SAC Sizing Die & Zero Press

[Defender3]

I'm pulling what little hair I have left out trying to get this combo to bump the shoulder on my 300PRC once fired Hornady brass. I'm setting up my just received Zero press with the SAC sizing dies, beginning with the 300PRC. I've followed the video instructions, used the lowest Redding comp shell holder I have (.002) and added a 13 shim stack to the SAC die, no bueno. Has anyone else experienced the inability to bump a shoulder with this die?

ETA - Ref the tooling in the pic, everything is working except the 300PRC sizing die. The other SAC sizing dies (6BR and 260R) are working as advertised, as are the seating dies.

 

[Mormegil87]

Following

 

[J_D]

Seems pretty straight forward.....I haven't set mine up yet, or the arbor press version, but I can't see how it's difficult according to this video.

 

[BuildingConceptsllc]

I'm pulling what little hair I have left out trying to get this combo to bump the shoulder on my 300PRC once fired Hornady brass. I'm setting up my just received Zero press with the SAC sizing dies, beginning with the 300PRC. I've followed the video instructions, used the lowest Redding comp shell holder I have (.002) and added a 13 shim stack to the SAC die, no bueno. Has anyone else experienced the inability to bump a shoulder with this die?

View attachment 8416069

I didn't need to bump this last batch I ran so I only annealed it and neck sized it so I haven't tried with my SAC creedmore die yet but I'm about to so I will let you know, assuming work doesn't get in the way here. I am waiting on some chamber length gauges to come in though so see about length of trim so may be a bit

 

[Defender3]

Seems pretty straight forward.....I haven't set mine up yet, or the arbor press version, but I can't see how it's difficult according to this video.

Not coming at your Brother, but I set it up to the letter. If it worked, I wouldn't have had to post my question.

I didn't need to bump this last batch I ran so I only annealed it and neck sized it so I haven't tried with my SAC creedmore die yet but I'm about to so I will let you know, assuming work doesn't get in the way here. I am waiting on some chamber length gauges to come in though so see about length of trim so may be a bit

As an update, I did send SAC a note and they replied that issues tended to be too much bump versus my issues with no to too little bump. I have not re-engaged with SAC, I wanted to do more testing.

I took everything apart and made sure it was clean, reassembled and still had issues. I bought the Area 419 shell holder set and while it helped (I could get a bump with the -2 shell holder and a shim), it was inconsistent. I swapped the SAC with a Whidden and had it up and running in 5 minutes. I took the SAC die and set it up in my Co-Ax and it was working in minutes and with consistency. Placed it back into the Zero and still issues with consistency.

I did not have similar issues with my SAC sizer for my 6BR or my 260R, work like a charm. My uninformed opinion is the cam-over in the co-ax works wonders.

I used my 300 PRC SAC seating die today and once setup, the rounds were all seated to depth or within .001.

 

[J_D]

That’s interesting. I have a Zero Press and will have to see if I have the same issues.

 

[Defender3]

That’s interesting. I have a Zero Press and will have to see if I have the same issues.

What caliber?

 

[Chris1972]

13 shims? Is there still slack in your bushing? It’s supposed to float.

 

[J_D]

What caliber?

I bought the universal creedmoor die.

 

[BuildingConceptsllc]

I will go try a few pieces on mine just to see. Hang tight

 

[BuildingConceptsllc]

I will go try a few pieces on mine just to see. Hang tight

Yeah it sized ok for me and was consistent with my regular redding shell holder. If you use the same piece of brass after you adjust you will have issues so you have to get it close then use a new piece, and so on or you won't ever get it, just fyi but you probably already knew that.

It sized consistently for me .002" on my zero press.

 

[J_D]

Yeah it sized ok for me and was consistent with my regular redding shell holder. If you use the same piece of brass after you adjust you will have issues so you have to get it close then use a new piece, and so on or you won't ever get it, just fyi but you probably already knew that.

It sized consistently for me .002" on my zero press.

Great to hear

 

[ShootnFool8]

I've had the same issue. Setting like video, to no avail. Only way was to turn in die slightly. All shims in die. So basically I just adjust it that way now.

 

[BuildingConceptsllc]

I've had the same issue. Setting like video, to no avail. Only way was to turn in die slightly. All shims in die. So basically I just adjust it that way now.

Oh, I didn't watch any video, I just adjusted the die like normal. Maybe I should go watch the video

 

[ShootnFool8]

Oh, I didn't watch any video, I just adjusted the die like normal. Maybe I should go watch the video

Lol... Don't know if it would help. You're suppose to just add the spacer shims to add a thousandth. Added to no avail. How u doing though

 

[BuildingConceptsllc]

Lol... Don't know if it would help. You're suppose to just add the spacer shims to add a thousandth. Added to no avail. How u doing though

I didn't use any shims. It looks like that's one of the ways they say you can do it but you can use it like a normal bushing die too, which is what I did

 

[Rio Precision Gunworks]

Lol... Don't know if it would help. You're suppose to just add the spacer shims to add a thousandth. Added to no avail. How u doing though

Watch the video again at around the 5:15 mark. That's not the only way it works. They specifically say you can thread the die in as well.

Which means there's no one size fits all way of using the die. Shims may work and sometimes you may need to thread the die in or use different size shell holders.

It's a three part system with shims, shell holders, and the die body threads.

 

[Defender3]

Watch the video again at around the 5:15 mark. That's not the only way it works. They specifically say you can thread the die in as well.

Which means there's no one size fits all way of using the die. Shims may work and sometimes you may need to thread the die in or use different size shell holders.

It's a three part system with shims, shell holders, and the die body threads.

To add, the die can be threaded in as far as you like on the Zero, but there is no cam-over so the ram simply stops when it contacts the base of the die. The possible solutions include using the thinnest shell holders possible to force the case further up into the die, or the shims to remove some of the free play and force the neck bushing down (or both). A more radical choice might be to shave a skoosh of the die bottom.

 

[Mormegil87]

I get wicked inconsistent shoulder bump with my SAC dies and the zero press. I'm going to try my Co-AX during my next session of sizing and try to figure out what the issue is.

 

[Defender3]

13 shims? Is there still slack in your bushing? It’s supposed to float.

Understand, but I was trying anything to get the slack out and force the bushing down to try and get some bump.

And I was using different pieces of brass while I was testing, not reusing the same pieces.

 

[secondofangle2]

That’s a ton of dough in tooling in the OP photo to have it not work. Yikes

Makes me happy to be using Type S dies

Hope you get it figured out.

 

[Chris1972]

Stupid question but since it’s new, are you torquing the turret with the torque limiter? Is there any obstructions keeping it from seating? I know this basic stuff but I often overlook the simplest of things.

 

[Defender3]

That’s a ton of dough in tooling in the OP photo to have it not work. Yikes

Makes me happy to be using Type S dies

Hope you get it figured out.

I updated my OP to clarify that only the 300PRC die is problematic. The SAC 6BR and 260R seating dies are working and the SAC seating dies are spot on once adjusted. I loaded 30rds of 300PRC yesterday in the SAC seating die (with 220 Bergers).

ETA: I use an Accuracy One Seating Depth Comparator, which measures from the shoulder to ogive versus base to ogive with the Hornady/Stoney Point comparator. So, if my shoulder bump was off, the AO comparator would indicate and I would just dial it in using the seating die. That way, my shoulder to ogive are all similar.

 

[Defender3]

Stupid question but since it’s new, are you torquing the turret with the torque limiter? Is there any obstructions keeping it from seating? I know this basic stuff but I often overlook the simplest of things.

Good questions. I actually removed the turret and made sure everything was cleaned and free from any manufacturing left overs (as well as the dies). I reinstalled and do torque the turret at each station.

 

[Mormegil87]

I get wicked inconsistent shoulder bump with my SAC dies and the zero press. I'm going to try my Co-AX during my next session of sizing and try to figure out what the issue is.

Got mine squared away

 

[J_D]

Was this confirmed just an issue with the 300 PRC die itself?

 

[Defender3]

Got mine squared away

What was your solution? Using the Co-Ax or a differing setup for the SAC die?

 

[Defender3]

Was this confirmed just an issue with the 300 PRC die itself?

In my case, with my three SAC dies (6BR, 260R and the 300PRC) it only occurs with the 300PRC.

 

[Mormegil87]

What was your solution? Using the Co-Ax or a differing setup for the SAC die?

Just a set up error on my part

 

[Marine52]

Not coming at your Brother, but I set it up to the letter. If it worked, I wouldn't have had to post my question.




As an update, I did send SAC a note and they replied that issues tended to be too much bump versus my issues with no to too little bump. I have not re-engaged with SAC, I wanted to do more testing.

I took everything apart and made sure it was clean, reassembled and still had issues. I bought the Area 419 shell holder set and while it helped (I could get a bump with the -2 shell holder and a shim), it was inconsistent. I swapped the SAC with a Whidden and had it up and running in 5 minutes. I took the SAC die and set it up in my Co-Ax and it was working in minutes and with consistency. Placed it back into the Zero and still issues with consistency.

I did not have similar issues with my SAC sizer for my 6BR or my 260R, work like a charm. My uninformed opinion is the cam-over in the co-ax works wonders.

I used my 300 PRC SAC seating die today and once setup, the rounds were all seated to depth or within .001.

So you did get bump with the Area 419 -2 shellholder and ”a shim”. Sounds to me like you have a very small chamber (at or below min SAAMI headspace) on your 300 PRC. I would get a go gauge and check the rifle headspace. If that’s the case, you may have to trim some metal off a standard shellholder or “shave a skoosh of the die bottom” as you mentioned above.

 

[Threadcutter308]

I updated my OP to clarify that only the 300PRC die is problematic. The SAC 6BR and 260R seating dies are working and the SAC seating dies are spot on once adjusted. I loaded 30rds of 300PRC yesterday in the SAC seating die (with 220 Bergers).

ETA: I use an Accuracy One Seating Depth Comparator, which measures from the shoulder to ogive versus base to ogive with the Hornady/Stoney Point comparator. So, if my shoulder bump was off, the AO comparator would indicate and I would just dial it in using the seating die. That way, my shoulder to ogive are all similar.

I really haven't read every post post in this thread in an in depth fashion, so forgive me if what I say is not relevant to what you are experiencing.....

As far as I know, there is no such thing as "standard" ID's for the (Ogive) bore in comparators. As a result, if you measure the bore of two different manufacturers comparators, there's a high likelihood that they will be two different ID's. Of course, a very small diameter difference of the comparator's bore will have a significant impact on where the comparator sits on the ogive, giving you (sometimes significantly) different measurement values.

Just something to be aware of, dunno if it helps you though.

 

[straightshooter1]

I really haven't read every post post in this thread in an in depth fashion, so forgive me if what I say is not relevant to what you are experiencing.....

As far as I know, there is no such thing as "standard" ID's for the (Ogive) bore in comparators. As a result, if you measure the bore of two different manufacturers comparators, there's a high likelihood that they will be two different ID's. Of course, a very small diameter difference of the comparator's bore will have a significant impact on where the comparator sits on the ogive, giving you (sometimes significantly) different measurement values.

Just something to be aware of, dunno if it helps you though.

That's why posting CBTO's, BTO's and jump to the lands to other reloaders is really meaningless. For example, my Hornady comparator measures CBTO's .060" longer than my Sinclair comparator. There can be significant variation just within one company's comparator. These are "comparators", not tools designed for universal measuring standards.

The best we can do when sharing cartridge information like that is to give COAL's. Even that isn't going to be very precise due to variations in bullet dimensions from one lot to another. But a least it's being measured by a universal standard.

 

[Threadcutter308]

That's why posting CBTO's, BTO's and jump to the lands to other reloaders is really meaningless. For example, my Hornady comparator measures CBTO's .060" longer than my Sinclair comparator. There can be significant variation just within one company's comparator. These are "comparators", not tools designed for universal measuring standards.

The best we can do when sharing cartridge information like that is to give COAL's. Even that isn't going to be very precise due to variations in bullet dimensions from one lot to another. But a least it's being measured by a universal standard.

I have adopted the position that CBTO measurements are "Relative" (to the tool/comparator), not absolute. As long as I always use the same comparator and load to the same dimension, I'm good.

I don't care if the unit of measure is thousandths of an inch, furlongs per fortnight or parsecs per second, the only thing that matters is that the finished product is always loaded to the same "number". That is, unless I decide to change the seating depth.

 

[Baron23]

I have adopted the position that CBTO measurements are "Relative"

Yep...that's why they call them "comparators"

 

[Marine52]

I really haven't read every post post in this thread in an in depth fashion, so forgive me if what I say is not relevant to what you are experiencing.....

As far as I know, there is no such thing as "standard" ID's for the (Ogive) bore in comparators. As a result, if you measure the bore of two different manufacturers comparators, there's a high likelihood that they will be two different ID's. Of course, a very small diameter difference of the comparator's bore will have a significant impact on where the comparator sits on the ogive, giving you (sometimes significantly) different measurement values.

Just something to be aware of, dunno if it helps you though.

I don’t think the OP was implying that he was comparing the numbers from the two different seating comparators. He said that the AO seating depth gauge indexed off the shoulder and the Hornady/Stoney Point comparator indexed off the case base. If his case bump was not consistent he would adjust seating depth to get consistent numbers on his AO gauge.

 

[Defender3]

I don’t think the OP was implying that he was comparing the numbers from the two different seating comparators. He said that the AO seating depth gauge indexed off the shoulder and the Hornady/Stoney Point comparator indexed off the case base. If his case bump was not consistent he would just adjust seating depth to get consistent numbers on his AO gauge.

Exactly, and well explained, thanks.