-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Headspace inserts : SAC vs Hornady
- Thread starter RTTY
- Start date
yes. the Hornady headspace is a datum only, so you have a ring trying to find a place on a cone.
The SAC headspace is shouldered so you have two cones mating entirely for measuring. This is a big deal for repeatability.
The bullet comparator also has a small chamfer cut for better interference.
They also look cool and can change inserts without a tool
The SAC headspace is shouldered so you have two cones mating entirely for measuring. This is a big deal for repeatability.
The bullet comparator also has a small chamfer cut for better interference.
They also look cool and can change inserts without a tool
*Unless the shoulder angle between the insert and the chamber reamer is off a couple degrees in which case it touches at the outside, or the inside, depending on the combination.
It’s six of one, half dozen of the other as far as I’m concerned. Practical difference, as asked? Negligible imo.
The look cool and tool less is nice as said, but once insert by itself is 3/4 of the cost of the entire hornady kit.
It’s six of one, half dozen of the other as far as I’m concerned. Practical difference, as asked? Negligible imo.
The look cool and tool less is nice as said, but once insert by itself is 3/4 of the cost of the entire hornady kit.
I have found there to be almost no difference between the two from a repeatability standpoint. With the SAC you get tool less insert changes, HS and COAL. With the Hornady you get lower cost.
I have 20 years of load data using the Stoney Point/Hornady tool and find that I still go back to it frequently. My early SAC tool has a few shortcomings that SAC revised in recent iterations, offset for example. I just bought another SAC body because of the offset but really I should have just scrapped it instead of spending more money. If I had to do it over I would just buy three or four Hornady tools.
I have 20 years of load data using the Stoney Point/Hornady tool and find that I still go back to it frequently. My early SAC tool has a few shortcomings that SAC revised in recent iterations, offset for example. I just bought another SAC body because of the offset but really I should have just scrapped it instead of spending more money. If I had to do it over I would just buy three or four Hornady tools.
It's like the difference between shopping at Walmart, or shopping at Nordstrom's. Hornady tools will always be lower priced but usable, and SAC is top of the line and provides superior results ... at least that's what I've found in my experiences. If you're shooting for plinking or close-in hunting, the Hornady tools are fine. If you're competing out to a mile and need serious long range precision, nothing beats the reloading tools from SAC (with the exception of their dies ... which I'm not a fan of so I use Redding for FL sizing and L.E.Wilson for inline seating on my AMP Press).
I switched to SAC comparators both ogive and shoulder, and they were a game-changer for me. Highly recommend over the Hornady.
Hi everyone, thanks for your comments. the O-ring solution that SAC has adopted to retain the insert does not make me think of a solution that can last over time and above all maintain a certain stability, but perhaps I'm wrong.
It's true that it's a tool-free system, but how many times do we have to change the insert while we're reloading or repairing cases? better a mechanical fixing type Hornady or if you really have to change often you can at least use an additional bit holder, I did this with Hornady.
I agree with @spife7980's reflection, the reamers who sized the die, the chamber and the insert must be as precise as possible with respect to the specifications otherwise everything is in vain.
Thanks again and merry Christmas
It's true that it's a tool-free system, but how many times do we have to change the insert while we're reloading or repairing cases? better a mechanical fixing type Hornady or if you really have to change often you can at least use an additional bit holder, I did this with Hornady.
I agree with @spife7980's reflection, the reamers who sized the die, the chamber and the insert must be as precise as possible with respect to the specifications otherwise everything is in vain.
Thanks again and merry Christmas
Every single person saying sac is worth it has owned both and the only one saying it’s unnecessary hasn’t but ok
The o ring doesn’t do anything but retain the piece. It has machine flats to zero against but it sounds like you’re trying to talk yourself into the hornady being just as good - which it’s not
I wouldn't have come to ask if I thought so. but if you want me to think the way you want, ok you're right.
I'm just saying that if the cones are not the same you have distorted measurements.
I not think like a "taleban"
I wouldn't have come to ask if I thought so. but if you want me to think the way you want, ok you're right.
I'm just saying that if the cones are not the same you have distorted measurements.
I not think like a "taleban"
Nah you’re right. You and spife are way better engineers and machinists than SAC and the thousands of people buying them. You two uncovered the secret that they’re no good
Good luck with your hornady gear
There was a noticeable difference in the quality of the product when Hornady bought the design from stoney point (yes, I have been using them that long). I switched over to SAC about 3 years ago and couldn't be happier. No more fiddling to get things square or binding when you turn a case or seated bullet. Are they worth it? I'd say it depends on the value you place on your tools and time. As has been stated, both will get you to the same outcome, one just comes with some minor frustration and extra time required for cost savings.
Do you use a 20-30 dollar caliper or a 100-200 dollar model? There is no mistaking the quality built in.
Do you use a 20-30 dollar caliper or a 100-200 dollar model? There is no mistaking the quality built in.
Leave it to Maury to be a cunt
I never said anything was superior. Only pointing out that both can give good results if you know how to use the tool. Maybe your ineptitude with the hornady is more indicative of your own inadequacies. In either case, Sinclair would probably be the ones to credit for using a cone in the comparator as they had it decades before sac existed.
The way I ended up going SAC is I found on the 40° shoulder of my 280 Ackley the Hornady just were not consistent. It was a huge problem for me. The SACs worked flawlessly.
I hear what you are saying about the o-ring system. But time and use has shown it to be a solid system. I do put an index mark with a marker on my holder and then another one on the insert at the insert always goes in the same way. Probably overkill.
Some folks are better with tools than others. I’m pretty good, having worked with tools and calipers all my life but my hands are showing the wear of time. The SAC set just seems more idiot proof and mentally I trust it more. A lot of being precise is finding what works for you and that you trust.
Merry Christmas
I hear what you are saying about the o-ring system. But time and use has shown it to be a solid system. I do put an index mark with a marker on my holder and then another one on the insert at the insert always goes in the same way. Probably overkill.
Some folks are better with tools than others. I’m pretty good, having worked with tools and calipers all my life but my hands are showing the wear of time. The SAC set just seems more idiot proof and mentally I trust it more. A lot of being precise is finding what works for you and that you trust.
Merry Christmas
I use the Hornady set without issue. You can use a spent handgun round if you have the patience. It's a comparator, set 0 on a fired case and go -.002 or whatever you're after. The SAC comparator seems really nice like all their stuff. Their stuff is premium. I believe I can do the exact same job with the Hornady. If money were no object all my stuff would be SAC even the $150 funnel holder so I could quit leaving mine just lying around like a neanderthal.
Thank you for sharing your experience. in fact I asked why I'm considering purchasing SAC comparators, both for headspace and freebore.
I use also a 45€ Digital Borletti and 130€ Mitutoyo Absolute.
Not also are a the same consistency....
I have had the SAC set up for years. I switch out all the time without issue. Like anything it has to be maintained. I clean them and put a little lube on the oring every now and then. As has been stated, both work. I prefer the SAC system. It is easier to use and provides more consistent results in my opinion. At the end of the day I am more confident with the numbers I get from SAC tools.
^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^
I've had the Hornady set since it was originally Stoney Point. They do work. I bought the Derraco set through Ugly Annealing a few months ago.
The Derraco set is very nice for the price. It also comes with a full set of bullet comparators. The set is machined very well.
It's worth taking a look at the Derraco set.
That's what i ultimately did. I got 3 sets and they are all as close as I can measure with my calipers. I have a few hornady sets (I only keep to compare from old numbers vs the new sets), and I've had 419 set as well as the forster set and I'm very happy with the derraco sets and I have 3 so I can have a set at each station and not have to swap bullet comparator to measure brass. Everything SAC I have is nice and I love their stuff. I wouldn't be against getting their set and I generally like the Gucci gear too but I just don't have a reason to change from the derraco sets now
As long as u are using the same Hornady insert every time there is not practical advantage of the SAC. I actually like the sharp edge better then the angle because if the angle dosent match the angle of the brass it won't measure as consistent as the sharp point. I have used both and I would say buy either one.
