[LoSTViKiNG]

I would like to share my experience and thoughts here, as well as posting a few questions.

I am new to realoading. As a keen IPSC shooter (~20.000 rounds/year) I was looking for an alternative for factory ammo, ending up considering reloading.

I was able to use a colleague's 650 twice, loading 2000 rounds. Apart from this I had no experience.

I wanted a press which is reasonably fast to operate, as I would like to minimize my time for reloading. Initially I considered a 650, too. Then I experienced some major troubles with certain brands of cases, crushing primers. It was a pain in the ... (see here http://www.brianenos...?...c=81161&hl= for details). After this I was sort of reluctant to buying a 650.

I decided to go for a 1050, ignoring the recommendation, not to buy a 1050 as one's first machine. (Sorry Brian ,-)

I did the set up yesterday and I did it from scratch, setting all dies myself, as dillon's claim, the machine comes from the factory ready to load does not hold true at all! (At least in my case.) Belling was way too much, bullets were seated way too far into the case, etc. etc.

I think, if one has some common sense and a certain interest in technical stuff (which holds true in my case) it's possible to set up and operate a 1050, even if it is one's first machine. Maybe disassembling and maintenance might pose a problem somewhere in the future. I can't tell now.

Certain things even seem to be easier than on the 650. I think, as the toolhead of the 1050 is larger, it's easier to cure a jam or malfuncion. I think it is easier to keep an eye on all processing steps of the press at the same time with the 1050. Finished rounds are ejected frontside to the left, in close vicinity to the bullet seating, whereas the 650 ejects to the rear/right.

If you come from a "metric" country like me, I would recommend buying the dillon tools. Otherwise you end up with metric tools for a non-metric machine. And it's not easy to get them here in a hardware store (vice versa getting metric tools in the US, I guess).

I have to admit, I spent the whole sunday setting up and trying out the machine, but I didn't care as it was pure fun. I like to handle technical stuff :-)

After all I was able to crank out a few decent rounds, I think. I measured each and every one (OAL, diameter, crimp, etc.) and weighted each poweder charge (after filling the case with the powder measure, of course). I am a bit usure about OAL: What grade of accuracy can I expect from the seating die? I had a variance of approx. 0,25mm (i.e. 0,01'' I guess). Is this acceptable? Why is there a difference at all? I was using a uniform lot of one-time-fired quality brass (DAG), same bullets, same cases, same machine and yet there was a variance in the OAL? Using "range brass" (mixed brass of different origins) the OAL differences even increased a bit more.

The "range brass" mentioned above was the same that gave me the headaches on the 650. This time there was not a single problem seating a primer. From this aspect I can say, that the 1050 (or the swaging stage it features) really pays off!

I would be glad to hear your comments. I will add some more comments myself here in this thread in diary-style as I start to "go into production" with the press. I am confident that the one or another thing (positive or negative) will come up sooner or later.

[Bigpops]

so...as I read this are you happy with the 1050 over the 650 as of now?

[Canuck223]

Now you just need the Mr. BulletFeeder and the P/W autodrive.

[Sterling White]

I think you should update us after every 5000 rds!

[al503]

Once I get going and get a good rhythm established, I get OAL differences of .0005" with an uncompressed load with the same headstamp brass. With compressed loads using the same headstamp brass, I get to within .001" Make sure that you feel the same 'stop' and hear the same 'click' at the bottom of the stroke.

I agree that with a little patience, most everyone could start on a 1050 especially if they have someone familiar with it giving them some pointers at the beginning.

[larry cazes]

LoSTViKiNG, on May 4 2009, 08:52 AM, said:

dillon's claim, the machine comes from the factory ready to load does not hold true at all! (At least in my case.)

This was my experience as well. Factory setup for me was very poor. Mine was sent and supposedly setup for 38 supercomp which should be easier since the brass is all the same within close tolerances of course. Primer depth was way off and lots of screws and fasteners all over the press that obviously should have been torqued were less than finger tight. I went through all of the suggested tweeks posted here over the years and the press eventually ran OK. This forum is really the best resource around for keeping these things running.

[LoSTViKiNG]

Bigpops, on May 4 2009, 06:15 PM, said:

so...as I read this are you happy with the 1050 over the 650 as of now?

Sorry, if this didn't come out clearly... Yes, I think, I made the right decision. At least as of now. This might change if something unforseeable happens. One should also mention that the 1050 is twice as much as the 650, with no lifetime warrany. Speaking in terms of amortization...

[LoSTViKiNG]

Canuck223, on May 4 2009, 06:25 PM, said:

Now you just need the Mr. BulletFeeder and the P/W autodrive.

I would lie if I say that I haven't watched the demo videos available on youtube ;-)

But seriously speaking I would hesitate to build and run a fully automated machine. What happens if something jamms or the machine ist blocked for any reason and the autodrive continues to cycle the machine?

[Sterling White]

KABOOM...LOL

[Braxton1]

Sterling White, on May 4 2009, 12:29 PM, said:

I think you should update us after every 5000 rds!

Do you REALLY want to hear about this machine EVERY OTHER DAY?????

Remember, nobody ever "saves" money by purchasing a progressive reloader. They just shoot a WHOLE LOT MORE!!

[Sterling White]

He will be complaining about the lack of primers like the rest of us!

[mlmiller1]

lostviking,
The difference in OAL probably comes from variances in your bullets. The ogive often varies considerably from one to the next in most brands of bullets & depending on how your seating die is set up, the bullet is seated off the ogive & not off the very tip end of the bullet. Does that make sense? If that variance is a problem, I believe you may be able to take your seating die & turn over the actual part that seats the bullet & get a different result. I personally prefer variations in length to pushing hard on the very tip end of the bullet to seat it so I "accept" slight variations in OAL to avoid pushing on the end of the bullet, you may prefer the other method.
MLM

Edited to add I just remembered that there is a "bullet comparator" available that will measure your loaded length off of a specific point on the ogive & not off the very tip of the bullet so you can see if you truly have variations in length or if it is a bullet problem.

This post has been edited by mlmiller1: 05 May 2009 - 05:17 AM

[L9X25]

mlmiller1, on May 5 2009, 08:15 AM, said:

lostviking,
The difference in OAL probably comes from variances in your bullets. The ogive often varies considerably from one to the next in most brands of bullets & depending on how your seating die is set up, the bullet is seated off the ogive & not off the very tip end of the bullet.

What he said ...

Different brands of projectiles hold different tolerances and I have experienced overall length variarions from .005 to .05, depending on the brand and shape. I was not satisfied with these results and modified a seater die to contact the projectile on the tip (in addition to the ogive) and it resolved the overall length variance but deformed the tip of some projectiles. In the end I decided that the variation was less important to me than the deformation and went back to a stock seater die.

[benos]

From my experience, the variance in OAL cause by inconsistent ogive's has little to no effect on safety, function, or accuracy. It's one of those thing I just learned to forget about.
be

[LoSTViKiNG]

benos, on May 7 2009, 05:55 AM, said:

From my experience, the variance in OAL cause by inconsistent ogive's has little to no effect on safety, function, or accuracy. It's one of those thing I just learned to forget about.
be

Yes, I just check with the caliper now and then. Same brand lots have a smaller variance than mixed brass, as I have learned. As long as they don't get stuck in the mag I don't care either.

[LoSTViKiNG]

Went into production today

• No idea, how people make 1200 rounds an hour. I made 500 in 4 hours... Admittetly I did some adjusting, bullet pulling, etc. in between. 1200 an hour however seems very optimistic.
  
• Even with the 1050 and its swaging station I wasn't able to avoid a crushed primer now and then. I think I will change from Federal primers to CCI. I was told, the Federal are more prone to crushing than others.
  
• I absolutely dislike the Dillon Terminator scales! I eventually switched back to an old beam scales I borrowed from a colleague. The Terminator never showed a clear number, almost always jumping around (4,2 - 4,1 - 4,3 - 4,1 - 4,2 - ...) infinetly. What's a 300 USD scales good that gives no clear reading?? The weight of the powder charge can't be both, 4,3 and 4,2. One value must be wrong. And yes, I made sure that there were now electronic devices, no neon lights, no draft, no breath, etc. etc. I even used the anti static shield thingie.. The scales is the big disappointment of my purchase so far. Get a good beam scales for 1/3 of the price and you are fine.
  
• I am now the proud owner of a set of wrenches in inch dimensions. Almost not available here... I wonder if metric tools are as exotic in the US :-) Ah yes, and I like the fraction-type numbers ;-) 27/32'' etc.
  
• The primer filler is a great invention! Not exactly cheap, but worth it as the manual picking was sort of annoying... I had two upside down primers in 500.
  
• What I don't understand: Why is the rod that supports the case from above while being swaged designed like this? I think it would make more sense to insert a rod smaller in diameter than the case and supporting the primer pocket instead of expanding the case. (Why expanding if the case is belled while charged anyway?) The swager now slightly lifts the shell plate, otherwise this station seems to have no effect. I hope, this does not damage the machine, as stated in the manual.

[LoSTViKiNG]

What I have noticed today: I had the persistent problem that the shells did not feed into the shellplate properly. Every third or so didn't make it all the way, causing the machine to jam. I tried everything, first of all, taking this section of the machine (casefeed plunger assembly) apart and thorougly cleaning and lubricating it. Didn't help. I inspected the shellplate for any burrs etc. Nothing...
Then, as I had, for another reason (poor primer seating due to another crushed and smeared primer *grrr*) to take the machine apart and reassemble it I discovered that the shellplate lockring obviously was not tight enough before: After fastening the lockring a bit more the cases went into the shellplate without any problems!

If I would not know better, I would say my 1050 has a kind of soul and therefore has its good and bad days ;-)

More seriously I can now (with the experience of approx. 10,000 rounds loaded on this machine) say that the set-up and adjustment of the machine as well as a clean workflow (no primer residues, no poweder spilling, etc.) is of paramount importance for the flawless operation of the 1050. Even the tinyest thing can mess up everything.

[Jim Watson]

Quote

The weight of the powder charge can't be both, 4,3 and 4,2. One value must be wrong.

If the actual charge weight were 4.25 grains, the one decimal place display can do nothing but jump back and forth. Remember, a tenth of a grain is only 6.5 milligrams.


When I first got my Super 1050, the primer feed adjustment was very tedious. I cannot recall or recount all the tinkering I did, but it is now reasonably smooth and reliable. Nearly as good as the primer feed on my ancient CH Autochamp.

[LoSTViKiNG]

Jim Watson, on Jun 27 2009, 12:55 AM, said:

When I first got my Super 1050, the primer feed adjustment was very tedious. I cannot recall or recount all the tinkering I did, but it is now reasonably smooth and reliable. Nearly as good as the primer feed on my ancient CH Autochamp.

Dear Jim, thank you for your reply!

Do you recall the tweaks you did to successfully improve the performance? Maybe I should give the cases more swaging the station before? But I think the amount of swaging is at the upper end already. The shell plate already slightly bends upward during swaging. I am afraid of ruining the machine by adding more "swage"...

I have a 5% scrap rate at the moment which is a bit above what I am willing to accept. I still don't understand what leads to the crushed primers once in a while... I use uniform brass (same make, same batch, etc.).

This post has been edited by LoSTViKiNG: 26 June 2009 - 04:11 PM

[whatmeworry]

I looked long and hard at buying a primer filler. Initially the cost kept me from having one. I have a couple of friends who have them and both have had minor problems with upside down primers. Unfortunately both showed up in matches and cost them dearly . Now they have to check all of their finished rounds. They still have some of the wrong way primers and just throw the rounds out after pulling the bullets and powder. A couple of lost pieces of brass here and there. Some new toys are not worth the trouble or money in my opinion.
Loading my tubes takes at most a couple of minutes each and I've never had an upside down primer. Some things I prefer to do myself.
With regards to the Dillon electronic scale. Mine has never jumped around unless I had a fan blowing across my loading bench. Needless to say the fan problem has been taken care of. Yes, my 650 will drop powder within a tenth, +/- but I'm not shooting benchrest with the ammo so I press on regardless.
Can't help you with the bugs on your 1050 as I own a pair of 650's and love them and ALL of my Dillon equipment.
CYa,
Pat

[boz1911]

I guess I'm lucky, I haven't touched the primer feed since I got my 1050, over 30000 rounds ago.

Maybe someday Midway will offer the VibraPrime again. A few seconds per hundred primers is all it takes, I load anywhere from 10-16 tubes at a time.

I can easily load at the 1200 rounds per hour rate but not for an hour.

[dhenry132]

One of the big things I have noticed is the consistency of pulling the handle on a 1050 is as important as anything. Once you figure out how everything works the 1050 is an easy machine. I clean and lube mine every 10K or so and do a complete tare down clean/lube every 40-50K. I have 2 of the buggers and knocking on 750K this year with the two of them. I bought one of the Ponsness Waarren a while back, all it’s been is a big pain in the %$#@. Even thinking about selling the thing.
Hang in there, it only gets easer for here.

[Canuck223]

dhenry132, on Jun 27 2009, 09:15 AM, said:

I bought one of the Ponsness Waarren a while back, all it's been is a big pain in the %$#@. Even thinking about selling the thing.
Hang in there, it only gets easer for here.

So far, most have had praise for the P/W kit. What issues have you had with it??

[dhenry132]

The machine itself is good. The problem for me is running so many different lot's/headstamp brass it's almost imposable to keep adjusted. I thought I had a deal going with a guy to build me a switch/system to stall the P/W drive when a shell hung in the shell plate and tearing the index claw out. This is my biggest and only problem with the drive. No word from the guy so I have postponed using the drive till I figure something out.

[LoSTViKiNG]

Thank you for your replies!

Yes, I still think it's a good machine. As I stated earlier, I tried out my colleauge's 650 and decided to go for the 1050 which I didn't regret so far (as the scrap rate on the 650 was even higher, especially with certain combinations of cases and primer brands).

I try to operate the machine at a constant pace. However, some primers crush, some don't.

Regarding the auto-drive thing: I don't even dare to think to use such an automated drive. Operating the machine manually gives me the chance to stop immediately if anything blocks (which happens now and then for various reasons: upside down shell, primer slide can't travel all the way, etc.). If the machine continues mercyless in such a case, I think, I'd need a new machine very soon.

What I tried out in the meantime: To apply more swage --> No improvement.

To put on some weight on the primer tube follower rod --> No improvement.

Tomorrow my colleague will give me a thousand CCI primers. I will try them out instead of the Federal (which are said to be more prone to crushing than others).

What's your average scrap rate? (I.e. How many proper rounds come out of the machine, if you pull the handle 100 times, with a perfectly seated primer, correct OAL, etc.)

Thanks for your imput!