Ram wobble on Lee Challenger and need to upgrade press?

[7055steved]

I ended out ordering the Lee Classic Cast and a few other little upgrades for my reloading setup. The Co-ax would have been sweet but it is pricey at the upper end of what I was willing to spend and (mostly) a pain to track down.

I'm gonna give the Lee Quick Trim dies a try and see how they do. I like the concept and if the case is supported a bit inside the trim die then it'll probably do a decent job of squaring up case mouths. I know this trimming option is not the same thing as a Wilson lathe style, but for the money (peanuts) I'd like to give it a try.

 

[fingers284]

Interesting post i ran across


"any idea how loose a ram can be in a press before it is considered scrap?"

When it won't push a case into the die without your fingers guiding it, it's time to replace. Otherwise, forget it. A round case WILL enter a round die hole precisely unless it's prevented from doing so. Thus, a bit of slack - and 20 thou is only a bit - is actually an asset to precision loading. A firmly fitted ram and die hole that is ever so slightly missaligned can easily bend long cases during sizing.#

Notice the BR guys use non-threaded dies and arbor presses. That means the case alignment is TOTALLY controlled by entering free from any exterior forces. A slightly loose ram goes a long way towards duplicating that.#

Notice that the most highly praised press for "accuracy" is the Forster Co-Ax. It has a totally free floating die holder system, no threads for a hard mounting at all. And no precision gunsmith chambers a barrel with a hard mounted reamer, they use free-floating reamer holders that allow the reamer to enter and follow the barrel's bore freely. And that works really good with pressess too!

Your press is just getting to be properly "broken -in". Keep it clean of primer grit and oiled, it has a long life ahead. But, it you just have the hots for a new single stage press get the best currently available, the Lee Classic Cast. And I say that as a Rock Chucker II owner who wishes he had the bigger, stronger and more user friendly CC instead!

I have to agree with this post from Yomomma, wherever it came from. Others have stressed the importance of everything in a reloading set-up being run-out free...but that is mostly unattainable in any of our systems as they all suffer from the same limitations...that being the free-slide/run-out allowed by the brass in the shell holders. I was in a thread discussion with ATR a few months ago about the limitations of trying to load "precision ammo " with progressive presses as opposed to a well built single stage...namely his design and produced press. He almost had me convinced, until I researched his press and discovered that he uses the same shell holders I do. I measured the brass-to shell holder movement in a bunch of shell holders and every one of them was from 20-30 thou. A piece of brass starts it self-centering process when the neck hits the neck sizer part of the die and completes that process when the tapered body comes into contact with the die body. The clearance of the brass in the shell holder allows this last little bit of line-up to happen and a press ram that is loose by a few thou will move to be centered as well...basically all our systems need run-out...even the ATR press...he can make his press as true as he want but it still requires that brass movement to self center itself in the die at the last instant before resizing. To have our meager equipment manufactured to a "0" run-out capability from first ram retraction to final bullet seating would carry an astronomical price and this discussion wouldn't have been discussed at all.

 

[bigedp51]

I'm still using my RCBS Rockchucker press I bought in 1973 and see no reason to buy a new press. I found the link below after reading this post and tested were the Forster Co-Ax, RCBS Summit, and RCBS Rock Chucker Supreme. And the Rockchucker produced cases with less base to shoulder variations and less neck runout.

Three Way Press Test by Laurie Holland
http://www.targetshooter.co.uk/?p=1750

NOTE, the biggest cause of case neck runout happens if the expander is locked down off center. The second is case neck thickness variations, and if you do not neck turn you have no control over it. Next, if you pause at the top of the ram stroke for 4 to 5 seconds you will have more uniform shoulder locations with less brass spring back after sizing. And in my opinion Forster full length benchrest dies with their high mounted floating expander produce the least case neck runout. And in second place would be dies that have locking collets that center the expander in the die.

Below for the average reloader with off the shelf factory rifles the Lee full length dies with their locking collet and centered expander can produce very concentric cases. "BUT" when you get a lee die clean the collet body and threads and remove any metal chips and burs. This will help to ensure the expander will be clamped down centered in the die. Also note the Lee dies have rubber o-rings that allow the die to float and self center in the press. A rubber o-ring under the dies lock ring turns every press into a Co-Ax press with floating dies.

 

[no-one special]

I have to agree with this post from Yomomma, wherever it came from. Others have stressed the importance of everything in a reloading set-up being run-out free...but that is mostly unattainable in any of our systems as they all suffer from the same limitations...that being the free-slide/run-out allowed by the brass in the shell holders. I was in a thread discussion with ATR a few months ago about the limitations of trying to load "precision ammo " with progressive presses as opposed to a well built single stage...namely his design and produced press. He almost had me convinced, until I researched his press and discovered that he uses the same shell holders I do. I measured the brass-to shell holder movement in a bunch of shell holders and every one of them was from 20-30 thou. A piece of brass starts it self-centering process when the neck hits the neck sizer part of the die and completes that process when the tapered body comes into contact with the die body. The clearance of the brass in the shell holder allows this last little bit of line-up to happen and a press ram that is loose by a few thou will move to be centered as well...basically all our systems need run-out...even the ATR press...he can make his press as true as he want but it still requires that brass movement to self center itself in the die at the last instant before resizing. To have our meager equipment manufactured to a "0" run-out capability from first ram retraction to final bullet seating would carry an astronomical price and this discussion wouldn't have been discussed at all.

You are aware that ATRS also makes their own shell holders for the more common cartridges? True all shell holders have to have some tolerance as not all casings are made to spec. To have the casing move a little inside the shell holder only makes sense so that the casing can align with the die. IF you use BR or Match bushing dies properly you do not use the decapping rod as a guide at all. In fact the decapping rod only contactes the primer AFTER the neck of the casing engages the bushing.
I check my casings for run out after sizing and get less than .0002, which is about as good as 1 can get I believe.

Having shell holders that hold the base of the casing truly at 90 degrees to the die are important. Many snap in shell holders are not 90 degrees to the die which can cause the casing to enter the die at a slight angle.

Bullet seating can be a totally different story though, again depending on the dies employed and the bullets chosen. Flat base bullets tend to be harder to get minimal run out with than boat tails, but again dies that guide the bullet staright up into the die and then apply the pressure to seat them once the casing is also supported helps considerably.

 

[fingers284]

You are aware that ATRS also makes their own shell holders for the more common cartridges? True all shell holders have to have some tolerance as not all casings are made to spec. To have the casing move a little inside the shell holder only makes sense so that the casing can align with the die. IF you use BR or Match bushing dies properly you do not use the decapping rod as a guide at all. In fact the decapping rod only contactes the primer AFTER the neck of the casing engages the bushing.
I check my casings for run out after sizing and get less than .0002, which is about as good as 1 can get I believe.

Having shell holders that hold the base of the casing truly at 90 degrees to the die are important. Many snap in shell holders are not 90 degrees to the die which can cause the casing to enter the die at a slight angle.

Bullet seating can be a totally different story though, again depending on the dies employed and the bullets chosen. Flat base bullets tend to be harder to get minimal run out with than boat tails, but again dies that guide the bullet staright up into the die and then apply the pressure to seat them once the casing is also supported helps considerably.

No I didn't know that but that and your second sentence just exemplifies my "point ",every set-up we as re-loaders use require run-out so the brass can center itself in the die. The only way an " absolute 0 run-out" system could function from round to round would be one that was line-bored all in one piece, chrome finished bore & precision ground ram built from expensive high chrome, hi carbon steel. And then you would have to control your "absolutely identical brass" with a tapered collet holding devise to guide it into the laser bored & lined up (again probably taper mounted) dies. Too be truthful it wouldn't surprise me though if you did have that grade of equipment available to you because if you have brass run-out measuring capability too 2 one hundred thousands of an inch you are far ahead of the rest of us.

You bring up another interesting point considering the relationship between shell holder and die base squarness ... and this will bring up another "ho-hum" from a lot of precision loaders but here goes LOL. After my last conversation with ATR I cut a short plug in the lath, faced off with as close to parallel ends as I could come. One end of the [plug was sized to fit into a shellholder, contacting the brass seating face, the other end was sized large enough to contact a die base on all points. The object was to bring the shell holder up with the ram and have the plug contact the die base at total circumference, not allowing any light thru at any point more than any other. What I discovered was that there would be an extremely thin light showing at one point on every die no matter what shell holder I had in the various presses I tried (a Dillon 650, three different Lee's from a hand press to a classic cast and one RCBS and one very old Herters). The surprising thing I found was I could chase that light gap around the total circumference by loosening the die lock ring and turning the die parts of a turn and re-locking. This tells me that thread engagement is never the same and no matter how hard we try to align everything the fact that the dies are threaded in a dozen or so different machines throughout the continent as are the presses there will always be an impossible quest to achieve perfect line-up with our budget priced equipment.

 

[fingers284]

One thing I forgot to mention yesterday was that while doing the above little experiment I found that when I brought the slug up to the die without the lock ring engaged virtually every light gap disappeared after the "lash" was taken up. This left me thinking that if someone could come up with a caged "floating die" system that would allow a certain amount of lash take-up for OAL control but still allow "perfect" alignment would be an absolute wet dream to every precision shooter no matter how OCD they are.