How do the old presses compare?

[1hole]

I don’t know how you can say that. It’s a heck of a lot quicker to rotate deterrent than it is to unscrew and set up an individual die. ... just rotate the turret. Heck of a lot quicker than unscrewing a die screwing another one in and making sure all the adjustments are correct.

If I don't have time to set up my dies properly I figger I don't have time to reload.

I don't understand what you're saying. Do you mean your turret press alternative to using a single stage press is to remove, replace and readjust each die at each step in the loading process while keeping each case in the shell holder until it's completed?

If so, yeah, I agree that your reloading will progress much faster with a conventional turret press.

I started reloading in 1965 with a six station iron turret press; still have it. I was taught to "batch process" my reloading, removing each die only at the end of each step. I can batch reload a bag of empties on my single stage faster than I can reliably step and jockey my turret's detent precisely into its proper place.

The high price of turrets (well, all except Lee's and I don't have one of them) prohibits me from having them set up for all the cartridges I reload.

I was also taught to adjust my dies and lock the adjustments in place, including the die lock ring, but not use pliers or wrenches to jam anything in place. I don't use "quick change" inserts at all because I don't need them, I can easily exchange dies by hand in less than a minute.

[Bazoo]

I never have to readjust my dies once the lock rings are set. Unless of course I switch them between presses.

After having used both a Lyman Spartan and an old style lee challenger side by side, I sold the Spartan. It is much easier to use for sizing even handgun brass. 44 special or magnum for example. Using the Spartan I was fatigued after less than 100 cases. It just takes so much effort to work the ram. The challenger is much easier. Its not because it’s stronger, which it probably isn’t since it’s aluminum vs cast iron, but because of the compound linkage.

As for press deflection, as long as it’s evenly deflected it’s not an issue. An O frame is more likely to stretch evenly. But a C frame would more likely stretch more on one side. I’ve not measured any for this myself. The Spartan used to be available with a bar that went from the lower and upper primer assembly ears, to convert it to an O press so you could use it for swaging and for heavy case forming. So that tells me the deflection was all on the open side during heavy operations. And those operations must have taken a heck of a muscle on the press arm.

[Harter66]

I'm late here having skipped over this thread a few times ......

I asked RCBS about repair of my Partner press , the little cheap one with the aluminum frame and the ram about the same dia as the shell holder , they said it had a design life of 50,000 rounds . I didn't as if that was , size ,prime , , seat repeat , or size , flair , prime , seat , crimp . In any case the engineer says that cheap light duty press should run the ram up and down something like 210,000 times with 50,000 cycles being a 500-+ lb load . I know there's an engineer that has the leverage math available to tell us exactly how much force is exerted to in making a nominal 06' a match case in a SB die and how much force it takes to remove 270° of rim from same .
My Partner has enough ram slop in it now it's set up with a ram prime and I expect it will soldier on for a few more years that way .

I have an RC and an RCII . So pre 1968 and pre 1990 I guess and I've worked them a lot with some moderate forming . There's no really discernable movement in either of them . I picked and Big Max about 6 yrs ago the guy selling it had been gifted a brand new RCBS press , the one between the RC and the one for 50 BMG . It has a little slop all the way down but it goes away about an inch under where the lod comes on . It is a nice half stroke turn and finish press that will easily single stroke the base/head swage to turn 308 family into 6.5×50 SR .
Just for grins I tried one in the RCII . Yeah I don't want to do a bunch of them that way . I'd guess about 35# on the handle of the Big Max A4 and closer to 45# on the RCII . No way I'd do that now with the Partner .

I have Dad's Hornady red Pacific 008 and I remember forming 22-250 from 308 in it when I was 11-12 with Dad . It wasn't a single pass deal , and the last stroke required fortification of the bench we were using . I don't know the exact vintage but I do know he would have purchased it between 1972&1974 and it came in a Hornady box with about $6 in stamps stuck to it . The actual PO mark is gone . To say it's as tight as high A in the Stienway is a waste because it's probably not loaded 750 rounds in it's whole life . Honestly I'd run a 6.5 CM reamer in his Type 38 Arisaka before I'd form cases in this press .

The Pacific Super DeLuxe and the Original RC were intended to be swage presses for 22 rifles and most half jacket pistol bullets so they were probably the leverage , casting , overkill frame kings .

QC is about 100 times now what it was 1943-1957 . We have the ability to test to failure 150 prototypes in a week with 2 observers where it took 20 a month . We can spec a digital design w/a lube standard , forging porosity , tensile , and shear loads , then run it up to a maximum fail point , plug in a 70% work load 25% higher than end user anticipated loads and tweek the linkage setups to provide 150-1 leverage on a 5-6 to one motion . Compound or changing load angles isn't new we just don't have to build a full linkage and measure an actual load to see if it's getting us where we want it to be .

Do I think a brand new shiny Redding / Forster /RCBS /Lyman Hornady press is a better , longer lived , more accurate tool than the one they made 70 yr ago probably not if they were .0005 of dead straight line bored and threaded then . The forgings are more consistent , in theory the frame should wear more consistently . The ability to plug in a 10% factor in both the ram and frame for oil retention instead of as it comes gives the manufacturer design life control . They simply aren't going to run chromed chromoly against a course grain cast iron with a 50% over build to get the strength and the 5 million stroke life . How will they sell you the new and improved 5th gen if you never wear out the 3rd gen press ? From there they probably were better tools .

My Grands will probably be using my Dad's 008 to load their ammo if they take it up , my daughter is getting Dad's RS and probably the 008 this summer . Lots of life left in them . My Son in-law is more of a new tool kind of guy but I think a little shopping will make him a lot happy .

I think it probably comes down to the scale and specific parameters that one applies to the tools and whether or not you can compare a really direct model .

[1hole]

...Using the Spartan I was fatigued after less than 100 cases. It just takes so much effort to work the ram. The challenger is much easier. Its not because it’s stronger, which it probably isn’t since it’s aluminum vs cast iron, but because of the compound linkage.

As for press deflection, as long as it’s evenly deflected it’s not an issue. An O frame is more likely to stretch evenly. But a C frame would more likely stretch more on one side. I’ve not measured any for this myself.

Bazoo, I have measured them, several presses of each material and type in fact. I had to repeat my first tests several times before I could believe the truth myself. My gage measured truth is, your reasoned guesses are quite logical but wrong!

First, I've learned that most if not all iron C presses are/were designed to be much stronger than they had be to do their jobs!

Second, within its own limits, I've learned that cast iron is more flexible - ductile - than aircraft grade aluminum alloy press castings!

(Note: Before the outraged howling starts, I'm only saying that, within their yield strength limits, good alum alloy presses are more rigid than iron, I am NOT saying aluminum alloy presses are "stronger" than iron!)

To tell it briefly, I did a carefully set up test of identical work. I found that my RCBS RC II (iron O press) deflected about three thou. But, FL sizing with the same dies and cases and shoulder setback and under exactly the same load, my two very small Lee aluminum framed "Reloader" C presses didn't deflect enough to reliably measure with my professional grade dial indicator that reads in tenths of a thousandth inch!

A mixture of some friend's other presses later produced virtually the same results.

As Popeye once said, "Well, blow me down!"

[laurencen]

for old press I have a hollywood turret press, one thing this is a smooth action, way overbuilt and even though the scale compared to a modern press is over twice the size its easier to use and less fatigue, love the old presses they were built in a better time when machinists had pride in work instead of making a buck

[JCM45]

I run both an old Pacific 007 single stage and a Lee Classic Turret Press. They both produce high quality reloads.

[Bobaloo22]

I just started reloading and I'm using an old Lyman Spartan single stage and it works great.

[ddeck22]

The understanding and practice of metallurgy of changed a lot in the last 40 years, so I think you get more solid presses now. That, of course, goes against the general inflation of raw materials and the need to stick to a particular price point.

I agree with others here, I don't think you can ever wear one out unless it is neglected.

[Ziptar]

Unless you get a Lee Classic Turret press with it's unique auto indexing feature I don't believe you'll find any real advantage to using a turret for reloading anything at all.

That would depend on the user and how it's used.

I use a T-Mag for handgun, while I don't use it like he does in that video I do find it advantageous.

[Land Owner]

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.

Saw a Rock Chucker as a garden Gnome, incorporated after a fire destroyed their barn. Otherwise, my Rock Chuckers will outlast me and my kids...even my Lee Classic Cast, when it was considerably less expensive, is a fine and hardy machine.

[Land Owner]

When I got out of the military I bought a used RCBS RS press, I have no idea when this press was made.

RCBS Presses are stamped with their "born on" year. To see it, unscrew the threaded bushing (#15) on the top of the frame (#1).

[ACC]

Since I have three presses from the late 60's(1969 or 1970) they hold up pretty well. Two RCBS Rock Chuckers and one Lee. Of course they were brand new out of the box when they were given to me.

ACC

[robg]

i use a Wamadet press only 40 years old bought it in 82 ,i also use a lee reloader c press to size boolits and factory crimp.

[William Yanda]

I cannot compare to RCBS. I picked up a Herter's Model 3 a while back. Mr. Lee was correct. Presses other than his are heavier than necessary.