon) All bullets were Berry's 230 plated RN's, mixed brass, all large pistol CCI primers, Taper crimp of .470 Universal 6.1 grains OAL of 1.24 average chrono of 15 rounds 784 fps 7625 5.9 grains OAL of 1.24 average of 15 rounds 685 fps Titewad 3.5 grains OAL of 1.24 average of 15 700 fps What has me perplexed is that all of these loads exceed maximum powder charges by a couple of tenths yet the fps doesn't come close to what Hodgdon has on their website for lesser powder charges. And there were no signs of overpressure either (ie no flat primers) The other difference is that I set an OAL that is .040 longer but past experience has shown that this would only reduce the fps by about 40 or 50 fps which would still be much slower than the published data According to Hodgdon Lead 230 grn RN with an OAL of 1.20 for all recipes 5.4 grns of Universal should push a lead bullet at 857 fps 6 grns of 7625 should be doing 897 fps and 3.3 grains of Titewad should be doing about 767 fps As you can see my rounds are way off even taking into consideration the change in OAL that should have been offset by my increase in the powder charge. All rounds were fired over on a chronograph that I fired 3 factory rounds and all 3 were within 15 fps of the rating on the box, Winchester White Box 230 grain FMJ. All Rounds were split evenly between two 1911's and both came out virtually identical so I didn't break that info down Also double checked my digital scale against a Dillon Beam scale and they both indicated the same charge weights so that is not the issue. Any idea what I may or may not be doing?