Hornady bushing die
- Thread starter tangolima
- Start date
My 28 Sherman Magnum uses Hornady bushing dies. Mine are a custom shop order though for a proprietary cartridge system….meaning all tolerances are closer. That said, the die is the same before machining.
It is a good die. It makes great ammo….literally <0.006” bullet tip runout…approximately 0.002” CBTD variation. Bushings provide consistent OD as always. I run the die with the expander ball. I find Hornady expanders very consistent with lubricant. I’m running the Creedmoor Sports case wax. Imperial works too. Actually this lubricant or another super thin & slick case lubricant is the key to bushing accuracy. The bushing has to stay pretty clean to keep it from binding off to one side.
I’m comparing to my experiences with Forster, Redding Type S, Whidden, RCBS basic, Lyman and Hornady std dies. People may say I’m biased because I find Hornady dies generally to provide consistent results and easy adjustment.
They key to good results in all dies is accurate setup and checking of first item results.
It is a good die. It makes great ammo….literally <0.006” bullet tip runout…approximately 0.002” CBTD variation. Bushings provide consistent OD as always. I run the die with the expander ball. I find Hornady expanders very consistent with lubricant. I’m running the Creedmoor Sports case wax. Imperial works too. Actually this lubricant or another super thin & slick case lubricant is the key to bushing accuracy. The bushing has to stay pretty clean to keep it from binding off to one side.
I’m comparing to my experiences with Forster, Redding Type S, Whidden, RCBS basic, Lyman and Hornady std dies. People may say I’m biased because I find Hornady dies generally to provide consistent results and easy adjustment.
They key to good results in all dies is accurate setup and checking of first item results.
This old five-minute video may be of interest. I've been using body dies or a bushing die without a bushing, plus the Lee Collet Die shown in the video for some time now for precision loads. If I seat the bullet with a Redding Competition Seating Die, I routinely have less than 0.001" runout in .308 Win. Alternately, if I don't have the Redding die for one of my chamberings, using a Lyman M-die to expand the case mouth just enough to put the short cylindrical step into it that keeps the bullet sitting straight up as it enters a conventional seating die is a method that gets close to that. Seldom anything over 0.002" runout, anyway.
Where do you measure your runout? and with what tool? I’m interested in possibly some M die or Lee Collet die testing!
For reference, I use a 21st Century tool with a basic gage. Together, I have a gage pin to check my setup. I find the pin rolls with 0.001” TIR. I think it is well made enough that the pin should have less than 0.0002” TIR….So???
Anyways. I look at the base to roller distance and try to match that at the shoulder. Then I put the indicator 0.050” roughly from the tip or below the plastic tip. This is how I get my numbers.
For reference, I use a 21st Century tool with a basic gage. Together, I have a gage pin to check my setup. I find the pin rolls with 0.001” TIR. I think it is well made enough that the pin should have less than 0.0002” TIR….So???
Anyways. I look at the base to roller distance and try to match that at the shoulder. Then I put the indicator 0.050” roughly from the tip or below the plastic tip. This is how I get my numbers.
I use both the Forster tool, which holds the ends of the cartridge stationary while I indicate off the bullet next to the case mouth, and the Sinclair tool, which supports the case only in two places, and then I indicate off the bullet tip. I also have Redding's gauge for neck wall thickness runout so that I can keep track of its contribution to the problem.
Here is a link to a PDF file illustrating how the same amount of bullet tipping would show in both systems of measurement and how to calculate actual bullet tip-tilt off-axis from both.
Here is a link to a PDF file illustrating how the same amount of bullet tipping would show in both systems of measurement and how to calculate actual bullet tip-tilt off-axis from both.
I plan to use the die without expander ball. That brings out the next question; the diameter of the bushing.
6.5CM has bullet diameter of 0.264". I'd like to have neck ID of 0.261". I turn neck thickness to 0.012-0.0013". I order 0.287" and 0.285" considering the brass will probably spring back by 0.001". Redding bushings are $5 cheaper than Hornady ones.
Hornady bushing die comes with expander ball. But why do we want to have expander ball in bushing die?
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
6.5CM has bullet diameter of 0.264". I'd like to have neck ID of 0.261". I turn neck thickness to 0.012-0.0013". I order 0.287" and 0.285" considering the brass will probably spring back by 0.001". Redding bushings are $5 cheaper than Hornady ones.
Hornady bushing die comes with expander ball. But why do we want to have expander ball in bushing die?
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
The only reason I know of for having an expander in bushing dies is if you are using a self-loader and get dented case mouths either from the case spinning and hitting the gun during ejection or from hitting the ground afterward. I prefer to use a mandrel die on dented mouths to ready them for resizing because leaving the expander ball mounted in the die won't let me choose how much interference fit the bullet will have with the case mouth.
If you later decide to try the Collet Die, it uses a mandrel to set mouth diameter, and that handles dents in normal use. However, you'd have to turn or sandpaper its mandrel down to get 0.003" of interference fit in a finished case. It wouldn't hit your numbers out of the box.
If you later decide to try the Collet Die, it uses a mandrel to set mouth diameter, and that handles dents in normal use. However, you'd have to turn or sandpaper its mandrel down to get 0.003" of interference fit in a finished case. It wouldn't hit your numbers out of the box.
What I do to make the collet die work the way I like is first lap the collet nose against the closing surface in the body to get rid of the gritty feel from the rough machining marks, and then when I size with it, after lowering the press ram, I rotate the case and run it in a second time, which seems to help consistency. It is some extra bother, but you get very straight and concentric necks out of it.
You should be able to come very close to doing the same with your bushing die. If it isn't quite as perfect as you would like, at least you have established the correct bushing sizing, and you can then order a conventional sizing die from Forster with the neck custom honed to that bushing diameter. Hummer70 says this provides the very best measurable case concentricity.
You should be able to come very close to doing the same with your bushing die. If it isn't quite as perfect as you would like, at least you have established the correct bushing sizing, and you can then order a conventional sizing die from Forster with the neck custom honed to that bushing diameter. Hummer70 says this provides the very best measurable case concentricity.
@UncleNick…have you validated the math in that pdf. I must admit, it has me confused as it is defining TIR as 1/2 of the max swing of the indicator plus 1/2 of the bullet diameter. or basically centerline to max distance from the centerline.
The, why is TIR shown in mils(angular measurement) and inch(linear measurement)?
Then B and C are based on a bend point, but In the real world, the bend point is unknown, right?
That said, knowing C the measurement point, TIR and a few cartridge dimensions, I and use basic trig to calculate a bullet tilt angle for the Hornady system.
I can also do the same with the cantilevered system.
That said, if I want to know how far my tip is from the centerline, I can just mease with the std tool like Accuracy One, RCBS and 21st Century tool do. I would contend that folks who make the Hornady style tool want smaller variation numbers so the user thinks they have higher precision. Which is false. It is just a less detectable measurement, where we actually want a more detectable measurement.
IME, when I run bushings without an expander, the neck curls inward. On something like the Hornady, I just spin the expander in a drill to turn down if required. I wonder if Hornady sells custom diameters?? I’m calling today!
The, why is TIR shown in mils(angular measurement) and inch(linear measurement)?
Then B and C are based on a bend point, but In the real world, the bend point is unknown, right?
That said, knowing C the measurement point, TIR and a few cartridge dimensions, I and use basic trig to calculate a bullet tilt angle for the Hornady system.
I can also do the same with the cantilevered system.
That said, if I want to know how far my tip is from the centerline, I can just mease with the std tool like Accuracy One, RCBS and 21st Century tool do. I would contend that folks who make the Hornady style tool want smaller variation numbers so the user thinks they have higher precision. Which is false. It is just a less detectable measurement, where we actually want a more detectable measurement.
Unclenick said:
IME, when I run bushings without an expander, the neck curls inward. On something like the Hornady, I just spin the expander in a drill to turn down if required. I wonder if Hornady sells custom diameters?? I’m calling today!
Nathan,
Sorry for the confusion. Mils refers to thousandths of an inch in common toolmaker and machinist lingo, which is how I used it in that diagram. I see the middle example label is incorrect. I'll fix that. The numbers are just an example, so the ratio of the reading difference for the same cartridge can be seen. The actual numbers would differ with the individual cartridge, of course. Angles in that document, as figured at the bottom, can be in whatever units you choose as long as they are consistent, but you don't need the angles to get sorting information.
See if this relabeled version is easier to follow. I'll change the original post, too.
The TIR (Total Indicated Runout) is how far the indicator needle moves altogether in a reading, so if the bullet tip was, say, tilted 0.004", then the TIR would be 0.008" because that tilt would be above the centerline when the tipped bullet was directed upward, and below the centerline by the same amount when the cartridge was rotated 180°, adding tilt to the reading in one direction and subtracting it from the reading in the other. In the top two drawings in that file, it is hard to see, but the blue lines touch the bullet at an indicator location. One on the upward-tilted bullet and the other at the same location on the superimposed downward-tilted bullet. This is much clearer on the third drawing, where the indicator location is out at the tip.
Sorry for the confusion. Mils refers to thousandths of an inch in common toolmaker and machinist lingo, which is how I used it in that diagram. I see the middle example label is incorrect. I'll fix that. The numbers are just an example, so the ratio of the reading difference for the same cartridge can be seen. The actual numbers would differ with the individual cartridge, of course. Angles in that document, as figured at the bottom, can be in whatever units you choose as long as they are consistent, but you don't need the angles to get sorting information.
See if this relabeled version is easier to follow. I'll change the original post, too.
The TIR (Total Indicated Runout) is how far the indicator needle moves altogether in a reading, so if the bullet tip was, say, tilted 0.004", then the TIR would be 0.008" because that tilt would be above the centerline when the tipped bullet was directed upward, and below the centerline by the same amount when the cartridge was rotated 180°, adding tilt to the reading in one direction and subtracting it from the reading in the other. In the top two drawings in that file, it is hard to see, but the blue lines touch the bullet at an indicator location. One on the upward-tilted bullet and the other at the same location on the superimposed downward-tilted bullet. This is much clearer on the third drawing, where the indicator location is out at the tip.
Interesting. It's not unusual to be unable to slip a bullet into the mouth of a fired case. It depends on how tight the fit of the neck into the chamber is. Below is an example of a range pick-up I sectioned without resizing:
What causes that slight curl is pressure actually expands a neck starting at the bottom of its contact with the bullet and that expansion rolls forward along the bullet bearing surface's contact with the rest of the neck but stops at the case mouth because gas starts to leak out as soon as it tries to expand the mouth, and that creates a pressure drop along the thin gap that has opened between the neck and bullet, so it no longer has enough pressure at the mouth to finish expanding it. As a result, the lip snaps back to something near its resized diameter after the bullet is gone.
What causes that slight curl is pressure actually expands a neck starting at the bottom of its contact with the bullet and that expansion rolls forward along the bullet bearing surface's contact with the rest of the neck but stops at the case mouth because gas starts to leak out as soon as it tries to expand the mouth, and that creates a pressure drop along the thin gap that has opened between the neck and bullet, so it no longer has enough pressure at the mouth to finish expanding it. As a result, the lip snaps back to something near its resized diameter after the bullet is gone.
I don't have a setup to measure runout, so I don't have figures to gauge the die. But there is no dragging or shaving. No curling either. I am shoot the loads. But I doubt there will be any observable difference in group size.
We know firing can cause curling of the brass mouth. If the resulted mouth diameter is smaller than the bushing diameter, it won't be corrected by sizing, and the brass will come out with curling.
Hmm... I will need watch out for this. It can happen quite easily. Say my bushing has diameter of 0.287". The neck diameter of a loaded round is 0.289". Almost any curling after firing will give problem. The countermeasure? I have smaller bushing of 0.285". Or pushing out the neck with the expander ball before sizing.
-TL
PS Never mind. I'm over thinking. The curling after firing never reduce the diameter. The mouth just doesn't expand as much as the base of the neck. We are good. Good to not have the expander ball.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
We know firing can cause curling of the brass mouth. If the resulted mouth diameter is smaller than the bushing diameter, it won't be corrected by sizing, and the brass will come out with curling.
Hmm... I will need watch out for this. It can happen quite easily. Say my bushing has diameter of 0.287". The neck diameter of a loaded round is 0.289". Almost any curling after firing will give problem. The countermeasure? I have smaller bushing of 0.285". Or pushing out the neck with the expander ball before sizing.
-TL
PS Never mind. I'm over thinking. The curling after firing never reduce the diameter. The mouth just doesn't expand as much as the base of the neck. We are good. Good to not have the expander ball.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk