Messages

841

Star Reloaders / Re: seating die

« on: February 20, 2009, 07:38:23 pm »

Ron,   I agree that your suggestion is better than putting all the pressure on the nose of the bullet, and given the chances of actually finding a seating stem that matches the Star bullet, it might be the most practical option. However, the Star swagged bullets are VERY soft and easily deformed, so I still think the optimum solution is to have a seating stem that exactly matches the bullet.   

As mentioned before, I shoot hard cast bullets (that I cast myself) and I don't think it really matters if the seating stem exactly matches the bullet as long as it centers the bullet and pushes it straight in.  I like round nose seating stems for this purpose.  My bullets are hard enough that they don't get deformed.

842

Star Reloaders / Re: seating die

« on: February 20, 2009, 01:10:55 am »

Back to your original question.   For best results, the seating stem should exactly match the shape of your bullet.  This is particularly important for a swagged bullet like the Star hollow point that is very very soft because its basically pure lead.   Finding an original Star seating stem to match a Star (no relation) hollow point is probably next to impossible.   I would check with CH Tool and Die http://www.ch4d.com/ and see if they can make one for you.  You might be able to send one of your bullets to them so they can craft a seating stem to fit.

I use hard cast bullets for Bullseye.  I have several semi-wadcutter seating stems, but I generally use a round nose seating stem to seat my semi-wadcutters because it seems to do a nice job of centering the bullet, and doesn't deform the bullet.

843

Star History / Re: Star or Not??

« on: February 07, 2009, 07:33:07 pm »

Below is Figure 1 from C.F. Peterson's patent of what we know now as the Star Reloading Machine.

844

Star History / Re: Star or Not??

« on: February 07, 2009, 07:28:28 pm »

In May 1934, American Rifleman published a review of the Star Reloading Machine by CF Ness.  Below is a picture that was included in that article.
Note the lettering cast into the base.   

845

Star History / Re: Star or Not??

« on: February 07, 2009, 07:25:32 pm »

The owner of the Pictured Star Reloader was kind enough to provide the pictures below.   Note the lettering cast into the base which says Pat. Pending.  Star filed their patent application in July of 1933, and it was granted in February of 1936.   I think it's reasonable to assume this machine was manufactured between those two dates, or at least sometime close to those dates.

846

Star History / Re: Star or Not??

« on: February 05, 2009, 09:28:16 pm »

Some additional pictures courtesy of Ricketts.

847

Star History / Star or Not??

« on: February 02, 2009, 12:10:00 pm »

Currently there is a Reloader on eBay that is proported to be a very early Star.   What do you think?  Star or Not??  Why??

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&item=270336982555

Courtesy of Ricketts, I have updated this post with larger pictures.    Anyone else have an opinion, Star or Not??

848

Star History / Re: Star Dunn & Bradstreet Report

« on: January 31, 2009, 05:51:28 pm »

I had a nice long conversation with the lady at Magma Engineering last week.   They had expressed their interest in the Lubesizer long before Star closed their doors.   They finally bought the rights, molds, and machines to make the lubesizer in the early 90's, she thought around 1993.   That matches up with other reports I've heard about when Star ceased opporations.   

As for when they started, it was in the early 30's.   They applied for their patent in 1933, and it was granted in 1934.   I have seen Stars on eBay that had a brass plaque that said Star Mfg, Patent Pending.  American Rifleman did a review of a "Progressive" in May 1934.  According to the review, Star was already making the Universal.

How many did they make??  I don't think we will ever know that one, but I'd like to hear if anyone has and ideas.

849

Star History / Star Dunn & Bradstreet Report

« on: January 31, 2009, 05:01:02 pm »

Attached, courtesy of Swanee, is a 1979 Dunn and Bradstreet report on Star Machine Works of San Diego Inc.

It shows their annual sales in 1978 as $900,000.  Eighty five percent of their sales was reloading equipment, and the balance was irrigation sprinkler equipment.   I always thought it was the other way around.

I have a 1979 price list which shows the price of a Universal at $760, so a little math leads me to believe they were selling maybe 900-1000 reloaders per year at that time.

Thanks Swanee

850

Star History / Re: CPM on Ebay

« on: January 31, 2009, 09:39:26 am »

The person listing the CPM machine on eBay emailed a number of pictures to me and gave me permission to post them on the forum.   Do to size limitations, I can only post a few, but I have more.

851

Star History / Re: CPM on Ebay

« on: January 29, 2009, 11:51:18 am »

Also, although it looks a lot like a Hulme case feeder, I don't think it is.  Take a close look at the case feeder cam.

852

Star History / CPM on Ebay

« on: January 29, 2009, 09:47:50 am »

Check out the CPM Reloader on Ebay  (Not mine)

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&item=170298156872

853

Star Reloaders / Re: plug for bullet drop through hole in base of progressive reloader

« on: January 23, 2009, 04:16:59 pm »

Manuel,   Yes, its very tight.   When I remove the nut on the central shaft, I remove the tool head, but then I put the crankshaft assembly back on, secured with the taper pin.   They with suitable padding (like strips of heavy leather, I clamp head of the crank shaft assembly in a vice to keep the shaft from rotating while you loosen the nut.  In some cases, I have applied some heat to the nut with a propane torch, but usually it isn't necessary.

If there is a bushing, you should be able to hook it with a bent paper clip and pull it out from above.  Only if its held in place by oxidized grease is it necessary to remove the aluminum base to get at it.   If the hole has straight walls, there is no bushing.  If the walls of the hole are tapered inward, then a bushing is installed.

854

Star Reloaders / Re: plug for bullet drop through hole in base of progressive reloader

« on: January 22, 2009, 09:35:24 pm »

Manuel,    I don't see why not, though I have never seen one where its been done.   

I have a few extra plugs that fit a Universal, but I think hole on a Progressive might be a different dimension.   The parts list shows #68 for the Progressive, and #68U for the Universal.   Since there are different part numbers, I assume there is a difference. The plugs for the Universal are 1.06" long and .749" diameter.  If the plug for a Progressive is different, I'm sure I could make one up, but I would need to know the dimensions.

855

Star Lubricator & Resizers / Re: lubricator and resizer parts

« on: December 21, 2008, 08:24:03 pm »

Magma Engineering http://www.magmaengineering.com/index.php?&vmcchk=1&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=1 still makes the Star Lubesizer.   You can get the pump plunger and the nut from them.   I don't know if they still make nose punches. 

Magma sells flat punches for nose first sizing, and that is what I use for almost all of my bullet sizing.   I do have a couple of nose punches for round nose bullets, but I don't know if they would match the profile of your bullet.  In any case, I'd be willing to sell one to you.