New Magna Sizer VS OLD Sizer

[Faisal Yamin]

The New MAGNA sizer sizes nose fist so the punch die stays same for all heads. The old sizer sized base first so you needed the proper punches.
Is there a disadvantage with the new nose first method. I heard from one smith that nose first has an adverse affect and the heads become less accurate, something to do with changing the base shape or something. What do you all think?

[phil218b]

The old sizer I have sizes the bullet nose down, the punch goes on the base to force it through,is that what you are refering to?

[Faisal Yamin]

The OLD STAR (original) sizers I know of Size base first. the punch goes on top, the bullet is pushed base first through the die- I am told that is the best way.

The New Magna Star sizer sizes with the nose first the punch still goes on the top be is a flat punch - one punch for all bullets.

[ed looney]

I cast 9mm, 357, 45ACP and 44's with SAECO molds, and have pushed them through nose first since the late seventy's or early eighty's with no problems.   ed

[phil218b]

I have never seen a nose punch for a star.  The base punch should be caliber specific a 45 punch will not fit in a 38 die, a 38 die will leave a ring in the middle of a 45 base.  I have been pushing them through my machine nose first for 15 years with no problems and better accuracy than the other brands of lubrisizers, even with gas checks.  But I could be wrong, just ask my wife!

[rbwillnj]

As I mentioned on the Bullseye forum, Star also made flat punches for nose first sizing.   They came out with the flat punch much later, but they did offer them, and I have a number of original Star flat punches for nose first sizing.

There has been a lot of discussion on this topic in various fourms that discuss cast bullets (It was a recent topic on Cast Boolets http://www.castboolits.gunloads.com/index.php? )

Like everything else, everyone has an opionion based on what works for them.   I have used them both extensively, both work very well provided you have a nose punch that matches the nose exactly, or a flat punch that is reasonably close to the size of the sized bullet.  If you are trying to do too much sizing (more than .002) in one step, you can deform bullets with either method.

Pesonally, I like nose first sizing because its a little faster, and I don't see a downside.   Now Faisal, I'm not quit as good a shot as you, but I don't think its my bullets.  Mine will hold less than two inches at 50 yards from a Ransom Rest.   I have some gas check 38s that I think will do better than that.  They give me a 1/2" group at 25 yards out of my 686.  Haven't tested them at 50 yards yet.   I nose first size them as well, and put the gas check on while sizing them nose first.

[Faisal Yamin]

Thanks Bruce, Should I Re-Size my Zero swaged bullets or not. They are .358" and I would really like them to be ..356". My Python grooves are .354", K-38, 14-5 and 686 are .355"

regards,

[rbwillnj]

Faisal,  As I'm sure you know, Zero swaged bullets are almost pure lead, and are very soft.  So you could size them very easily, but I'm not sure you would gain anything, and you might loose something if the bullets get deformed.   What you probably  want to know is what will give you the best groups at 50 yards, and I can't answer that.....and the answer might be different for each gun.

I have a Model 52-1 and a Clark 38 Special that I used to shoot before going double 45.  I was using Star HBWC till they went out of business.  I tried all sorts of cast bullets, and several commercial HBWCs.  I ended up using Remington HBWCs which give me better groups than the Stars.   The Remingtons measure .360, and the bores on both my Clark and Model 52 are about .355.   The bullets are so soft that I just don't think it makes as much of a difference as it does with cast bullets.

My guns didn't like the Zero HBWCs, I go a lot of leading, but none with the Remingtons.   I think the that black gooy lube on the Remingtons made the difference