IVC
-
Posts
1,173 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Profiles
Events
Store
Posts posted by IVC
-
-
On 7/3/2019 at 7:41 AM, rowdyb said:
For example, using only one tool head and having to change from small to large primer it takes me 2 hours to change from say 9mm to 45acp on my 1050. Take careful and thorough notes and setting things gets easier and faster. It's like anything mechanical, if you're in a rush you will pay for it.
Working off of a single toolhead is not a fair comparison of caliber exchanges between machines.
With a dedicated toolhead for each caliber, exchanges are pretty straightforward. I have just purchased a 1050 a few weeks back and it was my first progressive machine (I've had a single stage for several months, so I am new to reloading). It was set up for 9mm because I had dies for .40 and Dillon wouldn't sell it "vanilla" (there was a way to get the bare bones, but it was missing too many parts that I didn't know enough about). Sure, it took time to convert it to .40 with having to set up all the dies, but once set up, the exchange is now fast - I have just recently purchased another toolhead for another caliber and it was pretty quick to exchange the shell plate, swap the toolhead and the few simple parts such as collators (case feeder, MBF).
So, as a new reloader, I wouldn't put too much weight on "difficult caliber exchange." Cost and initial setup are a consideration, though.
-
3 hours ago, GrumpyOne said:
Perhaps you should read the forum guidelines about political content.
Restricted Content
Politics
Policy and political discussions or debates of any kind - even if you consider your opinions to be "facts" - are not welcome anywhere in the forum.
Specifically including (but not limited to):
• USPSA vs IPSC
• IPSC vs IDPA
• STI vs SVI
• Limited 10 vs Limited Division
• This Division vs That Division
• This Government vs That Government
• Gun Control IssuesI'm new to the forum and had to chuckle that the first five points are considered "politics" - I can easily see why they are not allowed (highly divisive), but it's funny that they would be included in the list with "Government" and "Gun Control."
-
2 hours ago, B585 said:
Did you ever try the drill Cha-Lee recommends for shot calling from his book?
No, I have Anderson and Stoeger books (I don't believe Cha-Lee is either of them). Do you have a link to the book or the drill?
-
My current load is 4.8gn N310 under 180 MG FMJ loaded to 1.200 in 5.4 SVI Limited.
I have a smaller batch of 200 MG FMJ that I bought a while ago to tinker with. From everything I've read, I should likely stick to 180, but I'd like to use up the bullets I already have. Partly to see if I can tell the difference, partly to learn more about reloading, partly to use up the stock.
So, when making a transition of this kind, what's a good starting point for the powder charge? Is there any rule of thumb about starting points when going to slightly lighter/heavier bullets? The new bullets are longer, so loading to same OAL will reduce the empty space in the case and change pressure characteristics so I want to make sure I don't do anything stupid.
-
I'm using recipe I got from the guy who built my gun - 4.8gn N310 under 180 FMJ from Montana Gold and 1.200 OAL. Soft shooting, consistent, clean, averages 171 PF.
-
As a mid-B shooter working on my A class, I have been working hard on shoot calling. No matter which drill I do, live or dry, I'm paying intentional and careful attention to the sights at all times. I don't even care if I miss in speed mode, as long as I was observing the sights and recognizing where they were. Transitions practice is about snapping to the next target and indexing as fast as I can without overshooting, while at the same time working on getting sights to "appear" aligned (enough).
This works well when I slow down, but I still find myself surprised if the shot is not where I thought it would go when I'm shooting fast (live fire). I know I saw the sights, but the bullet impact says otherwise. This has been a puzzle for a few months now and I've been trying to diagnose the problem. My default position was that I wasn't seeing the sights correctly and that I needed to pay attention to the moment when the shot was fired, believing that I was missing that moment in my reading of the sights.
However, I have recently acquired an open gun, same manufacturer, same grip, same safety, same holster, etc. What I noticed was that some of my indexing would be slightly off in rapid transition and that while I can see the dot being off the target, when I do the same with my Limited gun and the irons, I see them on target - what I am doing is calling the shot correctly in principle-I see the sights when the shot is fired-but the misalignment of the sight is sufficient to pull the shot enough.
So, I would appreciate some input from more experienced shooters.
First, is this normal that when calling shots one learns how to see sights before learning how to judge misalignment? Should I keep the speed and work on getting a more consistent index, learn the amount of misalignment I can tolerate, or should I slow down and ensure that I get better sight picture? My concern is to train correctly and not ingrain bad habits. Just seeing the difference between the dot and irons made me think quite a bit, but I don't know what the best way is to proceed without creating training scars.
Then, there is the issue of sight vs. target focus. Is there any trick to judge misalignment of sights in target focus? Is this something that comes to more precise index and understanding the sight picture that is slightly blurry, or should I do something different in training?
At least I feel much better about figuring out that the problem is not the vision itself and seeing the sights at the time the shot is fired, but processing the overall picture/image and making mental determination about the shot.
-
After some more analysis, I was able to fix #6 in the OP - it was light crimp that was causing the problems, not necessarily the sizing die. I figured it out after running a batch of pre-processed brass that was initially passing the gauge, so the problem couldn't have been the sizing die and it had to be crimping. Since I have micrometer adjustable Redding crimping die, I moved it several ticks and the brass started passing hundo.
This is certainly quite an interesting process to get the system to work well.
-
17 hours ago, cbrussell said:
Armanov makes a case feeder stop, I think there are others as well.
Thanks for the info - It's good to learn about various vendors if I need it down the road.
What I noticed is that they sell quite a bit of small improvements and that one can spend more than one's wife would on accessorizing her purses, jewelry and shoes combined.
-
17 hours ago, tkheard said:
For (1), I used a piece of coathanger wire, bent it around the bolt ( on the right side ) and pulled the case plunger back. Then I bent the wire around the back of the case plunger case. When I want stop feeding cases, I hook the wire around the bolt with the handle down and slip it around the housing. Plunger stays back and no more cases feed.
Looks like a good quick way to do it. I'll probably try it before I decide on a more permanent solution.
-
12 hours ago, 78Staff said:
1 - Several options, I use the Inline Fab casefeed stop (https://inlinefabrication.com/products/case-feed-stop-dillon-1050), but there are less costly 3d printed versions on ebay pretty often. Or you can use a homemade solution like a twisted up wire, pipe cleaner, etc...
That looks exactly like what I was looking for. $20 is not bad at all - it's a solid piece of gear.
Quote2. The primary purpose of the swager is crimping out the primer pocket (and opening up the case mouth if needed in the same step). You generally don't run into crimped primer pockets on 40 (which I think is what you were referring to)... anyway the Dillon swager rod is considered one of the weak points of the 1050, which might be one reason you see folks recommend to back it off if not actually using it, to prevent any accidental contact (missed primer) that might break it. Personally, I set the swager to swage as required when running brass that might have crimps, ie 556 or nato 9mm, but when running 45 I remove it and swap in a Small Pistol Primer detector instead. The Hold back die will still open up the brass and prevent runout on the shellplate. Other calibers I just set it similar to how you mentioned, so that I will feel a missed primer on the downstroke.
Good to hear - Yes, it's .40 (soon to be 38SC as well) and I don't use it for crimped primer pockets, just to detect failed decapping.
Quote3. I have the Everglades backer (I think this is what you meant, not EGW?) on my 45acp toolhead as well. It's been discussed some, the Everglades version is just a threaded bolt essentially so there is no "give" like you would see with the Level 10 product, so seems of little benefit unless processing sorted brass. Mixed brass will have variations in case length and base thickness rendering the EGA hit or miss. I haven't removed it, and have many times though about epoxying a small short spring on the bottom of the bolt that would allow it a bit of give, thus making it more useful for mixed brass runs - but never followed through with it. I'm not sure how necessary it really is to be honest. I think EGA developed it for their presses which had run 10's of thousands of rounds so were pretty well worn.
Ha, indeed it's EGA (not EGW).
Very interesting link to Level 10 backer (I am new to Dillon/1050, so I'm just learning about these vendors). I wasn't aware of it and I can see how the spring loaded design is the correct way to do it. I'll do what you did for now - just leave it there until/unless I run into problems.
Quote4. Several options - Using backup cam meant for auto's, or an endoscope that attaches to a tablet or similar small flat screen monitor. Search through the forum you'll find a few posts on it - https://forums.brianenos.com/topic/241288-diy-dillon-1050-powder-camera-video/? Honestly though, it's dang near impossible to load a double or a squib on a 1050 when using the newer style PM failsafe. I've got a monitor setup on mine but have been considering taking it off - i don't even use it that much, my eyes are on the tool head anyway so I can see the powder fairly well regardless.
I see the problem - even with camera you still have to watch it and if you don't, it defeats the purpose. I wish I had an extra station for powder check as I don't want to seat and crimp with a single die. For now, I'll just leave it as-is.
Quote6. This is a whole 'nother thread lol Check out the 9mm 1050 dies thread there is a lot of talk about size/decap dies. The Dillon die actually sizes further down than the Lee IIRC, and is akin to a small base/undersize die... almost. I think the lee advertises .003 undersize, and the EGW is .001. Lots of guys are changing to the Mighty Armory dies, but there have been QC and shipping issues. I tried the Lee Size/Decap and Factory Crimp Dies but am currently back to using the Dillon dies. 9mm is a work in progress for me at this point so I am still working out the issues so am leery to give advise here. However depending on the desired result (are you loading match brass, or range fodder), sometime a case gauge can have you chasing your a$$ forever. For range use a better option is to use your firearm's barrel/chamber as a checker.
I figured it would be along these lines - trial and error, finding what works, figuring tolerances based on the specific chamber, etc.
Thanks for your time and input!
-
Wow guys, thank you for all the detailed responses. I expected to get some information, but the amount of detail and knowledge here is amazing.
-
A new 1050 showed up at my front door a few weeks back, after I decided to get myself off of the 1100 waiting list - I don't have another progressive machine and needed to get practice and match ammo loaded long. I set it up on my workbench, set up dies, reloaded several batches and now have some pretty basic questions.
(1) When I'm about to end reloading and need to "cycle it dry," what's the best way to prevent new cases from feeding? I would just pull the handle down, grab the screw that holds the shell holder at the point where I won't get pinched by the actuator and then keep cycling until brass in station 2 goes it's merry way round. Is there a better way? Should I just remove the case-feeder tube and finish the few remaining pieces of brass?
(2) SWAGER: I have cut out about 1/3 of one case with Dremel so that I can see how far the swager rod goes in. Adjusting the backer was pretty straightforward since I was looking for the contact with the inside bottom of the brass. However, I could have somewhat different depth of the swager rod and it all looked pretty good. I decided to back it off just a bit because I've heard of shell plates being messed up when using incorrectly adjusted swager station, then I tested it with a piece of brass with spent primer to see whether it would "pass" (it didn't), which is the primary purpose for the swager (reloading .40). So, what is the main concern with swager rod adjusted too deep and how does it mess up the shell plate?
(3) I have added the EGW primer backer on stage 4, mostly just to balance the shell plate. Is this even necessary and does it help at all? Those are inexpensive so there is no financial reason to keep/remove.
(4) My setup includes MBF on station 6, no powder check, Redding micrometer seating and micrometer crimping dies. One thing that bugs me is that I cannot see very well the powder content on stage 6 for visual check unless I am actively looking around. Is there any mirror or trick to get a better view of the powder level?
(5) How often do you do QC? I will take a round at random from station 6 and measure the powder charge, then I will take a few from collection bin and measure the OAL. I do it about once per hundred or so rounds. Any suggestions here?
(6) My Dillon decapping die has the nice spring-loaded pin, but the size tends to be all over the place and a lot of brass doesn't really pass my hundo gauge. They get "lightly stuck" at the base (I can push them all the way in). I understand that the hundo is generally tight, but I also want to be able to separate brass that might have Glock bulge and could cause problems. I have ordered Lee U die (arriving tomorrow). Is this a good way to go and should I expect any issues with decapping now that the spring loaded pin is gone?
Any other tips that can make my life easier? My setup is solid now and I have worked out the kinks with adjusting everything from DAA powder funnel to the angle of collator and the speed of rotation.
Thanks!
-
I do "flip and catch" and prefer it to anything else - my hand is away from the port, my face and body and the RO are all pretty far away too, and I don't allow the round to linger while being held only by the extractor.
If I were to modify it, I would still never cover the port and I would seriously avoid any "intermediate speed" of unloading. It would have to be painfully slow, or very fast. I don't want to give gravity a chance to work on a live round that is only held by extractor. That's where the problems happen - going what one believes is "slow," yet having both enough time for the round to move and enough force for the ejector to impact such an unstable round.
-
Besides the argument of whether you should shoot right or left handed (you have a choice with pistols, not so much with long guns), you can control your "blading" with your stance, with your torso rotation and the flex in your elbows. Of the three, I wouldn't mess with torso rotation since you need it for transitions. That leaves stance and elbows. Personally, I prefer to compensate for slight asymmetry of the isosceles due to holding the gun and eye position by tweaking my elbows. Not sure it's the best way, but it works well and it's something that becomes a second nature through dry fire.
-
On 6/4/2019 at 12:42 PM, Blackstone45 said:
Now that you mention it, my sights track up and to the right. While it arguably doesn't matter which way the sights move as long as they come back down aligned, this is still symptomatic of too much weak hand pressure, right?
You should also pay attention to the sideways pressure that comes from rotating your elbows slightly - the torque comes from the shoulders, but the effect on the gun is through the top of your hand, where the torque is preventing the gun from recoiling sideways regardless of your grip. Fine tuning of grip in combination with this torque will give you the ability to fine tune where the gun recoils.
-
It depends on how the gun and magazines are built. If they are designed for longer rounds, longer will feed better and you get better reliability.
Why would they be designed that way? The design came from 1911's which were designed for .45 ACP which in turn has quite different dimensions from .40.
-
A somewhat unrelated question (don't want to start a new thread). I have a small(er) batch of Montana Gold 200's - I ordered them at the same time as the 180's thinking that it would be nice to experiment. While it seems that the consensus is to use 180's for matches, I would like to play with the 200's in practice since I already have them.
What's a good starting point when switching to 200's? I assume coal should stay the same for feeding purposes, yet that will result in smaller internal volume after (longer) bullets are seated. Any good rules of thumb?
-
UPDATE: I shot my first match with the SVI and my N310 4.7 gn, 180 MG FMJ, 1.200 coal reloads. No problems in feeding and no problems with ammo. It was pretty soft shooting so I'll consider this load to be GTG as Furrly suggested above. Just need to get used to the new gun.
The only issue I had was feeding out of my Barney magazine - I used an MBX 10-round magazine as a dedicated Barney and the gun wouldn't go back into battery without a light tap on the back of the slide (no, I didn't ride the slide). My guess is that it has to do with the very long coal. The 4 other SVI mags fed without any problems. Anyone had similar issue with MBX vs. SVI?
-
On 5/24/2019 at 7:04 PM, ltdmstr said:
On the question of why use fast powders for limited guns, the general consensus has long been that fast powder + heavy bullet = less felt recoil. If I recall correctly, the SAAMI formula backs that up.
Thanks for this information - I hoped there would be a meaningful explanation beyond just basic preference.
-
1) Trigger press/pull (let's not get into it).
2) - 10) Everything else.
-
50 minutes ago, candiru said:
In terms of the chrono rules, the idea is to make sure that you're at least 1.5 standard deviations above the goal velocity (and you're using a temperature stable powder) or 2x, if you're more conservative. There have been some write ups of the math about that.
That's a good rule of thumb. I'll stick to that and adjust the average of my load based on the standard deviation I'm getting out of my equipment and process. I'll wait until the progressive press arrives before finalizing the adjustments, though, as my SD is likely to change with the different press.
-
50 minutes ago, candiru said:
Oh yeah... Note that MG's take more powder to achieve the same velocity. Both because they are .400 diameter and between their jacket alloy is very hard. I didn't see any primer problem signs with MGs and CCI primers.
Great info - thanks.
My target load is 4.8 gn of N310 and it's right on the money based on the velocity I was told it would achieve out of my gun (no surprise there, the guys who built the gun would know what they are talking about). You mentioned that MG are harder and need more powder (you use a good 0.5 gn less) - how do bullet type and the extra powder affect recoil? Is it about the same, or something noticeable?
-
My SVI Limited with 5.4 barrel has finally arrived and after having some issues with the factory ammo I decided it was time to start reloading, both to get the feeding reliability and to get the slight edge in recoil. While I'm waiting for my pre-ordered Dillon 1100, I got a Forster Co-Ax as a future backup and as a ways to develop initial loads. I have all the measuring tools, including a chrono. So far, so good.
I talked to Casey over at SVI and he gave me a recipe that uses N310 and 1.200 COAL. I double checked with him that he didn't mean N320 (he didn't), so I wrote it all down, but felt a bit uneasy because N310 is one of the fastest powders out there and it's not listed in any manuals for .40. The long COAL is what made me feel a bit more at ease with respect to pressure, so I started at 0.5 gn less powder than the final recipe and put together rows of 10 rounds, each row with 0.1 gn more. I am loading Montana Gold 180 FMJ, using Federal primers #100. For the initial batch I measured each powder charge, partly to be careful, but most importantly because I didn't have a powder measure (only the trickler that came with the scale). So, now that I have been able to measure everything and collect some data, I have several questions.
(1) Is there any reason to use a very fast powder for .40 Limited? I understand why one needs slow powders for, say, 38SC in an open gun, but is there any reason to prefer one over another for Limited? Any idea why such a well established manufacturer suggests N310 when it seems almost everyone else uses N320 or slower powders?
(2) My primers are not getting flat, but they do get somewhat less rounded then before firing. Is this because Federals are soft, or is this a sign of building pressure? There is no cratering and the speed/PF are all within range, but I understand that this doesn't mean the pressure doesn't spike during firing (which is why I'm worried about fast powders when I cannot measure the chamber pressure directly).
(3) My final load, after getting Redding x10 powder measure, has the following velocity/PF distribution: 963 ft/s +- 7 ft/s (extreme spread 24), which is 173 PF (171 - 175). However, I've had a batch that had standard deviation of 17 ft/s (about the same PF). Are these numbers reasonable to be considered "consistent," or should I work on my process? Also, as a practical matter, should I drop the PF a bit and still be reasonably safe on a chrono stage?
(4) To me it seems that I should get better consistency if I use a powder measure than if I measure each load. The reason is that the scale has it's own inner inaccuracies and it only measures up to 0.1 gn. A good powder measure, on the other hand, can be calibrated once and then the inaccuracies only come from the small inconsistencies in the mechanical system that drops powder. I can measure 10 or 20 loads, divide the weight by 10 or 20, and get a very good value for the average charge weight. Is this correct thinking?
As a final disclosure, I spent a lot of time in physics labs, so I am very familiar with measuring, setting up precision equipment, data collection and error analysis.
-
13 hours ago, anonymouscuban said:
I've been working on drills where I'm moving in different directions to develop more awareness of where my muzzle is pointed.
There are several very specific situations that will get you close to 180.By far the most common and important one is reloading while moving towards your support side (moving left if you're right handed). This is the one that you not only need to practice, but it's often a significant factor on "close to symmetric" stages when deciding which way to go first. You'll have to keep the gun to the side in a way that will almost feel that the gun is behind you.
Another one is retreating from a position and entering a new position around a barrier that is uprange. You have to make sure you don't get too excited in "trying to see it as early as possible" as if you don't do it correctly, you can lead the gun around the barrier and break the 180.
K—O
in Dillon Precision Reloading Equipment
Posted
Not at all - 2 hours is pretty fast to set it up from scratch, particularly since it requires rigorous QC before you move it to "full production" mode.
What I was saying is that it's not a fair comparison for "caliber exchange difference between platforms" since caliber exchange usually implies preset components and considers just the time to swap the critical parts. Toolhead on 1050 is held by a single large nut (and a few auxiliary pins/ratchet that must be disconnected) and after removing the toolhead, the shellplate is readily accessible. Add a few minor parts that must be loosened or pushed out of the way, it's still a pretty straightforward exercise.
If you started from scratch on any other platform, including Lock'n Load, you would also have much longer overall setup time and, actually, 1050 would look even better - if you spend 2 hours adjusting the dies, you'd have (2 hrs + 5 min) vs. (2 hrs + 20 min), which is much smaller difference than just 5 min vs. 20 min.