How do the old presses compare?

[Michael J. Spangler]

I have been wondering.

How do the old presses compare? I can’t help but look at my Herter’s 47 pound turret press and wonder if it’s better/more rigid than a new “heavy duty” turret press.
I look at the older Herter’s model 3 C frame and can’t help but wonder if it’s as sturdy as my RCBS rock chucker or RS

Have any of you press aficionados put them side by side? I don’t have a concentricity gauge but I’m planning on borrowing one from a buddy and seeing if the ammo off the old girls comes out as good or better than the newer presses.

Were the old presses just over engineered? Did that matter? Will a new press load well for 50 years and that’s all we need anyway? Does that mean the old press could last 100 years and no manufacturer builds to that standard anymore?

Let me know your thoughts and results please and thank you.

[dverna]

The question is moot for most reloaders. Very few do heavy case reforming or bullet swaging. I cannot imagine anyone ever wearing out a single stage press. Maybe something like the Lee APP is a bit Mickey Mouse but it is not a real press either.

I had a Star that was made in the early 1950's but my Dillon 1050 is a better machine. Both are/were commercial level machines.

My old Co-Ax is no different than the new ones. If I had to replace my 50+ year old Rockchucker with a new one, I would not feel I would lose anything.

[pworley1]

I have not had any reason to buy a new press because the Herters, Wells, Lyman, RCBS, Pacific, Bair, and Texan presses I have will last and work for generations.

[missionary5155]

Quality precision made tools are as good today as they were 70 years ago. New innovations come along that speed things up but does not really make the end product much better.

[Murphy]

If I should ever see first hand, a worn out RCBS Rock Chucker of old...I'm pretty sure I'm going to stare in wonder and ask myself, what happened here? That can't be right? Those don't just wear out. I want answers.


Murphy

[Dekota56]

So true Murphy.. I have used my RCBS since 1976 still does the job..
now I have bought 4 others only to put other dies in and because I had the money to do so.

[RichardB]

Over the course of 45+ years I did wear an older (1972) Rock Chucker to the point it needed a rebuild. Visible side movement of the ram in the frame. Line bored it to fit an oversize ram we made. That was machined for a swaging die setup no reloading.

[Bazoo]

The advantage I see to newer designs vs older ones is the compound linkage used today allows less force by the operator, thus, less fatigue.

I used a Lyman spartan a while and then switched to an old style lee challenger. It isn’t better, but it is easier to work.

I want a Lyman crusher II, but I haven’t came across one at anything reasonable in price yet.

[Green Frog]

My only additional comment would be that I most regularly use a 40 year old RCBS Jr, a 60 year old Lyman All American and a Lyman TruLine Jr. I also have a Herter's Super U 3 if I really want to go heavy duty, perhaps for swaging, etc. At 73 I don't think I'll live long enough to wear any of them out at the rate I'm going now.

Froggie

[rbuck351]

I suppose it depends on which old press you are comparing to which new press. I have an old Bonanza CO AX that looks just like a new Forster CO AX. I have two Herters presses, a #3 and a Super O and I don't think you could wear out either. My two RCs should last forever as well as my Star universal and my Lyman AA. The only "new" presses I have are a Dillon 550b a SQD and three Lee pro 1000s. The pro 1000s are the only ones I have that I would consider possible candidates for less than stellar performance and potential less than several lifetimes of use.

[tew3006]

I used to "help" my father reload when I was just a little kid. He had a RF WELLS press that he bought in the early 60s. When I got out of the military I bought a used RCBS RS press, I have no idea when this press was made. I've used this press ever since and it still will load ammo more accurate than I'm capable of. A few years ago I finally got a dedicated room for my reloading and I wanted a new press. Thanks to the inline fabrication quick change plates I was able to get a few more. I haven't been able to tell any difference in accuracy.

[Winger Ed.]

The old & new presses have plenty of differences, but one producing better ammo than another is a bit of a stretch.
As far as long lasting-- the only presses I've seen that didn't work as well as they did when new,
had been allowed to rust up and freeze the ram.

[super6]

All hollywood here! Gotta star and cant wear any out. I had a 4 hole rcbs turret and gave it away, A piece of junk.

[jetinteriorguy]

The advantage I see to newer designs vs older ones is the compound linkage used today allows less force by the operator, thus, less fatigue.

I used a Lyman spartan a while and then switched to an old style lee challenger. It isn’t better, but it is easier to work.

I want a Lyman crusher II, but I haven’t came across one at anything reasonable in price yet.

I’m putting my Crusher II up for sale and am wondering what you’d consider a reasonable price?

[Bazoo]

I’m putting my Crusher II up for sale and am wondering what you’d consider a reasonable price?

$50 would be a steal. $80 would be a reasonable price. $100-$120 I think would be more what it’s worth today. I’ve watched them on eBay sometimes go higher than that.

[ascast]

I think concentricity is more dependent on stroke speed, dies (maybe) and bullet style and fit in seater than the heavyness off the press. That said, I think you could produce top shelf fixed ammo with a LEE unitized loaders ( wack-a-mole) or their "zero error" or the old Belding & Mull inline seater tools, or Newton ( English) loaders. Maybe not the Ideal/Lyman stuff. I p[lan to do that very test some day. Its the dies and your skill that do the real work. Presses makes it easier/faster. Generally, those that break were misused, like Lyman Tru-line presses or 45 series lubers. Or they were allowed to get sand and crap and rust and have gotton sloppy. You asked two questions I think. Old "C" frame presses fell from favor because of the spring/stretch in full sizing - enter the "O" frame. Same applies to rotor tops or turrets. To much stretch. I am not sure I could shoot the difference, but there are lots of guys who claim they have. And we are talking about long range rifle or benchrest. Not pistol.

[ascast]

It just occured to me, somebody was talking about a Dillion not producing good enough readout (concentricity) for his match shooting.

[Sam Sackett]

I have a Crusher, including both priming arms and tubes. You won’t get that away from me for that money. It’s been used a good bit, but still as smooth and tight as when I got it. That was probably back in the 80’s??

Sam Sackett

[Mk42gunner]

I have an old Pacific Super C press that loads ammo just as easily as my Rockchucker. It really doesn't take a lot of effort to just resize cases and load ammo.

Where the O frames and compound leverage really come into their own is with heavy case forming. There will be less deflection with an O frame, at least in theory.

What I like about the super C is the wide open front, it makes it a lot easier to use both hands while feeding cases and projectiles and removing finished rounds.

Robert

P.S.

I don't prime on the press, I use an RCBS hand priming tool.

R

[AZ Pete]

some of the most accurate rifle ammo I have loaded was on a Pacific Super Tool, bought used in 1964. I have a 1970's vintage Bonanza I use for rifle loading now, and a couple of 30 year old Dillons (SDB and 550b).