I used my 750 on new starline 300blk and cci primers and had a hell of a time getting all of them flush or below. I even have the adjustable height stop that lets you go beyond factory set primer depth. I measured the primer ram and even had Dillon send me another, nothing worked. It just didn't seem to have enough leverage to seat them down to depth. So far though, I haven't had any issues with the ammo.
I prime all my brass on my 750, never had an issue with primer depth. I even prime my ELR brass on there, across 10 rounds my ES is about 10 with SD of 2-3.
What press are you using? I have a hard stop if I go too deep. Therefore, I can set primer depth right below flush, or whatever I want.
Doesn't seem right at all. I'd suggest calling Carl. He literally answers the phone 7 days a week at all hours of the day. But I would suggest calling on Mountain Standard Time.
Thank you Conaso this is actually how I set mine up and also as you see in the photo there is a gap between anvil and micrometer. Also the same amount of space between the die and top of press. Perhaps it works so good that as you mentioned you “believe” that you can feel the bottom. Also a little more effort to punch the anvil in as you mention. I guess what I’m doing is correct. I will try new cases and see if that makes a difference. But I also just ordered the hand k&m gauged priming tool. Both together is still cheaper than the primal rights. Lol
No question on the quality and functionality of the Accuracy One's components but I'd like to know who manufactures their digital indicator. Every similar appears to be made in China and the reviews are not very good. Other quality indicators, e.g., Mitutoyo, etc., are as expensive as AO tool.
I have an Accuracy One that is a few years old and the digital indicator is made by iGaging. I don't have any validation tools to give you an idea of how accurate the gauge is.
www.hollandguns.com
Yeah I got like 6 of em so I could use em in all my primer stuff that uses thr lee style shell holder. They have less slop and are pretty nice
The T7 does not have a turret lock s rew , like the zero does, which means there is some play in it, and the zero is just nicer overall. That said, after I honed the bushing in my Lyman 8 (just like a T7) , it has virtually zero play in it and works great producing consistent ammo. Also the primer catch on the zero is a lot better and it holds more dies per turret.
Lol, every review I've read and watched videos on about the Lyman turret all say they've had to deburr/polish something to get them operating smoothly. But, I've been considering it as well just because of the price factor. The RCBS turret press is the only turret press I haven't done any real research on yet. I like the beefier construction of the T7 over the Lyman, but I'm sure the Lyman is built well enough to do the task. I need to take a closer look at the priming catch of the Zero because that could be a selling point for me. I'm not too impressed from what I've seen with the Redding's or Lyman's primer catches. The less I have to pick up spent primers off the floor and dumping spent primer trays/tubes the happier I'll be.
Neither the T7 or the Lyman have primer catches worth a crap. That said, the Lyman has always operated smoothly, it's just a very tiny amount of slop that I took out sanding or polishing really the bushing , but I am positive the T7 will require the same to get it as tight as my Lyman is. I'm not positive that it would matter with either one though, it's just my nature to want things as good as they can be so don't take it the wrong way. The T7 is also really good, a friend of mine has one and he's who told me to do the bushing thing.
I'm not expecting the T7, or most other presses for that matter, to be without their own sets of quirks.
I hear you there. A guy at the local gun club swears by the Lyman. He regularly places first or second in our rifle competitions so it can't be a bad press. I have heard of people having to polish the bushings on the T7's as well.
I remember that add. I was watching it and just one paycheck away from being able to afford it at the time it sold. I'm keeping that mod in mind incase I decide to shell out $$$$ for the Zero. My plans with a turret press concerning rifle and precision loading were to use it for the sizing, de-capping, and priming steps and do my powder dumping with an Autotrickler or Ingenuity and do bullet seating on another press like a K&M arbor press w/force pack or an AMP press (if funds allow). That way I have one turret for every two or three cartridges which I hope will minimize set up times and space saving on the bench comparable to a Dillon press. I'm considering them as well, but I'm not currently shooting the volume to justify buying an XL750 over a turret press just yet.
Yeah I get that. That's why I have the Lyman and the zero. I almost bought hat zero with the ears trimmed off but I really like the Lyman and with 2 turrets I have them set up so I don't have move anything, and can even leave large and small primer set ups of UR primer. It's pretty nice.
What tool are you using to measure your depth? I’m getting about + or - 1 thousandth using primer gauge from accuracy one. I’m also using Hornady lock and load bushing could be part of my issue why I’m having some variance. I cannot say I see the difference on paper but it’s a piece of mind knowing everything is pretty much the same.
I’m the same way just like nice tools. I think it’s plenty accurate just curious how to get it more constant seating but sounds like I’m probably getting about as good as expected. I’m happy with it just wanted to make sure I couldn’t squeeze a little better out of it. I doubt it without uniforming the primer pockets.
I was lucky to get hold of a Lee ACP tool that works really well and doesn't index of the case rim for more exact seating. I've modified the insert holder to where the seating pin can be adjusted to various seating depths. While I liked my 21st Century hand seating tool for its adjustability and ease on the hands (I keep it as a back up or something to use at the range), the ACP is way faster and produces more consistent results.
