308 head seating die

Craggy

Well-Known Member
Advice please.
I've recently purchased second hand loading kit set up for 308 of a mate.

I set the press ram up and wound down the head seater die up to it as seen on Internet. My problem is that when I put my case in and close the press I have about 1 mm gap between head and ram.
My mate doesn't have the gap on his press. My brass case is 51mm long. The danger is if I force the press I can actually deform the case.

I have cleaned the die head and it seems fine.

I have got over the problem by inserting the case on the ram and fully lift, then winding the die to it and then off half a turn. Then screwing g the adjuster down to seat the head to the correct depth.

With thanks
craggy

i
 
Its a bullet seating die! From your description I don't think there is anything to worry about. You shouldn't be forcing the press arm anyway. Close the press, screw the die in until it stops, open the press, screw the die in another turn and then lock it tight. When seating a bullet stop when you feel the resistance of the shoulder. Obviously adjust to correct seating.
 
Although I do not speak proper English, I do understand it and cannot for the life of me figure out what you are asking...

SS
 
Craggy find out what make your dies are then go and read the instructions on setting up your make of dies as the set up varies slightly between makes. Often you will find that the body of the die does not contact the shell holder when using the bullet seating die.

I presume you are talking about your bullet seating die. It might help explain your problem if you use the correct terminology.


reloading_course_1.jpg
 
Last edited:
My dies are lee
when I mention head seating die, I am referring to the bullet seating die ( I have heard bullets being called heads, sorry )

i have just read the lee booklet and it says put the case In holder and raise ram to die and screw down to touch then off half turn. Which is the way I got over my problem.

Its seems i was setting it up wrong (plonker). The confusion was when I questioned my other mates procedure (also lee dies) he was getting no daylight between case holder and die.

Maybe be the answer lies in the depth of the case holders as suggested

thanks for advice
craggy
 
Glad you got it sorted but I would set the die up slightly differently to the way that you have just explained or at least as I understand it. I do exactly the same as Tramp has described in the duplicate thread you started i.e. use a case to feel for the crimping ridge inside the die. Not wishing to sound condescending but you do realise that the sizing die is set up quite differently to the seating die?

Your mate has probably got a different press to you, so the retaining section of the press will be of a different thickness to your press. Hence perhaps why you have a larger gap between the bottom of the seating die and the shell holder, and as polestar says the shell holders may be of differing height.
 
Glad you got it sorted but I would set the die up slightly differently to the way that you have just explained or at least as I understand it. I do exactly the same as Tramp has described in the duplicate thread you started i.e. use a case to feel for the crimping ridge inside the die. Not wishing to sound condescending but you do realise that the sizing die is set up quite differently to the seating die?

Your mate has probably got a different press to you, so the retaining section of the press will be of a different thickness to your press. Hence perhaps why you have a larger gap between the bottom of the seating die and the shell holder, and as polestar says the shell holders may be of differing height.

Yep. Set the seating die up as you would a sizing die, and that's what'll happen to your brass, die. It'll push the shoulder in, bell out the body, and generally knacker the brass, in fact, hang on, I'll do one and photo it for you ImageUploadedByTapatalk1402954433.200412.jpg
There you go. That's with the seating die screwed in half a turn, on a smooth bullet, it can't crimp, so kills the brass.

Hope this helps

Now where's my kinetic hammer.....

Pete
 
I rectified my problem and it turned out to be the correct way to the booklet and to what tramp and 8 x 57 suggested.


I also have have a crimping die although I haven't used it. I can't decide if it's really worth it ( not wanting to be a big target shooter ) opinions seam to be split.


I have noticed my Full length sizing die sizes the internal neck measurement 0.1 mm smaller than my mates. I have loaded 5 of each to note the difference


Tramp i I had two bell out below the neck, that's how I knew something wasn't right
thanks
craggy
 
"I have noticed my Full length sizing die sizes the internal neck measurement 0.1 mm smaller than my mates. I have loaded 5 of each to note the difference"

Are you sure that's not just because of neck thickness, perhaps different makes or batches of brass?

I have used the factory crimp die on some loads and the chronograph has confirmed that crimped loads produce more consistent velocities. Whether this relates to greater accuracy at the limited ranges that I shoot at I don't know as I haven't noticed any great differences yet.
 
Craggy find out what make your dies are then go and read the instructions on setting up your make of dies as the set up varies slightly between makes. Often you will find that the body of the die does not contact the shell holder when using the bullet seating die.

I presume you are talking about your bullet seating die. It might help explain your problem if you use the correct terminology.


reloading_course_1.jpg

That picture just says it all, the person who drew it up obviously doesn't know his arse from his head.
sorry .
edi
 
Come off it Edi you know that the head goes against the face of the bolt. :lol:

Got to agree though that it's not the best graphic.
 
8 x 57 I checked internal and external neck measurements and both were 0.1mm bigger.

Come on ejg you can't leave it like that?

craggy
 
graphic, maybe more related to a politician.
I don't have a problem with people calling a bullet a "head" makes more sense that way.
just because someone got wrong we all follow like lemmings....
edi
 
I have used the factory crimp die on some loads and the chronograph has confirmed that crimped loads produce more consistent velocities. Whether this relates to greater accuracy at the limited ranges that I shoot at I don't know as I haven't noticed any great differences yet.

I agree. I have run many 20 round chronograph strips supporting this with several difference classes of cartridges. Accuracy is load dependent but smaller extreme spread and standard deviation usually doesn't hurt an already accurate load.

That said, don't waste your time with the 'roll crimp' that comes on most bullet seating dies. And especially don't waste the time if you have not trimmed the cases: You'll do more harm than good. A Lee Factory Crimp Die is the way to go with equal length cases. The value of crimping is starting to creep into mainstream media. "Shooting Times" (USA) Magazine states in one article that crimping reduced SD and ES in the loads being tested. An advert in the back of the magazine for a torque wrench attachment for reloading presses to measure the force of the crimp seems to support this in their literature.~Muir
 
Reducing deviation in velocities certainly can't do any harm to accurasy can it, even for loads only used at normal stalking distances, so the extra task of using a factory crimp die isn't too much of a chore but using a torque wrench in conjunction with the die?
That's just taking it to extremes as far as I am concerned. That's in the realms of bench rest mentality to my way of thinking. Lets just keep things fairly simple, you know the KISS principle.

Makes you wonder how extreme some people will go in order to achieve ultimate accurasy doesn't it. At some time in the future they won't just be counting each individual kernal of powder into the case but they will be measuring each kernal for size also.:rofl:
Crikey it's going to take them four hours to load each round.
 
Last edited:
What's wrong with counting each individual kernel ? But you make a point on size, perhaps I'll sort my kernels into sized batches ;)
 
Back
Top