Underwhelmed by my Redding Type-S FL Sizing Die and Bushing Performance

[Goes-Bang]

I'm hoping for some help/input chasing some issues I'm seeing with my Redding dies.

Context:

• Fairly new to precision reloading, but have been doing a ton of research, and have been loading pistol for years.
• Engineer by trade, OCD by nature. So looking to do the best job I can to get this bench tuned in.
• Loading 223 remington, on a Forster CO-Ax
• AMP Annealer, running Aztec mode.
• Measuring concentricity with Accuracy One + Mitutoyo. Calipers also Mitutoyo.
• Dillon Case Lube
• Redding TINi Bushings (0.246 & 0.247), installed numbers down.
• Redding Type-S FL Sizing Die, with decapping post and expander removed. (Only the black spacer nut and bushing installed.)
• 21st century Black Nitride Turning Arbor and die to set neck tension, post FL sizing.
• Lapua Brass
• Berger 80.5 gr Freebores
• Neck tension goal = 2 thou

No neck turning, yet. No brass sorting by weight or case wall thickness, yet. (Though I did measure some of the Lapua case wall thickness, for bushing selection.)

So here's what happened.

My research + math showed, that I needed to undersize the neck to a 0.246 bushing to set 2 thou of neck tension after the turning arbor.

Initial measurements of sized brass, and internal diameter mic of the bushing show that there is no way the .246 bushing was actually .246. It was closer to .245 (best case), in reality probably closer to .244. Maybe this one was made on a friday afternoon...

Ok so I ditched that, and pulled out the .247 bushing. The .247, measured out to ~.2465, ok not sure what's up with the stamped .246 bushing, but thats close enough to what I wanted. Moving forward, to concentricity testing.

• New Lapua brass out of the box = ~ 0.8 thou TIR concentricity. (Measured on the neck at about 70% in from the neck opening to the shoulder.)
• Cleaned, once Fired Lapua brass (annealed) = ~1.2 thou TIR concentricity.
• Cleaned, once Fired Lapua brass (annealed, lubed, FL sized, lube wiped off with a rag, with 1/16 turn backout on bushing) = ~3 to 4.5 thou TIR concentricity. (Enter the frowny face.)
  • I tried opening up the backout on the bushing to 1/4 turn, but that seemed to only make the concentricity worse.
  • Post mandrael / neck tension die this doesn't get any better/worse. (Turning arbor is opening up the neck to the expected 0.248.)
  • Also measured inside the case mouth on the neck, and it measures about the same for TIR concentricity.
• Seated a bullet (Redding Micrometer seater) for fun, and measured bullet concentricity just past the case neck, for 6-8 thou TIR. This is a visibly noticeable amount of concentricity outage without the gauge. (Not sure if that's an amplification of the neck concentricity measurement/issues from sizing, or the addition of a seperate seating / seating stem problem.)

So here are my questions.

• Is this the best achievable neck concentricity I can expect from the Redding Type-S + CO-AX setup? Or anything obvious i might be doing wrong/have too high expectations?
• Do I need/have to consider neck turning to improve on this?
• Would a different die / die+bushing setup get better results? (I had always been a fan of redding dies, but the previous bushing measurements combined with the concentricity issues, have me doubting this FL sizer + bushing setup.

(Not really looking to debate the impacts of chasing concentricity on accuracy, just want to get the most dialed in ammo from my setup that I can. Which I think should be better than what I'm seeing.)

Thanks!

 

[Supersubes]

Regarding the wonky .246 bushing. If you keep buying Redding bushings, you’ll see that again from time to time. I like LE Wilson better.

It’s weird that your fired brass is .0012 out. They should be dead straight unless the necks are dented. You have any means to measure neck wall thickness?

I’m no fan of Redding dies so that sticks out to me, but usually they're functional. Have you measured concentrity of the case at any other points, like below the shoulder and above the extractor groove(where the case is riding in the gauge)? Any axial runout of the case head? I’m not familiar with your tool so I don’t know what it’s capable of.

 

[Goes-Bang]

Some of the post fired brass does have a small flat spot on the edge of the neck looking in. Not sure what caused it originally. The sizing dies, seems to pull that out (at least visibly) so I didn't think much of it. The neck measurements listed above are deeper into the neck than the aforementioned post fired deformation.

I do have a Mitutoyo Wall Thickness Micrometer. When I was running the bushing selection math, I did some measurements on the Lapua brass, and it was pretty consistently 0.013 in neck walls. (That said, I didn't remeasure the neck thickness of any of the brass I was measuring concentricity on, so I'll check that.) The brass is only once fired, it started life as Lapua 223 69 gr sencar factory ammo.

The rifle it was fired in, is a Big Horn TL3, with a MHSA chambered (5.56 Target) Bartlein.

I haven't done any measurements outside of the neck, but I will check on that too.

What dies would be recommended/step up? Research seems to show that the Forster custom neck diameter might be a better choice, but I didn't want to go buying replacement dies or bushings unless I was sure I wasn't messing up somewhere.

 

[Supersubes]

A lot of people run the Forster. Nice dies. I’m well vested in bushings and typically use a bushing die. They offer more flexibility as well. Hornady match sizers are my first pick at half the cost of a Redding type S. No comparison in quality, much nicer dies, but smaller cartridge menu. I also like Whidden.

 

[AKMarty]

Is the base of your case square? What action are you shooting? My Redding Type S dies give me ~.001”. Try calling the Redding tech support too. They have been very helpful to me in the past, including having me send the the parts and after they confirmed the defect they pulled a new item, checked it on their bench there and then sent it to me.

 

[NamibHunter]

Well, i have both Ti-Nitride Redding and steel LE Wilson bushings, and most of the Redding examples are way off (2 thou plus). LE Wilson steel bushings are often more accurate (but not always perfect either).

Anneal three cases, resize and measure the diameter of the resized neck, then calculate the average and record in a notebook or a sticky note. Re-label what you have (if you have an engraver), and buy a few extra ones from LE Wilson. Think most reloaders have had the same experience with Redding bushings.

I have a Redding Type S, an LE Wilson (standard die) and a Whidden non-bushing die (with a set of sizing buttons one thou apart). The Wilson when used in an RCBS RockChucker press gave me really bad runout, 4-7 thou, no matter what i did. Gave up on it, now use it as a body die occasionally (no bushing installed) and there it does well. The other two bushing sizing dies work just fine in the same press....

The Redding Type S does well for me (0.5-2.5 thou range), while the Whidden does probably slightly better (0-2 thou). You can polish the button down by 1 thou with fine sandpaper if you need to make it smaller. I chose to buy the whole set of buttons, and they work very well. Lots of flexibility. They were all within 0.2 thou of what was printed on the packaging, according to the Mitotoyo micrometer. So quite accurate.

Both my Redding and Whidden dies give me about 0 to 1.5 thou runout on 80-90% of the case, with a few odd cases going up to 2-4 thou, often the ones you extracted too vigorously that landed on hard concrete and their necks got bent, or maybe the cases were not adequately lubed. I use Imperial Sizing die wax. Found that it works better than spray-on lube.

Would recommend you use the rounds with TIR beyond 2.5 thou for fouling or plinking rounds, so just sort them from good to bad.

I have run several experiments where i separated loaded rounds based on concentricity: Those with TIR below 1.5 had 20-30% smaller groups than those between 1.5 and 3.0. So the effect is real, but it is not massive if you are a little off. Those few with a TIR between 3 and 7 thou produced 50% bigger groups than the very best straightest ammo I can make. But some of the best groups had quite bad runout! Depends how the round is “clocked” (orientation) when it is picked up by the bolt. Is the runout adding to the slop (gap between case and chamber - making it worse), or cancelling it out.

Borrow a good die from a buddy that is known to work well for him, use it in your press, and if the results are bad, it might be the press tolerances. Very unlikely, as Forster has a good reputation for a reason. Then size on your buddy’s equipment and ask him to watch you and check if your technique is possibly to blame.

If you determine it is a bad die, call Redding and ask for a replacement.

 

[Steel head]

Pull the bushing and use it as a body die and buy a lee collet for the neck.

I really wasn’t impressed with bushing dies

 

[Boxerglocker]

I had the same issue with my Type S full length bushing die for 223. My Redding standard FL does a better job with concentricity. I size my Lapua 223 brass on a FA M Press. Mandrel loading progressively on my 650 with a Whidden floating tool head.

 

[Goes-Bang]

A couple of updates.

1. Neck wall thickness of a FL sized and neck tension mandrel set (not concentric) neck is 0.013 (same as when I was doing this measurement for bushing selection.) This piece of brass, measures 4.5 thou TIR at the neck post FL sizing and expanding mandrel.
2. Concentricity of that same piece of brass wasn't really measurable ( < or = ~0.0005 TIR) on the case body. This was measured at 1/2 the case body length, and again about 1/4 of the way down from the shoulder.

 

[918v]

I'm hoping for some help/input chasing some issues I'm seeing with my Redding dies.

Context:

• Fairly new to precision reloading, but have been doing a ton of research, and have been loading pistol for years.
• Engineer by trade, OCD by nature. So looking to do the best job I can to get this bench tuned in.
• Loading 223 remington, on a Forster CO-Ax
• AMP Annealer, running Aztec mode.
• Measuring concentricity with Accuracy One + Mitutoyo. Calipers also Mitutoyo.
• Dillon Case Lube
• Redding TINi Bushings (0.246 & 0.247), installed numbers down.
• Redding Type-S FL Sizing Die, with decapping post and expander removed. (Only the black spacer nut and bushing installed.)
• 21st century Black Nitride Turning Arbor and die to set neck tension, post FL sizing.
• Lapua Brass
• Berger 80.5 gr Freebores
• Neck tension goal = 2 thou

No neck turning, yet. No brass sorting by weight or case wall thickness, yet. (Though I did measure some of the Lapua case wall thickness, for bushing selection.)

So here's what happened.

My research + math showed, that I needed to undersize the neck to a 0.246 bushing to set 2 thou of neck tension after the turning arbor.

Initial measurements of sized brass, and internal diameter mic of the bushing show that there is no way the .246 bushing was actually .246. It was closer to .245 (best case), in reality probably closer to .244. Maybe this one was made on a friday afternoon...

Ok so I ditched that, and pulled out the .247 bushing. The .247, measured out to ~.2465, ok not sure what's up with the stamped .246 bushing, but thats close enough to what I wanted. Moving forward, to concentricity testing.

• New Lapua brass out of the box = ~ 0.8 thou TIR concentricity. (Measured on the neck at about 70% in from the neck opening to the shoulder.)
• Cleaned, once Fired Lapua brass (annealed) = ~1.2 thou TIR concentricity.
• Cleaned, once Fired Lapua brass (annealed, lubed, FL sized, lube wiped off with a rag, with 1/16 turn backout on bushing) = ~3 to 4.5 thou TIR concentricity. (Enter the frowny face.)
  • I tried opening up the backout on the bushing to 1/4 turn, but that seemed to only make the concentricity worse.
  • Post mandrael / neck tension die this doesn't get any better/worse. (Turning arbor is opening up the neck to the expected 0.248.)
  • Also measured inside the case mouth on the neck, and it measures about the same for TIR concentricity.
• Seated a bullet (Redding Micrometer seater) for fun, and measured bullet concentricity just past the case neck, for 6-8 thou TIR. This is a visibly noticeable amount of concentricity outage without the gauge. (Not sure if that's an amplification of the neck concentricity measurement/issues from sizing, or the addition of a seperate seating / seating stem problem.)

So here are my questions.

• Is this the best achievable neck concentricity I can expect from the Redding Type-S + CO-AX setup? Or anything obvious i might be doing wrong/have too high expectations?
• Do I need/have to consider neck turning to improve on this?
• Would a different die / die+bushing setup get better results? (I had always been a fan of redding dies, but the previous bushing measurements combined with the concentricity issues, have me doubting this FL sizer + bushing setup.

(Not really looking to debate the impacts of chasing concentricity on accuracy, just want to get the most dialed in ammo from my setup that I can. Which I think should be better than what I'm seeing.)

Thanks!

Congratulations you figured out the detriment of using Redding bushing dies.

I would remove the bushing and use the die as a body die. I would size the neck separately using a Lee collet neck die.

So continue to use the dies, but call Lee and order a custom collet die for your application.

 

[Dai Bando]

How's it shoot?

 

[Dai Bando]

Are you floating the bushing?

Floating the dies?

3-4 thou TIR and I'm banging them out by the dozens.

 

[TheGerman]

Just curious how you measured the diameter of the bushing.

Just used the caliper or do you have a .246, .247, etc diameter pin that you can drop into it?

 

[Goes-Bang]

More updates.

How's it shoot?
Rifle shoots great with the factory Lapua ammo. My first few attempts at load development had pretty good accuracy at 100, but gave higher than desired ES/SD, so much so that it was hard to verify nodes in Varget ladder tests, so I decided to play with neck tension and just recently changed the bushing and expansion mandrel setup, while I (not so patiently) wait for a auto-trickler to show up. The concentricity tests just seemed like a good idea for the OCD in me, for a un-tested die setup.

Are you floating the bushing?
Per the Redding instructions, the bushing tension screw (for lack of knowing the actual name) is backed off 1/16 of a turn, and I verified the bushing rattles when installed in the die. I also tried 1/4 tun of backoff, but that didn't help concentricity, seemed to hurt it actually. (I hope that answers the question?)

Floating the dies?
Well its a COAX and I'm using the Forster die lock rings, and not the Redding lock rings. (No additional washers, or gaskets or anything like that.) So by the Forster design, I think the answer is yes.

Just curious how you measured the diameter of the bushing.
I tried to use the mic-calipers for the ID of the bushing, but figured the alignments didn't look like that would be a super accurate method with so small a inner diameter, so I also sized a piece of brass with the bushing and then measured its OD, for comparison. (It wasn't exact, but it was within 1thou close.) I don't own pin gauges unfortunately.

Thanks again for all the helpful comments!

 

[Dai Bando]

I'd encourage you to work up a solid load and worry about concentricity down the road a bit.

 

[TheBoctor]

I'm sure you've tried these but it's worth double checking.
Have you flipped the bushing over and seen if it changes at all or checked the runout with the other bushing (even though it's too tight)? How's the runout on the shoulder? Have you douched the dies out really well with Brake Cleaner or another aggressive solvent? If the shoulder runout is good, either the bushing was machined wonky or something in die is preventing it from floating laterally.

 

[Goes-Bang]

I'm sure you've tried these but it's worth double checking.
Have you flipped the bushing over and seen if it changes at all or checked the runout with the other bushing (even though it's too tight)? How's the runout on the shoulder? Have you douched the dies out really well with Brake Cleaner or another aggressive solvent? If the shoulder runout is good, either the bushing was machined wonky or something in die is preventing it from floating laterally.

These are all excellent suggestions, and I haven't actually tried any of them yet, but I definitely will. Thanks!

 

[TheGerman]

I've also noticed that certain mixes of brass + arbor expander + bushing have different springback.

Can't explain it, but I had to make extensive notes on it for loading certain combinations and wanting certain results.

 

[NamibHunter]

I'd encourage you to work up a solid load and worry about concentricity down the road a bit.

This is good advice. Perfect concentricity is about fourth or fifth on my priority list.

Top priority: Start with premium brass and pick a high BC bullet that is easy to optimize. At least cull out the very heavy and very light cases. Prep the cases as best you can.

Run an OCW or similar test: Finding the flat spot on the speed graph, even if the widest node is a 100 fps below max. Also adjusting seating depth (and/or powder charge) to get good positive compensation at the distances you shoot has a much bigger impact on group size at long distance. With some luck the OCW test will also reduce speed SD as a happy side effect.

Then try to further reduce SD and ES (weight or volume sorted brass, weight sort your bullets, uniform your primer pockets and flash holes, and get a good lab scale) so vertical dispersion at long distance is minimized. Aim for a nice “waterline” beyond 500.

Then try to get highly consistent neck tension (use of mandrel dies, accurate annealing, neck turning, graphite dry lube to avoid bullet weld).

Then chase very low concentricity, aiming to get below 1 thou (difficult). I am happy if below 1.5 thou. Remove the loaded rounds that fail the concentricity test and use for plinking. There will always be a few bad ones.

Other factors not related to reloading can also make a big difference to your results: Attending a training course and learning good form, learning how to read the wind, learning how to shoot free recoil to improve the load development process, using a good brake to reduce muzzle jump, and lots of practice.

Enjoy the journey, and don’t let the OCD genetics frustrate you too much.

 

[Milo 2.5]

Not sure I can help here, but I cut my runout in half by switching from redding type s to whidden bushing dies. This was after replacing presses also.
I know you said let's not get into a debate as to where runout becomes detrimental, but in your quest for .000000000000000000001", at some point, run a test if you can, and see just where runout becomes a factor. We assume our chambers are 100% concentric, just FL sizing a pc of brass is going to impart runout when it goes into the chamber, it is not a tight fit. .0025" runout is not that bad. If you think about it, if you are not going to neck turn your brass, and do it correctly, you are going to have some runout. And when people start discussing it w/o tests, these conversations become moot.
My quest began 9 yrs ago, 7 saum, my crap was .006", I went on a journey, when done, had runout down to .0015", my ammo did not shoot any better. My testing was done at 1K and 1450 yards, if runout was going to surface and bite me, I would have seen it at these distances over shooting at 100 yards.

If there is one thing I have learned in 10 yrs of being a gun forum veteran, is to quit reading the BS and make my own conclusions. Life is simpler that way. Yes, I still pick up helpful hints on occasion, but everyone seems to have the need to be heard.

 

[NamibHunter]

Have to agree: Running your own experiments is critical. Have shot out a barrel doing this, but learnt a few things along the way. [I can explain what i did intentionally getting really bad concentricity, and show photos of the targets (dot dril), and the calcs used to reconstruct group size, but probably best done in a separate “range report”.]

Short summary: Case volume matters a whole lot if you insist on using cheap brass (buy premier brass and you can mostly ignore it), seating depth and powder charge have a very big effect and you have to optimize that, neck tension consistency has a marginal influence if you run a small jump or a jam (have not tested for super long jump, but pretty sure it will then have an effect), concentricity below 4 thou has a very small influence if you load for a small jump (not sure about long jump), like moving group size maybe from 0.2 to 0.3”, or from 0.5” to 0.6”. If you can even detect it on a windy day. Sorting bullets and primers gain you a tiny improvement (1-2 fps reduction in SD), not needed IMHO, unless you are already shooting groups below 0.2”. Big deal for a competitive BR shooter wanting to get into the ones, not so much for a PRS competitor shooting at 1 MOA steel targets.

On a side note: A chunky donut at the neck shoulder junction and a thick black carbon ring at the end of the chamber will move MV by 100 fps plus, and may even pop a primer. A badly punched flash hole (with an ugly burr) will also cause problems. Getting brass from different batches mixed up can cause your SD to double. And never trimming the cases and letting the necks grow way too long can do real damage. No i have not accomplished that feat yet, but did allow it to grow well past a carbon ring, a very bad idea. Worth worrying about these problems.

Best advice: Get a cheap borescope, very useful for inspecting chambers, barrel and brass. Then knock down your problems in the most impactful priority order.

 

[NamibHunter]

Btw: I get best runout with the LE Wilson neck sizer (hand) die with an arbor press, routinely around 1 thou, often below 0.5, but neck sizing only brings other bigger problems along for the ride. Sometimes i use a body die with the Wilson neck sizer (arbor die). Two steps instead of one, so takes more time. Whidden non-bushing die is almost as good. Redding Type S bushing die gets the bronze medal. Mine works OK-ish. Not using it anymore, should probably sell it.

Lee neck sizer is cheap but it is superb, combine it with a body die, preferably a custom honed die for your chamber. Not expensive to do. The ridges left by the collet will bump your concentricity gauge, a false reading, so just ignore the 4 bumps.

 

[Milo 2.5]

Have to agree: Running your own experiments is critical. Have shot out a barrel doing this, but learnt a few things along the way. [I can explain what i did intentionally getting really bad concentricity, and show photos of the targets (dot dril), and the calcs used to reconstruct group size, but probably best done in a separate “range report”.]

Short summary: Case volume matters a whole lot if you insist on using cheap brass (buy premier brass and you can mostly ignore it), seating depth and powder charge have a very big effect, neck tension consistency has a marginal influence if you run a small jump (have not tested for super long jump), concentricity below 4 thou has a very small influence if you load for a small jump, like moving group size from 0.2 to 0.3”, or from 0.5” to 0.6”. Big deal for a competitive BR shooter, not so much for a PRS rifle.

On a side note: A chunky donut at the neck shoulder junction and a thick black carbon ring at the end of the chamber will move MV by 100 fps plus, and may even pop a primer. A badly puched flash hole (burr) will also cause problems. Worth worrying about.

Get a borescope, very useful for inspecting chambers, barrel and brass.

Lol, not sure if this was the direction you were going, but I feel if a guy is not not going to wring out every last bit of accuracy from a rifle, worrying about concentricity would be my last focal point.
I pay my dues doing load dev, and I test, and have shot some extremely accurate rifles in the last 10 yrs. Right now, I have a LRI built 6x47 that I was in a hurry to get running, and I Settled on a load, yet when I take the rifle out, it hits what I aim at, all the time. Makes me wonder if it could do better, but at 800 rds on it, makes no sense to try.

 

[Thud]

Are you still using the Forester press. Is the die tight or does it float.
Try a rockchucker then compare.
Can the expander die, it really doesn't do anything with my experience. Just works the brass more
I has a forester and had run out problems went to a r/c much better.
It may be the best you can get with your setup.
Why are you annaling after each shot.
Just some of my thoughts.

 

[Wheres-Waldo]

“Numbers facing down on the bushing”


I’ve always only ever ran them w/ numbers up, as I believe that’s the correct orientation.

FWIW... My Redding S FLBushing Die will go from almost zero TIR to 3-4 thousandths just based on the position of the little bushing plug (the top bit you use to float the bushing).

play with the position of that plug a wee bit until you see your numbers go down.

 

[Thud]

You can run them both ways.
Numbers down a little more taper in the bushing.

 

[RmeJu]

My setup is almost precisely the same as yours. I routinely get .002" or less of bullet runout (~50% under .001"), so it's very possible. Some thoughts:

1. Depending on what you're doing to your brass, you might have a lot better luck with bullet runout if you use graphite powder in the neck or on the bearing surface of the bullet before seating.

2. Many will say your level of runout doesn't matter downrange. My testing lines up with that theory, but I like the low runout anyway.

 

[Goes-Bang]

I just wanted to say thank you to everyone for taking the time to provide advice. I appreciate the input.

I've got some more tests to run and things to check based on provided feed back (when time allows, which will probably be a few days).

I'll keep working this till I get it figured out, or at least until I get annoyed enough to buy some replacement tooling to try. Maybe a custom neck diameter Whidden or Forster FL sizing die.

 

[TheBoctor]

I just wanted to say thank you to everyone for taking the time to provide advice. I appreciate the input.

I've got some more tests to run and things to check based on provided feed back (when time allows, which will probably be a few days).

I'll keep working this till I get it figured out, or at least until I get annoyed enough to buy some replacement tooling to try. Maybe a custom neck diameter Whidden or Forster FL sizing die.

It should be an easy enough thing to isolate, and unfortunately the answer may be to replace the die or bushing. It sucks, they're not cheap, but luckily they're dumb iron and pretty easy to diagnose. Just try and pull all the levers at your disposal one at a time and you'll see the what's really driving it.

 

[Gtar]

The diameter of the neck on the fired brass makes a difference. I was having similar issues with a 6.5 creedmoor and the redding bushing neck die. The case neck was .294" after firing and I was running a .288" bush. The necks were spot on concentric after firing, the same after running through the body die then .003-4" TIR after the bushing neck die. I turned up a .291' bushing and ran them through that first which made it better so I'd say the issue was trying to size down .006" in one go. I then tried a Lee Collet die to squeeze the necks down a bit before putting them through the bushing but they came out so well I stuck with that.

I now use the Redding body die and a Lee Collet die for the necks. I polished the stem to get the correct neck tension and it's much more consistent, under .001" TIR on average. I do the same for my 223 AI with very similar results. I anneal the cases every firing so that most likely helps as they don't spring back.

I still use the Redding bushing neck die for my 6.5 SAUM but it is a tight neck which only pops out .002" when fired and they come out great.

I use a Wilson full length bushing die for my 6BR and it does a great job, I think the Wilson bush may have a bit more of a lead in on it? It's a no-turn neck but has never had an issue.

 

[NamibHunter]

The diameter of the neck on the fired brass makes a difference. I was having similar issues with a 6.5 creedmoor and the redding bushing neck die. The case neck was .294" after firing and I was running a .288" bush. The necks were spot on concentric after firing, the same after running through the body die then .003-4" TIR after the bushing neck die. I turned up a .291' bushing and ran them through that first which made it better so I'd say the issue was trying to size down .006" in one go. I then tried a Lee Collet die to squeeze the necks down a bit before putting them through the bushing but they came out so well I stuck with that.

I now use the Redding body die and a Lee Collet die for the necks. I polished the stem to get the correct neck tension and it's much more consistent, under .001" TIR on average. I do the same for my 223 AI with very similar results. I anneal the cases every firing so that most likely helps as they don't spring back.

I still use the Redding bushing neck die for my 6.5 SAUM but it is a tight neck which only pops out .002" when fired and they come out great.

I use a Wilson full length bushing die for my 6BR and it does a great job, I think the Wilson bush may have a bit more of a lead in on it? It's a no-turn neck but has never had an issue.

Good point: Many/most dies do better if the amount of reduction in the neck diameter is less than 4-5 thou. [Many factory rifles have way too much neck clearance. This is a good reason to buy your own chamber reamer and spec it for the correct neck clearance and freebore, have custom dies made, and your die will work on all the barrels you get chambered with that reamer.]

Speedy (Thomas) Gonzales is a famous BR competitor and gunsmith and if i recall correctly he published an article where he showed that TIR was better if the cases were sized in two steps, 2-3 thou at a time, using two different bushings. Extra effort but something to try. Could not find it, and if somebody has a link please post.

Yep: The Lee die combined with a body die works very well in my experience. I got excellent results on target. Light and consistent neck tension and also very straight ammo.

Did some FL sizing today with the Whidden non-bushing die, and so had the opportunity to run some experiments:

1) Tried to size with very little lube and as expected, TIR doubled to 3-4 thou. Also risking a stuck case, so a very bad idea.

2) Tried to resize the bad cases a second time with TIR above 2.5 thou using the Whidden non-bushing die (after rotating it 180 degrees) and it often got much better. [Disclaimer: My Whidden works the brass minimally so on the second resize, only the neck portion gets slightly reduced and and then expanded again, so will not really work harden the brass, or change neck tension much, but probably not a viable approach with the Type S.]

BTW: The 65Guys published a Youtube video “S2 - 07 - Resizing die setup” where they show that compreased loads can mess up TIR, and this worked well. A crunchy compressed load often has bad TIR. They also discuss the use of a small rubber o-ring placed inside the die to help the bushing float better.... not sure about the o-ring trick as i have not tried it, maybe i should give it a go on my non-compliant Wilson die...

I know non-bushing dies with sizing buttons have a bad reputation: In my experience a $30 RCBS die from 20 years ago gives TIR of 4-7 thou, not at all acceptable, and if you roll the case across a flat surface you can see a terrible wobble in the bullet. The die significantly overworks the brass, and changing the neck diameter that much is bad for TIR. A well made die with a series of accurately ground buttons like the Whidden that does not overwork the brass actually does a superb job, and there is no need to use a mandrel die as a final step to move the concentricity variance from the inside of the neck to the outside (if you do not neck turn). The button does that for you. And the set of precision made buttons in my experience works better than a set of bushings to compensate for springback changes (if you skip annealing). Also useful if you change to brass with different thickness.

 

[Goes-Bang]

Quick update.

I tried vigorously cleaning the die and bushing with break clean. Didn't help.
I tried reversing the bushing in the die. Didn't help.
I tried more variations of bushing tension/back-off in the die. Didn't help.

I swapped the bushing out with yet a third diameter, and now I have loaded bullet TIR in the 2 thou range. (I still need to do a bit more quantity testing to make sure this was truly the fix, but that's where I'm at.)

For those keeping score.
.246 bushing = measured way small in diameter, and produced non-concentric results.
.247 bushing = measured close to diameter, and produced non-conentric results.
.248 bushing = measured a little small, but appears "mostly" concentric for results.
* Diameters verified on mic'd recently annealed brass, near neck opening. (Which was the only somewhat viable method available to me at the moment.)

So all evidence seems to suggest it appears to be the bushings causing concentricity issues.

 

[Wheres-Waldo]

Possibly size some brass with no bushing, essentially turning into a body die and see where you are at? Measure TIR before sizing and after. May give more support to point toward the bushing.

 

[NamibHunter]

Quick update.

I tried vigorously cleaning the die and bushing with break clean. Didn't help.
I tried reversing the bushing in the die. Didn't help.
I tried more variations of bushing tension/back-off in the die. Didn't help.

I swapped the bushing out with yet a third diameter, and now I have loaded bullet TIR in the 2 thou range. (I still need to do a bit more quantity testing to make sure this was truly the fix, but that's where I'm at.)

For those keeping score.
.246 bushing = measured way small in diameter, and produced non-concentric results.
.247 bushing = measured close to diameter, and produced non-conentric results.
.248 bushing = measured a little small, but appears "mostly" concentric for results.
* Diameters verified on mic'd recently annealed brass, near neck opening. (Which was the only somewhat viable method available to me at the moment.)

So all evidence seems to suggest it appears to be the bushings causing concentricity issues.

I think your experiment is confirming that sizing brass a whole lot down in one go causes concentricity problems in your setup, because your chamber (neck area) is rather roomy.

Not trying to “give you work”, but it would be fascinating if you could run three simple experiments and compare: First size 5 pieces of brass (annealed) via the smallest busing you have in one go and measure TIR, to intentionally overwork the brass (a kind of stress test), then size down to the same final neck size in two steps: First use a bigger diameter bushing (just enough to get you to the halfway point), then use the original bushing as the final step, so probably 3-4 thou at a time for a tot of 6-8 thou. Second experiment: Then do it in three steps sizing say 1.5-2 thou at a time....

I bet two cheap Mexican beers named after a virus that the multi-step approach will be at least 2x better than the one step approach. Possibly 3x!

Out hunting hogs and coyotes, so not close to my reloading room. Will also try it with the Redding Type S and report back in a week or two. [Side note: The 156 gn Berger 6.5 hunting bullet explodes inside a hog (no exit wound) and it really messes up their lungs. Even though the loaded factory ammo has a TIR of 3-5 thou, the factory Savage shot 0.5” groups during zeroing. But if you ever see a dead hog sitting upright on his knees, not breathing, put another one in the head. They magically come alive when you poke them with a rifle barrel, even with shredded lungs! Amazingly tough critters.]

Sorry.... wrong forum.... back to TIR problems now.

 

[Clark]

I am also an engineer.
I own 310 dies characterized in a spreadsheet.
In 2009 I did a series of 223 tests with dedicated populations of brass each married to dies under test.
This was a lot of shooting, just to test some dies.
I started out thinking my Redding FL S die was the best. It cost the most and had the nice finish.
In the end, that die came in in last place, behind things like RCBS.
First place was the Lee Collet die, that was the cheapest and poorest finish.
I also did well with the Forster FL dies with the neck custom honed out at Forster and the decapping stem removed.

I was measuring after many reloads:
Concentricity measured on the bullet relative to the shoulder. Some clearance modification of tester is required.
Case growth relative to needing trimming.
The quality of a seater die seemed 10X less important than the sizer for concentricity.

 

[NamibHunter]

I am also an engineer.
I own 310 dies characterized in a spreadsheet.
In 2009 I did a series of 223 tests with dedicated populations of brass each married to dies under test.
This was a lot of shooting, just to test some dies.
I started out thinking my Redding FL S die was the best. It cost the most and had the nice finish.
In the end, that die came in in last place, behind things like RCBS.
First place was the Lee Collet die, that was the cheapest and poorest finish.
I also did well with the Forster FL dies with the neck custom honed out at Forster and the decapping stem removed.

I was measuring after many reloads:
Concentricity measured on the bullet relative to the shoulder. Some clearance modification of tester is required.
Case growth relative to needing trimming.
The quality of a seater die seemed 10X less important than the sizer for concentricity.

Wow that is A LOT of testing! [Presume you meant to type 310, not 31?]

I noticed that you are also measuring concentricity on the datum line of the shoulder, where the case should be indexing against the chamber? Presume the assumption is that for a properly full length sized case, there is enough slop (gap) between case body and chamber, and small inconsistencies there would not have much effect on how the case lines up in the chamber?

Maybe i got this wrong, can you expand a little?

 

[TRyanOC]

Tagging in on some great advice in this thread.

 

[dave300]

Chased this rabbit down an expensive hole and can assure you that All of what was mentioned above 2 were all the definite causes of inducing runout and another, which was the biggest contributing factor and that was taking more than .002 out at a time.
In the end, I couldn’t justify the time and money as it just did not matter in the accuracy department. I dont mean to sound harsh, but with a little bit here and a little there with the hardware, the runout was introduced. T7 press, Redding Comp Dies, with both Redding and Wilson bushings facing up and down.
Also, as mentioned above, spring back. This changed for the better when I annealed with the AMP and not the benchsource, I’m certain the AMP just flat does a better job and is way more consistent versus trying to repeat the flame setting and dwell time with Benchsource.

 

[Goes-Bang]

Chased this rabbit down an expensive hole and can assure you that All of what was mentioned above 2 were all the definite causes of inducing runout and another, which was the biggest contributing factor and that was taking more than .002 out at a time.

I haven't run any tests for this yet on my setup, but I have been suspicious of this as a contributor. So can I ask: Do you downsize in multiple steps, or did you just stop caring about concentricity? To get to proper neck tension (even without undersizing for a mandrel) I have to go 4 to 6thou down from my fired size.

 

[dave300]

Chased this rabbit down an expensive hole and can assure you that All of what was mentioned above 2 were all the definite causes of inducing runout and another, which was the biggest contributing factor and that was taking more than .002 out at a time.
Well, both, lol. Still in steps, And I could not do anymore to rid myself out of the runout, and it has had no affect, at least an immeasurable affect

I haven't run any tests for this yet on my setup, but I have been suspicious of this as a contributor. So can I ask: Do you downsize in multiple steps, or did you just stop caring about concentricity? To get to proper neck tension (even without undersizing for a mandrel) I have to go 4 to 6thou down from my fired size.

 

[NamibHunter]

Chased this rabbit down an expensive hole and can assure you that All of what was mentioned above 2 were all the definite causes of inducing runout and another, which was the biggest contributing factor and that was taking more than .002 out at a time.

I haven't run any tests for this yet on my setup, but I have been suspicious of this as a contributor. So can I ask: Do you downsize in multiple steps, or did you just stop caring about concentricity? To get to proper neck tension (even without undersizing for a mandrel) I have to go 4 to 6thou down from my fired size.

OK, tonight i ran the promised neck sizing experiment:

1) I grabbed a batch of 20 Lapua 12x fired neck turned brass that has not been sized yet.

2) Annealed all of them in the AMP machine.

3) Divided them into 4 groups of 5 each.

4) Sized one set of 5 in one go with the Lee Collet neck sizer, and neck OD came down from 294 to 288, so 6 thou in one go, and TIR was below 1, often 0.5 or less if you ignore the fast squiggles in the needle caused by the gaps between the fingers of the clamping device inside the die which leaves an imprint on the neck. [Superb results from a $20 die. I just wish they would sell a set of mandrels of different sizes.]

5) Then tried the Redding Type S with different sized bushings. Sizing down from 294 to 290 in one go pushed TIR out to 1.5 thou to 3.5 thou range. [Probably ok if you check runout on each loaded round and set aside the bad ones. But that takes time. Best avoided.]

6) I did not have a 292 or 293 bushing, so used the Lee with very light one finger pressure on the handle to get the neck down to the 288.5 to 289.5 range, then neck sized multiple times in increments using bushings that are 2 thou apart. Used the LE Wilson bushing that actually does what they say they will do, within 0.5 thou. All done in the Redding Type S die, and runout was great all the way down to 283 (my smallest bushing, which is rarely used). Ended up with 0.5 to 1.8 thou, but most were just below 1.0. That is an acceptable TIR, I think. But a lot of sizing steps to achieve that.

Conclusions:

1) My main conclusion is that a bushing neck sizer, no matter how good, cannot compete in terms of TIR with the Lee Collet die. Everybody should own one for each caliber they shoot. Incredible value for money!

2) Sizing the neck down in steps of 2 thou at a time reduces runout by 2-3x via the use of different size bushings. A workable solution for high runout/TIR situations, but it will slow you down. One more step down the endless rabbit hole.

Commentary:

Some people and some companies believe that leaving one third of the neck unsized (so at chamber dimensions minus springback) helps to better line up the case in the chamber and makes your groups smaller. Compensates for slop (gap between case and chamber), effectively lining up the case with the axis of the bore. Who knows for sure of this is true, but i am in this camp because of an experiment i ran some years ago: I compared the results on target at 100 of the Lee Collet die (which gives fairly light neck tension) with the LE Wilson arbor (bushing) die after optimizing neck tension weeks earlier, and the Wilson arbor die won the little contest. Repeated the experiment at 600 and the ammo produced via the Wilson arbor die had a higher hit percentage on the small steel targets. From my limited prior experimentation, even with better TIR, the ammo loaded with the Lee was not quite as accurate as the ammo loaded with the LE Wilson arbor die. It seems optimized neck tension (plus consistent neck tension) trumps low runout.

Perhaps if i used different sized mandrels in the Lee, maybe i could have achieved the same result (optimized neck tension plus superb TIR).

My conclusion was that anything below 2 thou is really good, and you are deep into the diminishing returns zone when you get below 1, but “correct” (optimal?) neck tension is more important than incredibly low runout...

Hope this helps!

PS: I probably have to go back to the Lee Collet die, and sand down a set of mandrel rods to different sizes... and try to compare results with the same neck tension but lower TIR.

 

[Goes-Bang]

Thanks for running that test. Interesting results, and consistent with the run-out I was seeing with a single step down neck diameter using a bushing.

I'm thinking I'm probably going to move away from bushing dies, and I have a custom honed neck diameter Forster non-bushing FL sizer on order, that I'm impatiently waiting for to try. Unfortunately I don't think the Forster sizer is going to be delivered any time soon (and the Whidden custom die web-page was quoting 16 weeks for deliveries...)

 

[918v]

OK, tonight i ran the promised neck sizing experiment:

1) I grabbed a batch of 20 Lapua 12x fired neck turned brass that has not been sized yet.

2) Annealed all of them in the AMP machine.

3) Divided them into 4 groups of 5 each.

4) Sized one set of 5 in one go with the Lee Collet neck sizer, and neck OD came down from 294 to 288, so 6 thou in one go, and TIR was below 1, often 0.5 or less if you ignore the fast squiggles in the needle caused by the gaps between the fingers of the clamping device inside the die which leaves an imprint on the neck. [Superb results from a $20 die. I just wish they would sell a set of mandrels of different sizes.]

5) Then tried the Redding Type S with different sized bushings. Sizing down from 294 to 290 in one go pushed TIR out to 1.5 thou to 3.5 thou range. [Probably ok if you check runout on each loaded round and set aside the bad ones. But that takes time. Best avoided.]

6) I did not have a 292 or 293 bushing, so used the Lee with very light one finger pressure on the handle to get the neck down to the 288.5 to 289.5 range, then neck sized multiple times in increments using bushings that are 2 thou apart. Used the LE Wilson bushing that actually does what they say they will do, within 0.5 thou. All done in the Redding Type S die, and runout was great all the way down to 283 (my smallest bushing, which is rarely used). Ended up with 0.5 to 1.8 thou, but most were just below 1.0. That is an acceptable TIR, I think. But a lot of sizing steps to achieve that.

Conclusions:
My main conclusion is that a bushing neck sizer, no matter how good, cannot compete in terms of TIR with the Lee Collet die. Everybody should own one for each caliber they shoot. Incredible value for money!

2) Sizing the neck down in steps of 2 thou at a time reduces runout by 2-3x via the use of different size bushings. A workable solution for high runout/TIR, but it will slow you down. One more step down the endless rabbit hole.

Commentary:

Some people and some companies believe that leaving one third of the neck unsized (so at chamber dimensions minus springback) helps to better line up the case in the chamber and makes your groups smaller. Compensates for slop (gap between case and chamber), effectively lining up the case with the axis of the bore. Who knows for sure of this is true, but i am in this camp because of an experiment i ran some years ago: I compared the results on target at 100 of the Lee Collet die (which gives fairly light neck tension) with the LE Wilson arbor (bushing) die after optimizing neck tension weeks earlier, and the Wilson arbor die won the little contest. Repeated the experiment at 600 and the ammo produced via the Wilson arbor die had a higher hit percentage on the small steel targets. From my limited prior experimentation, even with better TIR, the ammo loaded with the Lee was not quite as accurate as the ammo loaded with the LE Wilson arbor die. It seems optimized neck tension (plus consistent neck tension) trumps low runout.

Perhaps if i used different sized mandrels in the Lee, maybe i could have achieved the same result (optimized neck tension plus superb TIR).

My conclusion was that anything below 2 thou is really good, and you are deep into the diminishing returns zone when you get below 1, but “correct” (optimal?) neck tension is more important than incredibly low runout...

Hope this helps!

PS: I probably have to go back to the Lee Collet die, and sand down a set of mandrel rods to different sizes... and try to compare results with the same neck tension but lower TIR.

Lee sells mandrels in whatever size you specify. Call them.

 

[NamibHunter]

Lee sells mandrels in whatever size you specify. Call them.

Good to know, i was not aware of that! Will give it a try.

 

[Clark]

I wanted my usual dies, but where not available in 6.5-06, so I used the phone.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I called up Forster and went around and around until they sent me a 25-06 Full length sizer die body honed out to a 0.292" neck.

That would make it an ideal 6.5-06 sizer die body, for $57. [double the honing charge]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I called up Lee and went around and around until they agreed to reduce a 270 mandrel from a collet neck die down to 0.262", but leave the top 1/4" alone to fit a 270 collar.

This will make it ideal for turning a 270 Lee collet neck die into a 6.5-06 die.
$20 plus shipping [quadruple the reduction charge]
-------------------------------------------------

 

[NamibHunter]

I wanted my usual dies, but where not available in 6.5-06, so I used the phone.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I called up Forster and went around and around until they sent me a 25-06 Full length sizer die body honed out to a 0.292" neck.

That would make it an ideal 6.5-06 sizer die body, for $57. [double the honing charge]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I called up Lee and went around and around until they agreed to reduce a 270 mandrel from a collet neck die down to 0.262", but leave the top 1/4" alone to fit a 270 collar.

This will make it ideal for turning a 270 Lee collet neck die into a 6.5-06 die.
$20 plus shipping [quadruple the reduction charge]
-------------------------------------------------

This is good info, thanks for sharing.

So about $120 (correction: $90) total for the custom honed Forster (onr size only) and about $100 for the custom Lee die (add: for multiple sizes). That is a good deal, in both cases.

 

[Goes-Bang]

Verdict is in.

Forster custom honed FL sizer arrived today. I didn't spend a ton of time with it, but I did run some preliminary tests to see if the wait was worth it.

It was. Very happy with the results on the Forster FL (non-bushing) sizer.

The neck with the Forster was perfectly sized to the custom specification. Post FL sizer concentricity TIR (as measured ~1/2 the neck) was within ~ 0.5 thou of the going in TIR, and ~ 1 thou TIR total.

 

[NamibHunter]

Verdict is in.

Forster custom honed FL sizer arrived today. I didn't spend a ton of time with it, but I did run some preliminary tests to see if the wait was worth it.

It was. Very happy with the results on the Forster FL (non-bushing) sizer.

The neck with the Forster was perfectly sized to the custom specification. Post FL sizer concentricity TIR (as measured ~1/2 the neck) was within ~ 0.5 thou of the going in TIR, and ~ 1 thou TIR total.

Glad it worked out well!

If i may ask, what was total cost? Might try to do the same soon.

 

[Goes-Bang]

Full Length Sizing Dies – Forster Products

Order according to the profile of the specific cartridge.

www.forsterproducts.com

With custom honing the die was 77 dollars, and ~10 bucks shipping.

Was labeled as out of stock when i ordered but I had it in about 3 weeks.

 

[NamibHunter]

OK, so the custom honed Forster die arrived last week and i did some testing: In short, the runout results are superb!

With the expander ball removed, and sizing 15 neck turned Lapua cases, the case neck TIR averaged out at 0.0009” (0.9 thou), best was 0.2 thou, worst was 1.5 thou. Bullet runout averaged 1.5 thou. Best was 0.5 thou. At least 90% plus of the loaded rounds were better than 1.2 thou. Superb results IMHO.

The die is totally worth the $86 which includes the custom honing fee ($15) and shipping. Bargain actually.

Tested 15 cases with the button installed, and results were almost as good, but of course neck tension was less (

By buying extra sizing buttons (elliptically shaped sizing balls, actually) and sanding them down, it is possible to vary neck tension, just like a bushing die.