User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 11:02:08 AM EDT
[#1]
I'll try and watch the video when I'm at home tonight.
I like the idea of an automated press, though I'm probably not ready to drop the cash right now. I also want to see some in person reviews and people who are happy with them. I've thought about getting a Ponsness-Warnes drive for my 650. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 11:17:53 AM EDT
[#2]
If I didn’t have 2 1050’s with two M7 autodrives already, I would have sold my first born to get one of their new presses. Too much invested now. Maybe when that lotto ticket hits...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 11:40:16 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I like the idea of an automated press, though I'm probably not ready to drop the cash right now. I also want to see some in person reviews and people who are happy with them. I've thought about getting a Ponsness-Warnes drive for my 650. Many autodrives break parts on the press if there's a jam. Mark 7's autodrives have an adjustable clutch to prevent this from happening. Every autodrive user I've spoken to has said that the Mark 7 drives are the way to go for automating the 650 and 1050 Dillons. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 11:50:12 AM EDT
[#4]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 12:08:51 PM EDT
[#5]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 1:20:15 PM EDT
[#6]
Dude you should do infomercials you have a great voice for it
 cool toys you have
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 2:04:54 PM EDT
[#7]
You should use that sly smile more often in the video.
Automating the production of 500 S&W for an individual shooter = LOL! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 4:26:31 PM EDT
[#8]
Just looked at the set up, and not seeing a primer pocket swage tool in the mix.
Am I missing something???? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 5:06:44 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just looked at the set up, and not seeing a primer pocket swage tool in the mix. Am I missing something???? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 5:08:39 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just looked at the set up, and not seeing a primer pocket swage tool in the mix. Am I missing something???? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just looked at the set up, and not seeing a primer pocket swage tool in the mix. Am I missing something???? However, they have NOT corrected the design flaws inherent in their machines, and every commercial loader who uses a 1050 will tell you the same thing. To my eye the Evolution press corrects EVERY problem in the 1050, and I've decided to jump. I don't see me changing from Dillon, Even with their design flaws. The fact that I can drive for 15 minutes and be at their doorstep to get replacement parts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 5:20:37 PM EDT
[#11]
That's frigging sweet.
I want it and I want it now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 5:20:45 PM EDT
[#12]
$9500 is kinda spendy...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 5:46:27 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
$9500 is kinda spendy... The Evolution manual model is (or was at the SHOT show) $2500, and that includes the Mr. Bulletfeeder Pro. Dillon charges $470-$500 extra if you want to add a Mr. Bulletfeeder to an $1800 Dillon 1050. This means the Evolution is only $200 or so more than a comparably equipped 1050. Putting an autodrive on the Evolution (turning it into an Evolution Pro) adds about $2600, similar in cost to autodriving a 1050 with Mark 7's best unit. Last of all, Mark 7's $950 upgrade to their primer collator is a huge improvement over the 1050's system. I predict this thing will be a game-changer... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 6:12:22 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am curious as to what you specifically say is a design flaw with the 1050? The 1050 is based on the decade-older RL1000, and I bought one when they came out in 1989. It was a little better for fitment than the RL1000 but since price was only $950 IIRC, I developed workarounds for its shortcomings, specifically the priming system and powder delivery. I have a buyer for that tool as soon as the Evolution is in my hands. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 7:03:47 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I predict this thing will be a game-changer... Right now - It is way too expensive. Few hobbyists need the volume produced by such a machine. Few hobbyists would invest the capital even if they had the volume needs. Few hobbyists have the technical expertise for one. Most hobbyists have trouble using a single stage press. They consider changing to a turret or 550 to be too big a leap. Don't get me wrong, I wish the Company the best. I hope their investment in this pays off. I hope they are not over-invested, under-capitalized, etc. I also have great respect for my fellow reloaders (and shooters). I just see several places where this offering is disconnected from the mass market which is likely needed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 7:37:09 PM EDT
[#16]
Biggest flaws in 1050... 100 primers at a time and the STOP. Too few stations.
This one fixes both, right? How fast are change overs? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 7:47:05 PM EDT
[#17]
If there’s a market for it, it would be nice. I thought that the 1050 was a crazy investment. I could never justify that expensive of a press, but I do know some people with deeper pockets and less time on their hands. The only people I see getting the motor only ones are pro shooters, but a lot of them have ammunition sponsorship. You would have to go through a staggering amount of ammo to justify that, if you’re not getting into commercial ammo manufacturing.
If the op goes through enough .500 magnum ammunition for one of those, I salute you sir. Your wrists must be made of steel. I used to have a .50ae desert eagle. The recoil wasn’t bad at all, but I rarely went through more than a box or two of ammo per range session. I had my fill of holding a 5lb hand cannon by that point. .500 magnum has to either be a fatiguing heavy gun or an uncomfortable amount of recoil. I couldn’t imagine going through a few hundred rounds a week, let alone the volume that a press like that warrants. People will buy them though. Some just to say they have one or can load so fast (status symbol imo). Others will buy them, because they go through 1,000 rounds a week. I would buy one if I hit the lotto. Then again I would also buy a lot of machine guns and go through a staggering volume of ammunition if I won. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 8:39:51 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I predict this will end up on the ash heap of history. 1. "Way too expensive"? It is 5%-10% more than a similarly equipped Dillon 1050. I think that at that level it's a better value than the 1050, and will sell well. Unless you believe that Dillon is selling every 1050 they make at a loss for some reason, I think this product will make a profit for Mark 7. 2. "Few hobbyists need the volume"? Enough shooters have been buying this company's autodrives for Dillon presses to have made them the major player in that market segment. If there are 20 million people in the USA who reload ammunition, and one in a thousand needs this kind of volume, that's 20,000 potential sales. Add in the people that might want to start a commercial loading business and the number gets higher. Then factor in that this company is already doing business in over a dozen OTHER countries. See where I'm going here? 3. "Few hobbyists would invest the capital even if they had the volume needs"? Er... did you miss the point that a bunch of them are already buying 1050s and autodrives...? 4. "Few hobbyists have the technical expertise for one"? See #3 above. 5. "Most hobbyists have trouble using a single stage press"? That's a bit harsh, but even if true, "most" means more than half. This press is not aimed at "most" reloaders, any more than a heavy duty turbodiesel truck capable of towing a 15,000 pound 5th wheel trailer is marketed to "most" drivers, who just need a car to get to work, take two kids to school, and go to the store. 6. "I just see several places where this offering is disconnected from the mass market which is likely needed." See #5. What would ever make you think this press needs to be connected to the mass market? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 8:46:53 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If the op goes through enough .500 magnum ammunition for one of those, I salute you sir. Although I've done a lot of load development at top levels, most of the ammo I shoot for pleasure is several hundred FPS below max. JR |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 8:58:58 PM EDT
[#20]
I like your price comparison at the end. Less than 1% of a typical divorce sounds like a deal.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 9:08:09 PM EDT
[#21]
absolutely beautiful machine OP
now build a machine to rival the 550c in price point, ergonomics, robustness, simplisity, variety of calibers conversions and your name will go down in history like Dillon's a 550c type machine is all the average joe needs, anything else is just showing off |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 9:15:03 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Absolutely beautiful machine OP
Now build a machine to rival the 550c in price point, ergonomics, robustness, simplicity, variety of calibers conversions and your name will go down in history like Dillon's |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 9:28:19 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LOL! I am a buyer of this machine, NOT its designer! That would be Jay Hirshberg and his team of engineers... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Absolutely beautiful machine OP
Now build a machine to rival the 550c in price point, ergonomics, robustness, simplicity, variety of calibers conversions and your name will go down in history like Dillon's my post still applies, a 550c type machine is all the average joe needs |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 9:49:22 PM EDT
[#24]
I like my 1050 but there really isn't an enormous install base of them out there compared to, say, 650s, outside of commercial outlets. There was a survey on USPSA shooters recently and the 650 outpaced 1050s handily and the 1050 was even beaten by the 550 userbase.
I think it's a cool press but I doubt many non-commercial loaders will jump on. Mark 7 has a great reputation but for a machine o expect to last many years, it's nice to have a name like dillon attached to it. Quoted:
a 550c type machine is all the average joe needs, anything else is just showing off Also, John Ross is the real deal, if you guys didn't know who the OP is. Love your 500s! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 11:28:19 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think you are mistaken. You seem to be confusing a specific market segment with the market as a whole: |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2018 11:53:54 PM EDT
[#26]
U are a natural OP, thanks for the info and good natured video!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2018 12:01:44 AM EDT
[#27]
Granted that the revolution will be out the price range for most reloaders, what I do see is the evolution begin the game changer over a 1050S isntead.
With it's addition tool head potions, it solves the problem of running having a swager powder check, bullet feeder, bullet seater, and bullet crimp in the machine all at the same time with the addition needed tools as well. Also, since it does way with the Dillon dispenser that was less than ideal in the first place, solves the migration problems that you used to have with that powder instead. Now the million dollar question, and at some point, is there going to be a lawsuit blow back from Dillon on the Mark 7 machines since it has a great deal of Dillion part designes on it. Bluntly, did the patents run out on the 1050 to allow you to copy many of the 1050 designs, or is there a licensing agreement in play. Hence would suck to pick up a evolution, only see a huge lawsuit from Dillion to end up sitting on a machine that no longer has parts support from a lawsuit instead. When RCBS came out with the Pro 5 and 7, there were licensing agreements with Hornady since a lot of the part designs on the RCBS pro machines are copies of the LNL design to start with. We can see the same on the Mark 7 as well, and why the question needs to asked up front to begin with. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2018 12:17:46 AM EDT
[#28]
While we are making predictions, I have three......
That the liberals of this country will put all non-commercial reloading out of business within 30 years. A really scary thought in an of itself. 
That esoteric products that cost 10 percent or more of an average reloader's annual income will go first. That Lee products will outlast the rest, purely based on affordability. 
I want to add......I hope I'm wrong! and I wish the company......and the O.P. well.......and immunity to those predictions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2018 1:02:48 AM EDT
[#29]
I'm on the fence about selling my 1050's for one of these. But I like having presses dedicated to one caliber. I have three 1050's dedicated to 9/40/45 and a 650 and 550 to play around with loading other calibers. The cost of the evolution isn't even the hurdle, I've spent far more on toys and got a lot less return on investment.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2018 7:49:46 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Now the million dollar question, and at some point, is there going to be a lawsuit blow back from Dillon on the Mark 7 machines since it has a great deal of Dillion part designes on it? Bluntly, did the patents run out on the 1050 to allow you to copy many of the 1050 designs, or is there a licensing agreement in play? Hence it would suck to pick up an Evolution, only see a huge lawsuit from Dillon to end up sitting on a machine that no longer has parts support from a lawsuit instead. I'm not a patent attorney (need to call Ben Langlotz), but with few if any exceptions, design patents on mechanical devices run for 17 years. A patent is a temporary monopoly to reward the patent holder for innovation. After it runs out, the design in question is fair game, unless the patent holder has made specific improvements and patented them, and then those improvements alone are covered for 17 years. This is why in the age of CNC equipment, we see copies of S&W revolver and Beretta semiauto designs from Taurus, and everybody and his little brother is making 1911 and AR15 clones. Names can be copyrighted for much longer, which is why "AR15s" are only made by Colt. The Dillon RL-1000 came out in 1978 and the 1050 in 1989. Minor changes to the 1050 such as different bearings or lube points do not strike me as anything patentable. Mark 7 is the dominant player in autodrives, and the company is well capitalized. I would bet anything I own that they addressed potential patent infringement issues on their machines long before they announced them to the public. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2018 8:02:21 AM EDT
[#31]
Holy sleeper account
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2018 12:15:30 PM EDT
[#32]
jfross, it seems like we are dog piling on. Nothing personal, you've introduced something new, so it's to be expected.
. . . They forgot a few things - automated bullet puller, automated powder emptier, automated primer removal Can you imagine needing to pull 10,000 bullets and start over because you made a mistake??? I'm just kidding,... sort of. It will be interesting to see the consistency with which the powder measure throws charges of extruded powder. Ball powder throws consistently but, IME, does not deliver the level of performance you get from extruded powders. You will be processing lubed brass and cleaning at the end. I wonder if you can make it through 10,000 cartridges without having to stop to remove the lube build up in the dies and shell plate. . . . I am also conflicted by something. I can't imagine a guy who drops $10k on a reloading press and shoots 10,000 rounds a year would "cheaps out" and use crimped, mil-surp brass. Why not buy commercial, uncrimped brass like Lapua or even Winchester? OTOH, having more stations than you need is not a problem, especially when automated. On the other hand, I will use any brass I get my hands on. I am cheap from the get-go, so cheap I would never spend $10k on a press (could but won't). But that's just me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2018 1:02:36 PM EDT
[#33]
I realize your comment was tongue-in-cheek, but they actually DO have automatic controls addressing those issues.
For example, if a deprimed case passes the priming station without getting a primer, or if a primed case passes the powder charging station without getting powder, the press stops. RIGHT THERE. It won't charge an unprimed case or seat a bullet on an uncharged case even once, let alone hundreds or thousands of times in a row. About the only thing the press will let you screw up is putting the wrong powder in the powder hopper. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2018 1:18:35 PM EDT
[#34]
very interesting machine.
I don't see this putting a hurt to anything Dillon is selling. Price wise the Dillon is still cheaper and does a great job of reloading. I have 3 Dillon presses and I could not justify a new machine that costs more and has no established track record. The op seams to have an answer for everything, too much info in my opinion to be just a user/buyer but that's just me. Good luck with the machine and sales pitch. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2018 1:49:57 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
1. jfross, it seems like we are dog piling on. Nothing personal, you've introduced something new, so it's to be expected. [color=#b6b6b6]. 2. It will be interesting to see the consistency with which the powder measure throws charges of extruded powder. Ball powder throws consistently but, IME, does not deliver the level of performance you get from extruded powders. 3. You will be processing lubed brass and cleaning at the end. I wonder if you can make it through 10,000 cartridges without having to stop to remove the lube build up in the dies and shell plate. 4. I can't imagine a guy who drops $10k on a reloading press and shoots 10,000 rounds a year would "cheaps out" and use crimped, mil-surp brass. Why not buy commercial, uncrimped brass like Lapua or even Winchester? 2. The Evolution uses a drum-type powder measure (made by Hornady, on the demo units) and I will see if a Culver can be made to fit. Should be no problems with any powder types. 3. Never been an issue on my Stars or 1050, and there are hundreds if not thousands of guys running 650s and 1050s with autodrives, so why would it suddenly be a problem on this press? 4. First, it's not "$10K," it's a $2500 press upgradeable to autodrive for another $2600. Second, when did I ever say I intended to use milsurp brass? If you actually read what I wrote and watched my video, you will recall that I said I wanted to load .500 S&W, .44 Mag, .45-70, and Belted Mag rifle. None have crimped primers. The reason this press (and the $9500 Revolution, and the Dillon 1050) have a primer pocket swage station is for the commercial outfits that want to process fired military brass for sale to reloaders, or load it into completed ammunition for sale to shooters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2018 1:53:47 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
very interesting machine. I don't see this putting a hurt to anything Dillon is selling. Price wise the Dillon is still cheaper and does a great job of reloading. I have 3 Dillon presses and I could not justify a new machine that costs more and has no established track record. The op seams to have an answer for everything, too much info in my opinion to be just a user/buyer but that's just me. Good luck with the machine and sales pitch. He posts on several forums under his real name. He is no shill. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2018 2:18:16 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't see this putting a hurt to anything Dillon is selling. Price wise the Dillon is still cheaper and does a great job of reloading. The op seams to have an answer for everything, too much info in my opinion to be just a user/buyer but that's just me. Good luck with the machine and sales pitch. 2. If you do a little research, you'll find that I often comment favorably about products I like, that I have no financial stake in. Many people do this--just look on YouTube. You're right that I do have one motive of self-interest here, but I thought I made it glaringly obvious from the get-go: I want others to get interested in the Evolution press so they'll call up Mark 7 and tell the company to offer shellplates in more calibers, especially the S&W .500 Magnum! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2018 3:08:23 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
I realize your comment was tongue-in-cheek, but they actually DO have automatic controls addressing those issues. Tongue in cheek it was but the "joke" was automated DIS-assembly of a large number of rounds. The idea was you launched into high volume production but something was wrong. About the only thing the press will let you screw up is putting the wrong powder in the powder hopper. This is one plausible scenario causing the above.
Give it time. We will find LOTS of other ways to screw it up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2018 8:41:45 PM EDT
[#39]
I have a few cartridges I load on 1050 that likely aren’t setup for the M7 (357, 30-30, etc). It would be a show stopper if I couldnt load those.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2018 9:24:25 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have a few cartridges I load on 1050 that likely aren’t setup for the M7 (357, 30-30, etc). It would be a show stopper if I couldnt load those. JR |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2018 1:32:22 AM EDT
[#41]
A few of you have asked me privately about my experience with the Dillon 1050, and why I seem so eager to ditch it in favor of the Mark 7 Evolution. I don't mind telling the story in public.
As I explained in an earlier post, I had a less than happy experience with the RL1000, but ended up okay on that purchase when Kent Lomont offered to take it in exchange for 20,000 rounds of .223 ammo loaded with 55 grain Hornady SPSX bullets that shot 1/2" groups in good bolt guns. Mike Dillon had been a friend since the "Super Star" days, and he knew I'd been disappointed in the RL1000. He called me in 1989 to tell me about the new 1050, and offered it to me at about a third of what I'd paid him a decade earlier for the RL1000. At that time I'd been an MG dealer for six years and owned several Thompsons that I loved to shoot. I agreed to buy one of the first run of 1050s in .45 ACP. It was the original model with electroless nickel plated frame, and it arrived in the winter of 1989. It was my intention to use it to load ammo for my Thompsons, and I acquired 10,000 once-fired cases and began beavering away with 8-cavity H&G gang molds in my casting room on the weekends. (to be continued) |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2018 1:34:11 AM EDT
[#42]
(Dillon 1050 cont'd)
Then three things happened. First, the 1050 didn't work so well when loading ammo in military brass. It was supposedly "set up" at the factory to be ready to use for this purpose, but it was only reliable when using commercial cases. Parts in the swaging station broke or were damaged every time I tried to load a quantity of crimped military .45 brass. I also experienced the only primer tube detonation I've ever had in 44 years of loading over 1/4 million rounds of ammo on progressive presses. The second thing that happened was that I met the woman that I wanted to marry, and by Summer 1989 my priorities had changed before I had loaded even 3,000 rounds of .45 on the 1050. The third thing was that by the time I got back to thinking about loading for Thompsons again, steel-case Wolf .45 Hardball ammo had come on the market and was available at 11 cents a round in quantity. Only a confirmed masochist would cast bullets, pick up brass off the ground, and load .45 ACP for Thompsons on a manually-operated tool with $110/1000 factory ammo available. (to be cont'd...) |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2018 1:35:03 AM EDT
[#43]
(Dillon 1050 final part)
The 1050 sat unused on my bench for 14 years until after the .500 came out, and I began pestering Mike to cut me a .500 shellplate for it. He did me one better and came out with additional .500-specific parts for the 1050 such as a new case insert piece, new case collator plate, and new bigger plastic thingy at the top of the case tube under the collator. Mike told me my 1050 was the first customer-owned 1050 to be set up for the .500. I have now loaded about 8500 rounds of .500 ammo on it, and processed an additional 2000 rounds of brass (primed and belled only) for load development and small-quantity loading. There are still things I don't like about it and parts still break occasionally (case insert bar and shellplate, to name two), although the primer pocket swage is of course now a non-issue. I offered it at a good price to one of my 5" .500 buyers, to be delivered only after my Evolution press is on my bench and running in .500 caliber. He jumped at the chance, so maybe this will end like my deal with the RL1000, where everyone winds up happy... JR |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2018 8:15:28 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
(Dillon 1050 final part) The 1050 sat unused on my bench for 14 years until after the .500 came out, and I began pestering Mike to cut me a .500 shellplate for it. He did me one better and came out with additional .500-specific parts for the 1050 such as a new case insert piece, new case collator plate, and new bigger plastic thingy at the top of the case tube under the collator. Mike told me my 1050 was the first customer-owned 1050 to be set up for the .500. I have now loaded about 8500 rounds of .500 ammo on it, and processed an additional 2000 rounds of brass (primed and belled only) for load development and small-quantity loading. There are still things I don't like about it and parts still break occasionally (case insert bar and shellplate, to name two), although the primer pocket swage is of course now a non-issue. I offered it at a good price to one of my 5" .500 buyers, to be delivered only after my Evolution press is on my bench and running in .500 caliber. He jumped at the chance, so maybe this will end like my deal with the RL1000, where everyone winds up happy... JR |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2018 9:49:59 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Granted that the revolution will be out the price range for most reloaders, what I do see is the evolution begin the game changer over a 1050S isntead. With it's addition tool head potions, it solves the problem of running having a swager powder check, bullet feeder, bullet seater, and bullet crimp in the machine all at the same time with the addition needed tools as well. Also, since it does way with the Dillon dispenser that was less than ideal in the first place, solves the migration problems that you used to have with that powder instead. Now the million dollar question, and at some point, is there going to be a lawsuit blow back from Dillon on the Mark 7 machines since it has a great deal of Dillion part designes on it. Bluntly, did the patents run out on the 1050 to allow you to copy many of the 1050 designs, or is there a licensing agreement in play. Hence would suck to pick up a evolution, only see a huge lawsuit from Dillion to end up sitting on a machine that no longer has parts support from a lawsuit instead. When RCBS came out with the Pro 5 and 7, there were licensing agreements with Hornady since a lot of the part designs on the RCBS pro machines are copies of the LNL design to start with. We can see the same on the Mark 7 as well, and why the question needs to asked up front to begin with. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2018 10:14:51 PM EDT
[#46]
OP, I applaud you for being an early adopter and blazing a path for the rest of us. If I didn’t have well over 10k into Dillon 1050’s with M7’s, I would probably join you.
I will say while the 1050 has it’s issues, it is way more reliable when running with a M7 autodrive as the autodrive prevents issues as well as keeps it running at steady pace. Dryflash and others always recommend repeatable strokes as the key to consistent powder throws. There is nothing more repeatable then letting a motor run the strokes for you. For now, I will keep running the 1050’s... Maybe in 10 years we will all have robots reloading for us anyway. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2018 10:55:39 PM EDT
[#47]
That video has it all
USPSA shooters needing chiropractors 
Belt feds Elmer Keith
I think the market is ready for this Outstanding |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2018 11:01:42 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Had to Laugh, ever stop and look who mike copied ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2018 9:22:53 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Weren't the original dillons just gussied up Stars? The RL1000 of 1978 was Dillon's first complete reloading tool. It was a circular progressive like the Star, but with 8 stations instead of 6. Powder and primer delivery were different as well. I'm no expert on the subject, but I believe circular progressives existed long before Star sold their first one in the 1930s. Years ago I saw a picture of a press that looked similar to a Star, but larger, that was in a museum. The information plate next to it said that it had been used by the Winchester factory to load ammo circa 1890. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2018 8:20:44 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Mike was given a Thompson by the widow of a guy that crashed one of his airplanes. He used a Star tool (that I think came with the gun) to reload .45 ACP for it. When he got an M16, Star wasn't willing at that time to do another run of their rare Rifle tools. They sold Mike a .380 shellplate, and he made some slightly longer operating arms, a spacer for the case feeder, and some additional parts for the powder drop so he could load .223 on his Star. He made up and sold these "Super Star" kits (as he called them) to others who wanted to load .223 on their Star tools. That was when I first met him, around 1976. I think I've read that he sold between 100 and 200 of these kits in total. The one I bought from him is mounted on a Phelps tool (Star clone) with a Dillon case collator, the MUCH better powder system from a Rifle Star, and a microswitch and solenoid to eject loaded rounds from the last station. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1599920580062272&set=a.137042086350136.31516.100001330354039&type=3&theater The RL1000 of 1978 was Dillon's first complete reloading tool. It was a circular progressive like the Star, but with 8 stations instead of 6. Powder and primer delivery were different as well. I'm no expert on the subject, but I believe circular progressives existed long before Star sold their first one in the 1930s. Years ago I saw a picture of a press that looked similar to a Star, but larger, that was in a museum. The information plate next to it said that it had been used by the Winchester factory to load ammo circa 1890. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File