4n2t0

Yup, it has been seen before. People have tried fixes with varying degrees of success (red loctite, silver solder, epoxy, machining the parts etc.). I would ask Lyman to replace the die free of charge.

Crimped primers (I don't use Mag-Tech cases, so I wouldn't know) or ....... If it is primer "suck back" reshaping the extraction pin, as suggested by other members, usually does the trick. Also, if you can afford to do so, I would discard the Mag-Tech cases altogether.

That's more inline with what I was taught/learned. I really am willing to learn but so far I haven't heard anything compelling from zzt that changes my perception of recoil. All he's done so far is try to blame me for not understanding or convoluting the conversation. All else being equal, two different bullet weights (same construction), loaded with the same powder (with the heavier bullet always needing less powder to achieve the same PF), loaded to the same PF should result in the heavier bullet producing less recoil. I could still be wrong and I'm willing to admit it because that's how we learn, but someone would have to explain how the above statement does not hold water.

All my numbers are in post 4 and I provided the charge weights, 4.1gr for 124gr, 3.6gr 147gr.

But you replied directly to me when I ask you a question. Remember? Same PF, same powder? Then you posted a formula which I'm still trying to figure out how it answers my question. Also, if you were talking about the OPs load how could you make that determination? I thought you needed the powder charge weights? Which weren't provided. That's what you said. Besides, this hardly sounds like you're talking about the OP's data: "Many shooters prefer the 147gr load, because it 'feels' softer. It actually has more recoil, but the pulse is spread out over a longer time." I guess "many shooters" is a substitute for OP's data with unknown charge weights? You are the one squirming here, not me...

So, recoil energy is exactly the same when two projectiles of differing weights are loaded with the same powder, to the same PF (the heavier bullet always needing less powder), and fired in the same gun? Oh boy, now I'm really confused because zzt stated that the heavier projectile would produce more recoil. I'm just trying to learn and get what I thought to be true (apparently misinformation regarding recoil) straightened out.

Not 115gr zzt, 124gr. Of course those number worked in your favour. The 115gr would take even more powder than the 4.1gr you used (I presume you already knew that). Also, they're not such a guesstimate, it's pretty close. 4.1gr for 124gr and 3.6gr for 147gr. I have a chrono. I've tested many rounds. Those numbers are pretty sound for my bullet with TG in the same gun on the same day. I'm not driving at anything. Please do the math with the numbers I provided you because it's all too complicated for my small brain. Remember, you replied to this: Really? So if the PF and powder used is the same there will be more recoil with a 147gr when compared to a 124gr?

Huh? Maybe I'm confused (I probably am). Why does the math care about my charge weight since I gave the advantage to the 124gr? It would take more powder for the 124gr bullet to make PF and less for the 147gr bullet. I can't replicate a perfect equivalent in PF but if it helps it takes approximately 4.1gr of TG for the 124gr and 3.6gr for the 147gr.

Use my examples from above. Both PF's are 129.95.

Great. So how does it work out?

Really? So if the PF and powder used is the same there will be more recoil with a 147gr when compared to a 124gr? So what's happening here zzt? Here's my TG load to make 130 PF w/ 124gr (I even undercut the actual charge weight trying to give the 124gr an advantage): Now the 147gr (I use the exact same charge weigh to give the 147gr a disadvantage):

147... But which feeds better, shoots better and is faster for you?

Joe and I recently and briefly touched on the topic of book charge weights: In summary...charge weight ranges change from book to book and year to year because there are too many variables. e.g. Fear of litigation, universal receiver rigs, pressure testing equipment, margin of error etc. To emphasize the point, here's the data from Lyman's 48th Edition: Assuming your data/research above is correct (Did they use the same bullet? Are any of those designated as +P loads?) I would see 231 and that bullet as 4.3gr to 5.7gr (although Lyman has 3.9gr as the lowest charge weight, lobbing bullets at 589 fps, lol.) In terms of selecting a starting charge weight, I would start with the lightest load and work your way up since PF isn't important. Test for accuracy at the farthest distance you expect to shoot.

"Book max" charges are always changing. In recent years, they've become pretty conservative. You're right that there is no visual way to measure pressure, but I disagree when it comes to the "way over" part. Way over for me isn't, for example, seeing primers starting to flatten. Way over for me is losing digits. Many people load over suggested max in various calibres with a variety of powders. As long as you're smart and safe, I don't see anything wrong with going over max, but that's just my opinion. P.S. There was no book anything for my 9mm 147gr WST load but I'm glad I experimented and found one of my favourite 9mm loads. Besides, no one likes a party pooper Joe, lol.

To the land of 2.8 and 3.0 you go... The path has already been blazed so you should be able to keep all your fingers! lol. As always, look for signs of pressure and be safe.

I'm going to attempt to read minds... I'll give it a shot since I don't believe in the FCD either... What a FCD does it swage the entire cartridge, including the bullet, to make/force the ammo to pass while potentially masking other issues. It can also possibly affect bullet retention and unseal your crimp allowing gas to pass. BEFORE I GET FLAMMED: WITH ALL THAT SAID, MANY, MANY, MANY SHOOTERS EMPLOY THEM SUCESSFULLY. Between my crystal ball, tarot cards, and tea leaves I must have gotten something right! Cheers!

Pretty much everything has been covered but I will ask if 1.1 is the longest you can load for your barrel(s)/bullet combo? If you can load a little longer it might help a little.

I normally sit down to load 2K-3K, I'd be cleaning more than loading if I followed the recommendation, lol. Agreed on the shaft, when I feel it dragging I give it a few squirts. The rest of the machine goes at least 30K before I spend a day stripping it down for a detailed cleaning.

Definitely enough, probably too much, and just right if it works for you. You're erroring on the side of caution and that's rarely a mistake. I focus on the primer magazine, primer punch assembly, platform (under shellplate) and casefeeder. I also clean and reapply oil/grease to all the suggested contact points.

Definitely can't remove it with your fingers. I wrap it in some hockey tape and use needle nose pliers. Over a decade, with several pin changes, no problems yet. Maybe I'm just extra cautious because you would probably have to put it in a vice (vise for the Americans) or locking pliers to crush it.

A few other tips... Buy spare e-clips, you're going to need them. Apply a little bit of blue locktite on the threads that secure the decapping pin nut. That knurled brass coloured nut comes loose quite often, which allows the pin to wobble.

Two wrenches and a little muscle... You can add a little penetrating oil near the "seam" but it shouldn't really be necessary. No need to remove the clip for this first step...

Determine the max OAL by starting extra long and constantly shortening the round until it plunks and spins in the barrel. You should do this for every new bullet/barrel combo. As you found out, the magazine can also determine the OAL but usually that only occurs when your ammo is loaded fairly long. As for the Dillon seater...I've tried most and it's as consistent as any other. I target 1.09 for my 9mm and I get approximately 1.088 - 1.094 with mixed range brass. That's good enough for me! I only use the flat nose side of the insert for SWC's. I prefer seating all RN, including RNFP, off the ogive. I don't like any of the micrometer seating dies but that's just personal preference and poor experiences, similar to the one you're currently having. You can throw away a bunch of money chasing the "perfect OAL" or save a boat load realizing that it doesn't mean $hit. If the round chambers, fires and ejects call it good and move on to something more important.

Glad to hear that it's working out for you Spinge. If you want to make minor comfortably then you'll probably need to be around 4.0gr but if that doesn't matter and you're getting good ejection at 3.6gr have at 'er. Cheers!