• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

419 Zero "lock rings"?

MikeMcCasland

Team Texas F-T/R
Hey Folks,

Anyone on here have any experience with the 419 die rings with their zero press? I've watched F-Class John's video on them, but can't seem to find much other feedback.

The marketing seems to indicate they're CNC machined true/flat, and that they give you a few threads more real estate on die contact. The way they tighten down is also pretty handy considering everything is so close together with a turret. The only downside I see is they don't lock, and of course they're stupid expensive.

Anyone tried them? If so, you observe any benefits other than aesthetics?

Thanks,
Mike
 
Havent used them and never will. I find the sinclair and Forster rings are machined very well and I am satisfied with them.
 
Just for fun sometime, chuck up a piece of round stock and thread it exactly like a die, then put a split lock ring on it while it is still in the lathe and put an indicator on the face and turn the chuck by hand. Not all things that are shiny and look good are as straight as you might think they are. A friend trued a number of lock rings for both of us after seeing the runout.
 
Just for fun sometime, chuck up a piece of round stock and thread it exactly like a die, then put a split lock ring on it while it is still in the lathe and put an indicator on the face and turn the chuck by hand. Not all things that are shiny and look good are as straight as you might think they are. A friend trued a number of lock rings for both of us after seeing the runout.

That's the point I was indirectly getting at, but didn't want to call it out in the OP to start a concentricity thread derailment.

The idea behind the 419 rings is that they're actually CNC machined true (or significantly more true than your average locking split-ring)

I don't normally care about concentricity, and I can't shoot the difference at 1k, but I want everything perfect coming out of this press on principal alone. I figured with the better machining, wider footprint, more contact, and no side-loading lock screw...it would probably yield some improvement.

The added benefit of having a wrench that engages from the inside of the ring seems like a nice feature too; especially when it's so difficult to get a wrench around a standard die ring on a turret.

Anyone use them?
 
That's the point I was indirectly getting at, but didn't want to call it out in the OP to start a concentricity thread derailment.

The idea behind the 419 rings is that they're actually CNC machined true (or significantly more true than your average locking split-ring)

I don't normally care about concentricity, and I can't shoot the difference at 1k, but I want everything perfect coming out of this press on principal alone. I figured with the better machining, wider footprint, more contact, and no side-loading lock screw...it would probably yield some improvement.

The added benefit of having a wrench that engages from the inside of the ring seems like a nice feature too; especially when it's so difficult to get a wrench around a standard die ring on a turret.

Anyone use them?
Do you think that regular lock rings are made on manual machines? IMO the only way to know that they are straight is to check them in the manner I described.
 
Maybe I'm missing the point.
Doesn't the installation of a rubber "O" ring negate (most) of the problem with the surfaces in the press, die, ring, etc. Allowing the die to 'float', to me, creates the ability to a good degree of 'self' alignment.
Once you've gotten a lock ring to be perfectly square, you're then facing the other side which is the press. Then you are faced with the shell holder on both sides, and then the face of the ram, and I guess then the ram itself traveling through the press squarely.
Allowing a degree of 'float' with a rubber ring seems to me to the answer. ( to a huge amount of machining that may or may not ALL be perfect)
It's what I do and it works for me.
 
Last edited:
I personally use them and they work (and look) great. For a press of such price I figured why not use parts mated for it.

qBuIPqu.jpeg
 
Your die axial alignment will only be as true as your threads. The die gets loaded against the threads during sizing operations on any press except the Co-ax; in that case the lock ring and the top surface of the slot that it rests against in load are the determinant. I wouldn't pet the sweaty things.


Uhh..."strike that and reverse it" William Wonka
 
Your die axial alignment will only be as true as your threads. The die gets loaded against the threads during sizing operations on any press except the Co-ax; in that case the lock ring and the top surface of the slot that it rests against in load are the determinant. I wouldn't pet the sweaty things.


Uhh..."strike that and reverse it" William Wonka
Then why do tests with O rings generally show a slight improvement?
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
166,283
Messages
2,215,506
Members
79,508
Latest member
Jsm4425
Back
Top