Head-to-head single stage press comparison, or "shootout"?

[jmorris]

Force developed by a standard operator is just a standard input multiplied by the mechanical advantage of the press. This is the force developed in the last quarter inch or so of ram travel. Any engineer can do this with a pencil and a calculator.

It is also not linear. If it were linear it would be as simple as move the handle a known distance and record how far the ram moved and you will have a ratio. This is constantly changing though.

More difficult when almost none of the travel matters except the last few thousandths, where the work occurs. Lots of presses have “cam over” or the linkage goes over center at this point. That and manufacturing tolerances in the linkages even compound the difficulty/accuracy of any such measurements.

[dragon813gt]

Specs mean nothing if you don't like using the press. It can have more leverage than you'll ever need but if one feature is missing, or it has one you don't like, then the press is useless to you. I don't like any press w/out a hollow ram for primer disposal. I don't like the ergonomics of the CoAx. So the specs are meaningless to me.

I bought an A2 to see what all the hype was about. It was hype all right. I will buy a dedicated swaging press for that function. And there are modern presses that are superior in all aspects except press material. There is no doubt cast steel is stronger. But it's not needed for reloading.

[jmorris]

Yes, different strokes for different folks. The only press I have had with a hollow ram for primers was the Loadmaster but it wouldn't be my #1 pick.

[EDG]

So?
For an easy solution you would be interested in the maximum force produced.
Any other solution is going to be comparing a set of curves. No operator has a calibrated arm that will care about the curve. Rather the maximum force generated is all that is likely to impress a human user.
Did you ever take integral calculus?
Well you can find the slope if a curve at any given exact point even though the line is not straight. The same thing can be done with these presses. Just find the mechanical advantage where it counts.
No one cares what the mechanical advantage is 2 inches from the bottom of the die.

It is also not linear. If it were linear it would be as simple as move the handle a known distance and record how far the ram moved and you will have a ratio. This is constantly changing though.

More difficult when almost none of the travel matters except the last few thousandths, where the work occurs. Lots of presses have “cam over” or the linkage goes over center at this point. That and manufacturing tolerances in the linkages even compound the difficulty/accuracy of any such measurements.

[M-Tecs]

For some applications high force is great but for others it covers up the feel or sensitivity. The best is what fits into your needs and usage.

[EDG]

Without numerical values you have no means of direct comparison of the mechanics.

There is no accounting for the touchy feely part of personal preference. But most people can tell the big number from the little number.

If I want a sensitive press I can use the dinky little Harrell's benchrest press.
Common everyday reloading is pretty much a high boredom low energy marathon. It is just a repetitive exercise that demands little from the press. I am more interested in how the press performs at very high loads while forming cases. Any old press can seat bullets and size pistol brass. If you are not interested in the maximum force data then you are free to pick a press based on any criteria you chose.

[88QUOTE=M-Tecs;4300154]For some applications high force is great but for others it covers up the feel or sensitivity. The best is what fits into needs and usage.[/QUOTE]

[jmorris]

So?
For an easy solution you would be interested in the maximum force produced.

Ok, calculate it for the presses you have an post it, if it’s as easy as an engineer and a pencil.

How much do the presses mechanical advantage change over that last .25”, that you have?

FWIW they don’t make force only multiply what force is input to them.

[Jtarm]

Me too, I am wearing out faster than my Rockchucker.

Same here.

[Snow ninja]

Might want to add Forester Co-Ax to the list.

[maxreloader]

Dare I use the word "sexy" to describe a press? In the spirit of the OP and in the pursuit of ergonomics I can tell you that after using many, many brands, styles, types of presses that the star universal is the smoothest and the hollywood senior is the easiest on the body. I have literally had to bear-hug a RCBS ammomaster set up for 50 bmg to size LC brass... what a ca-ca setup. It all boils down to what you actually need and how you want to feel doing that job. I know guys that can afford pretty much any vehicle they could want and drive vintage vehicles because they like them. I use what works best and feels best for the job at hand with the means available to acquire. John asked a question and none of us except maybe jmorris has actually posted any answers that is what he may be looking for.

[lightload]

I have so many presses that I occasionally give one or two away to a young person, and then I'll fret and buy more. Many(most?)hand gunners could get by nicely using a Lyman Spartan or Spar-T, yet we all have heard that they are both obsolete. The press I'm most proud of is the new with the hanging tags Spar-T that I was given not long ago. I'm awaiting an Ultramag from bullets.com but have no great need for its leverage capability.

[Rick Hodges]

It seems to me that putting the same handle on all the presses defeats the purpose. The handle is an integral part of the press, the "user interface" and a large part of what makes a press comfortable to use.

[Lloyd Smale]

I own or have owned a rock crusher, co-ax, orange crusher, rcbs Jr. and a hornday lnl. None of them does a single thing the others wouldn't do just as well.