I have a Lee Classic single stage press (cast aluminum alloy) and it has performed well for me. I have not noticed any particular problems with it. I also have a cheap Lee C style cast aluminum press for priming and de-priming. It has functioned well too. Would I notice a marked advantage in going to a high dollar cast iron press? Would my end products be better? The Lee Classic press seems to have plenty of strength above and beyond anything I've needed. I reload 357 mags through 30-06. I reload, maybe, 200 rounds per month. I hear everyone touting the pros of the Dillons and etc., but will there be a tangible difference in my reloading?

You talking of the RL550B? I bought one many years ago, and it's cast aluminum just like your Lee. The cast steel bit is just marketing hype. You trust your life on cast aluminum alloy wheels on your car or truck? The many heat-treatable aluminum alloys are very strong, and lightweight to boot.

For utmost accuracy, look for a press that's design doesn't allow it to flex or spring while doing tough tasks like resizing or reforming. Having a press rock solid is more important than what it's made out of. An "O" frame is clearly superior to a "C" frame press, for no-flex strength.

Although I dearly love both my Dillons, upgrading from your Lee Classic to a Dillon will only mean you can load faster on the progressive.

If you happen to get rambunctious and snap a Dillon's aluminum frame, they'll replace it, or perhaps the whole damn machine...it's their famous "No BS warranty." I'm not sure you'd get the same result from Lee.

The only Lee press I own is their hand press.

The only tangible difference will be that you feel like you have a lot let money in your hand after you buy the Dillon. 200 rounds per month isn't that many, that can easily be taken care of by the Lee that you have. My father has a Dillon, and it has been a great press for him, but he shoots between 10000 and 15000 rounds per year with matches and practice. Good luck.

Sure you would notice a difference. You would be a lot lighter in the left hip pocket or ??? where you used to carry all that money. LEE came along after aluminum became available as a practical, cheap cast material and used it. It works. Others stuck with what was working for them. The Corbins (Dave, corbins.com & Rich rceco.com) have the Rolls Royce presses. (Priced accordingly.)

This is the "crazy" part of reloading. What is "best" for me?

The real match rifle shooters don't even use a press. Straight line dies.

The volume boys use Dillion or Lee or ??? and you cannot tell steel from Al unless something happens to be wrong...

You have to decide what "meets your needs." Seems LEE is getting the job done. You might find another 10 thousandths with cast, but can your weapons tell? Can you without expensive measuring tools? Do you need this? Go ahead. Lay awake nights. Suffer. Sweat. Enjoy. Luck.

I have never used a Lee press, but the quality of some of their other stuff leaves me abit off. It's cheap for a reason. Better than not reloading but IMO, the cast steel will last longer than the cast aluminum. At 200rds/month, there probably is little diff. Buy what you can afford, just stop buying factory ammo.

Red:

Your aluminum frame press will likely do everything you need. If you were using it to form .22-250 brass from .30-06, or swage jacketed bullets, then that might be a different story. You could spring or crack an aluminum frame under heavy stress, but normal reloading functions won't bother it. The aluminum press will eventually wear out at the hinge points (after xxxxxx or so strokes), but so will a steel press (after something more than xxxxxx strokes). At 2400 rounds per year, you have a lot of years left in your Lee.

By the way, Lee products exhibit some very clever engineering. They are produced very economically from low-cost materials, so they will wear out or break sooner than most competing equipment. But the great thing about a Lee product is that you just toss it and go buy another and you're still money ahead compared to the expensive stuff. I use Lee equipement where it is appropriate to the task.

My 1955 or 1956 manufactured Hollywood press has cast aluminum working parts and has served well for more than 50 years.

Had I had an old Pacific cast iron frame I think it would have done just as well but no better. roger

Where the cast iron presses excel over the aluminum presses heavy duty case forming work.
For example to make .303 British brass that fit the chamber better I formed some .444 Marlin brass. The solid head of the .444 case is .004 larger than the .303 chamber. As part of the process development I split or cracked 3 different dies swaging the solid head of the .444 brass with my Rockchucker. I don't think very many aluminum presses would live through that including the Dillons. I know a lot of folks prize their Bonanza/Forster Coaxial presses but I don't think the sizing die lock rings would ever take that kind of abuse.
I am not downing the other presses so much as pointing out that when you have to put a lot of force on a case, the heavy cast iron presses have what it takes to do it.

Why pay extra for a Mercedes when a Yugo will get you there at the speed limit just as fast?

I can't afford a Mercedes but I can enjoy a Co-Ax press. A Lee might or might not load as good of ammo (most likely not) but it's nowhere near as smooth or nice to load with. And yes some of my guns can tell the difference in a few too many thousandths.
If you are a casual loader or need to go cheap I understand. But nice reloading equipment is a luxury us gun nuts can really enjoy for a lifetime........................DJ

quote:

Originally posted by djpaintles:
Why pay extra for a Mercedes when a Yugo will get you there at the speed limit just as fast?

I can't afford a Mercedes but I can enjoy a Co-Ax press. A Lee might or might not load as good of ammo (most likely not) but it's nowhere near as smooth or nice to load with. And yes some of my guns can tell the difference in a few too many thousandths. If you are a casual loader or need to go cheap I understand. But nice reloading equipment is a luxury us gun nuts can really enjoy for a lifetime........................DJ

+1 I enjoy using my Co-Ax, too. A design that hasn't been improved upon since 1966. I wished I could have used one longer but the gun shop dealer recommended the RCBS Jr. press. I ended up using it for decades. But the luxuriously smooth compound leverage of the Co-Ax makes rifle case sizing almost effortless. I doubt I'd enjoy a Mercedes any better.

Aluminum has a finite fatigue life, regardless of the thickness. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatigue_limit . I have a Dillion 550 B, been using it for 20 years, and one day the compound lever block broke. Dillion replaced it for free.

Others who have the automated 1050 have loaded a lot more ammunition than I have and mine is the only experience I know of a Dillion part breaking. So I guess the endurance limit of aluminum presses and compounds is so long that fatigue failure is uncommon.

I have seen pictures of broken cast iron compound blocks, but it was a new press and it was a manufacturing defect.

I do like the Cast Iron presses, mainly because big massive things give me a sense of security and permanence. I have a number of them, Spar T, Lyman T Mag, and a Redding T-7.

I sold my RCBS rockchucker, an excellent press, I used that for almost 20 years, and I suspect it could crank out ammunition to the 3rd millennium.

So, while I “like†cast iron presses, I cannot say the aluminum frame ones are inferior.

The strength of Aluminum may be close to that of cast iron, but Young's modulus is over 4 times higher for iron.

What does it all mean?
Iron is stiffer than Aluminum.


I broke a cast iron RCBS Rockchucker press.
I had an 8mm collet neck die adjusted for 100 pounds of handle force to toggle over top dead center for the press.
If you push down the handle of your press, you will see that at the time of top dead center, some bars are in tension. Those bars are pinned to the casting. If the bars pull too hard, the casting will break.
Do this side by side with a Rockchucker and a Co-ax, and you can see that it would be much harder to break a Co-ax.

What does it all mean?
Pay the money and get the Forster co-ax press before you die of old age.

Lee's website page of their Classic press shows a picture with the caption, "Railroad rails ready to be transformed into the Classic cast."

I have used a section of railroad track for 4 decades as a pseudo-anvil for rivet bucking. If it had been made out of cast iron, it would have shattered in the first week of use. Cast iron is brittle and would never take the bending and flexing that train tracks must endure.

I contend that the Classic press is actually cast steel and Lee's use of the term 'cast iron' is a euphemistic one.

quote:

Do this side by side with a Rockchucker and a Co-ax, and you can see that it would be much harder to break a Co-ax.

You need to analyze each press by it weak points.
With the Co-ax the lock ring holding the die will let go. It is a weak point in the design.
You may have had a defective casting and that can occur with any brand. My Rock Chucker has had way more than 100 lbs applied to the handle with no damage.
The main benefit of the Co-Ax is the extremely long arc the hand swings through. Ok for reducing the amount of work but it does not make the system heavy duty, and it stinks for a pistol cartridge. All that motion for a small case is just a lot of exercise.

A Co-Ax isn't the fastest press around, for speed you need a progressive, not a single stage press. I love my Co-Ax, but I have a RCBS-2000 to do my volume reloading. And yes, the Co-Ax aluminum lock rings probably would fail before the press broke, but I would much rather a 3$ part that I have replacements for on hand breaks before some other linkage part breaks that I have to send away for replacement, even though that replacement might be free (RCBS and Dillon both have reputations for not charging for replacement parts). And if you WANT to try and break a Co-Ax, Redding lock rings are steel and work just fine in a Co-Ax press; I really don't know what would break first, and I don't want to find out.

quote:

Originally posted by ireload2:

quote:

Do this side by side with a Rockchucker and a Co-ax, and you can see that it would be much harder to break a Co-ax.

You need to analyze each press by it weak points.
With the Co-ax the lock ring holding the die will let go. It is a weak point in the design.
You may have had a defective casting and that can occur with any brand. My Rock Chucker has had way more than 100 lbs applied to the handle with no damage.
The main benefit of the Co-Ax is the extremely long arc the hand swings through. Ok for reducing the amount of work but it does not make the system heavy duty, and it stinks for a pistol cartridge. All that motion for a small case is just a lot of exercise.

I have never heard of a lock ring failing while using a co-ax press. Hard to call it a weak point if it never fails. The only reason traditional presses have longer threads is because it is cheaper to bore and thread a cylindrical hole through the press frame than to counter bore and thread only as much as is necessary (apparently no more than a Forster lock ring, in aluminum no less). The length of the hole (and therefore of the threads) is exacerbated by the fact that the hole is straight through one of the most stress-prone areas of the frame, which must be made even thicker (with even longer threads) because of the die hole in the middle of it.

As for the long handle arc, I don't usually grip the co-ax handle near the end for the entire stroke. The on-top position of the handle allows one to "choke up" on the handle much more easily than traditional press handles, avoiding the long stroke when not needed. I usually start out choked up on the handle, and then slide my hand out toward the end as needed for leverage. Forster even provides a long gripping surface on the handle to facilitate a range of hand positions and corresponding amounts of leverage. Forster also offers a shorter handle if desired.

Andy

quote:

Originally posted by BigJakeJ1s:
The only reason traditional presses have longer threads is because it is cheaper to bore and thread a cylindrical hole through the press frame than to counter bore and thread only as much as is necessary (apparently no more than a Forster lock ring, in aluminum no less). The length of the hole (and therefore of the threads) is exacerbated by the fact that the hole is straight through one of the most stress-prone areas of the frame, which must be made even thicker (with even longer threads) because of the die hole in the middle of it.

A very interesting analysis. I've never thought of it that way.

I have started forming .257 Wby Mag brass from 7mm Rem Mag brass and I'm already wishing I had a heavier press. This requires a lot of pressure and although things are holding up for now, I can see where this may be a stretch for my Lee press. I can see that when some extra funds come in, a heavier press will be at the top of the list of things to purchase. I can't even imagine trying to do this with my little Lee C style press.

i really like the co-ax

SH1000, OPTIONAL SHORT HANDLE FOR CO-AX® PRESS, $22.00

Install this short handle if you're getting too much exercise loading pistol cases with the original handle.

quote:

Originally posted by ireload2:

quote:

Do this side by side with a Rockchucker and a Co-ax, and you can see that it would be much harder to break a Co-ax.

You need to analyze each press by it weak points.
With the Co-ax the lock ring holding the die will let go. It is a weak point in the design.
You may have had a defective casting and that can occur with any brand. My Rock Chucker has had way more than 100 lbs applied to the handle with no damage.
The main benefit of the Co-Ax is the extremely long arc the hand swings through. Ok for reducing the amount of work but it does not make the system heavy duty, and it stinks for a pistol cartridge. All that motion for a small case is just a lot of exercise.

ireload2,
I know you have a stellar IQ, so I think we will resolve quickly.

The Co-ax and the RCBS both have links [RCBS cast, co ax steel] that are in tension at the time of top dead center. The RCBS has dual pins that capture the links to the main casting. These pins are in double shear. The outside pin hole supports on the main casting are .2 x .5".
1/8th of the link total link force is then on the each .2 x .5" cross section of cast iron in tension.
The 1/8 the force on the links is then .1 square in of cast iron.
The strength of cast iron in tension is ~ 25ksi.
The total link force at casting yield would then be 20,000 pounds.
The first 1" ram movement takes 6" of knob movement, but approaching top dead center, the last ~.1" takes 8" of knob movement.
That would be ~ 80:1.
To get 20,000 pounds at 80:1, we need 250 pounds at the knob.

So maybe I pushed down a little harder than 100 pounds.

Or maybe the compliance of an 8mm Lee collet die is less than .1"/20,000 pounds.

I sent it back to RCBS and they sent me whole new Rockchucker press. It was the same old design.

But the next year they changed the design after years of no changes.

So the Co ax has some Aluminum rings [ great rings they are!] in shear. If the are turned so the screw is in the front, then they are in double shear with 1 x .315" on each side.
The area in shear is then .63 sq in.

Aluminum is good for 30 ksi is shear.
That would be 18,900 pounds of total link force.
The last .1" of ram travel takes 5" of handle travel.
That would be 378 pounds at the handle.
I guess you were right

An unrealated note.
At the gunshow yesterday, my brother found it before I could; a one off, hand made, large reloading press for $20. Easily $20k today's dollars in design and build. I am guessing it was made between 20 years and 40 years ago by someone with a large horizontal mill, who is dead now, and rolling over in his grave. I sent Barche a pic. He wants more pics. I don't have more. It is at my brother's house. I can tell you that it has really large dual links in compression, more like an old Lyman.

tnekkec sent me a photo today of a press his brother just picked up. Talk about what appears to be a well thought out design and beautifully Machined press. (Home grown) If this is the Mk I , I'd love to see the Mk II, roger

OK,
Here is my only pic, with a 300 Win Mag case in it.

And it is all steel.



The guy clocked all the bolts

quote:

Originally posted by Red C.:
Would my end products be better?

If your current set-up produces straight (minimal run-out, both bullet and brass) ammo, there is nothing to be gained by changing it. You can produce it faster or easier, but that will not enhance the finished product. The powder dispensing function can be easily compromised with mechanization.

quote:

Originally posted by SlamFire:
Aluminum has a finite fatigue life, regardless of the thickness.

This is correct. Aluminum fatigue is what caused the roof of the Aloha Airlines 737 to peel open like a can opener. Cast Iron is a much more stable metal. Also Aluminum is much easier to machine over cast iron. Tool life is much longer. Fixturing required to machine it can be less captive, hence cheaper. It's the main reason firearms manufacturers are going to it in such abundance. I have presses made of both, but when I have a tough resizing job at hand, I use my Rockchucker or Redding. Bill T.

quote:

Originally posted by tnekkcc:
OK,
Here is my only pic, with a 300 Win Mag case in it.

And it is all steel.



The guy clocked all the bolts

that is a very nice press, Though i would prefer it mounted straight up.

As far as you analysis of the co-ax goes I think it is a little more involved. What happendes as the lock ring is loaded is the die threads apply a spreading force to the lock ring due to the 30° inclined surface of the thread. The force places the 6-32 lock screw in tension which ultimately pulls in two at about 550 lbs lateral force. I have had the flu so I have not had much inclination to resolve the force to see how much force on the ram is required to break the clamp ring lock screw.

quote:

Originally posted by ireload2:

quote:

Originally posted by tnekkcc:
OK,
Here is my only pic, with a 300 Win Mag case in it.

And it is all steel.



The guy clocked all the bolts

that is a very nice press, Though i would prefer it mounted straight up.

As far as you analysis of the co-ax goes I think it is a little more involved. What happendes as the lock ring is loaded is the die threads apply a spreading force to the lock ring due to the 30° inclined surface of the thread. The force places the 6-32 lock screw in tension which ultimately pulls in two at about 550 lbs lateral force. I have had the flu so I have not had much inclination to resolve the force to see how much force on the ram is required to break the clamp ring lock screw.

Golly! I hope you are well soon so you can solve this problem. roger

quote:

Originally posted by billt:
Cast Iron is a much more stable metal.

"...and the duck will come down and...." - Groucho

Someone has said the secret word. Cast iron's stability is what makes it a superior metal for a press.

quote:

Originally posted by ireload2:
As far as you analysis of the co-ax goes I think it is a little more involved. What happendes as the lock ring is loaded is the die threads apply a spreading force to the lock ring due to the 30° inclined surface of the thread. The force places the 6-32 lock screw in tension which ultimately pulls in two at about 550 lbs lateral force. I have had the flu so I have not had much inclination to resolve the force to see how much force on the ram is required to break the clamp ring lock screw.

For the aluminum lock ring to spread far enough to disengage the threads, it would have to spread the slot in the rather massive (compared to the RC anyway) cast iron top of the co-ax press. Now, if it spread just a little, the thread engagement would reduce a little, and weaken the hold on the die a little, and...

Don't forget the coefficient of friction between the die threads and the lock ring threads, or the lock ring and its slot, resisting the spreading forces on the ring, nor strength of the aluminum ring itself, either.

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention, I use steel hornady lock rings on some of my dies in my co-ax...

I think we're tilting at windmills here... Both presses are amply strong to handle virtually any reloading task with ease.

Andy