Getting brass to headspace to rifle chamber?

[cloverleaf]

I am seroiusly considering a set of Lee collet dies. Reading this thread I get the impression that partial resizing in a full length die is preferable? Incidentally I will use the collet die in a seperate press and leave my full length dies set up in the other for when they need a full resize. does that make sense? How much of a pain in the @$$ are the collet dies? CL

 

[Guest]

I like the collet dies I've got. They work well for neck sizing without a lot of overwork for the brass. I generally neck size a couple of times between partial full length resizing. Seems to work well for me. Of course, I also like the Hornady neck dies, and they work just about as well. I haven't had to anneal necks yet, but I'm prepared for that if the need arises. One word of caution - be sure your load bench is sturdy for using the collet dies. They require about 25lbs of force to seat the neck around the mandrel for resizing, and if you're setup isn't sturdy, you'll end up with a lot of slack and slop in the deal. I don't know if it makes a difference in your results, but I'm careful to be sure I have a good strong setup for the collet dies.

 

[Innovative]

RiverRider,

There's nothing to worry about. The angle of the shoulder is just one angle (real world or otherwise). Take that measurement anywhere on the shoulder and zero the gauge, then you'll be able to compare your fireformed loads to your handloads. The gauge then displays the difference, which is your exact chamber clearance.

This is handy to know, because smetimes a sticking case is not a case length priblem - it can be a case width problem, and this will show you exactly what's really going on in your chamber.

- Innovative

 

[RiverRider]

For FL or partial FL sizing, if the shoulder angle of fireformed brass is not exactly the same as the shoulder angle of the case after it has be resized, then the correlation is lost. You cannot possibly do better than to resize a case *just enough* to fit snugly but easily into the chamber, short of having a sizing die custom-made to perfectly match your chamber (or simply getting one that matches as perfectly as possible).

I think the tool could be useful in determining how well a sizing die matches up with a rifle's chamber, but that's about it. You're not going to correct anything by measuring error. That's the problem I see with so many of these gadgets you can buy for precise measurement.

Another example is the use of comparators supposedly useful for determining exact distance from the land when seating bullets. Unless the comparator is modeled after the leade of your rifle's chamber, you don't really *know* how far off the lands you are. Measurements don't change a thing about how your seater stem works with your bullets or how well your sizing die matches your chamber. By and large, what you get is what you get. There are variances inherent in every piece of equipment and every process we undertake. The best we can do is find the sweet spots and operate as close to the middle of them as possible.

 

[Innovative]

RiverRider,

Trust me . . . . the angle on a little bitty short shoulder is not going to differ enough to even be measurable . . . . no way. Your method works, and it's a good enough for most shooters. However, there's a lot to learn when you actually measure things. I have access to a shadow comparator and measuring equipment that is only found in the best machine shops.

As for measuring back from the ogive of the bullet . . . . read the Tech Tips section on my website. There are trade-offs that need to be considered between getting accurate measurements, and being able to get consistent readings. Due to the non-uniformity of bullet tips, it's almost always more accurate to measure back from the ogive.

- Innovative

 

[RiverRider]

I have had long detailed discussions with guys who use these things, and the bottom line is that your sizing die's output is what it is. Your seating die seats bullets as consistently as it does---what you get is what you get. You can measure stuff until the sun burns out and you're not going to improve a thing. We select components and tools complete with their shortcomings based on relative performance. My seating dies produce a certain amount of seating depth error and my selected bullet causes more of the same, and all the measurement in the world will not change it.

There are useful gadgets, and there are gadgets that are wastes of time and money.

You're not going to be persuaded, nor am I. You have a vested interest in these gadgets. Good luck with it.

I choose to argue with you no more, it's as big a waste of time as useless gadgets are a waste of money.

 

[Innovative]

I don't want to be argumentive either. It's always good to hear opinions from fellow shooters. I've been able to learn quite a bit from listening to other shooters.

One thing that used to baffle me is when I'd encounter one of my own handloads that chambered with a slightly noticable force when closing the bolt. How could that happen? They were all made with identicle components, and my dies were always set exactly the same. After measuring everything immaginable I've found some interesting reasons.

- Innovative