accuracy differences with dies

Hdwhit,
I have messed with a couple sets of common dies that produce nearly perfect SAAMI spec brass/rounds from Milbrass, without sizing the body, then the shoulder, then the neck in three different processes.
They even fit the Ruger American with it's 'Tight' chamber.

They also shoot pretty good, on par with factory 'Premium' ammo.
It wasn't as easy as it sounds, most common multi function dies are hogged out and the one thing you CAN'T do is put metal back in...

Since brass is abrasive, dies wear, so I'm often tinkering with new sets as I'm using currently finished sets.

Dillon dies come pretty close, available, but they are a long way from 'Common' or cheap.

I'd love to get my hands on a CNC wire EDM and crank out some solid carbide dies!
I tried cutting EDM blanks and finishing carbide dies but never got it exactly right...
My EDM is mostly shop made and isn't as accurate as it needs to be.

I can't seem to get die makers to produce a die to my specification no matter how much I pay them.
Seems they always think they know what I 'Want' over the specifications I send them...
I might try again now that most carbide cutters are using CNC EDM now that I have specifications that work 99.999% of the time on milbrass (made since 2012) and I have inspection equipment that can detect/reject a coat of was on the brass without handling every single piece... (Brain numbing work!)

I won't really give it away, but I've been using roller dies to shape shoulder/necks, getting nice, crisp bends back, and precise Datum length. Thinking of producing it if I can simplify it a little more, getting costs down.
Would be great for high volume processers, just have to figure out how to get it working in a common self indexing progressive press.
Probably another idea that will never see outside sales, but so far it's working for me.
 
old roper said:
Unclenick, If Redding was best why use Wilson. They make combo press you can mount on a bench for threaded dies. So you really don't care what he uses vs what he testing. I can buy that
Click to expand...

We don't know why. That's why I suggested you write Mr. Salazar. Apropos of another current thread, when you get to very long ranges you can't take much advantage of pinpoint accuracy. So one possibility is just that Mr. Salazar accepts that and does not worry about the difference the dies make at that range. My only point was that I don't think you can accurately characterize it as misleading without more information, just as you couldn't accurately conclude I didn't care what he was using. You need more data.
 
Nick, if you run test claim this is best but you use something else, I'll call it misleading if I want. I've earned that right.
 
I submit that you don't know that happened. The RT-10 in the 6mmBR.com article was used in the seating die test and is mentioned by name there. Both articles have 2009 copyrights, so you need to show the RT-10 article was written after the seating die test or that they weren't in process simultaneously just to show the photo of the Wilson suggests anything at all. Otherwise, you're just defaming someone's character from your armchair with no basis in fact. That's like writing for a tabloid. I suppose the constitution gives you the right to say it, earned or not, but board has no obligation to publish it uncorrected.

2009, incidentally, is the year the Redding patent on the floating stem addition to the sliding sleeve seating die design expired. That's why Whidden can copy it. It's probably a well-made version and may equal the Redding's performance. I don't have one to compare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top