RCBS Pro 2000 or Dillon 550?

A local place has the Dillon for $370 and the RCBS for $450.

I have heard a TON of good praise for the Dillon, but not much of anything either way on the RCBS. I have a Rock Chucker, so I know the quality of the RCBS, but nothing about their progressive items.

Questions:
1) No doubt the stationary powder die is better, but are 4 Dies better than 3? Unnecessary?
2) RCBS uses the strip Primers. Obviously, you don't have to worry about touching them or flipping them, but how reliable is the feeding system? Are primers significantly more expensive in this format?
3) Are there really any reasons that I should not spend the extra $80 for the RCBS? Seems like its a steal.

Please forgive my reloading ignorance. Thanks for the help.

Most folks I know that are doing the progressive thing really like the Dillon. That's about the extent of my knowledge on the subject. I've got a single stage and a turret press that I load on.

Some or our members will probably jump in here and give you some first had experience. The only thing I can say about four die sets is that the Lee four die pistols sets let you seat the bullet and drop the powder at the same time then the next die does the crimping. I like that system as it makes really nice ammo.

The Dillon is a 4 station and the RCBS is a five station.

I can't say much about the RCBS but I have heard that it is a good setup. It has auto index and with five stations would aloow you to have a powder check along with a seperat crimp.

I have used a Dillon 550 and liked it. It ran great. It took a little bit for me to setup but after time get easier.

I think to compare presses you would have to compare the RCBS to the Dillon 650 minus the case feeder.

RCBS and Dillon both have great customer support.

As of now the Dillon side has more accesories, but given time I think RCBS will add more to there line.

Not trying to sway you either way but the Hornady LNL has a rebate for a 1000 free rounds of bullets. This makes it a best buy. The only thing is 1000rnds on any of these machine will only last you (new to progressive) about 3hrs.

Out of the 2 that you have up I think I would go with the RCBS just for the extra station.

Out of the RCBS, Dillon650, and the Hornady. It would be between Blue and Red cause I like my case feeder and wouldn't be with out it.

actually, on the RCBS, the auto index is an optional feature that I don't think that I want, the one that I am looking at does not include it. And neither of them include Die sets.

Does Dillon offer a case feeder on the 550? If they do, im sold.

Thanks for the info, I'll take a look at the hornady.

Ok, I take that back. The case feeder is alone is $240?

Yeah, and if you are running manual indexing or are doing short runs of a lot of different shape cases you have to change the feeder plate for, it won't really save you much time or effort to have that case feeder. You'd have most of a box of 50 done by the time you had the case feeder ready. If you can leave it set up for one chambering and run a lot of it at one time, then it pays.

I think the RCBS would be worth it for the extra station. They boast the fastest caliber change on the market for the RCBS, but I would price that compared with the Dillon; toolhead (die plate) and etcetera. The APS primer system is one I've seen demonstrated at a show, but not actually tried myself. You would want to find out whether using the tool to put primers into the strips is any faster or slower than filling primer tubes for the Dillon? If you buy primers already in strips, I think you are limited to CCI primers only. It costs about $2/1000, or 7% more at Midway for the CCI APS primers in strips that for the same CCI primers in a box. 0.2 cents more per shot.

From my initial research, the RCBS die plates and die seem to be cheaper than the Dillon sets. and to not have to play around with the primers, 0.002 per round is more than acceptable for the strips. Is there anything wrong with CCI Primers? Thats what I use now.....

Not at all, but if you get into rifle loading for peak accuracy, you may want to try some primers that don't come in the strips. If you own a gun that has a light mainspring either from age or from a trigger job, you may find it needs the more sensitive Federal primers to be reliable. Besides, you can always find recipes somewhere that call for a specific primer, so you want the flexibility of being able to change them if you need to? Some guns can be picky. I think the press comes with a primer strip loading tool, IIRC?

The Hornady press in an auto index.

If manual index is what you want then I would forget about the case feeder. just my .02

for manual index I would go with the RCBS for sure just cause of the extra station.

As was said before by unclenick. I have a case feeder and have it set up for 45ACP. If I plan on loading more than 100rnds then I will switch it over but for anything less than that it takes a little tweak here and there before it is up and running smooth.

There are a couple of time that you set it up and bingo right off the bat.

When you go to manual index just pick a case up in the same motion and feed it manual.

I am seriously considering the RCBS. There is also a modification for normal tube feeding available if I want it. I am a big fan of not having to move the powder die every time I change calibers, as I will be doing a fairly equal amount of 9mm, .38spl/.357, and 45 ACP. Plus some .223 in the (hopefully) near future!

For the pistol dies, what would the 5th station be used for in the RCBS as compared to the Dillon? Does it seat the bullet at one station and then crimp it at the next? Other options maybe?

I'm looking further into the die sets now before I buy....

station 1. Size decap 2. Powder/expander 3. Powder check die 4. Seater die 5. Crimp die

I own the RCBS progressive and they include a jig for loading the little strips. This lets you choose the primers you want to use. I wouldnt spend the extra dollars for the other primer set up, the APS is very reliable and easy to use. It took just a short while for me to get used to the system and its the best thing since sliced bread in my opinion.
The extra die station is a plus if you want to seat and crimp in separate steps, and I like the powder measure better than the one on the Dillon press.
Now you're not going to go wrong with either of these presses, and I've even seen, but not used the Hornady progressive and its probably a fine press as well.
I also prefere the manual indexing of the RCBS.
Hope this helps.
JR

Ok,

I now have a few progressive questions. I currently own a Lee 100pro, and not that it's a bad press but I would like the option of a powder check. So I have thinking of upgrading to something else. So this leads me to my questions:

1) can you not use a powder check in the dillon? I was under the impression that you could am I wrong?
2) If you are going to manually index a progessive, then why not just use a cheaper turret press? Doesn't manually index take away from some of the speed that we buy progressives for?

. . .

1) can you not use a powder check in the dillon? I was under the impression that you could am I wrong? . .


They are in the 650 and in the 1050. The 650 has five stations and the 1050 has eight stations. The 1050 operates only on the downstroke, where the other Dillons seat the primer on the upstroke. The 1050 case feed setup needs one station open just for that, instead of sharing it with the sizing die, and one for swaging the primer pocket. The Square Deal uses special non-standard thread dies, and crimps separately from seating, which is best for limiting bullet distortion and scraping, so its fourth position is just for that crimp, leaving no place to put a powder checking die. All the above presses are auto-indexing.

. . .
2) If you are going to manually index a progessive, then why not just use a cheaper turret press? Doesn't manually index take away from some of the speed that we buy progressives for?

The turret press holds the cartridge on the end of a regular single press ram and moves the dies around so each takes a turn performing its operation. That means, if you have a three, four, or five station turret, it takes three,four or five handle strokes to make one finished cartridge, and you have to remove the finished round to free the shell holder for the next case.

On the progressive press, there is a plate that holds a case at each station and the ram moves the whole plate and all the cases up at once, so every tool does its job on a different cartridge with each handle stroke. You index the shell holder rather than the tool head, so it advances the cartridges and kicks a finished one off the last station into a bin. This means you get a finished cartridge from each stroke of the handle, instead of one every three, four or five strokes, as you do with the turret. Thus, the progressive, even manually indexed, is three, four or five times faster than the turret. It may lose a little time on the index, but makes it up by saving you the double hand motion of both removing the finished round and putting the next empty case in.

The 550B is the only manually indexing machine Dillon has, being the successor to their old 450. The 450 had manual powder charging as well as manual indexing. Despite that manual indexing, Dillon claims the 550B is slightly faster than their fully automatic Square Deal. I don't know why and their explanation was not satisfactory when I asked, years ago? I think their people are just more used to using the older design. You have to take an extra action with your left hand (indexing, then bullet placing, instead of just bullet placing). They say the manual index moves faster than adding that load to the handle. I have both the Square Deal and the 550B, and while the 550B is much quicker to change calibers on and has larger cartridge capacity, but I don't find it loads quite as fast as the Square Deal. It comes close, though.

That thumb flip to index the shell plate takes less effort than turning a manual turret head, by the way, because much less mass is being moved. I own ancient Lyman turret press I used to use, and it took more work to rotate. The 550B is much faster than even an auto-indexing turret because it takes much more time for all the extra handle strokes than it does to index the shell plate.

The 550B does not have room for a powder check because it only has 4 stations, because they use the fourth for that separate crimping die. You could use a combination seater/crimper die in the forth station to locate some form of powder checker in the third, but that means you will be using the right hand to set bullets in place as well as to insert brass and operate the press handle, which would slow you down considerably. You can still do a visual powder check on the fourth station before you place the bullet on the case if you set up a light to let you see into it.

Ok,

This all leads me to more questions,

One a "classic" style lee turret, the die holder moves as the ram operates much as a single stage press correct? And If correct does this lead to excessive wear of any parts? It seems to me that there is a lot more moving while the whole die holder is moving vs. the shell plate moving.

Also I had seen a video of a lee turret press, that indexed the shell plate much like a progressive press, is this still considered a turret press? Or is it a progressive that someone is using as a turret?

Regardless of the fact that the turret indexes automatically on the Lee turret press, only one operation on one casing is being carried out each time the lever is pulled.

On a true progressive (Pro 1000, Loadmaster, Dillon, Hornaday AP), three, four, five, or more operations are being done on that many casings with each lever pull. Each lever pull produces a finished round of ammo.

Tom,

The progressive has less wear for three reasons: 1, the turret press's toolhead has to step through all its positions for each cartridge produced. That is one full revolution and three, four, or five indexing events (depending on the number of stations) for each round. The progressive produces one round for each individual index event, so three, four, five, or, in the case of the 1050, eight rounds for each full revolution of the shell plate. Plus, the shell plate and rounds move rather than the heavy steel dies, so less energy and load is placed on the indexing pawl and the detent has to snap into place only once instead of several times per round, so it gets less wear. To ram up into all the dies at once and remain rigid, the progressive ram is simply made much heavier and given more mechanical advantage. That is the only part of the progressive operation which takes more force than the turret press experiences, and it is managed by simply making the press beefier. Not exactly rocket engineering to accomplish, and not all that great a load increase when you consider that only the sizing operation takes much effort, while the others take less.

The videos are on Lee's web site here (http://www.leeprecision.com/html/HelpVideos/video.html). They have one of their turret in operation, but not one of their progressive Pr0 1000 in operation. I don't know why not? If you look at the video for zero adjusting the Pro 1000, you can see the shell holder advance, though. Imagine a case going to the right of the vertical post and getting sized and decapped on the upstroke. On the downstroke it indexes to the next position and gets a primer seated and is ready for powder dispensing. At the same time, a second case goes into the first position for sizing. On the next upstroke the first case gets powder while the second gets sized and decapped. On the next downstroke the first case is put in position to receive a bullet, which you put on with your left hand, the second case gets a primer seated and a third case is added into position for sizing and decapping. On the next upstroke, the bullet is seated and crimped in a combination seater/crimping die, the second case gets powder, and the third case is sized and decapped. On the next downstroke, the first case, now a loaded round, is dropped down the ramp you see on the near position in the video, the second case goes into bullet receiving position, the third case gets primed and a fourth case goes into position for sizing and decapping. At this point, you will be producing a finished round with each stroke of the handle and a new case will go into the first position while others advance each time. It is chain production.

Lee's Pro 1000 has no fourth station for a separate crimp operation (much less a fifth one for a powder level checker) and it is less beefy and, by reports, more finicky than the more expensive progressives. I have one of their now-discontinued progressive shotshell loaders, and found its primer feed (same basic concept as the Pro 1000 scaled up for shotshell primers) to be hangup-prone. I hear the same complaint about the Pro-1000 and that it needs a lot of adjusting, so that and the lack of a fourth station would not make it my first choice. The Dillons are reliable workhorses. I have not heard anything significantly negative about either the Hornady or the RCBS progressives, either. All the companies involved, including Lee, have great customer service. Dillon replaces parts without question. I have cracked a couple of castings of theirs before (one handle and one swaging tool body), and called their 800 number and had new ones within a couple of days and they don't even ask to see the old one.

The bottom line is, the progressives cost more and give you significantly faster production in return. If you can afford a 5 station unit with powder checker, that is a good safety feature, but not essential if you use your eyes.

If you can afford a 5 station unit with powder checker, that is a good safety feature, but not essential if you use your eyes.

After having to remove a bullet from the barrel of my Ruger P91 40S&W (it's amazing how much power a primer actually has!) I refined my loading procedures, I sit on the left side of my Dillon 550B, so I can see down into the shell as it comes out of the bell/charge station, and I also glance down at the primer press and make sure that one is on the punch.
It takes some trial and error and practice to get any thing right, I'll bet most of the progressives and the Dillon for sure are a PAIN! to get all set up, but once you get it right and get the rhythm down you'll wonder why you ever went with the turret, and I'm not just making speculation here, I learned on a Lyman 4 station turret and I will admit it was good equipment it's just not up to what the progressive is capable of.

I'm almost positive that I am going to go with the RCBS Pro 2000. If for nothing more than the 5th station and the APS.

Now, Obviously easily altered and experimented with, but would you opt for a powder check or separate seat and crimp stations??

With 5 stations you can do both powder check and seat crimp in seperate stations.

Maybe I am having some sort of mental malfunction here, but I just dont see how that is possible.

there are 2 stations prior to powder dump and 2 stations after.

The RCBS manual says:
1-Decap 2-Size/Expand 3-Powder 4-Powder Check 5-Seat/Crimp
or
1-Decap 2-Size/Expand 3-Powder 4-Seat 5-Crimp

What are you going to primarily loading... I would only do seperate crimp and seat operations for heavy loads in .357/.44/etc.

I thought that seat then crimp (2 stations) was better over all and I had thoughts of using an FCD in the last station.

I'll be loading mainly 9mm and .38spl/.357. A fair amount of 45acp, a few 30-30/30-06 here and there and a serious potential for a good amount of .223 in the near future. But for all intents and purposes, lets say 9mm, .38spl and 45.

I don't think I specifically need a powder check, I trust my eyes, and if I can't look before I place the bullet, then I am probably going too fast anyways. But it would be a nice back-up.

Sizing dies come with the decapper built in, including RCBS dies. You can buy a separate decapping die, but mostly you just decap and size on the same die, and therefore only need one station for the operation (though it has to be the station that guides the spent primer where it is supposed to go). That is followed by primer seating, usually in the second station on the upstroke of the handle after indexing completes, while the expansion and powder drop happen in that same station on the downstroke. Next comes powder check, if you have the extra station? That is followed by bullet seating, which is followed by bullet crimping. The only reason I've ever had for a separate decapping operation is to be able to tumble the brass after decapping but before sizing and loading it, which I do for rifle match loads. In that case it is a separate single-stage operation, anyhow, so I do it on my Lee Challenger press and leave the progressive out of the equation.

Note also that size/expand only happens in bottleneck rifle dies. Pistol die expanding includes a flare of the casemouth to aid seating cast bullets, in particular, and which has to be done as a separate step because withdrawing from a sizing die would remove the flare if it were done in there.

I think you might be reading a description of the reloading event sequence, and not a loading die sequence. A decapping pin is usually set to stick out of the sizing die far enough that the old primer pops out just before the sizing is quite complete. That might explain the description. If you are using a Lee Loader, decapping is a separate operation before sizing, but that isn't normal for dies in a press.

I'll go to the RCBS site and see if I can download their manual? If they actually do use a separate decapping operation in their press, it is no more useful, with normal dies, than a 4-station Dillon, since a separate decapping operation would place the primer seating in station three, making it impossible to put powder in before then without it leaking out of the flashhole.

Sizing dies come with the decapper built in, including RCBS dies. You can buy a separate decapping die, but mostly you just decap and size on the same die, and therefore only need one station for the operation (though it has to be the station that guides the spent primer where it is supposed to go).

Well thats what I thought. My next question was going to be, Do I have to buy new dies now? but never mind that.

But even with those two operations combined into one, it still only leaves 2 stations after powder dump. Now there is one open station before powder....

I still think that I'm missing something here....

Well, wouldn't you know, it's: None of the Above. RCBS has both its Ammo Master and its Pro 2000 set up to fix the powder dispensing at station 3. They expand a pistol case in station 2 before dispensing powder, unlike the Dillon that expands and dispenses powder in one step. That means there is no way to use a powder check (theirs is called a lock-out die) unless you choose to seat and crimp at the same time. You'll have to go with the Dillon 650 or maybe the Hornady progressive to be able to do both a powder check and a separate crimp. I said "maybe" a Hornady, because I haven't read its instructions.

Nope. No luck with the Hornady Lock N' Load, either. It primes separately in station 2, then puts the powder in at station 3. Apparently neither the RCBS nor the Hornady use Dillon's trick of priming on the upstroke at the powder station while the powder drop and expanding tube is closed off from the powder supply. Maybe Dillon has a patent on that? The Dillon reduces the compound leverage while seating on that upstroke. Supposedly that helps you feel the primer seat home, though I have to say I can really only feel a primer seat positively using a hand priming tool, like the Markel. You feel it somewhat on the Dillon.

So now you're down to a Dillon 650 to get separate powder check together with separate crimping, unless someone knows of another machine that will do it? Not a trivial investment, that 650, but one you probably will not regret in the long run.

There may be a way to give a 4-station Dillon or the RCBS or Hornady a powder check, but nothing's on the market at this point. One of the main objections to the Dillon has always been having to adjust the powder measure with a wrench. There are two answers to that, now. One fellow is advertising a micrometer adjustment for the Dillon. The other is to get the Johnson Quick Measure and its Dillon adapter. Meanwhile, the wrench isn't all that bad. Just takes getting used to.

Well, I'm feeling better knowing that i am not totally out of whack here.....

So the question still stands, powder check or separate seat and crimp/FCD?

I guess i would be most concerned with the taller cases as far as the powder check was concerned, so .38/.357. Maybe with the .38, use the powder check and a seat crimp combo and for 357 use a powder check, seat and really light crimp and finish them off with the FCD in my RockChucker. That really wouldn't be terrible considering the little I actually shoot full mag .357 rounds anyways.

Just a thought.

I don't know about the RL650 but on the RL550B the primmer is inserted in station 1 on the down stroke and yes you can indeed feel it, with the pressure required to seat CCI primers I cant even fathom how you can seat a primmer with a hand tool? (but I've never used one so??)

The only thing I see different about the RCBS Pro2000 is the use of those primmer strips, if you thin they're neet?, I really like the Dillon system and you don't have to touch the primers at all and if you think that taking a minuet to load 100 primers is to long you're loading WAY! to fast in my opinion.

You're correct about the 550 doing it under the sizing die. The Square Deal and 650 do it under the powder measure. The result is the same: a station is freed up for the powder checker in the 650 and for separate seating and crimping in the other two presses.

You're also right about CCI primers in the Dillon. They are about half a thousandth wider and a little heavier in the cup, I think, than the Federals I use in the Dillons. I never got them to seat consistently either (lots of high primers), though it helps to run the brass through the Dillon primer pocket swager first. The 1050 doesn't care because it has the swager built-in and runs it on every case. It primes on downstroke, anyway, and depends on you setting the primer ram up for the standard 0.004" below-flush level rather than using feel.

The feel that the Markel tool lets you achieve that the Dillon does not is the exact moment the primer kisses the bottom of the primer pocket. I find I often am giving the Dillon handles a bit of a shove to insure full seating, and that precludes gentle sensing of the cup bottoming out.

AVIVIII,

You're correct that separate crimping won't be a big deal if you're not loading more than a couple of boxes at a time. You'll be able to do it in not much more time than visual inspection of the finished rounds takes. You just set up the seater die so it straightens the case without crimping. That may be a good solution for you. You may also find that you are perfectly satisfied using the simultaneous seat and crimp for much of your ammo? Jacketed loads in particular. It is the distortion and shaving of lead that is more of an issue. Many match rounds were loaded even in the days before separate crimping dies were available, and your particular guns may be more or less sensitive to the results. Try both ways to see if you find a difference on paper or not?

Nope. No luck with the Hornady Lock N' Load, either. It primes separately in station 2, then puts the powder in at station 3. Apparently neither the RCBS nor the Hornady use Dillon's trick of priming on the upstroke at the powder station while the powder drop and expanding tube is closed off from the powder supply. Maybe Dillon has a patent on that? The Dillon reduces the compound leverage while seating on that upstroke. Supposedly that helps you feel the primer seat home, though I have to say I can really only feel a primer seat positively using a hand priming tool, like the Markel. You feel it somewhat on the Dillon.

So now you're down to a Dillon 650 to get separate powder check together with separate crimping, unless someone knows of another machine that will do it? Not a trivial investment, that 650, but one you probably will not regret in the long run.

Not quite so with the Hornady...

The Hornady LNL AP primes on the up stroke of the handle after sizing/depriming in station 1, just like Dillon, except the Hornady advances a half step on the way up, and on the way down, so priming happens in between sizing at station 1, and expanding/dumping powder (with their new powder through expanders like Lee/Dillon) at station 2, without consuming an extra station. So, you can have a powder check, seat and crimp in separate stations on the Hornady.

Before Hornady came out with their PTE setup, you had to expand at station 2 and drop powder at station 3. But priming has always happened at station "1.5"

FYI, Dillon (and I suppose Hornady has also) licensed the PTE technology from Lee.

Andy

That's interesting. I simply looked at the Hornady online instructions and saw their measure was at station 3.

Are you sure about the powder through technology licensing? I remember my dad's 450 dropped powder down through via a manual measure in the 80's, but I don't know when Lee got it? If it was licensed back then, the patent will have expired or be about to any day now. The current Dillon has the drop tube doubling as an operating rod, which I don't see Lee doing. But patents can be a bit messy, and Dillon could have patented the use of the Lee technology in combination with the measure operating function, if Lee did have and control the through-powder concept first?

I really think the seperate seat and crimp is overplayed. I can see you wanting to use the Factory Crimp Die, I know a lot of guys here do, with good results. None of the guys that I shoot action pistol with mess with that stuff and they all use 550s. I'm using an RCBS Turret press for all my shooting and its so easy to crank out 100-200 rounds for my .45, plus its less than half the price of the Dillon (more money for shooting) I do pretty much all my rifle on my RCBS Partner press and the single stage really shines with that.

Mattsbox99,

Could you clarify? I'm not clear which stuff your guys are not messing with? If they use the FCD, they do have a separate crimping step and have no place open on a 550 for using a powder checker. But if they are using the powder checker and a combination seater/crimper in station four, then they are not crimping separately. I use my eyes for the powder checker and go ahead with the separate crimp. Otherwise, with a powder checker in station three and the seater/crimper in station four on the 550, your right hand has to place the bullet and the brass as well as run the handle. With the seater in station three, I use the right hand to feed brass by feel and the left for the bullet while I lean left and glance into the case, so the feeding operations are nearly simultaneous.

As far as accuracy goes, there is nothing in action pistol requirements that would likely allow you to tell the difference. It is in trying to get a group from three inches down to two inches at 50 yards that it becomes a factor, IME, and that is really only going to matter to bullseye match shooters in most instances.

Does the powder checker just give a go - no-go of powder being present, or does it really check the amount of powder to, i.e. a double charge?

The PTE is the operating rod for the PM on the Lee's also. They have a different mechanism for returning the PM for the next load than Dillon. Lee is/was the patent holder on PTE technology. Interesting you brought up the issue of patent expiration: that may be the reason Hornady now offers it (if they no longer have to license it from Lee.)

About the powder checker dies: they cannot tell whether you have an accurate drop, but they can tell no powder or double charge from standard drop.

Andy

I never looked at the Lee up close, since I was already invested in Dillons. I had always assumed that because the PRO 1000 came out after Dillon started to popularize progressives that LEe was playing catch-up. Now it looks like they actually did Dillon one better. They've never been short on innovative ideas. So, Dillon licensed their PTE to improve on that hand-operated measure in the old 450. It also fed the primer manually, IIRC. The 550 had the measure upgrade and the primer feed automated, but must have come out after the Lee press. It still had the die positions drilled and tapped into the frame casting, thouigh. Then the 550B came along to add the quick-change toolhead. Not much seems to have changed on that machine since. Interesting to get the time-line clarified, though.

Tom,

There a little V-groove in test rod of the Dillon that has a foot on the end that lands on the powder. If the V doesn't stop within a certain range its edges trigger a beeper. As Jake said, grossly high or grossly low is detected. It is really just looking for double-charges or empties, and not to be the equivalent of weighing the charge.

Nick, I meant the FCD/seperate crimp-seat operations. Sorry for the confusion. It just sounds to me like AVIVIII was planning on doing some action pistol or plinking rather than match bullseye competition.

I thought the 550 - 550b upgrade was for the PM linkage with the down-rod to help prevent double charges. The 550 had the tool plate, the old spring-return auto PM, and auto primer feed. A lot of folks upgraded everything but the frame on their 450's, so there are a lot of upgraded 450's out there with solid frames, auto PMs and primer feeds.

Andy

Nick, I meant the FCD/seperate crimp-seat operations. Sorry for the confusion. It just sounds to me like AVIVIII was planning on doing some action pistol or plinking rather than match bullseye competition.

Bingo.

Maybe eventually, but for now, when I want good, reliable accuracy, thats what the rockchucker comes in.

You could do every thing you wanted to do with the RCBS just use a Hornady powder dispenser with the powder through expanders.

As far as seat and crimp I load a lot of lead and this keeps the case from shaving the lead on the last little bit of movement that would crimp and push the bullet back at the same time.

If you use the hornady disp. you can put the size/deprime in station 1 the powder/expander in station 2 the powdercop/lock out/powder check die in station 3 bullet seat in station 4 and crimp in 5.

All while still being able to manual index

If you use the PM in station 2 on the RCBS, it is on the tool plate, and the powder check die (whatever type) is on the frame. It would work OK, but it would be more difficult to switch calibers that way.

you cant even do that, it seats the primer on the downstroke at station 2

Jake,

You may be right about the frame change. I remember purchasing the B upgrade with frame for my Dad as birthday or Christmas present at one point, but it could have come one step earlier. The Square Deal and 550B measures I have include both the spring return and the forced return rod. The first one I saw with no spring was on a friend's 1050, but that measure still had the post for the spring on it; just unused.

AVIVII,

Sounds like the Hornady would accept the arrangement Jake is talking about if it primes at a half-step between positions 1 and 2 as he described. Rereading the RCBS instructions, they say it allows for a lubing station at position one and the sizing die at position 2 for bottleneck rifle loading. The priming has to take place somewhere after that sizing die (which decaps) and before the powder goes in, so I am thinking it either half-steps like the Hornady, but one position later, or it primes like the Dillon after all, but, again, one station later, so you still can't do the full die compliment in it. That was in the 2000 instructions, so maybe it isn't the same for the Ammo-master? I don't have time to reread that again just now.

I guess the downstroke of station 2 would be equal to station 2.5? I don't know.

The RCBS definitely seats the new primer as the piston moves down after whatever you have it set up to do at station 2. When you push the handle past top center.

Regardless, after seeing them side by side, I'm still leaning towards the RCBS. Appears to be all around better quality, I like the APS, better powder system, powder isn't on the tool head and I have to choice of running the powder check or not.

I'd vote for the RCBS too, I helped put together a friends 550 and I'd never buy one. Everything that isn't part of the press was plastic or aluminum and small, like operating rods and such. The primer pickup tubes were junk, they wouldn't pick up primers very well or hold more than 10-15 in at a time.

I know a lot of people do use them, and maybe they have better setups, but I'll take the advantages of the RCBS.

After using the Dillon I cant even imagine a better priming system?, it probably takes less than a minuet to load a 100 primers, and the only issue I've ever had was finding that the follower rod must be in the feed tube for them to feed properly.

I still don't see the fascination with those strips?

You dump the primers into the tray, they flip over automatically and you press the lid and bingo you've loaded the strip. There is no chance of spilled primers, and if you decide to stop for the day, you just pull the strip out and you are done.

Mattsbox99,

10 or 15 primers?????? Those tubes hold over 100! I can't guess what you guys had go wrong? I sit in front of the TV with the primer flipping tray and load 10 tubes with 1000 primers while I'm watching an hour of TV. No sweat. I'd be curious to hear what stopped you at 10 or 15? No chance you were trying to pick up small primers with a large primer pick-up tube and had them falling out? Something was definitely wrong. As Wrench Man said, Dillon's is actually a pretty good priming system.

There is lots of aluminum in a Dillon, for sure, but the active plastic parts are just the primer pick-up tube and primer feed tube lips and some Delryn for lubrication of sliding parts. My Square Deal's ram is actually journaled by the stuff, but I've put well over 50,000 rounds through that thing without it scoring or wearing, that I can see? The rest of the plastic stuff is not normally subject to wear, like the low-primer warning sounder box or the powder hopper or the handle knob.

AVIVIII,

Your last post alerted me to the fact we are talking strokes in reverse. You are talking about the ram's motion, while I've been talking about the handle's motion, which is opposite. The Dillon thus primes ram-down, handle up, as do the other machines. That's the confusion. In the future, I'll just use 'handle stroke' or 'ram stroke' to keep it clear.

To clarify on the powder check, also to be clear, because you can't put powder in before the primer is in place, using a powder check (the RCBS Lockout die) will mean you have to combine seating and crimping or else crimp in a separate operation on your single-stage press. In your shoes, I would experiment with both to see whether you gain practical advantage from the separate crimp step? It also depends on your volume as to whether that matters? If you ever get to shooting IPSC or steel plates or anything else that consumes a lot of ammunition, you'll probably not want to have the extra operation. On the other hand, at that point you may be comfortable enough with the machine to skip the powder checking?

The bottom line is that the RCBS requires an extra station because it doesn't use the powder through-expander system. It is meant to work with standard pistol die sets, so 5 RCBS stations are like having 4 stations on the Dillon, where powder drop and expansion are combined, or a Hornady (if they made a 4-station press) where they can optionally be combined. The Hornady is the only press that can be made to work either like the RCBS or like the Dillon 650, except each brand requires you to use their priming system. The extra position on the RCBS only has an advantage over the 4 station Dillon when you are loading bottleneck rifle cases, in which case it offers the option of the lubing die to save you outside lubing as a separate step.

Whatever you decide to do, enjoy your new equipment.

Mattsbox99,
To clarify on the powder check, also to be clear, because you can't put powder in before the primer is in place, using a powder check (the RCBS Lockout die) will mean you have to combine seating and crimping or else crimp in a separate operation on your single-stage press. In your shoes, I would experiment with both to see whether you gain practical advantage from the separate crimp step? It also depends on your volume as to whether that matters? If you ever get to shooting IPSC or steel plates or anything else that consumes a lot of ammunition, you'll probably not want to have the extra operation. On the other hand, at that point you may be comfortable enough with the machine to skip the powder checking?

The bottom line is that the RCBS requires an extra station because it doesn't use the powder through-expander system. It is meant to work with standard pistol die sets, so 5 RCBS stations are like having 4 stations on the Dillon, where powder drop and expansion are combined, or a Hornady (if they made a 4-station press) where they can optionally be combined. The Hornady is the only press that can be made to work either like the RCBS or like the Dillon 650, except each brand requires you to use their priming system. The extra position on the RCBS only has an advantage over the 4 station Dillon when you are loading bottleneck rifle cases, in which case it offers the option of the lubing die to save you outside lubing as a separate step.

Whatever you decide to do, enjoy your new equipment.

Yeah, we are on the same page with the stations. Like I said before, I do trust my eyes more than anything else and I will probably opt for the FCD over the Powder check. Some of the taller cases make me a little nervous, but I guess I'll just take it slow for a while and keep really good lighting on it.

Thanks for all of your help.

Nick-

The lips on the pickup tubes were not gripping the primers, after ten or 15 were in the tube, it wouldn't pick up anymore. My RCBS tubes pick up the primers fine and are a tight fit.

The primer dispenser dumped the primers all over the place. Anyway, its not that important. It was probably an isolated coincidence and I'm sure Dillon would have replaced the parts under their warranty, which I speculate is at least as good as RCBS's warranty.