You guys with Star sizers, riddle me this......

[Buckshot]

...............Below is a Star size die blank I made.

http://www.fototime.com/0BC9ECC796F51F9/standard.jpg

I quit making these things due to their 'fussiness'. In order to make them you have to setup and zero about 6 different tools. Then you have to use .875" stock in order to form the flange which only keeps the die from being pushed through the machine casting when you push a boolit through. The remainder of the die is .750" so you end up peeling off 1/8" of steel (plus that in the lube recess) for the balance of the die. In my mind it's wastefull, more expensive, and more time consuming.

Can any of you think of why an 'E' clip wouldn't do the same thing as that flange? In that way you could use .750" stock and only have to turn down the lube recess in the center. Well you'd need the groove for the 'E' clip too. Drilling, reaming or boring, and then polishing you have to do to ANY die, so no change there.

Also, it would be much simpler to drill the countersink on the aft end of the die. Currently with that flange you have to remove the 7/8" collet then get the 3/4" collet, put the die body in backwards so the flange is on the inside, install and then drill. With the 'E' clip thing all you'd have to do is flip the 3/4" body around, close the collet and drill.

I still dislike those (supposedly) 'Timed' 2 diameter lube holes too :-)

................Buckshot

[miestro_jerry]

IO will have to try to make one of these dies in my machine shop, I need a couple of calibers or sizes that I don't want to pay for them as custom orders.

Can you post more pictures and the 411 on the ways you do things?

Thanks,

Jerry

[targetshootr]

No idea what an E clip is but it would be have to be as sturdy as the flange considering the pressure it's under when an oversize boolit makes it halfway through the die. When my first 44 GB mold came I thought I was going to ruin the sizer the boolits were so big.

[mtgrs737]

Buckshot,

The upper flange may help to seal the lube from migrating up and out around the top of the outside of the die. Having said that you might be able to cut a O-ring groove in the top full diameter portion of the die just under the E-clip groove to seal the lube back. However the bottom of the old Star dies does not have a O-ring and they very seldom leak. I would make one without the top flange and pass it around to Star users for a try, that is the best way to test something anyway. Good idea.

[monadnock#5]

First off, there's no Star luber at my house. No engineering degree on the wall either. It's not the price of the luber that puts me off, it's the price of dies and accessories that gives me pause. So I've been looking at your picture and thinking out loud.

Howse about parting the die at the juncture of the top .750 dia. and the lube relief. Thread the flanged upper portion internally. The lower portion would have to be extended and threaded to screw into the flanged upper.

The first unit would be very expensive due to the added machining steps. But you would have a univeral flange to which all other subsequent sizers could be mated.

If this is a really bad idea, please be gentle, otherwise who knows how long it will be before I crawl out from under my rock again. :neutral:

[garandsrus]

Monadock,

I was going to post that you could probably use a threaded attachment for the flange also.

The die is under a pretty good amount of downward pressure, so I don't think any type of clip or clevis would be strong enough to hold it.

Buckshot - I have made exactly one Star die, on a friend's lathe. I plan to make more as I get my lathe set up.

We chucked the blank and turned the flange and entire "lower" (below the flange) portion of the die and drilled the appropriate sized hole and counter bore with one setup. After parting the die off (same setup), we simply reversed it and cut the slight taper for the opening and honed it to the final size. We never had the flange on the inside of the 3-jaw chuck.

Maybe we just didn't know any better, but it worked great :)

John

[HeavyMetal]

I just purchased my second Star lube sizer. This one was used but in excellent shape. It came without a die and, with no lube in it, I was able to confirm your thought on what the flange actually does, and you are correct the flange is there to keep the die from being pushed through and out the bottom!

I suspect the cir clip / e clip idea has some merit but you must remember the base of the unit is aluminum so something with a sharp edge that rocks might be a problem!

Other than that I see no reason a good C clip or Snap Ring (even better) of the right thickness won't get the job done. I will be more than happy to volenteer my press if you need it for R&D.

As for the lube holes? Since the unit injects the lube under pressure only as you are reaching the pivot point on the linkage the lube system ( at the die proper) has no pressure on or in it and will never leak like the Lymans or RCBS.

Therefore size of the holes in the die, as long as they are not to small, should not be an issue! Again lets try one and see!

[runfiverun]

hows about welding a washer type affair a d grinding down your weld
i have a hunch thats how magma does it

[HTRN]

Buckshot, machining in general is "wasteful" - all too often, half or more of the barstock winds up as chips. What are the actual dimensions, anyway? You may be able to get away with using a smaller Metric size..


HTRN

[MtGun44]

I believe you'd need something more substantial than an e-clip, altho in
that diam, it may be pretty thick, too. How about a machined flange about
1/8" thick held on by an e-clip? Or even better, how about a 0.020" tall flange
about .010" radially and slide on a 1/8" thick flange with a counterbore to
match the tiny flange and a couple of hits with a center punch to crimp it
on?

Bill

[Buckshot]

Buckshot, machining in general is "wasteful" - all too often, half or more of the barstock winds up as chips. What are the actual dimensions, anyway? You may be able to get away with using a smaller Metric size..


HTRN

................The flange is .875" and the body is .750"/.7495". I'm just not real enthused by Star dies, basicly :-).

One of these days I'm going to begin the design and testing of a straight through lube/size press. Hopefully I don't die of old age before it happens!

..............Buckshot

[4060MAY]

Buckshot
Don't see why the clip won't work.
On the ones I made, They almost have to be a press fit to keep the die from leaking out the bottom when using a heater. I copied the Star.

The snap ring slot can be made with a cut-off tool easily enough.

I used a tapered reamer to cut the lead, and yes, drilling the lube holes was a pain, I used a center drill, like a 000, or 00 CRS not sure. The only reason the hole is stepped is to put in lead shot to be able to select which lube holes you want.

I found using plain base bullets works best, GC bullets with a point dent the next gas check. Haven't decided if this matters yet.

[lathesmith]

Ok, after gleaning some info from these posts, here is what I come up with:
Use a snap ring instead of an e-clip; you have a more uniform surface to work with. Thanks, Heavy Metal.
Under this, have a 1/8 thick 1" washer that is bored .750, to fit the die through. You only need to make one of these, as it can be removed from the die in use and replaced on the die you want to use. Thanks, Bill.
Now, with the above setup, machine all of your Star dies from .750 stock, and just move the washer to the die you want to use, and leave a snap ring on all of the dies. A-1 or O-1 tool steel shoud be sufficient, and it is round and dimensioned to within .001--which should be good enough. This should speed up die production somewhat, and lessen material waste. It also eliminates the concerns of leakage, and gives a nice fim lip so concerns of gouging the sizer body are eliminated. It also preserves the ability to change out dies quickly and easily.
As for the body holes, I am going to experiment with just a single size, to speed up production. I would like to make a die for each bullet I cast, and so I don't need to fool with the shot. This also should speed up caliber changes somewhat--pop old die out, install new die, adjust punch, which should be known from previous use, and off you go.
Thanks for the great ideas, guys! I can't wait to crank up the lathe and rotary table!

lathesmith

[4060MAY]

lathesmith
just a thought, if you are going to put a washer under the clip, and just drill a hole for lubing, maybe a different thickness washer might give you more fine adjusting.

I know that when I change bullets, I sometimes have to go elsewhere to keep my sanity, the lube never seems to be in the right place exactly without some(lots) of fussing.

[Firebird]

I don't see why having a single diameter body hole wouldn't work fine since you are going to make the dies to fit only a single bullet design. The purpose of the double diameter holes is to make it easier to plug them with lead shot; since you won't need to plug any extra sets of holes you should be able to make them the smaller diameter without any problems.

As for re-designing the Star luber, if you put a step in the bottom of the die hole through the frame so the die could just rest on the step at the bottom, then you wouldn't need the flange at the top of the die. It would make the frame harder to machine, but the dies would be easier and most people have more dies than Star machines; so the overall effort should be less.

[lathesmith]

4060, yes you could make washers of different thicknesses, to get some variation. No problem there, you would just want to keep track of what you are using and when.
Yes, I am hoping just drilling one hole size without the step will lube OK. I don't see why it wouldn't. Also, for simplicity I may try drilling 4 holes instead of 3--this would also shorten production time, as the die would only have to be indexed once instead of twice. Lots of stuff to try here!
lathesmith

[MtGun44]

Good synthesis of the various ideas thrown around.
Should work fine. Now, make up a large batch with .200" IDs and
send them to Buckshot for final interior sizing work only.

I was kinda joking at first, but on a bit of reflection, and as
a Star owner that needs some dies, I wonder if we got a group
buy up on Star "blanks" from a CNC shop could we get a really low
price and then have them sized internally as needed? We
might get a < $5 each or so price if we ordered enough for
a CNC lathe run of substantial size, especially with lathesmith's
simplified design. Interior sizing and polishing to fit might
make them a good bit cheaper than Magma's $40 price.

Bill

[willwork4ww]

Well, if teflon tape will seal the die I see no reason an E clip shouldn't accomplish the same. Besides, any lube that leaks by just ends up as fluxing matierial for the pot. That's what I do wit h the excess lube ribbons.

[garandsrus]

I was kinda joking at first, but on a bit of reflection, and as
a Star owner that needs some dies, I wonder if we got a group
buy up on Star "blanks" from a CNC shop could we get a really low
price and then have them sized internally as needed? We
might get a < $5 each or so price if we ordered enough for
a CNC lathe run of substantial size, especially with lathesmith's
simplified design. Interior sizing and polishing to fit might
make them a good bit cheaper than Magma's $40 price.

Bill, I thought the same thing a year or so ago. I went as far as having a guy draw up a CAD drawing of the die. I have never been able to open the CAD file though, so I don't know how well he did. My thought was to put a 1/4" hole through the die as most folks would need something larger than that. I figured that a minimum order to get a decent price would be something like 1000 parts. I really have no idea though as I have never taken a part through the manufacturing cycle...

Lathesmith - The die I made has two rows of a single size hole and it works fine. The hold spacing was sent for a specific boolit.

John

[HeavyMetal]

AS far as the dies go?

I once had the oppertunity to vist the Star works in San Diego, when I bought my first Star, and realized they were making die blanks on an old Browne & Sharpe "auto" lathe.

These were the original "CNC" machine and worked off a cam arrangement to actaviate cutting tools. To set up the machine you simply installed the cams called for in the Blueprint, adjusted tooling and turned on the machine!

Once set up and operating you just feed bar stock in it and semi finished parts came out the other end!

Star then put these in stock to be finished as they were ordered.

Lots of these old style machines are still in use here in L.A. in small job shops. Can't imagine L.A. is the only city that still has these small shops in business so I will suggest that a group buy is very feasible for die blanks.

If the blanks were limited to basic size, and hole diameter and it was not required to have lube holes drilled in them I think we might be surprised how cheap these could be purchased.

WE would need a working blueprint and we would need to decide which design to use, the original or the LS redesign.

Bear in mind I have always thought the flange on the original die served two purposes: One as a stop in the sizer itself and two; as a stop in the collet on the machine used to hone the bore and finish the die interior.

I would like to hear from Buckshot on this interesting idea. He is the original starter of this thread and dealing with the "waste" was his original issue.

WE also need to keep in mind Buckshot might not be interested in having 10,000 blank Star dies staring him in the face waiting for him to get it done "yesterday"!

[xr650]

lathesmith,
You referenced A-1/O-1 Tool Steel. Are these dies hard? Has someone hardness tested the dies?

I would think 4140/42 HT 125K Yield 32 HRC would be strong and hard enough.
Am I on the wrong track?

[HTRN]

................The flange is .875" and the body is .750"/.7495". I'm just not real enthused by Star dies, basicly :-).

So lemme get this straight, you're using 7/8th stock for something with a .875" flange?!http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v516/HTRN/Emoticons/eek7.gif

Tha's bad machining practice - a minimum of 20 thousandths cleanup per side is standard. In this case, I'd start at 1" personally.


One of these days I'm going to begin the design and testing of a straight through lube/size press. Hopefully I don't die of old age before it happens!

Are you looking at a full blown sizer or something that goes on a reloading press?


I was kinda joking at first, but on a bit of reflection, and as a Star owner that needs some dies, I wonder if we got a group buy up on Star "blanks" from a CNC shop could we get a really low price and then have them sized internally as needed? We might get a < $5 each or so price if we ordered enough for a CNC lathe run of substantial size, especially with lathesmith's simplified design. Interior sizing and polishing to fit might make them a good bit cheaper than Magma's $40 price.

Bill

$5/blank? Perhaps, if we can order 2000 of them. I've had the exact same part go out the door at $5 and at $200. The only thing that changed was quantity. Keep in mind, that setup time is factored into the price as well as such things as Is this a repeat customer? and Is this a commercial customer? Jobshops in general like repeat customers, who order the same thing a coupla times a year(thus amortizing custom tooling/fixturing), and commercial customers(because they're generally less of a headache). More than likely, if you just walk in off the street, you're gonna get a "go away" price. I think you'd find that at the quantities ordered, Buckshot and others who make/modify dies would actually find it cheaper to make diebodys themselves.

I know this, because I started looking into custom dies as a side business after Stillwell shut down operations. I came to the conclusion that the most economical way to make them was with a small CNC gangtool lathe, and finishing with flexhones. I'm still trying to find out what alloy Magma uses for their dies - I'm probably gonna use prehardened 4340(Rc 38 or so) and then machine them using carbide inserts.

I do like the idea of the straight wall die conversion - if nothing else, it makes the Star able to handle larger bullets. It would be easy to do, if one had a CNC milling machine - just go in with a radiused T slot cutter.. Heck, you could do a special jig where the base sits on a low pin, and destaco's clamp it in place. Call up the program, and watch it go. Would take 5 minutes, tops. You could even do it with a manual mill, but that would involve a facing head with stops like a Waulhaupter(translation: $$$$ - they regularly go for $500-750 on Ebay)
The question is, does the Star base have enough meat in it to have a groove cut in the die hole?


HTRN

[HeavyMetal]

Your quite right about several things, especially the"go away" price at most job shops.

My idea would require a bit more "rerlationship" than is average for a walk in customer!

At the time I posted that thread I was (and did) selling a product to just such a job shop! This relationship will last at least 5 years and during this time I , or someone I work with, will be in contact at least once a month with the end user.

Such relationships can lead to a bit better understanding when they know your not completely full of it.

Again the idea was: If we could order so many, if we could keep the work to a bear minimum, If we could show up with a "blueprint" to show we weren't idiots, could we make this work for both sides? I want a fair price, not favors, I think thats do-able.

You are again correct: we would have to buy or supply 1 inch diameter stock and the machines would be set up to "cut out" flanged blanks or straight blanks with a groove cut in it for the snap ring.

The tolerance's we ask for might be an issue. The center hole no problem we just need a hole.

Groove location might be able to "float" .010 or .015 up or down without creating an issue but I think to make the snap ring idea work the groove for that will simply have to be a specific width, say .125 plus or minus .0005! This way we won't have to worry about the die "flexing" and "digging" into the sizer base and creating a whole new set of problems!

I also think, as I mentioned earlier, that we should really hear from Buckshot about how much and how often he's actually willing to do these dies before we fly off the handle any more than we already have!

[mtgrs737]

Why not just make the ring to the size you want the flange to be and use liquid nitrogen to interferance fit it to the die body.

[monadnock#5]

The price of a cloned Star sizer die would have to get down to Lyman H+I die levels ($20.00 a pop) for me to get excited enough to get in line for a Star lube/sizer. At that price, the whole world of cast shooters will beat a path to "Buckshot$ Machine And Tool Emporium".

At this point, I'm curious as to whether Magma/Star maintains patent rights on their sizer dies?

[lathesmith]

xr650, both Lyman and Star sizer dies are "harder than the hinges of Hell's gates"(thanks Bill). I use O-1 and W-1 for my own personal dies and have never had a problem. However, this is a reason I am really not interested in trying to make these dies on a commercial basis--what is good enough for me may or may not work for the next guy, who wants/needs an exact factory duplicate in every way. As others have mentioned, there may also be some patent infringement issues on this type of business as well.
Remember, the "free" market is only so "free"--while workers of our society don't have any right to organize, the government stands ready to aggressively protect the "rights" of businesses or corporations against those who might draw away some of their profits with a cheaper/superior product. (Sorry about that, I couldn't resist.)
Anyway, on a personal level, and for making some of these dies as a favor to some of the casters here, I believe there is some workable and useable suggestions. I want to order some 3/4 O-1 drill rod and see how good dimensional tolerances are on this stuff; if it is as good as the 13/16 I have purchased, some of the ideas here will be real time-savers and should work great. In the mean time, I'll keep reading....
lathesmith

[HeavyMetal]

I was wondering when someone was going to ask about "Patent Rights" for the Star/Magma.

Patents are good for about 20 years, add a few more for "improvements" and after 30 years a design is "open" for all to use. Royality arrangements during the Patent protected period can also be arranged, some times.

I believe the Star design is at least 80 years old so Patent infringement is not an issue.

However Trademarking is another issue all togther!

So if one wanted to build parts or even produce an improved design of the Star sizer it could be done provided no reference was made to the original.

After examing my two star's I can't help but wonder why it hasn't been cloned?

I can understand why RCBS and Lyman haven't done it they both have to much invested in the current design to market a second design.

But one wonders why someone like dillon hasn't picked up on this?

With a few simple manufacturing changes, to make it easier to build, the Star design can be cost effective to produce!

Buckshot mentioned in one of his posts that someday he'd take a shot a designing a straight threw bullet sizer. As we have the Star any such attempt would be redesigning the wheel!

We have the better mouse trap already! We just need a "smart" manufacturer to produce it!

My opinion is the Star can be made and made profitably and still be competatively priced!

Price is the only reason the Star design has not dominanted the private cast boolit market place! It has always owned to Commercial side of cast Boolits.

[JIMinPHX]

I went as far as having a guy draw up a CAD drawing of the die. I have never been able to open the CAD file though, so I don't know how well he did.
John

If you would like to e-mail that CAD drawing to me, I'll be happy to convert it into a BMP or JPG that anyone can open & send it back to you.

[JIMinPHX]

So lemme get this straight, you're using 7/8th stock for something with a .875" flange?!http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v516/HTRN/Emoticons/eek7.gif

Tha's bad machining practice - a minimum of 20 thousandths cleanup per side is standard. In this case, I'd start at 1" personally.

HTRN

If you were starting with a piece of 1018 or some other type of mill-finish stock, I might agree with that statement. Here we are talking about starting with a dimensionally correct piece of tool steel in an application where the OD is not being used as a pilot diameter. I see no problem leaving the stock OD as the flange OD on the finished part for this job.

[JIMinPHX]

Now I don’t have a Star to look at, so I’m just talking off the top of my head here…

But, has anybody thought about maybe making some sort of adapter so that standard Lyman $20 dies could be used in a Star?

[Buckshot]

So lemme get this straight, you're using 7/8th stock for something with a .875" flange?!http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v516/HTRN/Emoticons/eek7.gif

Tha's bad machining practice - a minimum of 20 thousandths cleanup per side is standard. In this case, I'd start at 1" personally.

HTRN

............Boy, am I late seeing this :-) I don't see a single problem leaving the .875" OD as it is. The outside circumfrence of the flange doesn't fit inside anything. It's sole purpose is to serve as a stop for the die. The backside of it needs to be (or should be) perpendicular, but it's .875" OD is non critical.

The only critical portion of the Star die body excluding the bore, is the .750" body behind the .875" flange. The die doesn't use 'O' rings as a lube seal. The close machined fit of the die's body to the bore in the press serves the purpose. The dies OAL can be +/- several thousandths.

.............. JIMinPHX, "Now I don’t have a Star to look at, so I’m just talking off the top of my head here…

But, has anybody thought about maybe making some sort of adapter so that standard Lyman $20 dies could be used in a Star?"

I would suspect the issue comes in with how thin the adaptor would have to be. The Star die is .750" on it's sealing surfaces. The Lyman die's body is ~ .702" and at the locking nut end it's ~.720" for maybe a length of .200". Forgetting how you'd hold it in the press's bore, the adaptors would only be .024" thick. The internal AND external ID/OD would both be critical surfaces to seal, and I don't believe Lyman nor RCBS are super critical about that .702" dimension, so the adaptors ID may be problematical.

Then you have the lube hole position bugaboo the Star and it's dies have. The lube holes in both Lyman and RCBS lube dies are huge by comparison.

...............Buckshot

[xpshooter]

If we are looking at doing a bulk blank buy, which I think is a good idea. How much do you actually think the cost difference would be between the original type blank out of 7/8 or 1" vs the new style with the snap ring?

I don't think it would be that much of a cost difference and I would prefer the original type..

If these blanks are cut on a cnc it is not that big of a deal to cut the original type.

But that's just my 2 cents.

I would prefer the center hole <.224.

If we don't do a mass buy, I will probably have the toolmaker at work make the couple blanks I need on their cnc and I will install the lube holes and hone the id myself.

[JIMinPHX]

If I can get my hands on a workable drawing, I wouldn’t mind shopping it around to a few CNC shops that I am friendly with. Unfortunately, John’s CAD file is in an IGS format that none of my CAD programs will touch. I need DWG or DXF formats.

If you guys didn’t mind waiting about 6 or 8 months for this, I might get my CNC machine set back up again, but that seems unrealistic.

[jhrosier]

... Unfortunately, John’s CAD file is in an IGS format that none of my CAD programs will touch. I need DWG or DXF formats. ...

Jim,
If you need some igs files translated, drop me a PM. I have several flavors of cad/cam software that can do this without any problem.

Jack

[Buckshot]

.................If you're talking die BLANKS (basic bore drilled) purchaser doing the ID honing to size and lube holes that would be easy :-)

Using W-1 steel, the least noble of the so called high carbon tool steels, a 36" length of 3/4" is $12.65 (not on sale). The same, only of 7/8" OD is $9 more. With a die body length of 1.6", and parting off, facing, and one piece of unusable scrap you'll get about 20 of'em from each stick. That would be about $0.65 each for .750" material.

Using the 7/8" stock would bring the cost per unit to $0.95 each. Still no big deal for a couple sticks worth if considering only material cost.

Using the .750" stock means you use the circlip for retention. Machining ops would be:

TS = tailstock
TP= Toolpost

1) Face
2) Center drill
3) Drill (TS tool change)
4) Turn center lube clearance (TP tool change)
5) Cut circlip groove (TP tool change)
6) Then ream and /or bore to desired 'minus' tolerance for customer finish honing. (TS or TP toolchange, depending if boring or reaming)
7) Ream tapered lead (TS tool change)
8) Break all edges
9) Part off (TP tool change)
10) Reverse and drill counterbore at end of run (TS tool change)

Using the .875" material to the above you would delete cutting the circlip groove and add plunging the parting off tool maybe .200" behind the flange.

Then you would have to add the TP tool change, and makeing 2-3 passes to remove .125" (.0625" DOC) of material and form the Critical.750" body OD.

Then to drill the counterbore you cannot simply stick the die body backwards into the 5C collet as it only has the thickness of the flange to grip. So after your run is made you swap collets to a 3/4". Because of that 7/8" flange each of the die bodies has to be placed reversed into the collet, and then threaded BACK into the collet closer. This for each and every one.

If the circlip works without issue to retain the die in the press body, I would MUCH rather turn in a groove and forgo the forming of the flange and then bringing almost 1.5"of length to a critical dimension. Finally, the counterbore could be done at the end of the run in the SAME collet without being required to remove and replace it for each and every one. BIG time saver!

Cheaper material, less turning, and the main point is, NO critical dimension to be machined into the die body, as it's recieved already "To size". I'm into the KISS principle big time.

................Buckshot

[lathesmith]

That's one of the great things about Buckshot. Not only does the man have a way with tools, but also with words! I couldn't have said it any better for sure, he covered most all the bases with post #35.
I now have around 10 dies of the Buckshot design either made or pending, to be used by various guys on the site here. We should very soon be getting some "field experience" on the feasibility of the design for more widespread distribution. I myself will be making all my own dies with this design, it's just more efficient for the Star hand sizer machine.
For some of you guys who insist on the flange design, don't despair. I have been thinking about offering a "rough blank" machined from O-1, for those of you who have a lathe to finish it. This will be a rough machined blank; you finish the OD, ID, and drill your own lube holes. This blank would be priced around $12, plus shipping. For another $5 I'll locate and drill up to three rows of lube holes. This would be the outer large diameter lube hole; the customer would be responsible for boring the die and finish drilling the smaller holes. And finally, for another $5 I would finish drilling these small holes AND rough bore to around .012 undersize.

I'll let this idea float around, if there is enough interest we will get the ball er, lathe turning.All for donations to the site, of course, as the Buckshot design dies are now.
Thanks for supporting the site, and being willing to try new ideas!
lathesmith

[Firebird]

Buckshot

Wouldn't it be easier to turn it around, and do the lower end away from the collet? So you would

1) face
2) drill & ream
3) Counterbore
4) turn to .750", leaving lip against the collet
5) Part off
6) Turn die body around and put the .750" into the collet with lip out
7) Face lipped end of die
8) ream taper
9) break edges

You still have to change from 7/8 the 3/4 collet, but you don't have to mess with trying to put the lip on the backside of the 3/4" collet.

[JIMinPHX]

Or you could use a 3/4 to 7/8 split bushing & just keep running it in the 7/8 collet.

[dragonrider]

All of this discussion got me inspired and I made up this die for my Star for the 360-180 Group buy bullet. I have a 13x36 Clausing/Cholchester Lathe so taking it down from 7/8 to 3/4 is not a problem. My steps are as Firebird stated.
I use a collet block for drilling the holes in the Bridgeport.
I used a .059 drill for this one, 4 holes no steps, this bullet has a large lube groove, for smaller lube grooves I would use a smaller drill and space them to groove spacing with as many rows of holes as grooves. I am going to make a few more and they will be bullet specific as this one is. I will also make punches that will bullet specific, that is that once adjusted it can be removed and replaced without further adjusting. Thus I can insert die, screw in the punch and start lubing.
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/album.php?albumid=20&pictureid=70

Picture is a little fuzzy, my camera dosn't take good cluseups.

[JIMinPHX]

[QUOTE=Buckshot;353540
.............. JIMinPHX, "Now I don’t have a Star to look at, so I’m just talking off the top of my head here…

But, has anybody thought about maybe making some sort of adapter so that standard Lyman $20 dies could be used in a Star?"

I would suspect the issue comes in with how thin the adaptor would have to be. The Star die is .750" on it's sealing surfaces. The Lyman die's body is ~ .702" and at the locking nut end it's ~.720" for maybe a length of .200". Forgetting how you'd hold it in the press's bore, the adaptors would only be .024" thick. The internal AND external ID/OD would both be critical surfaces to seal, and I don't believe Lyman nor RCBS are super critical about that .702" dimension, so the adaptors ID may be problematical.

Then you have the lube hole position bugaboo the Star and it's dies have. The lube holes in both Lyman and RCBS lube dies are huge by comparison.

...............Buckshot[/QUOTE]

.024 in a round section under tensile load & made out of good material might be a lot stronger than you would think. I've found the Lyman die OD to be held to about a .001" tolerance on the 6 or 8 that I've seen. You can have a few thousandths extra clearance there if you are worried about it since they have an O-ring anyway. I don't know how much of a problem the lube hole size would be since I haven't actually messed with a Star yet. This still looks to me like it might be worth chasing.

[JIMinPHX]

Here's how I make my Lyman dies -

[Buckshot]

Buckshot

Wouldn't it be easier to turn it around, and do the lower end away from the collet? So you would
You still have to change from 7/8 the 3/4 collet, but you don't have to mess with trying to put the lip on the backside of the 3/4" collet.

.............Firebird, you're 100% right. You sure could simply use a lefthand tool and cut away from the headstock. I feel pretty dumb for not thinking of that, except my thinking was directed to simplifying the whole proceedure to save time and money. (Alibi :-))

The whole issue hinges on the suitability of using a circlip instead of a 1/8" (or so) wide 7/8" OD flange to retain the 3/4" die body. So far in apparently limited use it seems to serve the purpose. If it proves out, then you also get 3 added benefits. One is the ability to use less expensive material (3/4" vs 7/8"). The second is the elimination of unnecessary machining and waste. Finally the operation to create a die body is faster.

As an example, when making RCBS/Lyman lube sizer blanks, I can make a blank in about 5 minutes or less if I stay after it. I use 3/4" stock, and have to remove ~ .030" for the 'O' ring end, then dial in another .016" after .200" travel, for the .702" body OD.

I COULD use 23/32" stock at .718" to start with as the lost .002" at the 'O' ring end is no big deal. All I'd have to do then is infeed .008" for .016" total material removal on the body, but I don't. The reason I don't is that ENCO usually ALWAYS has the 3/4" size on sale @ 4 for $9.34 and the 23/32 is NEVER on sale and is $11.23.

Actually for what I was charging for Star dies, I'd STILL make them with the flange if people insisted only if I didn't have to deal with those lame 2 diameter location specific lube holes :-)

.................Buckshot

[GSM]

Buckshot:

Do the holes have to be 2 diameter? Would a chamfer hold a piece of smashed shot to block out unwanted lube ports?

[garandsrus]

Buckshot,

The one Star die I made was turned as suggested by Firebird. The top of the die was towards the headstock. I also turned towards the headstock. After the final diameter was cut, I just withdrew the bit to face off the bottom of the flange and then parted the piece off.

In the interest of learning, why are you thinking that you want to turn away from the headstock?

Thanks,
John

[warf73]

Do the holes have to be 2 diameter? Would a chamfer hold a piece of smashed shot to block out unwanted lube ports?
To add to this question a little couldnt a guy just put the holes in the die that he wanted instead of putting in holes that wouldnt be used? Since this is a custom type die.

Just thinking out loud.

What do you think?

[Buckshot]

Buckshot,

The one Star die I made was turned as suggested by Firebird. The top of the die was towards the headstock. I also turned towards the headstock. After the final diameter was cut, I just withdrew the bit to face off the bottom of the flange and then parted the piece off.

In the interest of learning, why are you thinking that you want to turn away from the headstock?

Thanks,
John

............You don't HAVE to, but the reasons I would is because making the plunge cut (simply partial parting off) is also forming the relief between it, and the .750" body shoulder. Beginning your cut in the groove formed by the parting tool and moving away from the headstock leaves the groove clean. Turning toward the HS means your tool passes into the groove, and doing so can form a burr over the edge, or actually create a small thin washer. It falls off into the groove and then you get to fiddle with a scribe or needle nose pliers to fish it out.

The other thing is, how fast are you turning? Since the .750" body is critical I'm not going to simply dial in .0625" and take it all in one pass. Nor am I going to do it at .0018" IPR either, except for the final finish pass. I'll take a .050" cut, then a .010" pass, mike it and make the final pass at that slow feed to get a nice finish. Those DOC's aren't deep so you don't have to doddle on the other one or two passes. By starting the tool in a groove and turning away from the headstock the tool simply runs off the end of the work. You don't have to stand there bent over watching the tool closely as it approches the shoulder.

It's just me. If you don't HAVE to turn up to a shoulder, why do it? If you have to then you have to, but if there are options check them out. Will it be faster, smoother, easier, less nerve wracking, or eliminate the possibility of a crash?

When I thread, if the part allows it, I will ALWAYS thread away from a shoulder or other feature. Even when batching out push through sizer bodies, which are .875" OD, there is no feature except the end of the threaded part. You have to begin retracting the crosslide and then a split second later open the half nuts. You're in backgear and maybe turning 60 rpm, yet you have to be positive and quick, especially if close to full depth.

Instead I single point off the backside. Why? Well I can run the lathe 3 times faster, which give s a cleaner thread, it's faster, and best of all, the tool runs off the end of the workpiece and you're not hunched over watching the toolpoint with one hand on the crossfeed dial and the other holding onto the halfnut lever with a death grip.

It's really odd that there appears to be a real fan club for that big flange on the Star die. I suppose it may LOOK nicer then a crummy old black circlip. I guess it also really provides a lot of room to stamp or engrave the dies' bore ID :-) Heck, rather then a 7/8" flange, why not one a full 1"? In fact I think I've even seen one with a 1" flange. That way we could peel off a whole 1/4" of steel. [smilie=w: If 1/8" is good, 1/4" has gotta be twice as good.

I find it hard to believe no one else has thought of a circlip to retain the die? Maybe they did but it doesn't work long term? Or maybe not in automatic machines? Or maybe they've just always made them with the flange, so why change?

A newlywed couple are hosting their very first Thanksgiving dinner. The husband notices that his new bride cut off about an inch off each end of the ham before putting it into the pan, and then into the oven. He asks why, and she shruges and said that's what her mom always did.

Her mom arrives and as the new husband is taking her coat, he mentions the ham cutting thing and asks about it. The brides' mother says she really doesn't know, but HER mom always did. Grandma shows up and heads off into the kitchen with the new husband following. He finally has a chance and asks her why she would cut the ends off the ham before putting it into the pan.

She seems perplexed at first but then smiles and says, "Years ago all I had was this one pan to use. It was always too small for the ham so I had to cut some off each end to get it into the pan".

:bigsmyl2:

.............Buckshot

[garandsrus]

Buckshot,

Thanks for the reply...

John

[lathesmith]

Like Buckshot, I fail to understand the fixation of that 7/8 flange on the top of the die. After learning to make some of these dies, and studying the mechanics of the thing, I have my own ideas:
The main thing I see about that flange is that it makes the die more or less idiot-proof. How are you gonna install it upside down? It will only go one way, or not at all. I guess with the C-ring, I can see where someone could try and install the thing upside down, or leave the lube grooves sticking out, or something. Also, you could leave the ring off and push the die thru the bottom of the press. This would be a bad idea, as I notice that my press's die chamber tapers slightly from top to bottom. Okay, so from a company's point of view, the flange makes the product more idiot-proof, but you notice this has nothing to do with actual mechanical integrity. It just limits their headaches when dealing with idiots. Also, the flange die is obviously a bit more difficult to copy, as demonstrated by the tons of threads just on this forum devoted to the subject.
Okay, that's my take on the flange; how 'bout the groove under it? Simple! The factory dies with the flange are finish GROUND on the outside. Ever try and run a grindstone right up to a flange? Why not just cut a groove and not worry about getting so close? Now you can let guys do all kinds of speculation about O-rings and other nonsense about this, as an added benefit! Let folks think it is a lot more compicated than it is! The groove is there to facilitate quick grinding, period.
I also set my factory dies out next to each other, and you know what? They are ALL made a little different(all 4 of them). Is this a big deal? Not in the least! There are only two critical dimensions to these dies, OD and ID. Speaking personally, I can rough out one of these dies in 15 minutes, start to finish. Ahhh, but its the FINISHING to within .0005(or less) that takes a lot more time than this. Darn those details!
As for that nonsense that a C-ring can't handle the force of sizing, and will mar the top of the press, well, what can I say? I have seen automotive and industrial applications of these C-rings that require them to handle a lot more force than you can generate with that wimpy 1/2" diameter sizing handle and rather flimsy linkage. And after examining my factory die and press closely, I see that the flange was not in contact with the press at all, due to a build-up of a film of lube between the two! No metal-to-metal contact at all! What kind of marring can occur here? You tell me....
Personally, I'm done with the flange, I don't need it. But, as in other areas of life, some folks insist on the hard way, even when there is a demonstrated easier way.
lathesmith

[JIMinPHX]

A slightly more robust version of Buckshot’s idea might be to put the C-clip a little higher on the die, then use a little aluminum bushing below it that has a shallow counterbore. The ID of the counterbore would be just a few thousandths larger than the OD of the installed C-clip. That way, the C-clip would not be able to open up & slip off. It would also give padding between the C-clip & the surface below it. C-clips do sometimes have a sharp edge or burr on them.

[KYCaster]

Like Buckshot, I fail to understand the fixation of that 7/8 flange on the top of the die. lathesmith


Lathesmith, Magma's Size Master automated sizer uses the same dies and has a counter bore for the flange so the bullet feeder can slide over it.

I suppose for the sake of interchangeability they make all the dies with the flange. Other than that, I agree with you...for the Star sizer, the C-clip should do the job just fine.

Jerry

[lathesmith]

Thanks for pointing that out Jerry, a sensible reason has emerged at last! And to realize it is just an interchangability thing. I had thought about those commercial sizing machines, but hadn't really addressed that issue because I've never personally seen one. Nor am I likely to own one in my lifetime. A commercial caster would probably size more bullets in a month than I am likely to in 10 years.
I suppose that it might be accurate to call the C-clip design the "poor man's die" or "economy die". Perfect for those of us who cast smaller quantities of several different kinds of bullets, and who cannot afford to invest their life savings in sizing dies. It sure is convenient to have a sizer for each style of bullet, or at least a couple of different sizers for the same caliber with one-, two-, and maybe three- lube groove capablity,and not to have to mess with that shot nonsense. That is my goal.
lathesmith

[Firebird]

Lathesmith

Wouldn't it be easier to just make a set of custom sizing dies, one per bullet, with the die lube holes set so that the sizing punch wouldn't need to be adjusted between different bullets. Then all you would need to do is change sizing dies to match the bullet and not need the expense of different machines (except for using different lubes of course).

[lathesmith]

Firebird, that is kind of the idea, although setting your holes on various sizers in order to maintain the same distance isn't really practical or needed. However, having a sizer in each caliber set up for one, two, or three lube grooves is really handy. You have to remove the top punch to pull the dies anyway, so re-setting the top punch for each die isn't an extra step as you will have to re-set it after die replacement anyway.
Jim, we had discussed that very idea of a washer, but that is an extra step that at this point just don't seem to be needed. As you point out, it is easy to add later, and I made these c-clip dies a little long to accomodate this possibility. And, those clips usually do have a slight burr on one side; one can either file this off or just make sure that it is placed up, away from the sizer chamber.

[JIMinPHX]

Jim, we had discussed that very idea of a washer, but that is an extra step that at this point just don't seem to be needed.

One c'bored washer could cover all the dies that you make. It seems like a small investment in time & material.

[quasi]

for you guys that wan't to do a CNC run of blanks, there is at least one and maybe more sites on the internet that have an easy CAD design program. Once designed the site has a review and suggestions mode, and a pricing calculator. The one I have played with was free. Minimum parts order was 50.

The site lets you pick the materials to use, and the type of machine to use. I cannot remember the name of the site, I think I bookmarked it but am on a borrowed computor right now. I got the sight from practical machinist.

I am a computor idiot, (and an idiot in general), and I found doing the cad designing easy and fast to learn. I had never done it before.

[quasi]

I found it, use is free.

http://www.emachineshop.com

[MtGun44]

I have been using a really nice Star die that lathesmith made for me.

Great workmanship, he deserves a real pat on the back for INSTANT
service and a beautiful internal polish job.

It uses the circlip on the top and works just fine. It is a touch smaller
in the body than some of my other dies which is a GOOD thing as it
is easier to change out.

Great job. :drinks:

Bill

[triggerguard1]

If someone wants to send me a a basic drawing............napkin, whatever, I can convert it to cadd in about 5 minutes......

I've got a CNC lathe that mostly sits, so I could cut the guys here a helluva lot better deal than $20 or $40.

I'd be willing to trade my knowledge on CNC work and gunsmithing with some of you guys who are experts in the casting.

If 45nut still lives in Prineville, he knows who I am and we've talked, though it's a pretty long time ago.



Matt Williams

[45nut]

I remember you Matt, I can drop off a Star sizing die in .429 I obviously have no use for. Maybe you can get the dimensions you need and open it up to something useful, I will be in town thursday and drop by your place. Good to see you here.

[triggerguard1]

Sounds like a plan.........

I'm working graveyard right now, trying to keep my machines running as long as possible.

If you could bring it by at about 9:00 p.m., I'll be there and I'll get the cadd work done and see what we'd be up agains't on price.

[triggerguard1]

We also need to discuss WW and living in the heart of Les Schwab country...................grin

[Tom Myers]

Matt,

This is a sketch I made up for a Star sizing die that I was thinking about having made. I wanted the hole pattern to be able to lube three different long range 40 Caliber bullets that I shoot. I used my bullet sketching software to sketch the basic outline and then edited the drawing to closely match a Star sizing die

Maybe it will help.

Tom Myers

http://www.tmtpages.com/LinkSkyImages/star%20sizer.jpg


If someone wants to send me a a basic drawing............napkin, whatever, I can convert it to cadd in about 5 minutes......

I've got a CNC lathe that mostly sits, so I could cut the guys here a helluva lot better deal than $20 or $40.

I'd be willing to trade my knowledge on CNC work and gunsmithing with some of you guys who are experts in the casting.

If 45nut still lives in Prineville, he knows who I am and we've talked, though it's a pretty long time ago.



Matt Williams

[HeavyMetal]

Just a report on how well the dies made by lathsmith have worked so far.

Took his advice and put a little speed green under the "clip" before I seated the die in my press. sized about 400 .452 boolits then pulled it and sized about 200 .430 boolits. I had asked for a single row of holes and thats what I got. Easist Star die I ever set up! So far no signs of any rubbing on the base area where the flange would usually be.

Like the results so well I asked for two more dies set up the same way!

[triggerguard1]

If that drawing is any indication as to what Star is selling for $40.00, I'm truely amazed....

I'll crunch some numbers after I talk to 45nut and run some samples. Let you guys see what you think and maybe someone on here can work out some trading with me..........

I want to learn about bullet casting and get into to it for my own personal use on 9mm, 44, 45, and perhaps some rifle rounds as well.

I figured If I can help out some of you guys, maybe I can get setup with some casting equipment of my own and get some good info along the way.

Machining I know and do everyday..........Casting I don't.

[45nut]

We also need to discuss WW and living in the heart of Les Schwab country...................grin

Oh that is a sore spot with me, from what I have been hearing even employees are being watched closely now and it will only get worse. Last time I asked it was 25 bucks for a 2 gallon bucket!

I am running on maypops right now and you can bet when I sell off something to afford tires the purchase will include some ww's or they can kma.

[runfiveslittlegirl]

triggerguard
all you gotta do is ask for help with the casting.

[Shotgun Luckey]

[QUOTE=Buckshot;354786.
A newlywed couple are hosting their very first Thanksgiving dinner. The husband notices that his new bride cut off about an inch off each end of the ham before putting it into the pan, and then into the oven. He asks why, and she shruges and said that's what her mom always did.

Her mom arrives and as the new husband is taking her coat, he mentions the ham cutting thing and asks about it. The brides' mother says she really doesn't know, but HER mom always did. Grandma shows up and heads off into the kitchen with the new husband following. He finally has a chance and asks her why she would cut the ends off the ham before putting it into the pan.

She seems perplexed at first but then smiles and says, "Years ago all I had was this one pan to use. It was always too small for the ham so I had to cut some off each end to get it into the pan".

:bigsmyl2:

.............Buckshot[/QUOTE]

You know....my mother has told the same story because it was true....:drinks:

[uncle joe]

Howse about parting the die at the juncture of the top .750 dia. and the lube relief. Thread the flanged upper portion internally. The lower portion would have to be extended and threaded to screw into the flanged upper.

:

Well I ain't got no degree either but I work in a tube mill and boy I would have lots of pratice stock :-D
I don't have a star sizer and I must admit I haven't read all these posts so call me lazy or stupid if it fits, but could you not retain the die by a plate on the bottom of the sizer with a pass thru hole in it for the boolit. I may be speaking out of turn because I don't know anything about a star but they are fassssst and look like they would make lube sizing fun.
je

[Willbird]

Another old trick comes to mind Buckshot, that is making them 2 for 1.

make two dies joined together at the flange, leave enough for cutoff between the two dies, machine them complete, then as the almost final step cut the two dies apart...

Starting from raw stock... finish turn one side.....do a batch of them...then put on the collet and machine the other end,

and still grabbing them in the same size collet cut the grease undercut on one end, flip, do the other end.......

rough blast the hole thru the ID

Start to part the two dies apart at the flange, deburr each side of the cut, then finish parting them in half.

Bill