New ta me Ideal 32-20 tool

[DOUBLEJK]

Does anybody have a set of instructions on how to use the old Ideal mold n reloading tool in ones?
The die on it is a seating die and it has a couple additional holes in the handle with protrusions lined up with the holes on the oppasite handle...the smaller one looks like might seat a primer if ya were real careful...the larger one I got not a clue too big fer a primer n to small ta bell with....any help would sure be appreciated as the idea a this small self contained complete loadin' setup intrigues me...:???:

[Springfield]

My guess would be a bullet sizer.

[floodgate]

John:

You've got an old "Ideal" No. 4 loading tool (I've got one in .32-20 too, but it's pretty beat up); these were made from the late 1880's up until well after WW II. I assume that it has the fixed seating / crimping chamber, although a few No. 4's use the "screw-in" dies like the Lyman 310 tool. You're right, the hole in the middle is for priming (for the old round-top primers, but with care will work with today's flat-faced ones). As "Springfield" says, the hole furthest from the hinge is for sizing the bullets cast in the mould, and really doesn't work all that well - but it is better than nothing. The mould is almost certainly for the #3118 (now listed as #311008, to keep Lyman's computers happy) 115-gr. Winchester bullet. We are studying how to date these older tools: does it have a set-screw in the left side of the mould to lock the sprueplate pivot screw? Are there any markings on the mould block parts or sprueplate? And exactly what do the caliber and manufacturer's stamps say? Maybe we can pin your tool down a bit closer.

There was originally a little slug with a decapping pin that dropped into the die, and in later versions also flared out the old crimp (you could bell the case mouth further on the conical outer end of the seating chamber), and the tool originally came with a little dipper for 20 grains of Black Powder, but these are almost always missing. No big deal, as you can decap with a suitably-filed 10-penny nail, and measure powder with a cut-off empty case. A lot of ammo was made with these old tools on peoples' kitchen tables or over the campfire (not TOO close when adding the powder!) in years past, and they can still be used make up a serviceable round. Go to the Antique Reloading Tool Collectors Association website at www.antiquereloadingtools.com and check "Ideal Tools" on the homepage and on the message board (which is free to visitors), if you want to ask for more info. Enjoy!

Doug/floodgate

[DOUBLEJK]

Thank's Doug....:smile:

Yes it has the fixed die and the screw to lock the spruce plate screw....and the mold is identical to an old Lyman #3118 single cavity I have including no vent lines...will get the numbers n markings off it tommorrow...I went n left it at the south place after castin' a few with it as it was kinda hot!!:lovebooli

[Bret4207]

No less notable than Elmer Keith himself pointed out that the "sizer" hole in the Lymans was amost always out of round. That stuck in my mind a million years ago and never having had a Lyman tool like that I wonder if he was right? Any chance one of youse guys could shove a boolit through and see how bad it comes out? Plain old curiosity on my part. Never found one of those rigs at the right price.

[floodgate]

Bret:

The main problem with the sizers is that the "pusher" is on a swivel, so it doesn't center on the base of the bullet very well (they size nose-first, like the Lee), the motion is in a short arc, and the sizing aperture is short and provides little lead-in guidance to the boolit. That said, I just ran a couple lubed with LA through a fairly decent No. 4 in .44 WCF, and they came out 0.4245" - 0.4258"*, or only a bit over a thou out-of-round. Not too shabby, and better than I expected. Sharpe says the ballistic labs of some of the ammomakers (back before WW II) used tong tools for their ballistics checks and data gathering.

Doug

* This confirms the discussion a few days back that 0.424" +/- was the standard for the 44 & 40 back in those days.

[Bent Ramrod]

DoubleJK,

Floodgate has it down exactly as to the manipulation of the tool. I've made a number of decapping pins by turning aluminum cylinders to fit the dies and gluing pieces of small-diameter drill shank with Loc-Tite into a hole in the end. A squeeze of the lever pops them right out.

Generally, the "expanding" portion of that decapper-expander was pretty unnecessary unless you have the multidie set with the muzzle resizer. The bullets would drop down to the bottom of the unsized shell, same as they do in shells fired in modern factory chambers. The tools with the nonadjustable chambers, at least the ones I've used, do nothing to the case except crimp the mouth of the shell over the bullet. I've heard it mentioned that a well-used example would have the crimp shoulder inside the die worn to the point where the tool was in effect useless, at least for loading for lever-actions, revolvers and other guns that need crimps. That would take some use, even with the malleable-iron used for the tools.

And, yes, a leather glove, preferably with a cotton one inside, is a necessary adjunct for casting with one of those little gems, and even with that, I've found an occasional dip of the handles in water in the course of a session will reduce a lot of the pain. Several of the molds I've never been able to duplicate are on the ends of those tools, and every now and then, a session of "X-Treme Casting" is necessary. Elmer Keith made the comment that these tools were from an era when the extent of one's personal property was sometimes dictated by the weight one could carry on a horse, or on one's own back, and that's obvious by the compromises built into these nutcracker tools.

Floodgate, I'd be interested in any research you do on organizing the tools into manufacturing dates by design and markings. I had the dim impression from the ones I've seen, and the catalog pictures, that the earliest ones had a semicircle cut out of the front of half the bullet mold and a tab with the recapping stud on the other half. Later tools moved this arrangement inboard to a hole and stud on the handle. Is this right?

[floodgate]

Dave:

Yes, the attached photo - I hope - shows three No. 4 tools in the three Wnchester '73 calibers:

Top one is marked ".44 CMR [Colt "Lightning" Magazine Rifle] & WCF" is a "middle-aged" Barlow / Ideal production; mould is unmarked but is for the standard #42498 (now cataloged as #42798);

Second is a later, but still Barlow (pre-1910) one marked ".38-40", unmarked mould for the regular #40143; this one has the set-screw for the sprueplate pivot screw, and also has the later drop-in decapper with the crimp ironer rib on it at the "bullet" end;

Bottom is an early Barlow stamped ".32-20", with the nose-capping setup Dave mentioned, no set-screw in the block. [You can't see it here, but the upper jaw is cut out in a semi-circle to .32-20 head size; the priming peg is clearly visible. The handles are noticeably thinner and lighter, for this smaller case.]

On these tools, the seat/crimp chambers were cut specifically for the factory bullet, case and seat/crimp depth. It doesn't apply here, but - especially on the larger No. 6 tools for longer rifle cases like the 30 & 30, where Winchester, Marlin and Savage all liked different bullet profiles, you had to order the tool for the particular brand of ammo you preferred, and the chamber and mould were cut accordingly.

Albert Krause has started charting the tong tools as you asked; go to the ARTCA
website > "Messages" > "Ideal Tools" and you'll see - a couple of threads down, what he has so far. It will take trolling through about 40 Ideal Handbooks to finish the job, though.

JKJK: You asked about instructions. I dug out a late Lyman / Ideal sheet (December 1938, per the print-order code) on the Nos. 3, 4, 6 and the No. 10 for rimless cases; the No. 3 and No. 10 did not have moulds, and were set up for the 310-type dies, giving more flexibility in bullet shape, crimp, etc. It really only mentions the No. 4 as sort of a footnote, but if you (or anyone else) will PM me your s-mail address, I'll kick off a copy to you.

I can post a shot of the No. 6's in .38-55 and .32-40, the former a complete boxed Lyman set with detachable blocks; maybe tomorrow, as we're off to dinner with a neighbor.

Doug Elliott

[floodgate]

Dave:

"Generally, the "expanding" portion of that decapper-expander was pretty unnecessary unless you have the multidie set with the muzzle resizer. The bullets would drop down to the bottom of the unsized shell, same as they do in shells fired in modern factory chambers. The tools with the nonadjustable chambers, at least the ones I've used, do nothing to the case except crimp the mouth of the shell over the bullet."

To understand why these non-adjustable tools were made the way they were, you've got to think Black Powder, tubular magazines or revolvers, soft lead bullets, thin-walled cases and the 1880's. For 95% (maybe 98%) of the users who reloaded, the bullet was dropped into the charged case, butted against the BP, crimped to a fare-thee-well, and fed back into the same gun they were shot in. The flare on the pin was NOT for expanding the case mouth as we think of it (remember, today we over-squeeze the case down, then use the expander to bring the ID back to two or so thou under bullet size; and the "rifle cranks" of the '80's and '90's did the same using the No. 3 tool with all its dies).

But the hunter with a SAA, or a Win.'73, just used the flared pin to iron out the last of the previous crimp as he decapped - and maybe flared the mouth a bit more on the conical end of the fixed seat/crimp chamber if the bullet wouldn't go in easily - and then just jammed the whole thing together and went on his way. Simple, quick, and accurate enough for deer at 35 yards.

Doug

[DOUBLEJK]

Here's a few pics a the tool might help ya ta identify which model it is....also found I can neck size bout .80" a the neck by squeezin' it in the base band a the mold....sure gives a better grip then no sizin' n just crimpin'... expanded em by removin' the seater stem n givin' em a light twist on the die like floodgate said....werked good...this ole thing's got me hooked....fun ta fool with fer sure....n yep need gloves while castin' big time er a very high pain tolerance ;)
http://www.geocities.com/doublejk2/ideal.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/doublejk2/ideal2.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/doublejk2/ideal3.jpg

[floodgate]

John:

That's an interesting tool! Someone has made some useful mods; the screw and stop-nut added to the chamber allows adjustment to seat a shorter bullet, or to seat the #3118 deeper if desired. Mould cavity looks in fine shape, and has the set-screw. The sizing plunger has been taken out, shortened to about half its original length (don't know just why), and its original pivot pin replaced with another screw; maybe for priming another, larger cartridge??? From the markings, it was made before 1910, when Barlow passed the Ideal Mfg. Co. over to Marlin. And since the .25-20 repeater came in with the Winchester 1892, it was after that date. We're still trying to find out when they added the set screw for the sprue-plate pivot screw; that may help pin the date down even further. The instructions will go out in s-mail today.

Have fun!

Doug

[floodgate]

John:

"And since the .25-20 repeater came in with the Winchester 1892, it was after that date."

OOOPPPPS!!! Yours is a .32-20, so the 1892 date doesn't apply. I was thinking about another No. 4 in .25-20 R I am dickering on.

One funny thing you'll note on the 1896 catalog cut I'm sending along with the instructions: The No. 1 tool (similar to the No. 4, but without the bullet sizing station) shown on the left-hand page was originally made with the priming station out on the extended nose, beyond the mould, like my .32-20. They later moved it back behind the seat / crimp station like the No. 4, but must have had a passel of forgings, since they kept the (un-machined) extension lugs right down to the end of Marlin production in 1915-16. I suspect they used the same forgings for the early, lighter small-case No. 4's like my .32-20. Trivial Pursuit, anyone?

floodgate

[DOUBLEJK]

Doug...sure wanta thank ya's fer all this here info....

the mold makes good Boolits....was castin' em outa 160 parts WW to 1 part Tin.....I havta hold the mold right up to the spout on my lyman furnace er the base band doesn't fill very good...no vent lines trappin' the air I suspect....
just had a ruptuereed disc took outa my neck taday so shootin's gonna be slim fer a spell n deer season here opens saturday....
Hmmmm' 32-20 Brownin' new manufactured 1 n them #3118's at 1700-1800fps....40-70yd. shot broadside.....might just be what'll werk fer the conditions I got....n a blast ta boot...:lovebooli

[floodgate]

John:

I was just chasing someother stuff down in my file of Xerox copies of old Ideal Handbooks, and found that the set screw and the alignment peg between the block halves was first shown in the 1902 Ideal Handbook No. 14. Since after Marlin took over in early 1910 the tools were marked "Marlin Fire Arms Co." in bold italic script, and yours has the older "Ideal" marking, that dates your tool pretty closely. I'm glad the mould works so well. I've never had trouble with the unvented moulds they made before about 1960, but I usually use 1:30 up to 1:16 tin to lead alloys; I don't like antimony.

Doug

[DOUBLEJK]

floodgate
I got yer generously sent zerox's taday....mucho gracias...

[StanDahl]

I've got a couple of these, one in 32-20, and one in 38 S&W. Both are stamped IDEAL MFG CO. NEW HAVEN, CT USA, and have an 1894 patent date. Neither has the set screw for the sprue plate. The 32-20 looks like it may have been used as a hammer at one point and the halves of the mould don't line up either. There are some deep arc-shaped vent lines on one half of the mould also. There's an empty hole opposite what I assume is a bullet sizer? Was there a swiveling gizmo in that spot to push the bullet through?

The S&W is in much better condition, and has the decapper/resizer(?) still. It does not have the sizer(?) spot at all, or vent lines in the mould.

Unfortunately, the only one that I can load with is the crummy one. Are these as old as I'm thinking from this thread - pre 1902? Thanks, Stan

[floodgate]

Stan:

That .32-20 tool is a No. 4; and yes, there was a swinging plunger opposite the third hole to push the bullets through the sizing aperture, nose-first. The vent lines are not original,

The .38 S&W tool is a No. 1 (no bullet sizer); you're lucky to have found the decapping slug with it (Bill Loos makes replicas of these, if anyone needs one).

Both are pre-1902, since they lack the sprue-plate pivot screw setscrew.

Go to <www.antiquereloadingtools.com> for more pics and data.

Floodgate

[StanDahl]

Thanks, Floodgate for the info and the link...interesting stuff there. Reminds me that I'd like to find an Ideal #6 duplex powder measure. A while back I watched an old-timer making duplex loads on the spot and breechloading for his 28-__ Hepburn(?) (I forget the caliber too, but it was an oddball). Didn't see any mention of powder measures there, I'll have to poke around. Stan

[floodgate]

Thanks, Floodgate for the info and the link...interesting stuff there. Reminds me that I'd like to find an Ideal #6 duplex powder measure. A while back I watched an old-timer making duplex loads on the spot and breechloading for his 28-__ Hepburn(?) (I forget the caliber too, but it was an oddball). Didn't see any mention of powder measures there, I'll have to poke around. Stan

Stan:

Those #6 Duplex powder measures are going for scary prices on eBay these days. There was actually even a TRIPLEX No. 4 measure made for a few years in the late 1890's that would throw a duplex load of powder plus a load of shot for "shoots-bird guns".

If that was a .28 caliber Remington "Hotbox", it would almost certainly have been for the .28-30 Stevens cartridge, a moderately popular, straight-case round of the 1890's

Lots of interesting stuff out there.

Floodgate

[StanDahl]

Floodgate, that sounds right - 28-30. The old gent only had about 10 cases left and they were ancient. I think he was using 777 or Pyrodex and 4759 in that #6. So what is a 'scary' price for a #6 on ebay these days? Stan

[floodgate]

Stan:

Glad I got that right. On the Ideal No. 6 Duplex powder measure, I don't have any specific prices noted down; they were just too rich for me. Ordinary single-barrel No. 5's are going in the $100 range, and the old No. 1's about twice that. I traded off two of those; I'm happy with one working No. 5, a No. 55 and another that just came in needing cleanup. Go to the Antique Reloading Tool Collectors Association Message Board and post a question there under "Ideal Tools"; you can post for free as a guest.

Floodgate

Floodgate

[TAWILDCATT]

an interesting read.
my first tool was a win 32/20 and mould.I still have it.friend had tool and 73 win.I loaded case with bulk shotgun and fired it finally bought sizer die.could not get gun but was given tools.bought win 73 in Burmingham ga. on way home after discharge from navy.paid $5.00 for gun.primers were $.35/100.I have a ideal tool in43 spainish and another in 32/40 another in win 44/40 got the decapers to. had them since 1950.:coffee: :Fire: :coffee: [smilie=1:

[Bret4207]

Doug...sure wanta thank ya's fer all this here info....

the mold makes good Boolits....was castin' em outa 160 parts WW to 1 part Tin.....I havta hold the mold right up to the spout on my lyman furnace er the base band doesn't fill very good...no vent lines trappin' the air I suspect....
just had a ruptuereed disc took outa my neck taday so shootin's gonna be slim fer a spell n deer season here opens saturday....
Hmmmm' 32-20 Brownin' new manufactured 1 n them #3118's at 1700-1800fps....40-70yd. shot broadside.....might just be what'll werk fer the conditions I got....n a blast ta boot...:lovebooli

DJK- I can assure you that a straight WW 311316, sort of the GC version of the 3118, at about that speed from a Savage Sporter 23C is more than adequate for <200 lb deer given good shot placement. Stick one between the eye and ear (the poachers shot) and get your knife ready. Mind you I have the benefit of an ancient Weaver K-4 on mine.

[KCSO]

I am currently working on an article for NCOWS on using the #4 tools. I have loaded boxes of 44 Russian and 38 S and Wesson with each tool and have sized the bullets with the tool. The main thing is that you have to take your time and line everything up good while you work. The tools don't resize the cases and the bullets are held by the b/p in the case and the crimp so smokless loads are out for these tools. If you load smokless the bullet could push down into the case under pressure. The bullet drops from my mould at .360 for the 38 S and W and sizes to 360 so the bullet is no more out of round from the sizer than from the mould. My toll drops the bullet 360x 359 and thats pretty darn good for a tool made prior to 1900. My tool came with the factory box, instructions and advertismnets. My 44 russian tool has had the mould removed but is still in fine shape and reloads great ammo. It is slow thoug and if I do a box of shells a night that is good work. By the By for the article I did the work in deer camp in a cabin on a wood stove with a kerosene lamp for light.

[Bent Ramrod]

Somebody in one of the old books (Elmer Keith, maybe?) commented that the Ideal tong tools were made for an era where often the extent of one's personal property was limited to what one could carry on his horse (or on his own back). Any extra weight capacity was earmarked for powder and lead, rather than amenities to make the reloading job quicker and easier.

I just cast up a bunch of .32 Short and .32 Long heel boolits from a couple old Ideal tong tools, and have taken to using my .30 USA and .25-20 WCF for priming and seating chores. It's good discipline; keeps me from taking the compound linkage presses, full-length dies, interchangeable mould blocks and long cool handles completely for granted.