QL says 5.56 holds 28.5 of water 223 is 28.80 a 223AI holds 31 Just back off 1 1/2 gr and seat a few . They still will shoot ok just slower. I shoot a Dasher that has the same fill my bullets wont seat right without using a long drop tube and a slow pour. and I still hear a crunch . Larrykrprice84 said:
Forstner ultra seating die inconsistent
- Thread starter krprice84
- Start date
If the comparator works to measure OAL for your loaded rounds which is the distance from the ojive of the bullet to the head of the case, it will also measure base to ojive for your bullets. You are not trying to measure the total length of the bullet which is base to meplat, that measurement is useless because when you seat a bullet, you are seating or pushing on the ojive not the meplat.
So why would differences in base to ogive of the bullet affect the OAL of the loaded round? That is a good question. If you seater contacts the ogive of the bullet in exactly the same location as your OAL comparator, theoretically it should not. However, it is unlikely that the two contacts exactly the same place on the ogive and for a thin more streamline bullet like a Berger, this can theoretically cause a difference. In addition, a longer bullet (as measured by base to ogive) will seat deeper into the case. If you case is already filled with a compressed load, this may cause you more problem as the powder will resist the seating more and may in fact push the bullet back out (depending on your neck tension).
Regardless, even if your problem with OAL is not caused by this, most people will tell you it is best to sort the bullets because differences in seating depth cause by differences in base to ojive lengths will affect MV and that could move you away from an accuracy node.
So why would differences in base to ogive of the bullet affect the OAL of the loaded round? That is a good question. If you seater contacts the ogive of the bullet in exactly the same location as your OAL comparator, theoretically it should not. However, it is unlikely that the two contacts exactly the same place on the ogive and for a thin more streamline bullet like a Berger, this can theoretically cause a difference. In addition, a longer bullet (as measured by base to ogive) will seat deeper into the case. If you case is already filled with a compressed load, this may cause you more problem as the powder will resist the seating more and may in fact push the bullet back out (depending on your neck tension).
Regardless, even if your problem with OAL is not caused by this, most people will tell you it is best to sort the bullets because differences in seating depth cause by differences in base to ojive lengths will affect MV and that could move you away from an accuracy node.
savagedasher said:
No offense, but what quickload says and what is reality are very different. Quickload is only as good as the data one puts in. I've measured, very carefully (measuring to a convex and concave meniscus as well as a flat top of the water, averaged all three), the water capacity of my cases. They are IVI military cases that have been full length sized, trimmed to 1.750" and shot once in my gun. They are then measured. Not sure how much more accurate I can get there, but the water capacity averages out to 30.167 or so, and none in my set of "kept cases" are outside of 30.1 to 30.3, just checked my data book.
Regardless, I just took ten freshly annealed and prepped cases and seated bullets into the empty cases. The results were certainly better, but still varied between about 1.890 and 1.897. That is horrible.
I just took the stem out again, honed the inside a bit more, and used a bullet as a backing to the emery paper/sand paper. I measured the overall length of the stem with a bullet in it before and after honing and I got the bullet to sit a full 15 thou deeper into the stem. I could likely go further but I don't know that this would truly help anything here.
Also, can you explain how a compressed load would cause this seating depth issue? I mean, the stem is a solid piece, it doesn't compress. The case won't compress either. If the bullet is solidly in the stem and it is brought to a certain distance from the base of the case with the shell holder, how can there be any variation at all? It just doesn't make sense to me that there would be any variation at all. It is a constant length....No?
BoydAllen
Gold $$ Contributor
There are a few things that are known to contribute to the kind of problem that you are experiencing. The reason that the possibility of a heavily compressed load was mentioned was that compressed powder can act a a spring, and push a bullet out from its seated position, in an inconsistent manner. Years ago, I have seen this happen.
As far as the suggestions go, the bullet sorting exercise was designed to take the best look possible at differences in the distance between where the seater stem contacts the bullet (simulated by the .17 cal ogive length attachment), and where your .22 caliber attachment makes contact. Any variation in this dimension shows up directly in ogive to case head measurements, and adds to variance from other causes.
This brings me to the die body setting. Because there is imperfectly made linkage between the end of your press handle and your shell holder, tolerances and material compressibility, and stretch can and do change the height of the shell holder relative to the die, depending on the resistance encountered during sizing and seating operations. By putting a little stress on the system, by adjusting the die body so that additional force is applied to the combined system, the rubber band is stretched closer to its limit, and the end position of the shell holder relative to the die becomes more consistent. Seater die bodies are not hardened, so keep that in mind and don't overdo the toggle.
The part about shortening the sleeve and increasing the spring pressure are more about concentricity, but since they are so simple, I thought that you might as well do the whole package. You don't need to be lathe precise about sleeve shortening, because you are creating clearance, and the evenness of the gap is not critical. Your last post ended with a statement of what you understand to be the conditions of the problem, and the question of it this is true, how can the problem exist. Obviously your understanding of what is really happening is what needs to be addressed in order to improve the situation. Friends who have reset the die body, and broadened the contact of the seater stem on the bullet, have gotten better results, and those who have substituted a heavier spring and shortened the sleeve have achieved more concentric ammunition.
As far as the suggestions go, the bullet sorting exercise was designed to take the best look possible at differences in the distance between where the seater stem contacts the bullet (simulated by the .17 cal ogive length attachment), and where your .22 caliber attachment makes contact. Any variation in this dimension shows up directly in ogive to case head measurements, and adds to variance from other causes.
This brings me to the die body setting. Because there is imperfectly made linkage between the end of your press handle and your shell holder, tolerances and material compressibility, and stretch can and do change the height of the shell holder relative to the die, depending on the resistance encountered during sizing and seating operations. By putting a little stress on the system, by adjusting the die body so that additional force is applied to the combined system, the rubber band is stretched closer to its limit, and the end position of the shell holder relative to the die becomes more consistent. Seater die bodies are not hardened, so keep that in mind and don't overdo the toggle.
The part about shortening the sleeve and increasing the spring pressure are more about concentricity, but since they are so simple, I thought that you might as well do the whole package. You don't need to be lathe precise about sleeve shortening, because you are creating clearance, and the evenness of the gap is not critical. Your last post ended with a statement of what you understand to be the conditions of the problem, and the question of it this is true, how can the problem exist. Obviously your understanding of what is really happening is what needs to be addressed in order to improve the situation. Friends who have reset the die body, and broadened the contact of the seater stem on the bullet, have gotten better results, and those who have substituted a heavier spring and shortened the sleeve have achieved more concentric ammunition.
BoydAllen said:
Ok, well I will certainly try to find a 17 cal comparator attachment for this tool, I'd really like to check the consistency of the bullets.
Regarding setup of the die, I was under the impression, based on what a highly regarded shooter and what the instructions say, that the die is not to be set up that's m so low that there is contact. I fully understand what you are saying and agree, if the shell holder contacts the die there is less opportunity for changing dimensions.
As for the bullet pushing back out, I can understand that may be possible, but if that is happening, it should happen with the Lee die too, should it not? I mean, if they both seat and then are released, I would expect those results to be the same?
I just tried another time to compare the dies, this time I didn't fine tune they length I simply set then up to be close and compared how spread out the final bto lengths are. Lee die did between 1.8900 and 1.8915, so 1.5 thou spread. The forstner ultra seating die did between 1.8880 and 1.8925, for a total spread of 4.5 thou. Only did five of each rounds, no powder or primer, just to eliminate variables.
As for modifying the die, you basically just grind/trim off a bit from the bottom of the sliding sleeve? How much about? When you say reset the die body, do you mean make it come into contact with the shellholder? If so, and I'm just asking, does this not somehow risk damage to the die? The instructions say not to allow the sliding sleeve to bottom out.... and when you say increase the contact surface between bullet and seating stem, do you mean honing out the inside surface, or is there anther way? I just pondered using epoxy or jb weld, but decided that I can't think of a good way to ensure that my new plug is in any way centred and concentric. How do you go about making an epoxy plug?
I think I'm going to call the company tomorrow and ask what they think, but I'm really frustrated with this. I was told this was on par with the Redding seating die, and an very unimpressed so far. I understand that the compressed charges are not considered wise by some, but I think I have eliminated them as the most likely source of error given that a no charge dummy rounds exhibits similar, albeit slightly less it seems, variation.
What I believe may be happening is that when the seating stem encounters the bullet, it touches in one location. Then depending on the force, they bullet deforms ever so slightly to allow the stem to slide down further on it. This leaves the bullet seated long. The only solution I can think of to this is a better contact surface between the bullet and the stem. That is very disappointing though, as I like to load a few different bullets and would like to be able to try out new ones without having to order new stems for each bullet. No way others are having to do this.
Another thing I noticed is that the stem has very minor play between the sliding sleeve. When it is in the sleeve, I can rock it sideways a little and can easily see it moving within the sleeve. That can't be correct either, can it?
I just did 10 without any powder with both the lee and the forester seating die. Both never varied more then 003 with moly bullets.
Then I did 3 each with brass that was clean with sonic cleaner and naked bullets.. they varied as much as.010. with both dies.
The stem in both dies applied pressure on the side of the bullet not the point.
Take the stem out of both dies and see if the bullet when you spin it if the pressure is on the side of the bullet not the point.
If your doing naked bullets with sonic or stainless cleaning you must lube the neck.
But check your seating stem first.
You were correct on water gr with commercial brass. Lake city or military is sized with a small base die and the head is thicker. That was the number I was giving you. Larry
Then I did 3 each with brass that was clean with sonic cleaner and naked bullets.. they varied as much as.010. with both dies.
The stem in both dies applied pressure on the side of the bullet not the point.
Take the stem out of both dies and see if the bullet when you spin it if the pressure is on the side of the bullet not the point.
If your doing naked bullets with sonic or stainless cleaning you must lube the neck.
But check your seating stem first.
You were correct on water gr with commercial brass. Lake city or military is sized with a small base die and the head is thicker. That was the number I was giving you. Larry
i have had this problem and focused on the seating stem...it is hollow and the bullet WILL enter the stem a varying amt depending on the case neck's resistance. i tried filling the hollow stem with a variaty of materials such that the bullet made contact from the meplate to ogive EVENLY thinking now all bullets would be seated to the same depth since the bullet cannot enter the stem to a varying distance. too much runout sent me back to the hollow stem. the ring noted on the bullet ogive is the only contact point and if a bullet seats hard (i purposedly used a small neck bushing) the ring is long and the bullet doesn't seat as deep as when the neck is resized with a larger bushing. this bullet is entering the hollow stem! as noted by you and many, seat the bullet, back case out of the die, wait a few sec and run the case back into the die and you might feel bullet contact AGAIN and it seats another .001-.003! i think what happens here is that the neck tension resisting the bullet's entry relaxes, as it must, and the bullet can then enter those few thous. factors contributing to this are: factory brass(thicker necks and varying neck thickness), work hardened brass, too much neck tension, bullet's base to ogive variation (sorting helps reduce this aggrevation). good quality brass, timely annealing and adequate neck tension go a long way in reducing this problem.
savagedasher said:
Well I may have it figured out, or at least close. To address the other things though, I vibratory clean with walnut then I use a bronze brush to clean the necks. I then dip in imperial neck lube before filling with powder.
As for the stem, it clearly seats off the curvature, though not as far down towards the ogive as I'd like to see. Additionally, there is minor slop between the sliding sleeve and the seating stem. But when I put a bullet into the stem and spin it, you can see clearly where it is touching.
Anyways, I took a bullet and chucked it up in the drill, put a few dabs of 14 micron diamond paste and carefully honed the seater. I did this five times until I could clearly see there was a but more contact area. I then moved to 10 micron, then 5, and finished on 3.5 micron.
Tried 5 rounds twice, and both were within 1.5 and 2 thou respectively.
To be honest, this still isn't satisfactory, I can't understand how come this would br4 acceptable. Anything more than one thou total variation is, to me, not right for a product such as this. But I did this by setting up the die so the press lightly cammed over....worried about damaging the die now....
Going to change this load over to 8208xbr or ramshot tac, as I'm a little nervous with a compressed load after reading about stems splitting. How do competition shooters load compressed loads? Or do they not, ever?
Oh and by the way, this is military brass, IVI brand (Canadian) and it is not sized with a small base die. Small base dies are, mainly, unnecessary, unless the brass you have was rattled out of a machine gun and you have a super tight chamber. Even then, my research tells me that they often are used when not required.
And this military brass absolutely does have 30.1-30.3 grains h2o capacity. Done commercial brass I have looked at had between 29.6 and 30.7 grains depending on brand. Forget what the crappy federal military surplus stuff has....crimped primers like mine but everything I hear about federal brass is to stay away. Any thoughts on that? I've got almost a thousand pieces.
BoydAllen
Gold $$ Contributor
Both Redding and apparently Forster tell users not to let the die body touch the shell holder. IMO this is to prevent problems caused by the "if some is good, more is better" crowd.
On the sleeve shortening, I would do it with the sleeve out of the die, and do a little and test. My friend is the one who has done this. Check function with a case and the die out of the press. You should be able to measure how far the case sticks out of the sleeve when the case is all the way in, and compare that to the dimension from the top of the shell holder to where the bottom of the case sits. As far as comparisons with the similar Redding go, a friend who has both tells me that the Forster actually gives him better ogive to head consistency than the Redding.
Your thought about using some sort of epoxy in the seater stem has been done, just remember that you need to use a straight dummy, or loaded round to do this. If you seating force is not putting marks on the bullet, this is less important than if it is.
On the neck cleaning thing....I am always amused by the super clean crowd. In short range benchrest, which is arguably the shooting sport that produces the highest consistent accuracy, experienced shooters intentionally do not clean the inside of their case necks of all powder fouling so that they will have more consistent seating force, and better accuracy. I think that it is good to keep everything that you do pointed straight at the production of superior accuracy.
On this point, reloading presses are generally insensitive to fine distinctions in seating force, because of their built in leverage, which is needed for FL sizing. The alternative is an arbor press, and Wilson type seater. This is what is generally used in short range benchrest. There is little to go wrong with one of those setups, and the impression that some who are not used to doing it that way, that it is slow and awkward is for me incorrect, but it did take a little getting used to, back when I first started doing it that way for some calibers.
Now back to the kitchen for my second cup of coffee.
On the sleeve shortening, I would do it with the sleeve out of the die, and do a little and test. My friend is the one who has done this. Check function with a case and the die out of the press. You should be able to measure how far the case sticks out of the sleeve when the case is all the way in, and compare that to the dimension from the top of the shell holder to where the bottom of the case sits. As far as comparisons with the similar Redding go, a friend who has both tells me that the Forster actually gives him better ogive to head consistency than the Redding.
Your thought about using some sort of epoxy in the seater stem has been done, just remember that you need to use a straight dummy, or loaded round to do this. If you seating force is not putting marks on the bullet, this is less important than if it is.
On the neck cleaning thing....I am always amused by the super clean crowd. In short range benchrest, which is arguably the shooting sport that produces the highest consistent accuracy, experienced shooters intentionally do not clean the inside of their case necks of all powder fouling so that they will have more consistent seating force, and better accuracy. I think that it is good to keep everything that you do pointed straight at the production of superior accuracy.
On this point, reloading presses are generally insensitive to fine distinctions in seating force, because of their built in leverage, which is needed for FL sizing. The alternative is an arbor press, and Wilson type seater. This is what is generally used in short range benchrest. There is little to go wrong with one of those setups, and the impression that some who are not used to doing it that way, that it is slow and awkward is for me incorrect, but it did take a little getting used to, back when I first started doing it that way for some calibers.
Now back to the kitchen for my second cup of coffee.
lpreddick said:
That is a load of crap then... The forster seating die is supposedly designed purposely for use with VLD bullets, how can they make it so crappy? My neck tension is 0.0023" (using a Lee collet die, everything I've read seems to say they can do very concentric ammo and thru do it cheap, with the biggest downside lack of adjustability). Necks are annealed and lubed. I think I'm in a position to give the seating stem the least work to do, really. This is a load of crap, I'm calling Forster today about this.
BoydAllen said:
Thanks for the reply.
Interesting that Redding shows wise consistency. That really sucks as they were what I was considering looking to instead.
As for the sleeve, so the idea is to simply shorten it enough to have the sleeve be moved by the shoulder of the case, not by the ram /shellholder itself, right? So just a little clearance? What shape is the inside of the sleeve?
As for the spring....what does the spring do exactly? I can't figure out how it helps... It seems to me it is just too ensure the sleeve returns, but I must be missing something.
As for the epoxy, my concern is that either there is no way to get it perfect, or you run the risk of having epoxy squeeze out and onto the sleeve, right? I think for now I'll stick with honing. Maybe honing it a bit more will get it working perfect. Will see what Forster says about this.
BoydAllen
Gold $$ Contributor
On the sleeve, yes, and take the die apart and look. On the spring, I am reporting what others have told me. The whole point is to try things, and see what happens, and that we may not fully understand exactly how everything works. I think that some are more comfortable thinking and operating out of the box than others. If you are going there, remember that manufacturers generally have to assume that you have not particular sense or mechanical aptitude when giving directions, and that they will never tell you to try anything that might result in their product being abused or damaged.
krprice84 said:
Problem looks to be solved. I will be grinding down the chamber and getting a stronger spring, but the solution to the variation was to take some diamond paste of increasingly fine grit, from 14 micron to 1 micron, put a dab in the stem, chuck a bullet up in a drill and hone the stem out some. I went from having maybe less than 1/32" contact between stem and bullet to about 3/32".
Loaded up 50 two nights ago after starting this honing and got 2 thou variation, finished the honing last night and got down to 1 thou variation max, most were within half a thou. Tried SMK 69 grain bullets too and those stayed within half a thou over 50 rounds. The slightly compressed load is possibly causing the slightly higher variation in a few cases on the Berger loads, as the smk loads are with 8208XBR instead, leaving me some room at the top. I figure once I get my neck turner and bushing size die, and get my consistency in the necks down further (they are surprisingly good right now as they come) I suspect that variation will drop even further, likely to the point I cannot measure it any longer
Thanks for the help guys! Will report back on the shortening of the chamber sleeve when I get it done
read about honing the inside edge of the seating stem but tried filling the stem with various agents and that didn't work. i will try the honing process as it does remove the sharp edge of the stem's lip. my biggest concern was after honing will the bullet's tip(meplate) bottom out in the stem? doesn't sound like that for you. thanks for the info.
No, I have found that the stem was clearly designed with long thin bullets in mind. They just used more of a compromise shape instead of tailoring the curve very well at the bottom edge. Essentially you have about a 50-60 degree taper in the stem and say a 70-80 degree taper on the bullet at the point of contact. This means that only one corner of the tapered section contacts the bullet.
Don't know what you mean when you say agents, but the best stuff to use, that I can think of, would be either engine valve honing/grinding compound (comes in very fine grits for grinding engine valve and seats, creating a perfect match, just like we want to do here), or diamond knife honing paste, which is not nearly as gritty and will take much more time to get it to work. I honed with the harshest stuff (14 micron) for over half an hour myself. Ideally you would start with fine valve grinding compound and them work quicker through the diamond paste to mirror up the finish inside the stem.
But I'm very happy with this, and it didn't hurt the ability to seat something like the Sierra match king which uses a servant ogive instead of tangent (very different geometry, much larger angle on the taper. ) Not sure why it works well with both now but it does
Don't know what you mean when you say agents, but the best stuff to use, that I can think of, would be either engine valve honing/grinding compound (comes in very fine grits for grinding engine valve and seats, creating a perfect match, just like we want to do here), or diamond knife honing paste, which is not nearly as gritty and will take much more time to get it to work. I honed with the harshest stuff (14 micron) for over half an hour myself. Ideally you would start with fine valve grinding compound and them work quicker through the diamond paste to mirror up the finish inside the stem.
But I'm very happy with this, and it didn't hurt the ability to seat something like the Sierra match king which uses a servant ogive instead of tangent (very different geometry, much larger angle on the taper. ) Not sure why it works well with both now but it does
Very impressed now. With tightening the die so that the press very lightly touches and cams over, I've gotten it to seat within 0.0005" from base to ogive as measured. I think that's rather impressive, and I'm quite happy with it. One out of every 25 or 30 loads is about a thou or two long but putting it back through the seating die. I attribute this inconsistency to maybe .... I have no idea, since it is fixed when ran through again. Odd, but what do you do? Just measuring each round quickly solves the risk of having them not perfect
I use nothing but the forester and it is the most accurate I have ever seen! but I just got some new berger 7mm bullets and started loading them but they seated long. I checked the bullets and they were about .003 longer but they weighted right on the money so I will check each new box I get. I had a redding turret press and out of nowhere when I loaded 25-06 shells would not go in gun. found out the turret was flexing and making shells crooked. the lee dies with o-ring was doing that. nice thing redding fixed the press but I sold it and got a forester and man what a different. I have ordered all forester dies for all my guns but haven't been able to get them all.
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.
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.