So what is the 2023 Lee Pro 1000 ?

[wannabefree]

LiverLife, .
Good information, I never gave it that much thought since I am new to progressive loading its not something I would have thought of. Of course I don't currently do any competitive shooting with any of my reloads its a non issue but if I was I would probably so more of it on my Lee Classic Turret or old RCBs RockChucker
Thanks for the information,
Dave

 

[refuse2bafool]

+/- 0.0005" is insane. Even +/- 0.002" is really good to me.

Some thoughts.. and yes there is a question at the end:

• With mixed brass I don't get anwhere near that.
• I will not even tell you what COL I live with. If it feeds, it's fine.
• It is indeed a bit worse with my Pro 6000 than on my Pro 1000.
• But again, I don't worry about it.
• I just measured 10 rounds of Federal Factory Target 45acp 230 ball and it had a variance of 0.007 or +/- 0.0035
• I can get 1.0-1.5in. groups at 50 ft from a rest. I would bet a good shot could do MUCH better.
• I believe ljnowell is a high master.
• I've only competed a hand full of times and have not broken 700 SF.
• I have read Bullseye standard is 3" at 50 yards.
• A Rock River will give 1.5" at 50 yards... for $3500.

Given the above, I felt that worrying about COL, or doing extensive load development in general, is not value added. Am I way off base?

 

[LiveLife]

Given the above, I felt that worrying about COL, or doing extensive load development in general, is not value added. Am I way off base?

Perhaps ... here is another accuracy rabbit hole for consideration.

Keep in mind that it's not just the "finished OAL" that matters rather "chambered OAL" after the bullet nose bumps the feed ramp and suffers any bullet setback that truly matters for utmost accuracy.

When I learned to reload for USPSA "action pistol" matches, my reloading mentor was a seasoned bullseye match shooter who did all his own gunsmith work. And he sweated the details to the point where he was sorting components for consistency and even scraped the bottom of FMJ lead base so all the bullets weighed exactly the same. But he was getting groups at 50 yards I was struggling to get at 25 yards (And I thought I was doing pretty good getting sub 2" groups).

It was my mentor's pursuit of accuracy that triggered me to identify reloading variables to determine which had greater affect on accuracy that could overshadow other variables. One such variable was neck tension and subsequent bullet setback that prompted a myth busting thread - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...neck-tension-and-bullet-setback.830072/page-4

Since most of us use mixed range brass, time and work spent on minimizing OAL variance won't matter if insufficient neck tension produces bullet setback. Myth busting thread examined reloading variables of not just the case wall thickness at .100"/.200" below case mouth measured at 12-3-6-9 O'clock but also effects of different 9mm bullet sizing (.354"/.355"/.3555"/.356") to identify headstamp/case wall thickness and bullet sizing combination that produced sufficient neck tension to not produce any bullet setback in two test pistols (Fullsize and compact). Yes, even using mixed range brass.

How does all these translate to real-world shooting? Quite a bit. As illustrated by OAL variance vs pressure chart, even small .005" reduction in OAL could increase pressure by 4000 PSI for 9mm and 8000 PSI for 40S&W using Ramshot Zip, which has comparable burn rate as W231/HP-38 - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-and-discussions.778197/page-11#post-12503881

 

[refuse2bafool]

identify reloading variables to determine which had greater affect on accuracy that could overshadow other variables.

That hit home. Big time.

When encountering a performance goal with a complex set of variables, it always seemed there were an infinite number of things you should get right, but only a relatively small number of things you must right.

Take care of those and get anywhere close to reasonable on the rest and you were okay. Screw them up and all the hard work you did on the rest was a waste of time.

It is indeed a rabbit hole, but I think I will explore that threat before I ask any of the dozen other questions your response prompted.

Thanks again.

 

[LiveLife]

2023 Pro 1000 on order and will do an extensive overview when I receive the kit.

And here's the link to the "extensive" overview - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/new-2023-gen3-lee-pro-1000-unboxing.916672/

Why would someone prefer a new pro 1000 over a Pro 6000

For more consistent OAL ... All progressive presses experience some sort of shellplate tilt/deflection that affect OAL variance. Larger the shellplate size, greater the potential for shellplate tilt/deflection affecting bullet seating depth/finished OAL variance.

+/- 0.0005" is insane. Even +/- 0.002" is really good to me.

Here's the OAL variance consistency in progressive mode with shellplate full - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...e-consistent-oal-on-progressive-press.921633/

• Blazer unsorted - OAL of 1.128"-1.131 (.003" variance)
• FC unsorted - OAL of 1.129"-1.132" (.003" variance)
• .FC. unsorted - OAL of 1.129"-1.131" (.002" variance)
• R-P unsorted - OAL of 1.132"-1.134" (.002" variance)
• R-P "." unsorted - OAL of 1.133"-1.135" (.002" variance)
• WIN unsorted - OAL of 1.133" (.000" variance)

And this is confirmed by bullseye match shooting member @ljnowell who I helped set up a new Pro 1000 new out of the box (Yes, he was impressed with .001" OAL variance I posted for Pro 1000 testing) and went on to win many bullseye matches with Pro 1000 loaded match rounds - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/first-place-in-bullseye-league.780168/

I belive ljnowell is a high master.

Nice!