Posted: 10/20/2002 3:14:48 PM EDT
|
I have an old single stage Lyman press. I am starting to get into reloading for very accurate rifle shooting. Should I change my setup? I was looking into some of the Turret style presses (like the Lee 4 position) - I would assume the benes there would be having all the dies set up just right all the time, and simply changing out the turret for other calibers. It has what is called auto-indexing, but I don't know what that is - is this where the turret turns everytime you pull the lever, so that the next die swtiches? Sort of like a semi-progressive? It also has an auto-powder thrower, but I wonder if that is accurate for when I'm trying to get consistent powder loads. Basically, I'm simply wondering if going with a new turret press would be better and allow me to do more accurate loads quicker than the old single stager. Thanks for any help or advice. |
|
For reloading extremely accurate ammo, your single stage press, if in good repair is more than adequate. A turret press, as it wears, adds in a certain variable that can be avoided altogether with the single stage. Forget the auto powder drop, you will throw and individually trickle each charge. You can load very accurate rounds quickly, say on a good Dillon or RCBS progressive press. But extremely accurate ammo is done one stage at a time for uniformity's sake. |
|
Well, not exactly, IMHO. Yes, the benchrest and 1,000 yard shooters use single-stage presses (and some other highly exotic stuff) but you can build match-grade ammo on a progressive. There are more single-stage presses sold (again, IMHO) for two reasons: One, they're much less expensive, and two, most people don't burn enough ammo annually to justify the cost, even reloaders. I have both, a Dillon Square-Deal B for .45ACP, and a Lee (yes, a Lee) Challenger "O" press for everything else. I'm looking at selling the Square-Deal and getting an AT-500. I like the speed of progressives, but I too prefer the quality control a single-stage gives (even though I know, intellectually, that you [i]can[/i] get good quality control on a progressive.) The AT-500 seems to be a best-of-both-worlds compromise to me. |