jmaass Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 In the February 2003 issue of Handloader Magazine, on page 64, Brian Pearce makes the assertion that: "Most ammunition is loaded on single-stage presses..." This seems unlikely in this day and age. My viewpoint may be skewed somewhat by my association with local USPSA/IPSC, NRA Action Pistol, and Steel Challenge-type competitors, most of whom load and shoot from 5000 to 20000 rounds a year. None use single-stage presses, of course, and you would think that any one of them would equal the annual total number of rounds loaded by 5 or 10 average single-stage reloaders. Can anyone provide a source for this assertion? Is Brian citing the conventional wisdom of the pre-progressive days? Is there a recent industry survey somewhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 Sigh... This is right up there with assertion that accurate ammunition cannot be loaded on a progressive press. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOtherErik Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 You cant forget about rifle ammunition... I think a large majority that load for rifles use a single stage. Hunters and Hipower rifle people what to control every every little detal for accuracy. An automatic powder drop in progresive press is is not as accureate as hand measuring each powder charge. Where as the IPSC shooter can live with one or two tents of a grain difference, a rifle shooter wont. This is, I think, the main reason many people still use a single stage press. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 That may be the (incorrect) reason given, but I still think Mr. Pearce is wrong. Yes, single stage presses have a century head start, but my impression of the average single stage press owner (and I was one of them) is that loading in volume is dreaded. Progressives load more ammo, and as for quality, unless you're willing to go the benchrest route, progressives don't take a back seat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErikW Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 What he probably should have said was, "There are more people loading ammo on single stage presses than there are people loading ammo on progressives." There may be more hunters and benchresters loading ammo, but I'd guess the fewer steel challenge and IPSC shooters catch up to them on rounds loaded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shipster Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 I agree that more people load on single stage presses, but more ammo is loaded on progressive presses each year. I have many friends who load on single stage presses, but only load a couple hundred rounds a year. I'll load 7000-10000 rounds a year on my Dillon. (Edited by Shipster at 6:44 pm on Jan. 8, 2003) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 Yeah a hunter needs what, 100 rounds a year? Maybe it was supposed to be "Most rifle ammo is loaded on single-stage presses". That might (might) be true. Poking around on handloads.com (who knew?), they seem fairly evenly split on SS vs Progressive, but the sample size is small. (Edited by shred at 4:14 pm on Jan. 8, 2003) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 "An automatic powder drop in progresive press is is not as accureate as hand measuring each powder charge. Where as the IPSC shooter can live with one or two tents of a grain difference, a rifle shooter wont." Dillon Precision was justifiably proud to run, about a year ago, the letter from the world championship rifle team that loaded all their ammo, practice and match, on Dillon progressives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loves2Shoot Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 TheOtherEric, FYI, I have friend who does bench rest and they use powder drops (expensive ones) because volume is more accurate then weight suposedly. But then again they weigh each case and seperate them out also. I think they just like to fondle their brass so they use the single stage presses. I hate reloading, so I got a 1050. I would stop shooting before reloading on a single stage again, I am too A.D.D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 Thanks Duane! I've said it before and I'll say it again. The accuracy of the charges thrown by a measure, be it Dillon's or anyone else's, is largely determined the person operating the measure. Bang your press around while you're loading and you betcha, you're going to throw wide variations in charges. I wish I had saved a copy of it, but I read a study where a guy put Dillon's measure against a bunch of high zoot measures and tested the charge accuracy. The Dillon was as good or better than every other measure. For those who claim that they "know" that Dillon's measures are inaccurate, I'd love to see their equipment and their analysis. You need a very precise, laboratory grade scale to properly analyze the deviations of individual charges. The common digital scales sold to reloaders don't cut it accuracy-wise either. The reasons most people seem to stick with single stage loaders are: price and mythology. The mythology is tough to explain. I don't get price either. My time is sure worth the couple hundred bucks to jump to a progressive. I wonder if guys that use single stage presses out of religious convictions also eschew the telephone for the telegraph and use tubs and wash boards for laundry. Loading on a single stage is just like hitting yourself on the head with a hammer. It'll feel SO much better when you stop. That said, I'm simply amazed at the accuracy of the rifle ammo coming off my Dillon - especially in light of the fact that conventional "wisdom" deems it impossible. Yeah, right.... ------------------------- Now back to the original question: There's no way in hell that more ammo is loaded on single stages than on progressives. Unless everyone with single stage is loading for 4-5 hours a night every night of the week. The sheer time contraints of the process would seem to preclude the possibility of it. Maybe this was true in the early days of the progressive. Not anymore... (Edited by EricW at 4:04 pm on Jan. 8, 2003) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan550 Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 I think too that "more people load on single stage presses" but there'd have to be a bunch more doing it than I think there are to make up for the sheer volume that action shooters send down-range in a given year! Alan~^~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paraman1 Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 I think more people "OWN" single stage presses than progressive but most people I know that own one use it once every 3 years to load their hunting ammo and then ask me to load all their handgun stuff on my progressive . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2alpha Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 This hard to prove either way. We competition shooters tend to think we are the big consumers but I bet we number in the thousands where the other reloaders are probably in the millions. That is number of people reloading. I know a lot of single stage presses are still being sold. There's a lot of Hornady, Sierra, and other major bullets sold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimel Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 It would be interesting to know just how many single stage presses are sold each year as compared to progressives. Surely the competition shooters aren't the only people keeping Dillon in business. I have both single stage and progressive and I still use both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolan Posted January 10, 2003 Share Posted January 10, 2003 Between my brother Gene and I we own and regularly use 5 progressive presses (1-1050, 2-550, 1-Pro1000, 1-Mec) and 1 single stage press. The single stage hasn't been bolted to the reloading bench in over a year. I wish Hangloader, er Handlouder, er Handloader would have done a little research before making such blanket statements. A few phone calls to RCBS, Dillon, Lee, Hornady, Midway, etc... would have straightened up the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmaass Posted January 10, 2003 Author Share Posted January 10, 2003 Quote: from Nolan on 1:05 pm on Jan. 10, 2003 I wish Hangloader, er Handlouder, er Handloader would have done a little research before making such blanket statements. A few phone calls to RCBS, Dillon, Lee, Hornady, Midway, etc... would have straightened up the facts. I emailed Handloader, Lee, Dillon, Redding, and Hornady, and so far all but Hornady have replied to tell me they have no information on the matter. Handloader does not have a working email address listed on the web site or in their magazine, except for the marketting folk. The respondent from there said I should ask the compainies whether they sell more single-stage or progressive presses, but that is not the crux of the question nor Pearce's claim. Lee suggested I email Brian Pearce, but again no email address published. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2alpha Posted January 11, 2003 Share Posted January 11, 2003 Nolan, how do you know that no research was done? Because you don't agree with the article? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1badmagnum Posted January 11, 2003 Share Posted January 11, 2003 I'm necking down 50 ae cases to make 440 corbon rounds.I do these rounds on the rock chucker because of the torque needed to reform these cases.progressive presses are made with tolerences to flex slightly because your performing many processes at once.I could not make certain ammo with just one press. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 I think that without some serious customer-surveying, there's no way to get the data we're looking for. You could ask the all reloading machine manufacturers what their sales are, but then (even if they give you such proprietary information) you have no idea how often each machine is used, or how long they last (I'd bet, for example, most Dillon 1050's are still in use, and most Lee Challenger presses aren't) You could ask the all the bullet sellers how many of each bullet they sell, but you don't know what press the bullets get used in. You could make some guesses, but then we're back to guessing again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 ErikW, It's funny you mention that, because I am one of the few weirdos who use a lab scale for reloading. I have done multiple tests on my RCBS Uniflow measure and my Dillon measures. MY RCBS is more accurate than MY Dillons, period . The Dillon is accurate enough though. I'm not saying this is a general rule. I'm just saying that there are differences between measures. This does not say that single stage loading is more accurate than progressive loading. It isn't. I just wish I could put an RCBS Uniflow on my Dillon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now