trixter
Member
For those of us that use powder coated lead bullets, sized to .356, will this system work?
Thanks
Thanks
While coated lead bullets are sized slightly larger by .001", they are often bevel based so should fit into the flared case mouth or may need slightly more flare amount. I was planning to test more bullets to include larger sized lead bullets next but storm downed tree/limbs on our power lines so we were out of power/internet.For those of us that use powder coated lead bullets, sized to .356, will this system work?
I had some concerns about bullet tilting after drop and during indexing ... greater case mouth flare of .382" (from .380") has allowed the bullet to drop square and lock the bullet base to inside of case flare so shellplate indexing is not making the bullet lose contact with case mouth flare.
Will continue with more bullet type/brand/weight/nose profile testing
YesFor those of us that use powder coated lead bullets, sized to .356, will this system work?
Thanks
Yes, +1.YesFor those of us that use powder coated lead bullets, sized to .356, will this system work?
That is my threshold of "enough" flare also...when loading flat base bullets. I should be able to pick up the case and invert it without the bullet falling out, the bullet will make a slight "popping" sound when I pull it out.When I increased the flare skosh more, dropped bullets "locked" with inside of case flare to take some effort to remove.
Continuing with lead bullet testing.
If you recall case mouth flare OD (Outside Diameter) amount for .355" sized jacketed/plated bullets:
Here's comparison of case mouth flare with .382" on the left and .383"+ on the right (I ended up having to put skosh more flare to "lock" the bullet inside the case flare due to flat base used)
- .380" worked for normal progressive reloading with manual hand setting of bullets
- .381" allowed bullets to drop square from drop tube on case mouth but tilted when shellplate indexed
- .382" worked to prevent bullet tilt during shellplate indexing
- .383" was decided to start with the .356" sized bullet testing
For .356" sized lead bullet testing, since most commercial cast bullets are bevel based, I decided to test flat based bullet to push the limits of bullet feed die.
This is flat based SWC bullet made by Matt Dardas no longer in business who retired (Note the squared off base of bullet meant to trap expanding gas better and these were more accurate than bevel based SWC bullets)
I initially tested .382" flare just to see and while bullet did drop, it immediately tilted with any movement of the shellplate. .383" flare allowed the bullets to drop square and mostly prevented tilting of bullet when indexed.
When I increased the flare skosh more, dropped bullets "locked" with inside of case flare to take some effort to remove.
I was actually agreeing with you and I added "Yes, +1" to the post which I meant to do but I was rushing to do more primer tray testing. Don't get old.I'm not sure why you quoted my post
Lee Precision sent me an early R&D 3D printed unit for my testing. Final production unit will have parts made from more durable materials.My primary concern after reading this thread is the plastic cap that screws on and holds the spring in. May not be a problem but metal would have been better in my opinion for long term reliability.
Lee Precision sent me an early R&D 3D printed unit for my testing. Final production unit will have parts made from more durable materials.
Having said that, 3D printed part has been working well.
While 3D printed parts work, as shown in below picture of black 3D printed case retainer ring compared to gray hard plastic current production retainer ring, it is way better and more durable.I don't have a problem with 3D printed parts in the right place but this is one part that I think would be much better to be metal.
Yes, Calvin indicated retail/vendor pricing will be less than MSRP.I will definitely be buying one once they get to the vendors to compare with the Mini Mr. Bulletfeeder. Curious to see how the 2 ball bearings work compared to the 3 in the Mr. Bulletfeeder.
MSRP for the kit is $70 so they should be around $50 from the vendors.
Maybe they delayed product launch to be able to offer with stepped "M" style powder through expanders? https://support.leeprecision.net/en/knowledgebase/article/six-pack-pro-and-inline-bullet-feedersAccording to Lee’s knowledge base the inline bullet feed won’t be available until March 2023. Was hoping to pick up a couple of them first week of January.
That would make sense as one would think they'd go hand-in-hand.Maybe they delayed product launch to be able to offer with stepped "M" style powder through expanders?
Feed tubes that were sent to me for testing measure .021"-.022" in thickness and there is almost no give, even when squeezed firm.Mini Mr BF ... one thing I notice w/ those tubes is they're pretty stout. By that I mean if I try and pinch the middle of the individual tubes, there is very little give.
My question is, are the Lee tube walls thick enough?
Pictures of multi tube feeder/magazine show black/red colors and tube end piece looks very different from my early R&D 3D printed white unit. (My 3D printed unit top is press fit pentagon in shape but picture on website is round)Are they press fit like their universal case feed, or they have some adhesive?
According to Lee’s knowledge base the inline bullet feed won’t be available until March 2023. Was hoping to pick up a couple of them first week of January.
Thank you.LiveLife, superb reporting, pictures, testing and all! A little delay to me just means they may be working on some small bugs to iron out.
Damn good work there LL.
Calvin emailed and asked for last minute/summary instructions/usage tips before final draft of documentation went to print and I provided several tips/detailed usage steps to prevent bullet tilting to include from my testing.Any new updates on the development and availability of this new Bullet Feeder.