Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

New Super 1050 Vs Older 1050


Recommended Posts

I am picking up a used 1050 this weekend. It is so old that it has the old style case feeder but the guy I am buying it from says that the press looks basically the same as the new ones. Does anyone have experience with both the old 1050 and the newer Super 1050? What are the main differences and are they any pitfalls I should watch out for that are specific to the older machine?

Thanks!

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There have been a few threads on this in the past. Try a search for more info.

IIRC, at least a couple of the differences:

1. shorter stroke/less room for longer rifle cases on the older version

2. the shellplate snaps into place a little quicker/more abruptly in the older version, which is not good if you're running a compressed load (= more spilled powder.) I think you can get an updated spring/part that slows this down somewhat.

I'm sure there are a couple of other things but none that come immediately to mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. the shellplate snaps into place a little quicker/more abruptly in the older version, which is not good if you're running a compressed load (= more spilled powder.) I think you can get an updated spring/part that slows this down somewhat.

Uhhh. I don't think so. :huh:

I have used both new and older versions of the 1050. ALL of mine are the RL ver. by choice.

Merlin

Edited by benny hill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Merlin, you prefer the older ones? Why? I have heard that from another guy but I think he heard it third hand because he has a couple new 1050s.

I did a search but am clearly searching on the wrong keywords....

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhhh. I don't think so. :huh:

I use the RL version also.

It gets a little confusing but you are right. The "RL 1050" and the new "Super 1050" have the same indexing characteristics. I think the model in between, referred to as just the "1050" had the snappier indexing.

Edited by al503
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Merlin, you prefer the older ones? Why? I have heard that from another guy but I think he heard it third hand because he has a couple new 1050s.

I did a search but am clearly searching on the wrong keywords....

Thanks!

IMO...The older models run smoother. They have less distance to travel to get the job done as they cycle. IF you are never going to load long rifle ammo I personally feel the RL is the better machine. And yes, I may very well be crazy. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks! I am not sure if this is an old 1050 or an RL1050. I will be picking it uo in a couple days. I understand is has a chrome or nickel toolhead and the old case feeder so I am assuming that it predates the RL designation.

I will be loading pistol cartridges only with it so cartridge length is not an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure from the description that you're picking up an RL1050 --- it sounds remarkably like the one sitting on my bench. When Dillon first released the Super 1050, they had the problem of snapping the shell plate forward, and potentially spilling powder if you were loading a near case filling charge. IIRC, Dillon developed some parts to alleviate that --- which may be able to be retrofitted to early Super 1050s.

When loading on the 1050, my left hand places the bullet on the case while the shellplate is still turning. I hang on to the case and ease it and the shell plate into their final resting position....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, I took delivery of my S1050 in August and my shellplate indexes *very* smoothly. I don't see any of the "snapping" issues that jiggle out powder. In fact, the one thing I love about the 1050 is that there isn't crud everywhere - which seems inevitable with the 550.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The RL1050 was the first 1050 introduced.(no such thing as just a '1050'). It was just for handgun and 223 rifle. It had a shorter shaft, and therefore a shorter stroke. It indexed very smoothly. The Super 1050 replaced the RL1050 in the product line. It has a slightly longer stroke combined with a different linkage to allow loading of rifle up to 30-06 length (3.340"). The first few years of production had faster indexing, further along in the handle stroke, to allow the long rifle cartridges to completely clear the dies before the shellplate began to rotate. A side effect of this was that the abrupt indexing could fling powder out of the shorter pistol cases, primarily cases full of powder such as 38 Super and 9mm major. Several years ago the index lever was redesigned. Instead a short, straight angle to the camming surface it has more of a french curve, starting to index sooner, but at a slower rate. This forced us to shorten the crimp die for 30-06, so a loaded cartridge wouldn't bind in the die as the shellplate rotates. Dillon sent replacement index levers to everyone in our database we could identify as owning an older style Super 1050.

BTW, the earliest RL1050s had electroless nickel plated frames and toolheads. Improper lubrication could cause this plating to peel, so it was eventually changed to a phosphate finish, aka "Parkerizing". :ph34r:

take notes, there might be a quiz later :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The RL1050 was the first 1050 introduced.(no such thing as just a '1050').

dag nab it. Please disregard my posts above. :wacko:

I just remember that there was a period when it had the quicker indexing, which I erroneously referred to as a plain '1050.'

My apologies to all. :unsure::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent! Thanks for all the info!

I have one more question. Is a caliber change on an RL 1050 (not super) faster or slower than on an XL650? I have a 650 with 6 different toolheads and it was my intention to use the RL1050 for 9mm only while using the 650 for 38SC, 40 and 45. I also load 7mm Rem Mag, 38-40 and 357 but I use a Lee turret press or pro 1000 for those since the volume is low. Just wondering if it makes sense to load 9mm and 40 (highest volume of rounds shot) on the 1050. I have 3 complete primer setups for the 650, small pistol, small rifle (for the 38SC) and large pistol so it is not terribly hard to change the primer setup but it would be great to be able to dedicate as few types of primers as possible to each press.

Thanks!

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the risk of putting my foot in my mouth again... ;)

I've been using my 1050 for .40's and 38 SC. I just ordered another toolhead so that I can load 9mm for my newest open gun. It probably takes me ~20 minutes to make the change. I also have a 650 set up in 9 but once I started loading on the 1050, there was really no going back for me.

The good thing about the 1050 is that you can load up a boatload of ammo and make a lot of extra rounds so you don't have to keep switching back and forth between calibers.

Edited by al503
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have one more question. Is a caliber change on an RL 1050 (not super) faster or slower than on an XL650?

Anywhere from somewhat slower to considerably slower converting a 1050, depending on what all needs to be changed. Considerably more expensive too. A bare 1050 toolhead is $157 and a complete quick-change can easily go north of $300 even from BE if you include dies, shellplate and so on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr Dillon:

The first few years of production had faster indexing, further along in the handle stroke, to allow the long rifle cartridges to completely clear the dies before the shellplate began to rotate. A side effect of this was that the abrupt indexing could fling powder out of the shorter pistol cases, primarily cases full of powder such as 38 Super and 9mm major. Several years ago the index lever was redesigned. Instead a short, straight angle to the camming surface it has more of a french curve, starting to index sooner, but at a slower rate.

Dillon sent replacement index levers to everyone in our database we could identify as owning an older style Super 1050.

I have an early Super 1050. Would have bought a RL for pistol loading only but dithered over the expense too long and only Supers were available. It has the abrupt index you describe. I would like to have the improved index lever you describe - I got my machine through a commercial loader and am not in your S1050 data base to have gotten a replacement - but the guy I talked to the other day when requesting another part said there was no such thing as an improved advance and I did not have the book at hand to go from. What do I order by part number and name? Looks like a 20312 index lever assembly, but I want to be RIGHT when I call again.

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Picked up the 1050 this AM and spent the day trearing it down, scrubbing the old grease off, and putting her back together. This thing is a tank! It is one of the older ones, all nickel. The previous owner had disabled a few features including the primer swage and the rachet assembly that keeps you from short stroking it. He must have been some type of electrical guru because he had rigged an optical powder sensor.

Anyway, I have moved my 9mm stuff over to this press but I cannot figure out how to make the powder check work. It appears that there is a recess for the rod that presses agains the carrier but with the powder measure in place there is no way to set it up that way. Please tell me that the new style powder check works on the old style 1050 tool head, I have 6 of them I have been holding on to until I got a 1050...

Thanks!

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...