Joined
·
4,725 Posts
If one wants to drill and tap various fired cases to use in the Stoney Point seating depth gauge, what drill and tap is required? Any suggestions where to get them?
TIA,
P.
TIA,
P.
Stoney Point: What drill & tap?
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Stoney Point
Jack
It Takes a 7.3 m/m drill bit and a 5/16-36 tap. Travers tool has them.
Jack
Joined
·
4,725 Posts
Thanks all!
Joined
·
4,725 Posts
I can juuuuuuust imagine what they would look like!!And, I will drill them out and tap them for you "ya old phardt".
Yeah, I would like to work on your cases.
Actually, RF is sending me his tooling, and I'm gonna drill some of mine and a couple of his and send 'em back.
(Besides...how would it work if you drilled the hole in the side of the case???
)P.
Joined
·
4,725 Posts
Why not, Mr. Dave? I thought I would do one for each of my calibers (fire formed) rather than pay a bunch to have SP send me their cases.
Measurements I get will be used as reference only to establish a baseline for the chambers so I can keep records on errosion issues. Something I'm missing here?
TIA,
P.
Joined
·
1,434 Posts
No, you probably aren't missing a thing!
Paul, I know you know all of this already. But I decided to post it anyway, just in case someone is reading who might not know some of this. And of course, this is all just my opinion. Many people don’t agree, and a lot of those people are probably a lot smarter than I am…
The reason I don’t like to use fire formed cases with the SP tool, is because the fire formed cases may fit the chamber too snugly for good repeatable measurement operation of the tool. The camming action of the bolt when closing gives us tremendous mechanical leverage to squash a tight fitting case into a chamber. But we have no mechanical advantage at all when pushing a case into the chamber with the SP tool. My experience with drilling and tapping my own snug fitting fire formed cases for use with the SP tool, was that my measurements were less repeatable than using FL sized cases that slipped easily into the chamber.
Now, I do realize that not all fire formed cases will pose this problem. But one that has the slightest bit of “feel” to it, when closing the bolt, just may. One that has definite "feel" when chambering, definitely will give some repeatability problems with the SP tool (I got the T shirt!). But if the fire formed case is an easy slip fit into the chamber, then it should work just great, with none of the repeatability problem induced by cases that fit the chamber too snugly.
For me though, the measurements given by the SP tool were never more than a “starting point” anyway. I never got too hung up on trying to really measure the exact, precise point where my bullets touch the lands. For a variety of reasons, that “just touching” point is too transient, too hard to repeat. It has long been my policy that my loads are either going to be in nice firm contact with the lands, or they are going to be cleanly free of the lands (say, .005 off or more). That way, I completely avoid the headaches that can grow out of trying to maintain that “just touching” relationship between bullet and lands. So, for my purposes, the SP tool just gave a quick and dirty place to start, easy repeatability from cases that go easily into the chamber were the ticket for me. Figuring .005 short of the SP measurement as a good place to start for “free of the lands” load work. For loads that I want contact with the lands (most of my loads), I rely on trial and error “bullet jam” and visually observing the engraving marks on the bullet to determine my starting point. I like to start with “square” marks, all else being equal.
Anyway... No, I don't think you are missing anything. Just if it were me, I'd FL size those fire formed cases for use with the SP tool.
- DAA
Paul, I know you know all of this already. But I decided to post it anyway, just in case someone is reading who might not know some of this. And of course, this is all just my opinion. Many people don’t agree, and a lot of those people are probably a lot smarter than I am…
The reason I don’t like to use fire formed cases with the SP tool, is because the fire formed cases may fit the chamber too snugly for good repeatable measurement operation of the tool. The camming action of the bolt when closing gives us tremendous mechanical leverage to squash a tight fitting case into a chamber. But we have no mechanical advantage at all when pushing a case into the chamber with the SP tool. My experience with drilling and tapping my own snug fitting fire formed cases for use with the SP tool, was that my measurements were less repeatable than using FL sized cases that slipped easily into the chamber.
Now, I do realize that not all fire formed cases will pose this problem. But one that has the slightest bit of “feel” to it, when closing the bolt, just may. One that has definite "feel" when chambering, definitely will give some repeatability problems with the SP tool (I got the T shirt!). But if the fire formed case is an easy slip fit into the chamber, then it should work just great, with none of the repeatability problem induced by cases that fit the chamber too snugly.
For me though, the measurements given by the SP tool were never more than a “starting point” anyway. I never got too hung up on trying to really measure the exact, precise point where my bullets touch the lands. For a variety of reasons, that “just touching” point is too transient, too hard to repeat. It has long been my policy that my loads are either going to be in nice firm contact with the lands, or they are going to be cleanly free of the lands (say, .005 off or more). That way, I completely avoid the headaches that can grow out of trying to maintain that “just touching” relationship between bullet and lands. So, for my purposes, the SP tool just gave a quick and dirty place to start, easy repeatability from cases that go easily into the chamber were the ticket for me. Figuring .005 short of the SP measurement as a good place to start for “free of the lands” load work. For loads that I want contact with the lands (most of my loads), I rely on trial and error “bullet jam” and visually observing the engraving marks on the bullet to determine my starting point. I like to start with “square” marks, all else being equal.
Anyway... No, I don't think you are missing anything. Just if it were me, I'd FL size those fire formed cases for use with the SP tool.
- DAA
Joined
·
7,140 Posts
If the thing with RF doesn't work out for some reason, give me a shout, Paul. I have the tap and have used it for exactly what you're proposing. Can't swear how long it'd take me to find it, but I do have it somewhere and could send it to you.
Joined
·
4,725 Posts
We're exactly on the same page again (and don't think I'm not worried!
)Truth-B-known, I really have no idea exactly where my bullets are in relation to the lands...And, it doesn't matter. Like you I use the SP to get in the ball park, and then go +/- .xxx until the sweet spot is located and then use the bullet comparator to get the "magic" relative number. Periodically, I'll check the throat w/ the SP, and adjust the seating die accordingly and test to see if I've relocated the sweet spot. I don't feel I have to know exactly where the bullet is in relation to the lands. The relative measurement simply provides a starting point, as you said.
BTW, I know you use Wilson seaters too. As for seating depth verification and adjustments, I have found that measuring the length of the seater stem/top together makes an extremely repeatable measurement. Nowadayz, my seating depth references include the Wilson seater stem/top length. (IMO, that micrometer top they sell is a pricy unnecessary thingy, considering how quickly one can put a dial caliper on the seater and turn the set screw and re-check. Making adjustments for .001 is no problem at all.)
Thanks for your post, buddy!
P.
Joined
·
4,725 Posts
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Join the discussion
