IVC
-
Posts
1,223 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Profiles
Events
Store
Posts posted by IVC
-
-
Rebuilding the press might solve the problem, but it's not a good way to do it. What good is it if the press starts working but you have no idea what caused the problem, so you don't know the next time where to look or what to adjust?
-
Let's be analytical about this - it's a mechanical system with several moving parts and we need to eliminate potential problems, one at a time.
Here's the link to the 1100 manual, page 67 shows primer feeding system less the push rod which is installed in the toolhead. So, starting from the push rod side, here are the steps:
- Is the push rod secure and undamaged?
- Is push rod contacting the rocker?
- Is rocker free but snug?
- Is primer punch damaged?
- Is primer punch free to move?
- Is primer bushing tight, allowing punch to protrude the amount it's adjusted to?
This can be checked by simply observing the assembly as the arm is lowered. It's a mechanical set of "pulleys" so it either works or doesn't. The primer punch must be going up and down and must be able to change depth as the push rod is adjusted. It's easy to see and play with it with the toolhead lowered.
Once you confirm that the punch is doing its job, that part of the debugging is done - the primer is being pushed up and it's being pushed up the correct amount.
Next is to confirm the primer station itself. The brass must be centered, but if it's not the symptom is NOT that brass sits high, the symptom is that the primer is partially damaged. Looks like the brass is centered, but it doesn't hurt to confirm (I believe this is where 1100 is different from my 1050, there is no plastic tab on 1100). If there are no problems with damaged primers, use a clean and inspected brass to test seating. If it works on this brass, but not on all brass, the problem is in primer pocket preparation, a.k.a., swaging station.
There is nothing in the OP to suggest problems with feeding primers, but there is one aspect that should be checked - that the area is clean and that there is no debris caught in the primer slide. Any foreign material can make the primer sit slightly higher, although it would cause it to be pushed deeper, not shallower.
-
Check for the broken decapping pin on station 2. Looks like you're jamming new primers over old ones. That's the only explanation that would be consistent with all of your symptoms. A remote second would be that the white tab that holds the brass in place isn't set up correctly, so the primers are not lined up with the pockets. But this would result in squished primers, not merely sticking out.
-
I like the answers - thanks - especially about not having to sort the brass and inspecting cases the same way as for pistol.
For crimp, I assume it's the same as for 38 Super Comp. Light taper crimp, just enough to prevent bullets from shifting under recoil. It's mostly neck tension, though. The way I adjust it for pistol is to measure the diameter of the final round, but this is approximate because cases have different brass thicknesses. Yet it's more than "good enough."
Is it the same for rifle? Set crimp such that it holds the bullet and doesn't imprint on the bullet, try a few different brass types, call it "good?" The variation in the brass is there no matter what and the die can be set to a single value anyways, so it will only be as consistent as the brass thickness, which is "somewhat"...
-
My reloading background is in pistol, on 1050, reloading several calibers (38SC, .40, 9), shooting USPSA and some local 2-gun outlaw matches that include AR-15.
There is a lot of information on the reloading process for the rifle cartridges and load data, that's not the problem. My question is PRACTICAL, based on my setup and what I need (at this time). The short version of the question: Is it worth setting up reloading on a 1050 for .223 plinking ammo? The long version follows.
I have access to a lot of .223 brass because at the two ranges that I frequent most people don't reload it. It's shiny and once-fired. I also have a 1050, so I already have a swager on station 3. Changing calibers, tuning primer system, calibrating, QC, setting up MBF and alike are routine tasks that I've spent enough time fine-tuning (especially various aspects of the MBF). I already have multiple toolheads, including one I use for preprocessing brass (to minimize shake when loading 9 major and cases are pretty full). I even have a stash of SRP primers from the time it was the only game in town, thinking I might use it in Open major instead of SPP.
The questions I have are about mixed headstamp brass, trimming, case inspection and headspacing. All the "goodies" I don't worry about when reloading for pistol.
First mixed headstamp. For plinking ammo, how much do I care about small variations in headspace that remain after processing? This is probably the biggest unknown since sorting out brass is something I hate with passion and could be a non-starter.
Next is trimming and case inspection. I would get the Dillon trimmer so that I can trim while I preprocess the brass. Do I need to worry about the mixed headstamp brass in terms of OAL? Rifle cases headspace on shoulders so my guess is that trimming is just to keep the brass in spec, but it's otherwise not a big deal. Correct? So, I would clean the brass, lube (just basic lube such as spraying One Shot works, right?), preprocess, clean again to remove shavings and lube, then it's ready to load? And at some point I'm supposed to look inside *each* case for cracks so I don't end up with separated cases in a match? This also seems to be quite time consuming - for pistols, I clean the brass and sort and inspect in one relatively quick step, looking for cracks, kinks in the rim and dings anywhere on the case. Is it much more time consuming for rifle brass?
Finally, headspacing and bullet jump to the rifling. I understand the process for precision guys who will reload for the particular chamber and load ladders in .001" increments to figure out which headspace works best in their rifle, but I'm talking here semi-auto combat rifle plinking ammo on a progressive press. The ammo should work in any of my ARs, much like factory ammo does. If I stick to the spec and do plunk test on my ARs, am I good to go with just using an "OAL in the middle that works?"
-
It could also be a crimp issue. Did you pull bullets immediately after seating die, or did you pull them from finished rounds? If it's crimp, it's an easy fix - back it off until you get the desired result. If it's NOT crimp, it's more likely neck expander than the flare. If you have any flare, the bullet coating shouldn't peel as long as you have neck expanded to accept the bullet.
-
Understood, but how do you see the role of 8.6.1? Should it be removed from the rules?
-
Since we are opening a can of worms, here's a question. What's the purpose of the rule 8.6.1 and when should it be used?
8.6.1 No assistance of any kind can be given to a competitor during a course of fire, except that any Range Officer assigned to a stage may issue safety warnings to a competitor at any time. Such warnings will not be grounds for the competitor to be awarded a reshoot.
-
7 hours ago, IHAVEGAS said:
Good info. I wonder what would have caused a spark inside a 1050 case feeder ? I didn’t think you could get a spark out of brass and plastic, static electricity?
6 hours ago, ParrytheWind said:This!
5 hours ago, dtuns said:Probably the electric motor on the feeder.
5 hours ago, 4n2t0 said:You guys beat me to the ignition source question because it definitely wasn't from the cases rubbing together. Static electricity from somewhere (maybe even from the the case feed bowl) or the electric motor were my thoughts as well.
This has been on my mind and I can't really tell.
While "static electricity" seems like the obvious or only choice, I can't see it happening. The motor doesn't create sparks when operating normally, and it's not directly exposed to the bowl anyways. The brass is a conductor, so even if there was a way to collect some static charge and keep it while being moved into the feeder, it would discharge on contact, before I sprayed the One Shot.
It was pretty hot that day and I did open the garage doors to cool it off, but we are talking about mid-80s at the time it ignited. And the floor is concrete, I was touching all sorts of metal shelf brackets and the press as I was setting up, never had anything remotely close to a spark over the years of use.
But I also can't believe it was the new brass clinking together providing the ignition. Yet it's the only difference between 38SC and .40 that never had an issue using the same "protocol." The .40 brass is a range mix cleaned in dry tumbler so it's always "dirtyish."
If anyone has any ideas, it would be great to explore and try to replicate it. Knowledge is the key here.
-
5 hours ago, m700 said:
How much is "a bit"? It wouldnt take much to poof, but it shouldnt take long for the Hexane to clear. My use of one shot has always been about 100-150 cases of 9mm or so with about 2 mississippi's into a ziplock...
Probably similar to what you do - a few "Missississippies." I don't think it was about the amount, it was about quick dispersion in the air and timing.
-
5 hours ago, mikeg1005 said:
Ya but that is a bad approach to ROing, yelling something at the shooter who might very well be aware they are close to the line and impacting their stage performance. Just say stop if the rule is broken.
That's one side of the argument - "call it or shut up." The other is that if I cannot see an infraction or I cannot determine positively that it has occurred, the safest option is to issue a warning because the infraction might have occurred and if it did, it was an unsafe action for everyone involved even if I cannot call it.
The rest of the USPSA rules are pretty clear about the intent to make the sport safe, after all we are running around with loaded guns and discharging them at full speed, so courses of fire will be constructed in such a way as to minimize potential unintentional safety violations or close calls. If there is a need for a warning, it's something the competitor is already doing wrong.
I'll give you another example. The trigger finger on reloads (and on the move). The rule requires it to be outside the trigger guard, but it can be curled and "touching" the plane of the trigger guard. A millimeter further and it's a DQ. Can you see it and judge it that precisely at speed? No. Is any experienced competitor going to keep the finger that close? No. Do you go by "call the DQ or shut up?" I don't. The requirement in 8.4.1 is "visibly outside the trigger guard" and if I cannot see it, well, it's open to interpretation whether I am a bad RO who is blind, or the person is playing with fire. My tool in that case is to issue a warning. Someone else could push for DQ because "he couldn't see it, so it wasn't visibly outside," but that would get overturned in arbitration because, arguably, someone else could've seen it so it was after all "visibly outside." As long as we have the right to issue a warning, prudently using it keeps us safe. And for those who don't want to get impacted, it's easy - keep it safe at all times, like all the top shooters and all the experienced shooters do.
-
Well, I went to Home Depot and got a two-pack fire extinguishers. They are the basic, single use type. I consider it at least a good start, it's quite eye opening to (sort of) need one and not have it. Next will be to get the CO2 version, per @dannyd's suggestion.
-
1 hour ago, mikeg1005 said:
I always enjoy seeing this a matches... ROs who stand on the 181* several yards away from the shooter looking to make the call.. its like you're so interested in DQing people you're willing to put your life on the line for it lol.
I've seen it on videos, it's a horrible idea on so many levels. I would never allow any RO under my jurisdiction to do anything that unsafe.
But it's also important to remember that we can still issue a warning as the muzzle is dancing around the 180 (or for any other safety reason). The rule 8.6.1 explicitly allows it. And it's good to know that we are allowed to give a warning, which means "you're close to the line," not "you crossed the line but I'm letting you off the hook with a warning." Some shooters will not like it, arguing that if it's not a violation the RO should remain silent. Sort of "call it or shut up." But it's in the rules and there is a reason for it.
-
Using One Shot. Didn't see this thread, just started one about an interesting experience with One Shot last night.
-
Last night was the first (for me).
After loading a few scoops of new and shiny Starline 38SC brass into the case feeder on a 1050, I sprayed a bit of One Shot over the cases. I could smell it, so I knew it was well vaporized and mixed with air, but I didn't expect what happened next. I turned the feeder on, it started the usual mixing and tumbling of brass as the collator picked it up, only to hear and feel a solid "FOOP" as I watched the brass getting flambéed. The vapors (obviously) ignited from just the clean brass being shuffled and the beautiful flames danced inside the feeder as if it was a campfire. After a few seconds it quickly died down, no harm done.
Which brings me to the point. I didn't have a fire extinguisher in the vicinity and, while I looked for blankets or anything else I could use to cover the flames, it wasn't a good time to start developing a contingency plan. Lesson learned, thankfully with no consequences. Anyone else had case lube ignite on its own? Anyone else skimping on the fire extinguisher around the reloading setup? Asking for a friend... Lol.
-
13 minutes ago, motosapiens said:
The second one, not so much, because the rule regarding 180 violations doesn't say anything about pointing in a safe direction.
Yup, but there is one caveat, though - to call the 180 violation you, as an RO, have to be absolutely positive the muzzle broke the 180. If it did, it's an automatic DQ. If it didn't, it's not. But the real problem is when it's close and you are not sure. That's when I give the break to the shooter, because I cannot say "yes, it was past 180." So, in reality, the 180 is closer to 200 in most cases (unless you're perfectly aligned and can make the call with certainty).
/thread drift.
-
PAL is a type of manual pickup. None of the consumer-level "automated" systems I've tried ever worked reliably.
-
I vote "Attic."
RF 100 is finicky at best and the upside down primers are extremely frustrating no matter how rarely they happen. And they aren't that rare with my setup. Also, different primers feed differently because some are more uniform than the others and the "shiny sides" are more or less slick depending on brand. Worse, the recent batches of Winchester primers looked like they were manufactured by monkeys, with visible irregularities (they fire fine, though).
The DAA feeders, both the collator and the "shaking table" are only good as concepts. It's cheap plastic that will keep jamming and that's even more frustrating than dealing with the RF 100. My favorite is when the primers get stuck in the funnel and won't drop into the tube, whether correctly oriented or not. And I had them try to pass through sideways. Not usable.
Primers require either a fully professional setup that will have a working collator, or just pick them up manually in the tubes. The joy of *knowing* all primers are correctly oriented and *knowing* none of them are sideways, jammed or otherwise stuck is priceless. Shake a bit, flips the last few manually, pick them up quickly and be done. I have dozens of tubes so it's easy to devote some time to just primers and then not have to deal with them during reloading.
And no more "squished yellow bug on a windshield bits" in the primer feeding bar on 1050, which would happen with other "solutions." Manual in this case is both fast and satisfying. But, YMMV, as in everything else...
-
5 minutes ago, Joe4d said:
Anytime a discussion of something blatantly unsafe is brought up,,, if it isnt listed it isnt a DQ.
Maybe we are not talking about the same thing, but 10.5.12 explicitly refers to 2.4.1. It is listed. It is DQ. There is no need to cover it under any open-ended verbiage when it's explicitly listed.
Quote10.5.12 Handling live or dummy ammunition (including practice or training rounds, snap caps and empty cases), loaded magazines or loaded speed loading devices in a Safety Area, or failing to comply with Rule 2.4.1.
-
It's not ignored in 10.5.
Safety areas are defined in 2.4 and 2.4.1 specifies DQ for safety violations. However, 2.4 is not by itself a DQ section, so it points to the actual rules that would be cited if a competitor was DQ-ed due to the violations in 2.4. Section 2.4.1 points to 10.5.1 and 10.5.12, which would be the actual DQ rules, even if it's due to the violations defined in 2.4.
For example, pointing a gun outside the "safe direction" area specified in 2.4 would trigger 2.4.1 about firearm not being pointed in the "safe direction" which would trigger DQ under 10.5.12 which specifies that it's applicable for violations of 2.4.1.
Section 10.6 is a catch-all stupid behavior where it's the RM's word against DRL's word. The tie goes to the RM.
-
There is common sense about when the match starts and how the rules apply. The safety rules of the venue itself apply at all times and are independent of the USPSA rules.
It's not worth trying to create a full "legal system" around the egregious behavior, so we have section 10.6 to deal with it. While it might seem that it gives too much power to the RO-s, I see it as a "tie breaker" when it comes to the unacceptable behavior that is not explicitly stated in the rules. The standard is "would an ordinary person find these actions objectionable" and if "yes," then the RM has a mechanism to sanction it.
Here are the two rules, notice how they are intentionally left open and expansive so the RM's hands are not tied:
Quote10.6.1 Competitors will be disqualified from a match for conduct which a Range Officer deems to be unsportsmanlike. Examples of unsportsmanlike conduct include, but are not limited to, cheating, dishonesty, failing to comply with the reasonable directions of a Match Official, or any behavior likely to bring the sport into disrepute.
...
Quote10.6.2 Other persons may be expelled from the range for conduct which a RangeOfficer deems to be unacceptable.
...
-
28 minutes ago, jwhittin said:
What if this was a local match and the "Safe Direction" was clearly shown as only the side berm? I would have to issue a DQ then.
Yes, the same as if the person around the safety table stepped outside the marked boundary. It would be covered under the unsafe gun handling.
-
The problem here is "safe direction" - most safety tables will have a regulation fault line around them, but the safe direction will be assumed to be the berm in front of the table and the safe direction won't be clearly marked. It should be. Precisely for the reasons in the OP.
If the safe direction is not marked, it comes down to the judgment call by the match officials. In this case, I wouldn't find any justification for the DQ since pointing at targets is generally safe.
-
19 hours ago, DougCarden said:
All I can say is on some minor loads the primer cup will not have enough pressure to seal between it and the case, and the gas will start eroding some breech faces. The cups on the small rifle primers have to handle +60,000 PSI in the rifles, and are tougher than the pistol cups.
This is an excellent point I didn't think of - shooting minor, in this case, makes a huge difference because of the pressure and sealing. Learned something new today!
In the event of a tie...
in USPSA/IPSC Rules
Posted
Practiscore will sort it out any way it likes, it doesn't really have to be "by the book." What you're seeing is just random ordering that is either based on which sorting algorithm they use (stable vs. unstable sort in computer science lingo), or how the data is entered into the system. Even the stable sort will create seemingly random result because the initial order of shooters is not based on anything predictable.
USPSA rule book specified handling of ties in section 9.3, but it's not quite consistent and it's only about *match* results, not individual stages. And tie breakers don't change any score, they only determine ranking of tied shooters.