So I will still need to buy a bushing separately for the fl die, but, that just sizes the od of the neck and the mandrel die will true up and size the id?
Yes. But see below.
So what you may be missing is that bushing dies are used on brass with very uniform neck thickness. The expander is there to help compensate for any irregularities. You can turn necks or buy top tier brass or both.
A mandrel is largely used when a guy is NOT neck turning. If you have perfectly uniform brass, then only a bushing die is needed, setting the OD and ID in one fell swoop. But when brass is NOT perfectly uniform, the bushing is selected to assuredly size down enough to allow the mandrel to do its work, and the mandrel is what sets the ID.
Short version: if you’re neck turning, Bushing only, if not, bushing + mandrel.
I think I like the idea of using either a honed out die or bushing and then maybe a mandrel as opposed to an expander. Seems like it may be less stress on the brass.
Using neck turned brass and only using a bushing die is the least stress a shooter can impart on the brass. But a bushing + mandrel isn’t far behind. A regular die + expander grossly undersizes then pulls back out, whereas with a bushing and mandrel, you only slightly undersize the neck before pushing back out.
That’s the true advantage of the mandrel - the shoulder is more self supporting and will take on less run out when being pushed open rather than pulled open.
I would be extremely happy with 1/2 moa at 100 yds when it gets dialed in.
Wouldn’t we all.
In my personal experience, achieving a 1/2moa load has far less to do with the specific dies used as it does with how well the load is developed and how consistent the process - yielding consistent ammo. I’ve made 1/2moa loads in cheap Lee dies, even simply expanding with the standard ball. Buying top gear helps, versatile & adaptable gear, but it really doesn’t offer any promises of improved precision. Bushing dies, expanding mandrels, and micrometer seaters simply offer more control, but may or may not actually offer greater consistency if they aren’t well employed. No free lunches.
I will have to look into getting a fl die that is honed for my brass. Seems to be the simplest method. Thanks
Not to be excessively blunt, but you couldn’t give me a honed die any more, and certainly can’t convince me to part with my own money for it. At best, a honed die does only marginally less work on the necks than a standard die, and in real practice, it does MORE work hardening than a bushing die would have to.
Brass moves, brass work hardens, and brass varies from lot to lot. Honing, in theory, lives on the same principle as the bushing dies, but without the versatility to adapt. You don’t have to change bushings every firing, but if you are not neck turning, you may likely change bushings when you change lots, and if you’re not annealing, you may have to change your bushings as your brass work hardens and springs back more or less in each step. Brass also thins with use, so your neck tension reduce in time as your honed die fails to sufficiently size down the neck.
So inevitably, there’s a lose-lose situation in front of you: 1) hone for your ideal size with your first lot, such then any brass ever undersized loses neck tension, or 2) hone for a sufficiently undersized neck such you know every lot or every use-thinned neck you could ever encounter will still get sufficiently sized down - which might be slightly less work on the neck than a standard die, but would be more work hardening than needs to be done if a bushing is used. For these reasons, I’m exceptionally pro-bushing and equally anti-honing.
