Even with the few posts I've made, I've taken a few weeks away from forums here and there because it gets daunting. A select group of people don't like hearing that they don't already know it all. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem explaining shit if people don't understand, and have no problem saying I'm a dumbass if I miss something... But the people who feel the need to attack shit from whatever angle they can find to get a "gotcha!" to feel like they're smarter than everyone are a cancer.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
AMP Press now in stock!!
- Thread starter Dthomas3523
- Start date
Even with the few posts I've made, I've taken a few weeks away from forums here and there because it gets daunting. A select group of people don't like hearing that they don't already know it all. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem explaining shit if people don't understand, and have no problem saying I'm a dumbass if I miss something... But the people who feel the need to attack shit from whatever angle they can find to get a "gotcha!" to feel like they're smarter than everyone are a cancer.
Hi,
@Dthomas3523
This guy literally just has it out for AMP, specifically this press in general.
Here is quote from another thread..
Sincerely,
Theis
@Dthomas3523
This guy literally just has it out for AMP, specifically this press in general.
Here is quote from another thread..
He is here for nothing more than to argue the validity...
Sincerely,
Theis
You’re completely right. I didn’t say any of the elite equipment wasn’t good. If you’re looking to extend your accuracy to shoot the hair off a gnats ass? Then yes. It’s made to get the most consistency you can outside of the shooter doing their part.
20-30 yrs ago ppl handloaded using what was available. They won matches. Made money. Got sponsored some bought better equipment, some were given it to continue their success. Nothing wrong with that.
but a newb coming to this forum and someone tells them buy a giraud, an amp an amp press? That’s where the bs comes in. If you’re not competing? You can hand load ammo accurate enough to make you happy without breaking the bank. That is my point. I don’t care if someone 70yrs old buys elite equipment, reloads and shoots 20 rds a yr.
Do I want an amp? Yes! Amp press? Yes! Can I afford them? Yes! Will I buy one? Fuck no! Because I don’t shoot 10s of thousands of rounds a yr to eek out that .1” more accuracy. It wouldn’t be cost effective for me. So I won’t WASTE my money on it. If I was single? And spent my life at a range? Yes I’d buy them.
your pushing your opinion of cost, range time, acceptable accuracy on others
this thread is not about the cost of the press its about the ability to use the press and decipher data what is now available because of their investment in product and thinking outside the box
dont confuse your "lower" standards of acceptable accuracy with someone else
i personally go to the range trying to put bullets through the same hole every shot, thats what makes me happy
if i shoot 1 time a month or 1 time every 6 months it makes no difference i have goals im looking to meet
if your happy with "X" moa groups dont poo-poo product because it doesnt meet your price/criteria matrix
also, if one of your criteria considers is cost effectiveness....your in the wrong hobby
Can you link to that thread please, where that was recommended as the minimum starting equipment for someone new to reloading? I haven't seen that myself.
Yeah... you tell em!
I'd hop in and help you tell em, but I have to go load some ammo on this:
Don't let the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about stop you from posting.
@orkan video hit this on the head in so much as it will give information previously unknown. What its value on target may be is yet to be determined.
There is new wizbang stuff brought to market in all aspects of competition technology, some game changers and some gimmick. There is always a group that doesn't see the need/value.
Let's get back to the data that its spitting out and learn what we've literally been missing.
There is new wizbang stuff brought to market in all aspects of competition technology, some game changers and some gimmick. There is always a group that doesn't see the need/value.
Let's get back to the data that its spitting out and learn what we've literally been missing.
Why? So those doing all the work and providing the results for free can be harassed without end by people that wouldn't believe any information provided no matter how compelling it is? So the more compelling our evidence and the harder we work to show the truth of it, the stronger idiots can argue against it from a position of zero experience with the item in question?
I'm selling all my reloading gear and loading exclusively on the manual hammer-driven lee kit pictured above. If you don't think that is the best way to produce ammo and everything else is a waste of money, then we can meet somewhere and we can fight. I'll borrow someones savage and use it as an axe.
Not a mod but I'd be ok with kicking folks out who derail this thread.... I appreciate your sharing of knowledge greatly.
Just keep it on the rails. For every Wizard who posts in this thread, there are 10k people patiently watching and reading.
You and @Dthomas3523 have my thanks, please keep it coming.
Yeah, I'll make a youtube vid at some point with more info as I get worked through it. I'm shooting a lot of stuff that I don't have inline dies for right now, so as that stuff trickles in I'll be doing more experimenting. It'll take me a while to correlate what the graph says to what I see in the field. It's not as if I've discovered some specific "thing" that is the holy grail yet. So far, how the graph looks doesn't often correlate to any performance down range... however, my handloading process is ultra refined anyway. I've consistently been chipping away at my process over 20+ years to give me super uniform seating... and this machine simply "proves" that. That's why I say, its the most inexperienced guys that this press will benefit the most. We'll all benefit, because its super cool to be able to see a rogue piece of brass that is misbehaving, or a under/oversized bullet sneak into the mix. However, if a noob is working through is process, he'll be able to catch those wild variations early and save a lot of time/effort/expense. Sure, I might have felt that same under/oversized bullet myself on a manual... but it's SOOO relaxing to be able to just let the graph do that work for me.
In talking with the guys at AMP, when I justify my data by the start of the force, I'm loading hundreds of rounds at a time within a window of 2lbs of force. (software won't let you do that yet, but I can in photoshop!) From what I can tell, you don't start seeing things show up on the target until you are somewhere around 10lbs of force in disparity. So, I'm basically going to have to intentionally "break" my processes, in order to design specific tests which will yield results with a wide enough swing to affect down range performance. Remains to be seen whether peak force, work done, a combination of both, or the "shape" of the graph is most important.
To be frank... I'm putting a couple thousand rounds down range per month so far this year and I enjoy shooting too much to "stop" my normal shooting to test things, only to have the results pissed on by people handloading in the back of their wives walk in closet. I legit had a guy claim his savage bmag was just as good as the brand new 17WSM TS Customs rifles we just launched! Not gonna lie, I'm pretty jaded about this whole situation these days. I just spent over $10k on new camera equipment... then I get on here and see some dipshit claiming his $35 hand primer is just as good as our CPS. lol That kind of thing just doesn't put me in a sharing kind of mood. Why would it?
Instead I'm thinking... I'll just build things that "I" like... and if people want that stuff... great. If they don't, fine, get lost. We're weeks away from another new product launch, and I probably won't even post it here. Anyway, that's the last I'm saying about all of that. Those that want what I have to say, know where best to find it. Suffice it to say, I'll still be producing content... but these days it's very much in the spirit of not giving a singular shit about any negative thing anyone has to say about it. Which, when you care about things... makes it hard, if not impossible, to get accurate feedback.
You can’t customize on the Annie unless you have tools (expensive tools) to analyze the brass.
Tempilac and looking for case to glow isn’t analyzing.
No one is saying you can’t make good ammo without this stuff. No one is saying other stuff is bad equipment.
But I’m not going to piss on you and tell you it’s raining. I’m not going to tell you a Harris is just as good as an atlas. I’m not going to tell you an athlon is just as good as a theta. And I’m not going to tell you a $300 hydro press or $600 Annie is just as good as an Amp Press or Amp Annealer.
I’m also not going to get mad or berate someone for owning non “top” or “elite” gear. You (and others) can’t seem to be able to say the same thing when the better gear (or newer ideas) are discussed.
I'd be really interested in seeing some targets or some downrange performance. I have no issue spending the money, I just don't know how to take the information it provides and translate that into better performance.
Is the idea to segregate lots of reloads based on seating pressure, or something else?
What is an acceptable range of pressure to segregate into?
Will this translate into lower SD/ES, higher level of precision?
What goals should a person set when using something like this?
Is the idea to segregate lots of reloads based on seating pressure, or something else?
What is an acceptable range of pressure to segregate into?
Will this translate into lower SD/ES, higher level of precision?
What goals should a person set when using something like this?
Until the loading machine begins to wear, needs lube or maybe even crashes.
It happens.
I hate to sound like I’m dancing around this. I’m really not.
But the answer to this is quite long. A lot of “depends”. Also, what we know today, won’t be what we know even next week. As the amount of rounds the collective community will need to shoot to verify things…..is astronomical.
Besides the trouble shooting and as @orkan pointed out, new loaders….I have two current working theories on ways to use this (as far as sorting). There are countless other ways to also use this, which is why it’s not an easy subject.
1: to make the best ammo possible and nothing remotely less. You test your rifle and figure out what trace style works. You only accept a trace that’s damn near on top of it. I could see finding the perfect trace and saving it as a file. Have it loaded so you can see every round compared to it.
2: batch sorting for closest consistency. Let’s say you have a 200 round match. And you want 50 to dope/zero for a total count of 250 match rounds.
I have a working theory to sort via one standard deviation unit of total work done (could also do peak force if you wish). A single standard deviation is ~ 32%. So, 30%.
So let’s say my average total work is 3,000lbs and the SD is 200.
You load 325 rounds (30% more than you need).
Then everything outside of 2800 and 3200 goes into the practice ammo pile.
You know have 250 round that are one standard deviation of the average.
You could cut that down to 100lbs if you wanted. You’d just need to load enough extra to accommodate the sorting.
Those are literally only two of the many ways I have found to be an option.
Even that is a simplistic take on it I think... because the graph can tell you so much more. The location of a force spike can be super helpful in figuring out a potential issue that you might not have felt due to the way brass flows during an op.
OK here goes.
I think 10lbs of force variation starts to show up on target. I think a trace that isn't as "smooth" as the mean, despite the work done and force not varying too much... can also show up on target. Matter of fact, I have a TON of theories at this point... but nothing in the way of statistically sound "proof."
I wonder if some of you even know what you're asking? I'm shooting 1/4moa right now, mostly. No worse than 1/3moa. Do you have any idea the kind of testing that must be performed to properly proof just ONE change to any process? At least 100rnds at 100yds, at least that many at 600, at least that many at 1000yds... then another batch of tests on both sides of the theoretical "correct" way to see if its just statistical noise, or a real phenomena. Then to try and analyze the graph to see where that process improvement showed up. ... and thats just a basic 60,000ft fly by of how the "proofing" of this is all going to play out. It's going to take YEARS for people qualified enough to even be doing it to properly solidify their conclusions.
So here's where I'm at with it. I know, for certain, this thing will show me very tiny force variations. It can do automatically, with more precision, than I can "feel" with my hand. So that means, its a win. Pure and simple. Are you all listening to me? This press, is a complete and total win, and it is in the "must have" category in my brain... because it is the absolute end of the discussion on force-measuring bullet seating. There is NO DISCUSSION on whether we needed force measuring bullet seating, because every reputable arbor press HAS a gauge on it already. If you don't know why we need that, then you aren't even qualified to be having the discussion. Just listen. None of them work properly. Or at least none of them work anywhere close to as good as this AMP Press works. Inline dies have been working perfectly for basically the entirety of the sports history, so the nature of feeling something weird and having that round shoot differently is already established. It's just now, we don't have to "feel." Instead we can just look at the graph. WAY less demanding.
Right now, that's where it is for me. It's the ultimate way to use inline dies. Period. This is not up for discussion or debate. This is the new reality. Don't like inline dies? Fine... that's a different discussion and belongs in a different thread. This thread is all about inline... and the AMP Press is the king. It's SO good, that I know that after only a little over a week with it and barely a thousand rounds seated. That's how good it is. I can trust what I see on that monitor totally. No crappy hydraulic gauge that is entirely dependent on how it's ran. Just a trace on a graph, and what I see is what happens. It's proven that much.
As for the rest of the tiny details, again I think some of you are missing the point. That's what this tool is for! It's for YOU to analyze what YOU are doing and give you a solid unwavering basis for comparison. It's not for me or someone else to produce a video and say "you need this press because of this target performance." It's not that at all. You need it because of the consistency in target performance it will provide. It will take a round that would have potentially went out, and show it to you plain as day on the graph. You might have missed it because you didn't "feel" correctly. You need it because its effortless, automated, and totally idiot-proof bullet seating.
Yes, myself and others will be testing our little hearts out with this thing. Yes, we'll eventually have statistically sound conclusions to be drawn. THE THING JUST CAME OUT A WEEK AGO! It's gonna take a bit. Don't wait for us. If you have the money, and you like inline dies... just go buy it. Maybe you'll be the one to crack the code on what the best possible trace looks like on the graph!
OK here goes.
I think 10lbs of force variation starts to show up on target. I think a trace that isn't as "smooth" as the mean, despite the work done and force not varying too much... can also show up on target. Matter of fact, I have a TON of theories at this point... but nothing in the way of statistically sound "proof."
I wonder if some of you even know what you're asking? I'm shooting 1/4moa right now, mostly. No worse than 1/3moa. Do you have any idea the kind of testing that must be performed to properly proof just ONE change to any process? At least 100rnds at 100yds, at least that many at 600, at least that many at 1000yds... then another batch of tests on both sides of the theoretical "correct" way to see if its just statistical noise, or a real phenomena. Then to try and analyze the graph to see where that process improvement showed up. ... and thats just a basic 60,000ft fly by of how the "proofing" of this is all going to play out. It's going to take YEARS for people qualified enough to even be doing it to properly solidify their conclusions.
So here's where I'm at with it. I know, for certain, this thing will show me very tiny force variations. It can do automatically, with more precision, than I can "feel" with my hand. So that means, its a win. Pure and simple. Are you all listening to me? This press, is a complete and total win, and it is in the "must have" category in my brain... because it is the absolute end of the discussion on force-measuring bullet seating. There is NO DISCUSSION on whether we needed force measuring bullet seating, because every reputable arbor press HAS a gauge on it already. If you don't know why we need that, then you aren't even qualified to be having the discussion. Just listen. None of them work properly. Or at least none of them work anywhere close to as good as this AMP Press works. Inline dies have been working perfectly for basically the entirety of the sports history, so the nature of feeling something weird and having that round shoot differently is already established. It's just now, we don't have to "feel." Instead we can just look at the graph. WAY less demanding.
Right now, that's where it is for me. It's the ultimate way to use inline dies. Period. This is not up for discussion or debate. This is the new reality. Don't like inline dies? Fine... that's a different discussion and belongs in a different thread. This thread is all about inline... and the AMP Press is the king. It's SO good, that I know that after only a little over a week with it and barely a thousand rounds seated. That's how good it is. I can trust what I see on that monitor totally. No crappy hydraulic gauge that is entirely dependent on how it's ran. Just a trace on a graph, and what I see is what happens. It's proven that much.
As for the rest of the tiny details, again I think some of you are missing the point. That's what this tool is for! It's for YOU to analyze what YOU are doing and give you a solid unwavering basis for comparison. It's not for me or someone else to produce a video and say "you need this press because of this target performance." It's not that at all. You need it because of the consistency in target performance it will provide. It will take a round that would have potentially went out, and show it to you plain as day on the graph. You might have missed it because you didn't "feel" correctly. You need it because its effortless, automated, and totally idiot-proof bullet seating.
Yes, myself and others will be testing our little hearts out with this thing. Yes, we'll eventually have statistically sound conclusions to be drawn. THE THING JUST CAME OUT A WEEK AGO! It's gonna take a bit. Don't wait for us. If you have the money, and you like inline dies... just go buy it. Maybe you'll be the one to crack the code on what the best possible trace looks like on the graph!
Too piggy back, I have a hydro press.
In just a short week or two, I’ve been able to get the inside surface prepped in a way that is incredibly consistent. Runs about 35lbs peak force on the amp.
When I put this same brass in a hydro….it barely registers a few pounds.
Two weeks ago, I would have consider that too “loose” because it wouldn’t register.
The amp has shown me, it’s not even close to too little force.
I cannot overemphasize how important this point is. If you are already performing well, any further improvement in the system is going to be small. That’s the nature of diminishing returns. And in a noisy system you need a larger sample size to be able to discern the true signal.
You'll notice the Dasher brass I ran in the video a while back was sitting at about 38lbs average peak force. Which is right where I've run that brass for the last 8 firings. Consistent 1/4 to 1/3moa for the past 1800 rounds of barrel.
I've known most guys, even ones that think they know what they are doing... run heavy loads on the bullet during seating. They fail to understand they are deforming the ogive/jacket, and scarring the bearing surface.
I mean, why do people think I went to rice tumbling in the first place? Rice feeds the necks accuracy juice.
Seriously though, I still haven't found a better way to process the ID of a fired case to give the best relationship between the neck and the bullet. I've felt it during seating when it was wrong before... and now the AMP shows when its wrong much better than I could ever feel. Nothing is guaranteed, but if something seats way easier or way harder, you can bet it will come out on target. That's the whole point behind all of this, and its all old hat. Like, that part of this has been known forever. I'm seeing as little as 8-10lbs of force variation showing up on target. I just don't have enough rounds tracked and fired to be certain of what the "threshold" of a culled round should be yet. It's definitely not 5lbs... at least not in my process.
Yup, which is why the biggest benefit for me is being able to relax and watch the graph, rather than have my human sensor pack switched on into high gear trying to feel every little thing. It's surreal to be able to just be relatively mindless during the bullet seating op. lol I mean, I dump out of the prometheus, shove it all in the die, click go, and glance at the pretty colors... into the ammo box it goes. It's crazy.
Last edited:
You'll notice the Dasher brass I ran in the video a while back was sitting at about 38lbs average peak force. Which is right where I've run that brass for the last 8 firings. Consistent 1/4 to 1/3moa for the past 1800 rounds of barrel.
I've known most guys, even ones that think they know what they are doing... run heavy loads on the bullet during seating. They fail to understand they are deforming the ogive/jacket, and scarring the bearing surface.
I mean, why do people think I went to rice tumbling in the first place? Rice feeds the necks accuracy juice.
Nothing is guaranteed, but if something seats way easier or way harder, you can bet it will come out on target. That's the whole point behind all of this, and its all old hat. Like, that part of this has been known forever. I'm seeing as little as 8-10lbs of force variation showing up on target. I just don't have enough rounds tracked and fired to be certain of what the "threshold" of a culled round should be yet. It's definitely not 5lbs... at least not in my process.
Yup, which is why the biggest benefit for me is being able to relax and watch the graph, rather than have my human sensor pack switched on into high gear trying to feel every little thing. It's surreal to be able to just be relatively mindless during the bullet seating op. lol I mean, I dump out of the prometheus, shove it all in the die, click go, and glance at the pretty colors... into the ammo box it goes. It's crazy.
What I'm trying to ask is if you seeing the ability to sort your rounds knowing where they will land. Example, Batch "B" was outside ideal part of the graph within +N%, let's say 25lb but you wanted 15lb, so POI will be .3 mils high-right.
Last edited:
@Dthomas3523
Thanks for taking the time to respond and breaking it down, that gives me a better understanding of the press's purpose and how to use it
Thanks for taking the time to respond and breaking it down, that gives me a better understanding of the press's purpose and how to use it
No... it comes out, but doesn't seem to be any conclusive consistency on "where" it comes out, which makes sense in its own way. When you're in the middle of a node, and you come out... there's a scatter node. It's often not very consistent, but rather "sprays" it around some. I suspect this is very much in line with what I've always seen with cull rounds in that way.
Well I just bought my seating dies in anticipation. Will pick one of these up as soon as I can.
Case volume sorting with AMP Press?
Sorting cases by volume using an AMP Press. Hypothesis: That as cases vary in volume, the height of the powder column will also vary, and that this difference will be detectable on the X Axis o...
www.ampannealing.com
Check it out! Case volume measuring capability with the AMP Press!
I bet the bulk charge dumping straight out of my prometheus would pack sufficiently to get an accurate reading.
If you trust the density and volume of powder with a 7" drop tube to be consistent enough to measure case capacity... You could just fill the case with powder and weigh it. (FWIW, I don't trust powder density to be consistent enough to qualify cases-- not even spherical).
Interesting idea, though.
Interesting idea, though.
Water is a more accurate way. No air. But here’s a great article on it. However they article on amp press isn’t accurate with every powder. As Varget was extremely erratic. So they have a LOT more testing to do before it actually can case sort
RSI - Low Load Density = Poor Accuracy
Discussion of ammunition load density pertaining to performance and accuracy.
www.shootingsoftware.com
Last edited:
I'm with this guy ^^^^^
Keep the data coming please, I'm quite happy with my current setup (but who knows what the future will bring.....) but I am confident there is much to learn here.
Everyone that has one is happily using it. lolIt got quiet in here...
I must admit that press is a great bit of kit. Extremely well designed & built. A lot of thought & effort gone in for sure.
I'm not convinced that it will or can make much if any difference to velocity or accuracy.
From the perspective of measuring final seating force accurately, maybe we'll see some statistically valid improvement however, I fail to understand how seeing every lump & bump on a graph during the seating process could have any effect whatsoever.
Anyone who has taken the time to study Internal Ballistics should be sceptical.
Some of the latest research conducted by John Ritter & Richard A Beyer on "Primer Output & Initial Projectile Motion" suggest very strongly that the primer pressure alone is responsible for initial projectile motion into the lands. Since the primer force pressures have been measured from hundreds to 3KPsi to 4KPsi, I doubt very much that a few Lbs difference in seating force will cause a measurable difference in group size or bullet velocity.
In any case, the only thing which could have any effect would be the bullet unseating force which, has been measured to be in the same range as the seating force after initial stiction has been overcome.
I've already heard of theories about the slope of the graph & etc &, I can't see how any of that could possibly make a difference with regards to the IB cycle.
I'm not convinced that it will or can make much if any difference to velocity or accuracy.
From the perspective of measuring final seating force accurately, maybe we'll see some statistically valid improvement however, I fail to understand how seeing every lump & bump on a graph during the seating process could have any effect whatsoever.
Anyone who has taken the time to study Internal Ballistics should be sceptical.
Some of the latest research conducted by John Ritter & Richard A Beyer on "Primer Output & Initial Projectile Motion" suggest very strongly that the primer pressure alone is responsible for initial projectile motion into the lands. Since the primer force pressures have been measured from hundreds to 3KPsi to 4KPsi, I doubt very much that a few Lbs difference in seating force will cause a measurable difference in group size or bullet velocity.
In any case, the only thing which could have any effect would be the bullet unseating force which, has been measured to be in the same range as the seating force after initial stiction has been overcome.
I've already heard of theories about the slope of the graph & etc &, I can't see how any of that could possibly make a difference with regards to the IB cycle.
I have to admit, I can be closed minded to unsubstantiated claims but, I do rely on the laws of physics to give things meaning.
Anyway, time will tell.
Every new piece of equipment goes the same way. Some early adopters, and a huge dogpile of negativity. Then more people get it and “get it.” Some will never buy it even if they “get it.”
Those that don’t buy it will never have experience, and inexperienced opinions are only worth something to those that value nothing.
Everyone gets to make their own decisions.
Those that don’t buy it will never have experience, and inexperienced opinions are only worth something to those that value nothing.
Everyone gets to make their own decisions.
I don't see the point in rushing to buy one to then discover it is the huge dogpile of negativity.
Pretty bullet seating graphs don't do a lot for me.
My understanding of IB tells me that the hype may not match reality.
As I said, time will tell.
And people wonder why the guys stopped sharing information about what they are seeing with there presses.
if you don’t need it stay out of this topic and move on.
So what information has been shared to date?
I don't see any statistically verified data. I don't read any theories as to how the forces involved when seating a bullet interact with the IB process.
All I've read so far is a whole lot of how it should, would & could &, how wonderful & beautiful it is.
I never said I would never buy one, nor have I said that the thing is totally useless.
We'll see what comes off in the wash, for now though, there's nothing I've read which tells me I'm missing out on anything.
no one knows yet. It’s called trial and error so far.
so if you don’t have anything constructive to add go make your own topic talking about how it doesn’t matter.
So far they have been willing to share what they are seeing.
So far not one person said it has to be done like this. Just observations.
I'm on the list....I'll have one soon. Here's my observation.....just like with the AMP....yes...I can anneal with a flame and make a good batch of ammo...but is it the same as the last batch?
So...I can feel the difference using the K&M arbor press with the force pack....and I can see a coarse measurement of force....but is it the same as last time?..and the time before that? Is my reloading techinques consistent from one week to the next? Was that a donut?
But in reality...I like nice things....I like precision equipment...and I like shooting distances where nat hairs matter.
So...I can feel the difference using the K&M arbor press with the force pack....and I can see a coarse measurement of force....but is it the same as last time?..and the time before that? Is my reloading techinques consistent from one week to the next? Was that a donut?
But in reality...I like nice things....I like precision equipment...and I like shooting distances where nat hairs matter.
I don't look at things in terms of good or bad. They are subjective terms which is exactly what I try to avoid.
I don't believe it's good or bad to be objective especially when it's worth $1200.
I know there are some who would prefer to read only that which agrees with there beliefs but then that's just a sales pitch.
