shell holder id

[William Yanda]

Can anyone here confirm that the Lyman "j" style shell holders have a recess for a detent located 5/16 inch under the widest portion of the shell holder, centered on the opening? Is the base, about 5/8 inch in height, 3/4 inch wide? Thanks
Bill
Leaning toward Lachmillers-single detent depression, numbered 2 and 8. One source stated Lyman followed current numbering system with J style holders, I could not find an 8 on the list. Another list showed 2 or 8 for 257 Roberts. The plot thickens.

[Pavogrande]

No - my J holders have 2 holes about .262 below upper diameter -
the shank is 9/16" in diameter and about 7/8" long -
You may have a shellholder for a lachmiller 400 --
if i can find mine i will measure --

[Guesser]

Or it could be a Herters

[Pavogrande]

Herters ? maybe though all my herters are 3/4" buttons for #3 which fit my lachmiller as well --

I know there are threaded herters --

anyroad - the one i have, a adapter to rcbs button was marked for lachmiller 400 -
It has a set screw dimple about 5/16 below upper diameter and the shank is 3/4" dia and
between 9/16 and 5/8 long --
found a photo of the lach 400 shellholder
my ha-penny

[William Yanda]

Thanks for the pics. That's what I have. #'s 2 and 8, any idea of application? I couldn't find a Lachmiller chart.
Bill

[Pressman]

Those are a perfect fit for the Lachmiller primer tool. They work better than the standard Lachmiller shellholder.

Ken

[Pavogrande]

Yes, they do fit the lach bench primer but they need a slot in the bottom face for primer clearance when using the auto feed -
Herters button style fit as well -- but same issue, need a slot
My lach is the link style not the cam style -- perhaps cam type is somewhat different --

[too many things]

ken /pressman will know

[William Yanda]

Thanks, Ken, for posting the chart. Looks like 2 might be for 30-30 base and others, 8 for 44 Special, 30-40, 303 etc. However they show neither P or L after the number.
The hole through the center is 0.220+-.

[Pavogrande]

My sh's (the ones like yours) are not marked as to prime or press either --
I have about 8-9 of the lachmiller button style and most of them are not marked either -
As far as I know lachmiller press's did not prime --
Your sh's will fit a herters #3 but with only .220 bore will not prime -
my ha-penny

[Pressman]

I don't know about the P or L. Lachmiller had a very inconsistenty way of marking their shellholders. Some were scribed for a caliber, some stamped for caliber some use the chart numbers and some were never marked.
These full shank shellholders came out after the 1953/4 redesign of the bench priming tool. They work well in the newer tool, which eliminated the auto primer feed.
I have never been fortunate enough to be in the right place at the right time to get a Model 400 press but I would like to see how they work in it. They came on the market in 1959 and had a very short run before the company changed hands finally ending up owned by RCBS who dropped everything but the lubesizer and primer tool.

Lachmiller had the Model 100 press, shellholders and primer tool on the market a full two years before the Herter's Model 3. Copied design? Probably. As Pavogrande said you can use Lachmiller in a Herter's but cannot prime. The same is true, mostly, in reverse. Herter's shellholders will work in a Model 100 press, no problem but the opening is too large for the primer punch to function correctly when used in the primer tool.

Ken

[Pavogrande]

P'man -- you are right - forgot that i made a new priming post for the lach bench primer to use the herters sh's -- got most all of them (herters) but just a few lachmiller --