Buying Lyman M dies over NOE expanders...am I missing out?

[THE_ANTIDOTE]

I like the simplicity and convenience of having one die for each of my calibers, but I have wondered if the NOE expanders offer greater versatility/use? Will the NOE system produce better neck/bullet tension vs the M dies or would it not be enough to make much of a difference. For example, value wise, it is slightly better for me to buy an M die for my 45-70/90 than to buy a separate LEE die and NOE expanders/spacer to cover bullets from .458-.462. Anybody have experience with both and would you choose one over the other. Also, NOE is hit or miss on availability and it could be months wait for just one expander if they are sold out which is something for consideration. Lyman can be had going down the list of online vendors.

[Taterhead]

For me the primary benefit of the NOE expander system is that they typically have more expander options for each respective nominal diameter. My experience with Lyman M dies is that they are typically of a shank diameter suitable for setting the neck ID for jacketed bullets whereas NOE often offers plus sized diameters for the typical extra diameter of cast bullets. For sake of clarity, I'm referring to the diameters of the expander shank that sets the ID of the neck. I'm not describing the M step that opens the case mouth.

[Wheelguns 1961]

I use NOE expanders in all of the calibers that I load for. I used to use M dies until I measured my 45 colt M die and the expander only measured .448”. I can see using the Lyman dies if you only load for one caliber, but, if you load for multiple calibers, the NOE expanders are more cost efficient while having a better selection.

[Bazoo]

I use both, and I also use RCBS expanders that come with their new dies which are shaped like the M die. The NOE M die plugs are great, but they do have one small issue, they aren't long enough for some applications.

Their 30 caliber plugs do not give the length needed to fully expand the neck on a 30-30 case. Since I size to .310, the Lyman M die is my choice there as it's the size I want, and of sufficient length.

You can have 1 M die per caliber simply by purchasing a Lee universal body for each of the expanders you use. Once it's set, you can switch between .457 and .458 by changing plugs without losing your adjustment.

The main problem with Lyman M dies is the lack of desirable sizes.

I like the RCBS version better than the others for my pistol calibers, and thankfully, for 357 Magnum and 44 Magnum, they suit my desires size wise.

[SoonerEd]

For me the primary benefit of the NOE expander system is that they typically have more expander options for each respective nominal diameter. My experience with Lyman M dies is that they are typically of a shank diameter suitable for setting the neck ID for jacketed bullets whereas NOE often offers plus sized diameters for the typical extra diameter of cast bullets. For sake of clarity, I'm referring to the diameters of the expander shank that sets the ID of the neck. I'm not describing the M step that opens the case mouth.

/\ This

[THE_ANTIDOTE]

All valid points and exactly the type of feedback I was hoping for. I imagined the NOE expanders would be better suited to larger diameter bullets.

[RickinTN]

For me the primary benefit of the NOE expander system is that they typically have more expander options for each respective nominal diameter. My experience with Lyman M dies is that they are typically of a shank diameter suitable for setting the neck ID for jacketed bullets whereas NOE often offers plus sized diameters for the typical extra diameter of cast bullets. For sake of clarity, I'm referring to the diameters of the expander shank that sets the ID of the neck. I'm not describing the M step that opens the case mouth.

I have had exactly the opposite from Lyman M-dies. They expand the inside of the neck suitable for cast bullets for me. For most cartridges there is no need to expand the neck for jacketed bullets. I do use a few of the RCBS expander dies as well. I started buying these because I could use several expander buttons in one body. I soon realized I don't like changing the buttons for each cartridge.
Take care,
Rick

[ascast]

Just for clarity, are you guys using 2 or 3 thou for cast and less for jackets, or other way round? I use the Lyman cause the M step is great, but the sizes are not always the best. I have turned a few to custom size but lose the step.

[Bazoo]

I use .002 undersized plug for the size cast bullet I want to use, if using a plain based bullet.

I did some testing, whereby I expanded 44 Magnum brass with various sized expanders, and seated various sized bullets (no crimp) and then pulled them. My findings were that I got rear driving band swaging (about half of the band on my RCBS 44-250-K and the entire rear band on the RCBS 44-245-SWC (which has a shorter rear band)) when I had anything more than .002 difference.

When using .002 or .001 smaller expanders, bullets resisted swaging when cast from WW+Sn (2%) and from 50/50 WW/Pb+Sn (2%). I didn't have anything harder or softer cast up, but I do have some harder and softer alloy, and plan to do a more comprehensive test to share with everyone.

If using a gas checked bullet, the gas check resists swaging and you can even seat the bullet farther in than the expander goes into the case. This is the case with my Ranch Dog 432-265-RF.

[Chill Wills]

I use .002 undersized plug for the size cast bullet I want to use, if using a plain based bullet.

I did some testing, whereby I expanded 44 Magnum brass with various sized expanders, and seated various sized bullets (no crimp) and then pulled them. My findings were that I got rear driving band swaging (about half of the band on my RCBS 44-250-K and the entire rear band on the RCBS 44-245-SWC (which has a shorter rear band)) when I had anything more than .002 difference.

When using .002 or .001 smaller expanders, bullets resisted swaging when cast from WW+Sn (2%) and from 50/50 WW/Pb+Sn (2%). I didn't have anything harder or softer cast up, but I do have some harder and softer alloy, and plan to do a more comprehensive test to share with everyone.

If using a gas checked bullet, the gas check resists swaging and you can even seat the bullet farther in than the expander goes into the case. This is the case with my Ranch Dog 432-265-RF.

I did something like this too and reported here
https://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?466661-Factory-die-set-expanders

Check out my VS at RIX for more info on expanders.

[THE_ANTIDOTE]

Well I placed an order for some NOE sizing bushings and expanders. Looking forward to it's arrival.

[Bazoo]

I did something like this too and reported here
https://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?466661-Factory-die-set-expanders

Check out my VS at RIX for more info on expanders.

Thanks. Heck, I commented on it and don't even remember it lol, man. I hadn't seen it since the update, thank you for sharing.

[THE_ANTIDOTE]

I called Lyman and yeah, their M dies do have limitations in regards to seating over sized bullets. The rep even suggested I check with LEE/RCBS for custom sizing dies which made my decision to order NOE instead. The NOE has it's own set of issues, but still a better option than the M dies.

[MostlyLeverGuns]

I use both the Lyman 'M' and the NOE expanders. IF the Lyman 'M' die expander IS the CORRECT diameter, I find the Lyman to be a bit easier and smoother to use. I have had more 'crumpled' necks when not carefully aligning the NOE expander for rifle cases. The NOE expander also has a 'clunk' and does not disengage from the case until it hits the bottom of the die while the Lyman is stationery with the case sliding off the expander as soon as the down stroke is started, most noticable with rifle cases. The selection of NOE expanders is far greater than Lyman's and many are available for powder-thru charging with Lee powder measuring equipment.

[PhilC]

I really like the versatility and range of options with NOE's expanders and only one expander die body, meets all my needs.

[gwpercle]

I now make it a habit when ordering a NOE boolit mould to get a proper NOE
(M- type ) expander plug to go with that NOE boolit ... the little inserts are not that expensive and take up hardly any room .
Gary

[THE_ANTIDOTE]

I did watch a couple videos of guys having some issues with the NOE, but I already ordered them and will have to see for myself. I haven't seen anyone actually drop a charge while using the NOE powder through expanders which is what had a better selection and what I opted for. I also ordered the LEE universal and charge die kit. I really like their sizing bushings so I hope the expanders will be just as good.

[Taterhead]

I have had exactly the opposite from Lyman M-dies. They expand the inside of the neck suitable for cast bullets for me. For most cartridges there is no need to expand the neck for jacketed bullets. I do use a few of the RCBS expander dies as well. I started buying these because I could use several expander buttons in one body. I soon realized I don't like changing the buttons for each cartridge.
Take care,
Rick

I'm not following. Are you talking about case mouth flair or the interior diameter of the neck? Jacketed bullets migjt not require any flair but I do want no more than 2-3 thousandths neck tension for neck tension even for jaceted. More like 1 thousandth for cast.

Example: a 40/10mm Lyman M die measures .398" IIRC. That's perfect for a .400" jacketed bullet. If I want to load a .402" cast bullet, that is far too little neck ID expansion. It might have enough case mouth flair, but when I seat thar .402" cast bullet into a .398" neck my bullets get swaged down. NOE has many nominal sizes so I could specify a .400" or .401" expander to mate better with my actual bullet diameter. Lyman doesn't offer that.

To be sure to get a long enough shank be sure to select from thenrifle expanders not oistol expanders.

[Bass Ackward]

I use the Lee universal beller then allow my bullet establish its case neck tension. Case neck tension is not a fixed variable. It, along with bullet length, material and seating depth control powder selection, primer type or selection, brass firings / age, etc. I don’t concern myself with plain base sizing of softer slugs cause, when the charge goes off, all bases expand the same which is out until the brass stops it. It only matters to me if it matters to my guns which it hasn’t so far.

I forgot bullet diameter which cases so many different opinions. :groner:

[ammohead]

Just for clarity, are you guys using 2 or 3 thou for cast and less for jackets, or other way round? I use the Lyman cause the M step is great, but the sizes are not always the best. I have turned a few to custom size but lose the step.

Ascast, I make my custom m-dies from grade 8, 9/16 fine thread bolts. Cut the hex head off and machine the unthreaded shank portion into the expander you want. They wear pretty good. And there is no insert thingy to come loose.

[Minerat]

All valid points and exactly the type of feedback I was hoping for. I imagined the NOE expanders would be better suited to larger diameter bullets.

I use them for my .17 HH .223 and .22-250 and they work just fine.

[THE_ANTIDOTE]

Sorry, I meant that the NOE are better suited to oversized bullets whereas the Lyman only cover up to such size. Like in speaking to the Lyman tech, the Lyman M die for my 45-70 covers from .457-.460. NOE Has .461, .462 so a better choice for me.

[Green Frog]

I’m probably taking too limited a look forward into all the new technology but I like the Lyman Multi Expand Powder Charge Die that expands the case mouth and allows powder to be introduced to the case in a single station. The set of inserts are fashioned very much like M die inserts and perform about the same. For pistol cartridges, I find it most satisfactory. I’ve never tried it with rifle cartridges though.
Froggie

[Shopdog]

Slight tangent but,not really....

The ability to fine tune the bullet grip isn't totally a function of expander diameter. You also have depth,annealing,lube interface.

Just saying it's not just an; X/Y(x over y) calc. It's (x/y times A) + Bsquared. Or some such.

However,the ability to test the diameter,and it's effect on say,ignition.... then,you're going to have to be able to obtain different diameters. I make my own, whoop T doo.. If you don't have that available,then choose the company that can provide it. Sorry for the trip into the weeds,carry on.

[Chill Wills]

I posted this about a month ago...
I did an experiment making one expander and turning it down 0.001" smaller each time and pulling the bullets to measure.
This is a small sample and may not reflect the whole range of alloy hardness we casters use.

====================
Starline 45 Colt cases

Bullets sized to 0.452"
The first diameter I expanded the sized cases to 0.452" and as expected, it did not show any bullet reduction. I did this as a baseline.
Bullets tested were two alloys, range scrape and 20-1 Pb-Sn. and were cast Lyman 245gr SWC with an aged hardness of 9.5+ range scrap and 10.5 BHN for the 20-1.

Expander diameter
0.452" showed nothing but marks from being in the brass
0.451" showed little to no reduction in size
0.450" did reduce the bullet to 0.451"
0.449" reduced the bullet to 0.451"
0.448" reduced the bullet to 0.451"
0.447" reduced the bullet to 0.451"
0.446"

This as far as I took time to machine the expander this morning and got an outcome I did not expect!

[uscra112]

Going way, way back to when I was developing competition loads for .38 Spl I realized right away that the one-size-fits-all Lyman M die was a serious liability. Back then there was no NOE, so I wound up making my own expanders for the M-die body. Ended up with no less than four sizes, to be used depending on the bullet, and the resilience of the brass. The gun was a near-mint 9 inch barrelled Colt Officers Model, which was sensitive enough to show me the differences in case mouth size. In more recent times I've made my own "NOE style" plugs for the Lee die body, and also bought NOE plugs when the size was right. Would not buy a Lyman die today.

I've never used "powder through" dies of any kind. My kind of shooting doesn't consume ammo like popcorn at the movies. So can't talk about those.

[Chill Wills]

It appears that with in the above hardness range, reasonable cartridge neck sizes get pushed out (expanded) by the bullet ending up with the same hold on the bullet.

[gloob]

I posted this about a month ago...
I did an experiment making one expander and turning it down 0.001" smaller each time and pulling the bullets to measure.
This is a small sample and may not reflect the whole range of alloy hardness we casters use.

====================
Starline 45 Colt cases

Bullets sized to 0.452"
The first diameter I expanded the sized cases to 0.452" and as expected, it did not show any bullet reduction. I did this as a baseline.
Bullets tested were two alloys, range scrape and 20-1 Pb-Sn. and were cast Lyman 245gr SWC with an aged hardness of 9.5+ range scrap and 10.5 BHN for the 20-1.

Expander diameter
0.452" showed nothing but marks from being in the brass
0.451" showed little to no reduction in size
0.450" did reduce the bullet to 0.451"
0.449" reduced the bullet to 0.451"
0.448" reduced the bullet to 0.451"
0.447" reduced the bullet to 0.451"
0.446"

This as far as I took time to machine the expander this morning and got an outcome I did not expect!

I predicted you'd end up with something like this even before I saw your results.

The factor you're not including is the sizing die. If your sizing die and brass are within spec, the case comes out of the die very close to the correct neck size, already. For a caliber that normally takes a 452 bullet, a case that is sized 1 thous too tight is just about right. This is why a lot of reloaders can shoot cast bullets in many of their guns without ever buying or making a new expander. And the die makers can throw in an undersized "expander" that doesn't really expand, at all. It only flares the case mouth a little.

45 is also a weird caliber, in that jacketed bullets and nominal cast boolits are the same size. So you wouldn't expect much swaging, using a 452 cast boolit, exactly same diameter as jacketed bullets. (452 is the most common size of 45 cast boolits, per my shopping experience. And it's what I use and size to, with no problems in any of my 45's, same diameter as jacketed; other calibers, not so.)

There are many reasons you would want a custom expander. You might happen to have a tight sizing die. You might have a gun that doesn't shoot cast perfectly until the bullet is more than 2 thous larger than jacketed. E.g., a lot of shooters use 358 in 9mm. Or 311-312 in certain "308" cal rifle. In this case, you might see case swaging of several thous, at least towards the base end of the cast boolit.

Seating a 358 cast bullet into a sized 9mm case, using the normal expander, I've measured base of the bullet swaged down to 353. (And the boolits fouled and tumbled). Normal jacketed bullets are only 355, and the 9mm case is tapered. So only 2 thous too small seems pretty optimal as far as the sizing die manufacturer is concerned. But it's far from optimal for shooting 358 sized boolits! It's in these cases where you should pretty much use expander the same size as the boolit.

Your testing shows that an expander even 1 thous smaller than a soft enough boolit will cause case swaging. The fact your swaging stopped at 1 thous should not be comforting; that's because your case only came out about 2.5 thous smaller than 452, so after 1.5 thous of spring, the case could only ever swage a bullet down to 451. The fact that you got maximum swaging at only 1 thous under boolit size is the important bit.

If your cast bullets shoot fine without it, then you don't need an expander. 45 ACP is one of the few calibers where I actually don't need one for cast. But I got one, anyways, because they exist. My 452 sized expander doesn't change the size of my 45 ACP cases, at all (assuming our brass is the same, my size die must be about 1 thous bigger than yours). But it just makes me feel better. I figure I might one day unwittingly pick up some range brass that is half a thous too thick, and it ends up swaging my bullets too much. But I only figure that out after I drop some into a big can of good reloads.

[Chill Wills]

I predicted you'd end up with something like this even before I saw your results.

The factor you're not including is the sizing die. If your sizing die and brass are within spec, the case comes out of the die very close to the correct neck size, already. For a caliber that normally takes a 452 bullet, a case that is sized 1 thous too tight is just about right. This is why a lot of reloaders can shoot cast bullets in many of their guns without ever buying or making a new expander. And the die makers can throw in an undersized "expander" that doesn't really expand, at all. It only flares the case mouth a little.


Your testing shows that an expander even 1 thous smaller than a soft enough boolit will cause case swaging. The fact your swaging stopped at 1 thous should not be comforting; that's because your case only came out about 2.5 thous smaller than 452, so after 1.5 thous of spring, the case could only ever swage a bullet down to 451. The fact that you got maximum swaging at only 1 thous under boolit size is the important bit.


???????????????

Your assumption is wrong.
Why would I make expanders smaller than the RCBS carbide sizer sizes the case to????
That would void the test as you claim.

My carbide sizer die does size the case to smaller inside diameters than I tested.

I know of no industry standard describing how small the sizer is required to be. I tested my other carbide sizers in 38/357, 41 mag, 44S and mag, 45ACP and 45 Colt. They all size down smaller than what you suggest.