Crashbox

Oooohhh... beautiful indeed, Pablo! Nice score.

I usually use an RCBS bench-mounted priming tool which does separate the individual primer being seated, from the tube. I must admit, though, that I do get nervous sometimes with all those primers in that skinny little tube- primers are NO toy, that is for sure.

Interesting concept. I really like RCBS stuff and their customer service is impeccable- maby I'll buy one of these for full-length resizing my .405 cases...

Thanks, Pablo and G-MAN. It really is beautiful, and yes, I knew my shoulder would be slightly sore today as well The amazing thing is that I set up a target at about 50 yards and put three of the ten inside the "diamond" and five others managed to hit the paper- me standing up. Ol' Mole Eyes me can't complain a bit!

I think this is the first time in 20-plus years I have shot a rifle. Took it out today and fired ten rounds just to check its function. A very fun rifle to shoot but not one I would shoot 100 rounds in a single session.

About two years ago I purchased an RCBS Bench Priming Tool and have used it exclusively for small primers. When I bought the tool it did come with the large priming cup but IIRC there was only a single rod, but it didn't matter until recently when I geared up to load large rifle primers. I had misplaced/lost the large priming cup a long time ago so I shot an e-mail to RCBS last week and asked how much the priming rod assembly would cost. They replied that it was under warranty and therefore no charge (even though I think it was still my fault). Today I received BOTH the large and small priming rod assemblies, so I now have a spare one for the little guys. I don't think I even filled out a warranty card! HATS OFF TO RCBS FOR EXEMPLARY CUSTOMER SERVICE!!!

It is quite possibly related to the firearm under test. The original 1895 has considerably more drop toward the butt end than does the Ruger, and that solid metal curved buttplate probably doesn't help WRT real or perceived recoil.

Indeed, they are very attractive firearms! I have to admit, though- the .405 Winchester is fairly known to be a cartridge that kicks *HARD* and there is a bit of trepidation on my behalf...

Even though this thread is dated, I just HAD to say something about the Ruger No. 1- I was in a semi-local gun shop yesterday and found some brass for Mom's old rifle and I also told the gentleman behind the counter that I was here to spend some money. He replied "I can help you with that" and placed a Ruger No. 1-H Tropical in my hands. About ten seconds later I said, "I'll take it". Since it was post-Thanksgiving Day a discount was applied, and the total price was a tick under $770. Brand new. I felt I practically stole it. It is one beautiful rifle IMO, I love its lines. My new toy and Mom's old rifle (original Winchester M1895) are both chambered in .405 Winchester.

I have been pondering the possibility of shotshell reloading and am considering either a MEC or P-W single-stage press. I want the capability of loading 12 gauge 3-1/2" shells so that does limit the choices somewhat. I know MEC makes the Sizemaster and the Steelmaster, and P-W has the 375C press. I will likely be loading a very large percentage of buckshot and slug rounds which does require manual placement of the projectile(s), and I have read the P-W may be better suited to this. The MEC's are less expensive but the P-W appears to be better built... I am willing to pay the extra $$ for quality workmanship and especially if my reloads can have the potential of being higher quality. I was wondering if anyone out there has has experience with either or both presses, and your recommendations if any. Thank you in advance.

I love my SIGs, they are not cheap but you get what you pay for IMO. Very reliable semi-autos. I just wish they made a 10mm Auto...

I reckon I should summarize what I've discovered in the past couple of years with respect to ultrasonic cleaning solutions- * Version 1.0: Kafko Oil Eater- not good, found there must be some chemical (probably an amine) that attacks the brass. It doesn't readily show itself, either. Avoid. * Version 2.0: Maintex Neutral Floor Cleaner with citric acid added- it does work satisfactorily, no attacking of brass observed in over one year of use. * Version 3.0 (beta): two teaspoons of polyoxyethylene nonylphenol, a.k.a. Tergitol NP-9, with four heaping teaspoons of citric acid per gallon- I'm still testing this, but it appears to work even faster and better than v2.0. This one really works well; we'll see how the brass holds up. Since there are no amino compunds to de-zincify the brass, it should be good to go. The NP-9 is available at chemical supply houses that specialize in detergent compounds; I got mine at The Chemistry Store for what it's worth. Just thought I'd share.

Very nice. Semi-manual safe method, eh? Sounds like a hybrid approach, like I use with some of my .357 rounds and all of my .40's... cool! I sure wish SIG Sauer made a 10mm

Apparently, Herco was a fair amount more popular in the past. I've seen manuals dating back to the '60s showing it used for .357 Mag. Perhaps one reason it is seldom-published as a useful powder is one particular load in Lyman's 44th, it was definitely a shrapnel-maker IMO. Another advantage to Herco is that it seems to be readily available no matter where I'm shopping-

I'll toss in my two cents' worth here, even though the thread is a bit dated. I haven't shot 158-grain lead pills, but for the Missouri Bullet 140-grain TCFP's that I bought, I did find that 7.5 grains of Herco works quite well. It seems to have turned my Ruger SP101 into a near tack-driver compared to any other loads I've used, and I've read elsewhere that others also find Herco to be very accurate in the .357 Magnum. So if anyone else is shooting lead 158's, I would advise at least trying out Herco. It's a bit smoky and not as clean as some more modern powders, but *VERY* accurate in my opinion, YMMV.