IVC
-
Posts
1,170 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Profiles
Events
Store
Posts posted by IVC
-
-
I wish my variance was as little as 0.001 - 0.003.
Coated bullets and mixed brass even in principle won't produce that level of consistency - the bullet is seated by pressing off-center, towards the ogive, so the tip of the bullet is not touched and any deposit (coating or lead below) will change the OAL. Look at the bullets before you load them and you can see with naked eye that the tips are a bit off. Also, it's easy to measure the length of each bullet and you'll see variability. Note that this doesn't even mean that the base of the bullet is seated at different depth, the depth could be anything. But it will be close enough...
Brass is another issue. I'm pretty sure that the press won't hold the brass within 0.001 at the seating die. Maybe at the sizing die, if overcammed, but not at other stations.
You don't have a problem
-
1 hour ago, andrewst359 said:
Can the plate handle 40sw, 44mag and 223?
Yes, probably not and no.
The plate is designed for the standard competition calibers such as 9mm, 38 Super/SC, .40 and even .45 is pushing it a bit. I'm pretty sure that 44 Magnum is too tall and would cause issues, and 223 for sure doesn't work. But for 223 the Dillon basic plate works really well, where cases travel in tangent to the edge of the bowl and not perpendicular.
-
On 5/28/2022 at 6:31 AM, Tom S. said:
Didn't piss me off near as much as the stupid Federal small primer cases though. I hope whoever at Federal came up with that stupid idea gets monkey pox
Swager with the large primer rod should be able to "detect" small primer brass. But messing with the primer pocket size... you're right, monkey pox on them. Lol.
-
On 12/24/2023 at 8:46 AM, racerba said:
That's why i will tell the shooter that I think he skipped a target and wait to see if there is/are hits on the target...if they know they shot it, they will usually tell you that they took it from this position or that position...
The "I think" phrase is the mortal enemy of good RO-ing. If you're not sure, the break goes to the shooter and you don't mention it.
Play the shooting plan back in your head, confer with other ROs, be sure before you make any call.
-
On 12/26/2023 at 11:20 AM, Sarge said:
The uncased gun can point into a berm and left alone.
At the safe table - yes. At any other location, the moment one picks up such a gun it's "gun handling." For PCCs there is an explicit exemption that allows casing and uncasing (and nothing else). For other guns, it's a DQ.
And leaving a PCC on a cart is not "casing/uncasing." It's "storing." Rule 5.2.1.6 applies.
-
Rule 5.2.1.6 is very specific about "storing in a mobile rack or carrier." If you leave your PCC on the side, it's "being stored," i.e., not carried. It must be vertical, as specified in the rule.
While there is no DQ associated directly with this rule, it does call for the RM to determine what is acceptable. One can argue that the RM's jurisdiction applies only to "transport" ("In the event of disagreement on how the firearm is being transported, the Range Master shall be the final authority..."), but that would be trying to stretch it and could be counter-argued that the moment you pick it up, you're "transporting" it.
-
I ordered it years ago, when ordering directly from Australia was the only way. No problems, it all worked nicely, got stuck at some checkpoint or another along the way for a few days, cleared all the customs and arrived with only slightly bent mounting bracket, nothing that would be a problem. No hiccups or issues with it ever since. You're good to go ordering direct.
-
The amount of burrs will depend on how you press your handle. If you go firm and positive, then pause for a moment while the trimmer cuts, you usually end up with minimal to no burrs. And if you reload FMJBT-style bullets, you don't have to worry about what little burrs might remain, they'll get cleaned up as the bullet is seated.
Over-tinkering with brass is something I try to avoid with passion.
-
A few months back I started reloading 223 (for some local matches, already had 1050, so it was a matter of both curiosity and the ability to have a load that matches my rifle). Rifle rounds are quite different from pistol and I went through the setup process slowly and systematically. Initially, I over-lubed and ended up with small dents on the neck - easily fixed. But I still had a lot of failures in the final gauge (it's not a hundo, it only takes 7 rounds at the time). Then I got the more precise rifle gauge with min/max case length and realized that my brass wasn't consistent. After looking into it, turns out the sizing die needs to be *over* cammed, that's just how the design works. It takes away any shellplate wiggle room, ensures full length sizing works correctly and, most importantly, gets the shoulder within the spec. Once adjusted like this, it's practically 0 rejection rate at the gauge (but I still gauge all the ammo).
This not only opened my eyes to the issues with rifle rounds, but it also made me readjust the pistol sizing dies. And, voila, suddenly there are no more "barely" passing rounds, it all fits perfectly in a hundo. Unless the case is defective, or there is another obvious problem. Note that I have a Roll-sizer and size all my brass, and I also used the U-dies on some setups to try to minimize gauging issues, but it wasn't until I figured out that the sizing die needs to press the shell solidly that I got around the problem.
-
On 12/18/2023 at 2:06 PM, Maximis228 said:
Wet clean brass.
This is the only step I'm not sure about - other than aesthetics, what's the purpose? Do you think your rejection rate would go up if you didn't?
-
On 12/20/2023 at 1:30 PM, MoNsTeR said:
My point is that I have not found it difficult, at all, to achieve rounds-up-to-perfect results. Ordinary equipment, ordinary processes, same(?) components as everyone else. So what's the causal factor in differing results?
Case-gauging is just another QC step where you inspect the brass. No different than sorting out similar calibers or visual inspection of the random range pickup - unless you have a machine, it's a manual process where you look at each one and quickly classify into go/no-go.
The real question is: what are your steps *prior* to running the press? Any preprocessing merely moves the QC steps from the backend to the front end.
I would bet that at some point you have to remove an odd .38SC/.38 Super or 380 out of your 9mm stash, or an odd 357 Sig out of your .40. Not to mention the annoying .38 Super if you reload .38SC (Dillon to this day lists incorrect shellplate for 38SC). But apart from caliber sorting, you also have to cull brass that is at the end of its useful life, those with dented or pitted walls, any type of crack at the mouth, any other deformity from, e.g., stepping on it, etc. Then you have brass from all sorts of manufacturers with visibly different dimensions around the rim. All of this will create potential problems in the final round.
Given that the mixed brass is by far the most variable part of any reloading setup, it must be addressed *somewhere*. The last step of case-gauging is a "catch all" test to ensure smooth operation. For example, case gauging will catch cases that cracked during mouth expansion or bullet seating, something you can't catch in preprocessing.
-
Interesting study and good to see someone collect and analyze the data.
But the conclusion should be a bit more qualified, especially if they are going to submit it to an academic journal - the emphasis must be on the untrained shooters. The finding that people who don't know how to use a red dot will not do well with a red dot, or will do better with irons or lasers, is much less dramatic than any finding about how *trained* people perform with each sighting system. Also notice that his graphs show irons outperforming any other aiming system across the board, again confirming that this is about untrained shooters.
Beside small factual inaccuracies (e.g., that "GMs are the top 5% in USPSA") and some technical inaccuracies (e.g., about comparing divisions where differences are more than just the sighting system; and more), the study shows what we intuitively know - a person who doesn't know how to type will be faster writing it down than pecking at the keyboard, or, a person who doesn't know how to ride a bike will get to the grocery store faster on foot.
Yes, red dots have a learning curve before they start outperforming other sighting systems, something we all went through when first learning the dot. Searching for the dot it a telltale sign of someone new to the system, especially when doing SHO/WHO.
-
5 hours ago, Daslinger said:
Is unweighting the holster side of the body slightly or stepping with the opposite foot and drawing (unweighting the dominant side leg)……something that other people do ? Or am I just finding it better because of my inadequate holster rig set up ?
Probably the latter. Holster shouldn't change retention based on quite a bit of contact, let alone the incidental contact you imply. If the gun is getting stuck, look for what is catching and where. It shouldn't happen with a well-fitting holster, so a guess is that it's something related to the rest of your setup.
-
11 hours ago, Dr. Phil said:
1 I lift the gun, looking through the sights at the single plate at 20 yards. Or at the large plate at 50. Or the, well, hopefully you get it...
No I don't.
If you have a 6" plate at 50 yards we are talking about angular size of 12 MOA, which is 1/5 of a degree. Let's make it a 12" plate, for 0.4 degrees and let's round it off to 1/2 a degree, so it's an even bigger plate. Given that the width of your pinky at arm's length is about 1 degree, we are talking about a target the size of half of the width of your pinky. Correct?
Now, you have a laser and a target that is a quarter size of your pinky (half width, half height... squares and all that), you raise the gun and the dot is not on the target. Which way and how do you move your gun to get the dot on the target? I assume you're not claiming that you can close your eyes, index at the target and be within quarter of the pinky nail from the center of the plate, right? Instead, you'll have a small target, no visible dot anywhere, and... now what? Which way and how do you adjust your aim so the dot even gets on the target at all?
I won't even get into the (in)ability to see the dot on a 50 yard plate, but if you insist it works, I'll actually take photos of a green laser (SureFire X400) at this distance and post it here, then you can post your own photo and we can compare our notes.
-
On 12/15/2023 at 9:18 AM, Dr. Phil said:
I actually shoot a laser just like a dot.
You can't, that's the problem.
The dot is there regardless of the background or the light conditions, the laser is not. Laser needs background to reflect off of. Standalone targets (no good background), (semi)distant targets, outdoors targets in the sun, etc., are all examples of where not only you can't shoot laser like a dot, but you can barely shoot it at all. There is no laser dot until you're very close to being fully settled, there is no peripheral dot as you index the gun.
I would compare it to shooting 4x+ pistol scope off-hand at, say, 50 yards. If/when you get the crosshairs on target you do get the benefit, but you can't get it there fast and for all practical applications it's not a good setup.
Can you explain how you shoot laser at a single steel plate at 20 yards?
-
On 12/13/2023 at 12:04 PM, Dr. Phil said:
I guess your many years of testing has discovered much different results than mine.
I gave you specific arguments, not some story about "my experience" or "trust me." If you discovered different results, you can state them and refute what I said. This is a discussion forum and the idea is to have a (gasp) discussion about what does and does not work. I would be more than happy to hear about your "experience" and "findings" and discuss them. I also own a laser and can state my own experiences, for what they are worth to the community.
What are you, three year old or something?
On 12/13/2023 at 12:04 PM, Dr. Phil said:I'm out
Yup, three year old.
-
4 hours ago, Dr. Phil said:
I have seen that advantage in lots of situations from shooting in a dark room, nearly dark and with the light in your eyes, to awkward shooting positions which don't allow a full or even partial field of view of the sights. The advantage is real, just as the dot advantage is real. I don't like the laser so much at 50 yards, but the laser works at that range if it is the right laser.
To the extent you can shoot a laser the same as a dot, it's an advantage over iron sights - target focus, no alignment issues, visible on target.
But the "awkward shooting position" benefit is dubious at best because you still have to see the target and have a direct line of sight, so if you cannot bring the gun to this line of sight, you're either shooting off of some other index at extremely close range (where sights don't matter), or it's something *really* awkward where you're going to have to "fish" for the laser dot anyways, which is very slow for a dynamic situation.
On the other hand, the dot will be much better during target acquisition because it shows in your peripheral vision as the gun is brought to the target and because it will be "settling" on the target the same regardless of the size or location of the target. A laser won't show at all in your peripheral vision unless there is a very close background and not only it won't settle on a small target, but you won't be able to find it in the first place because you'll have to index it practically perfectly just so you can see the dot on the small target. Not to mention that lasers don't work in regular daylight past close distances. In these situation the laser is *much* worse than iron sights because you can't use it at all.
I would say that laser as the only/primary system is the worst option for both self defense and competition. At best it's a useful add-on in *some* situations (I have a SureFire green laser and have tried finding a good use for it, but couldn't).
-
On 12/10/2023 at 9:17 AM, Dr. Phil said:
I have many guns with dots and they are great. Some with irons. But the laser beats them all.
Lasers are explicitly allowed for PCC and they aren't forbidden for Open in Appendix D1.14 like they are in other divisions. Yet they are rarely used and mostly on PCCs to get the first shot without aiming. Not an advantage you claim.
-
5 hours ago, shred said:
I've known people that would declare Open and shoot a Limited (or LO or whatever) gun in Open right up until a major then switch to the proper division to win that class. Seen it first hand.
But that's a different issue (and who even looks at the concepts such as "winning a class??"). People who start shooting a new division are not classified lower, they are simply not classified at all in that division. The flag "U" signifies the lack of classification. I'm not sure anyone could claim to have won "an unclassified class" no matter how pathetic the person...
-
The classification system requires a certain number of classifiers to get a more representative score and it's not directly connected to the auxiliary rules that limit how cross-division classes correlate. When one is starting out, they are not automatically classified as "D" either, even though that's the lowest one can start with. Just because we know what the lowest is doesn't mean we bypass the process, and having to shoot a few classifiers to get a classification is a good rule, not only because it provides a much better average, but also because it indicates that the person actually dabbled in that division.
But "sandbagging," .... c'mon.
-
Doesn't make sense to connect classification in 2nd+ division to sandbagging - how would it even work to "sandbag" by having a "U" next to your name?
The OP's question is about the timing of the change from "U" to an actual class, something one can "control" by simply not shooting classifiers. A person who wants to be a "U" can remain a "U" indefinitely. It's not a class and it doesn't provide any benefit, so sandbagging as a motive doesn't sound plausible.
-
3 hours ago, Nik Habicht said:
Actually even at that point the competitor can continue to shoot - the command you partially quoted is "If you are finished, unload and show clear."
The competitor must stop after "If clear, hammer down, holster" is given. Bang at that point is DQ.....
Oops, you're quite right, I didn't notice I quoted the wrong command. The whole point was that one can still shoot after "...show clear." I'll correct the post, thanks.
Edit: can't update the post, too old. -
Dots are not practical on *all* carry guns. On my pocket-carry PM9 it's not an option. On my IWB setups I could have one, I just don't. These are not guns to run competition drills or to practice at speed where the dot makes a difference, these guns are for self-defense, likely at a very short range and possibly from an index without aiming at contact distances.
But if you have a dot and it doesn't affect concealability or draw and you aren't worried about the battery or glare in the dark, definitely nothing wrong with having a dot. Who knows, I might have a setup in the future with the dot, but at the moment it seems like a solution looking for a problem.
-
3 hours ago, lgh said:
Some gamers have their own rules.
Some posters don't complete their [this space intentionally left blank]
weirdish 40 minor chrono results
in 10mm/40 Caliber
Posted
I wouldn't correlate the two since you're at the low end of PF and things can deteriorate quickly.
Normally, I would check the chrono first (direct sunlight can make it go crazy), but since you're getting FTE and no cycling, it appears that it's working correctly. The rest is about the load - before you get into brass, consider that you're comparing 165 to 180, bullets that are not only different weight, but significantly different length. If you're keeping OAL fixed, the 165s will have quite a bit more space in the case and will yield lower pressure. In fact, this alone could explain what you're seeing.