16ga.com ~ View topic

Joined: 08 Feb 2009 Posts: 1308 Location: Western WA

Pbking welcome. Excellent 16ga guidance posted above, and here are a few more notions:

The MEC Supersizer is an excellent, if not necessary addition to the 600 jr, especially if you want to use an auto or repeater. The outstanding Sizemaster uses the same collet system if you can scare up the funds for it.

A chronograph should be considered a necessity if you will be trialing various different loads. My Chrony was very low cost, and once I figured out how to use it, it produces extremely consistent results.

Hulls trimmed to 2 1/2” work great because 1 oz loads and under fit perfectly without fillers and cards. 2 1/2” hulls are the original size for the 16 ga.

Get the Byrdog hull trimmer, an absolute necessity for 2 1/2” hulls.

Stick with Euro type hulls (Cheddite Herters Win Rio) and wads, they are precisely dimensioned to fit perfectly. Other combinations of hulls and wads can create all kinds of unwanted problems. Avoid reloading Fiocchi hulls.

Good luck, you might well be irrevocably drawn into the 16 ga domain, it is an enchanting world unto itself, as many here would attest. It’s like a land that time forgot, while the rest of the world is racing by.

Cheers
B.

Welcome pbking. A SuperSizer or any other type of collet resizer is not an absolute necessity. The "ring" type resizer on your MEC 600 will do the job just as well as a collet resizer.

History -- MEC brought out it's collet resizer simply to make it possible for resizing to be done in the sequence of it's progressive reloaders. Their early progressives, the 500, the Super600 and finally the 650 use their older "ring" type resizer, same as all their single-stage loaders up to that point in time (in historical order: the 300, 400, 600, 250 and 310). As a result, if resizing was needed, the user of a MEC progressive reloader was required to do it as a separate operation, out of the "progressive" sequence. This was all well and good to satisfy the market intended for the progressives reloaders -- the high-volume trap and skeet shooters, for whom resizing was an option, especially considering the new compression formed AA hulls of the day, which never needed much resizing, if at all. These early MEC progressive reloaders always had a feature for resizing as an operation separate from the progressive ones, but it required some fiddling -- not much, but some: the addition of separate, easy to lose parts. For those that did not want to use this feature, MEC introduced the Case Conditioner. They simply adapted the linkage and parts of the 600 single-stage to a small press dedicated strictly to de-priming and resizing by the "ring" method. It was a "partner product" to the 650.

As you can imagine, time marches on and improvements will be devised. MEC figured out a way to incorporate resizing in the sequence of their progressives -- the collet resizer. They simply added the collet to the MEC 650 to produce The Grabber. "Grabber" was the descriptive term for the collet! As of now, the ultimate evolution in MEC progressive reloaders is the 9000 -- simply a Grabber with a feature to automatically rotate/advance the shell carriage/turntable.

Of course, when a new feature is introduced, it has to be promoted as "better", and certainly the collet resizer is better -- for progressives. But it also is a catchy feature that would stimulate the purchase of "new stuff". For instance, there still was a market of folks who thought they should resize separately, so the old Case Conditioner was replaced in the product line with the new SuperSizer, which uses the same collet parts as the Grabber series. Then the collet resizer was adapted to the 600 to produce the Sizemaster. In my opinion the Sizemaster, while being something of a market/product "coup", is totally unnecessary and a bad value to the customer. The collet resizer brings no actual value to a single-stage loader. However, once sold (oversold?) on the miraculous collet resizer, a lot of people had to have it, even on a single-stage loader. Once a consumer buys something based on the values he perceives, he will usually defend those values to his grave, regardless of the facts surround them. So what I think and know about the collet vs. the ring does not matter. I think very highly of MEC products, but I, for one, will not have a MEC single stage reloader with a collet resizer.

Cheers!
Tony

Joined: 04 Mar 2019 Posts: 1837 Location: Central ND

Maximumsmoke,

Not sure why you are so upset with the subject of collet resizers/Sizemasters.

My concern is that you are painting a picture for the OP, that there is something wrong with the collet resizer, which there is not. There is also nothing wrong with either a 600 Jr. or the Sizemaster. The differences are the larger base, primer feed and collet resizer of the Sizemaster.

Personally I have both Sizemasters and a 600 Jr. and really haven't had any issues with either type of resizer. However if I had to choose, it would be the collet resizer, mostly because the ease in which the collet resizes high metal steel heads and you can adjust the size of the metal head if you choose.

No argument here Maximumsmoke just trying to give the OP the correct information.

Joined: 13 Apr 2017 Posts: 150

Lube not needed with the collet resizer. Much prefer it

Joined: 16 Jul 2015 Posts: 2124 Location: Hudson,Wy

Here you go:

Fed Hull
7/8 oz. lead shot
18 gr. 700-X
Fed 209A primer
Rem SP 16 wad
1,305 fps
10,700 psi
Source: Lyman 5th edition

Fed Hull
1 oz. lead shot
15 gr. 700-X
Win 209 primer
SG 16 wad
1,125 fps
9,000 psi
Source: Hogdon 2009

Fed Hull
1 oz. lead shot
16 gr. 700-X
Win 209 primer
WAA16 style wad
1,195 fps
11,200 psi
Source: IMR

Notes: Cheddite 209/ CX2000 primer is a direct substitute for Win 209

While not identical, many people substitute the Cheddite hull for the Federal hull. Some data sources lump them together and others do not. With loads that are below maximum I have never seen an issue. The one time I did was with a hot steel shot load. Steel shot is very unforgiving of small changes.

Hopefully this will get you started. I would not be afraid to drop those 1 oz. loads back to 7/8 oz. The last one would actually be a good candidate. Change to the pink clay buster wad on that one or add a spacer inside the regular wad on this load. Pressure will be lower when reducing the shot charge weight.

Hey Mark, MSM2019, I'm not upset with collet resizers! How do you figure that??? I use them in my 9000's -- all 7 of them. I understand why collet resizers exist, and know they work great in the MEC progressive loaders. I said that. I just want to point out that other than in the MEC progressive systems, they are quite oversold in their capabilities, and for me they do not add value to single-stage MEC reloaders -- not in performance, and not for price. If you feel otherwise, I acknowledged your right to feel that way. If you or anyone else wants to understand the facts behind the efficacy of ring resizing versus a collet, I can tell you, or you can go get the info from your own experience. Someone was advising a new 16'er, the OP, to get a SuperSizer or a Sizemaster. I just happen to think that if the OP has a 600 he might want to think twice about how he spends his $165.95 for a SuperSizer, or the $139.07 difference retail between a Sizemaster and a 600 -- not including sales tax. OK?

So let's talk about the perceived adequacy of ring/sleeve re-sizeing vs collets in the field of reloading system manufacturers and users. OK, Dillon uses the collet re-size method on the SL900, and they are the only other shotshell reloader manufacturer to do so. They caught on to MEC's idea and use it for the same reason. So how come some big names like Ponsness-Warren and Spolar, plus Pacific/Hornady and little old economy Lyman and Lee still use a resizing method that slides a cylindrical sleeve over the hull base metal? Hear any bitching from the users of these "high end" P-W's and Spolars et al about resizing inadequacy? Nope. In fact the manufacturers and their customers brag about their resizing and case handling methods, which happen to be exactly the same as used on the first MEC, the 300, way back in the '50's. Do they advocate lubrication? No way -- not needed! And have you ever measured the difference in the results between a MEC ring resizer or any other ring/sleeve method and the MEC collet? That's what I'm talking about. I encourage you to avail yourself of some experience on the topic. You certainly do not have to take my word on it.

If you read my earlier post, you can see that I acknowledge my opinion alone on the efficacy of a ring vs a collet need not be a factor in a person's choice. Nonetheless, I don't apologize for presenting my quantitative observations about rings vs. collets. I acknowledge that if the idea of a collet resizer feels best to a user, then that is enough reason for him to have it. Far be it from me to tell anyone how to spend his dollar. On the other hand, I don't think it is a crime for me to explain how I spend mine and why. Shared experiences are the very purpose of this 16 Gauge Society and forums.

Cheers!
Tony

PS -- I have 8 MEC 600's and old 700's, all in different gauges, except two are 28's. In addition to the seven 9000's mentioned I have one ancient 650. I have a couple of SuperSizers, and one Case Conditioner. Five of the 9000's feed my clay target appetite in Minnesota, 12, 16, 20, 28 and .410. Seven of the 600's and 700's are used to feed my hunting guns, all in different gauges, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, and .410. The remaining 4 live in Arizona to feed my skeet game, 9000's in 20 and .410, a 600 in 28, and the old 650 and Case Conditioner for 12's. All progressives, including the 650 are rigged for the electric assist Auto-Mate, one in MN and one in AZ. I've been reloading shotshells with MEC reloaders for just shy of 60 years. I have used shotshell reloaders of other brands.

Joined: 04 Mar 2019 Posts: 1837 Location: Central ND

Tony,

Unfortunately, this has turned into a who can pound on their keyboard harder conversation, which I want no part of.

I only wanted to present the OP with facts and not muddy the water with my opinion(s).

Cheers

Member Joined: 31 Aug 2005 Posts: 1257 Location: Nebraska

Joined: 09 Mar 2016 Posts: 753 Location: Mn.

Joined: 08 Feb 2009 Posts: 1308 Location: Western WA

We’ve successfully extended a warm generous welcome to new member PBKing51 so I will shift gears and start a new thread on the topic of Supersizer and collets vs Ring resizers, evidently a subject of considerable interest.

B.

Member Joined: 31 Aug 2005 Posts: 1257 Location: Nebraska

Joined: 01 Jul 2021 Posts: 81

In regards to the collet vs ring size debate...I appreciate what maximumsmoke was trying to say. A 600 Jr is all I need to load and I will be happy with it and it will do a fine job getting me started. Though way more long winded, I appreciate the brief history and can let my MBA run wild with how companies have to always come out with new things even if they work just as well as the original.

The package is coming with a 410, 20, and 16 ga 600jr as well as a sizemaster with 12/16/20 dies so do have the option of using the sizemaster for 16s but because I presently own a sxs and a Ithaca 37 in 16, I understand that I would be better off using the sizemaster for my 12s or 20s as I have autos in each which I use for sporting clays frequently. I do have alot of #5 and #6 in 16, 12, and 20, so my reloading journey will start measly for target loads

@wyochukar thank you for that data. I feel alot better for spending $50 on the couple of pounds of 700x now Smile

Next question, as not to create a thread for each question I may have
The factory remington shells I shot and got hooked with say 2 1/2 and are 2 3/4 one fired. Am I correct in saying that they are indeed 2 3/4 shells but naming changed over the years to indicate the shell length as "open length"?
I ask because the fired hulls are the same length as the new ched hulls I have purchased.

Not sure why I would need a hull trimmer?

I *think* what you’re seeing listed as 2 1/2 is the dram equivalence. This is an archaic system for comparing smokeless powder loads to the original black powder loads in terms of velocity, and subsequent ‘power’ of the load.

To confuse things further SOME of the RGL hulls have actually measured 2 5/8” when open.

Member Joined: 31 Aug 2005 Posts: 1257 Location: Nebraska

Joined: 01 Jul 2021 Posts: 81

got it. I think i have enough info to be comfortable with the knowledge I have received. I went to a local honey hole for normal priced powder yesterday hoping to get some red dot, unique, or universal.

No luck, but they had american select, and hs-6 any good info for 7/8 or 1 oz loads there?

I am hoping to set up a trip to go pick up my package deal I'm the next week but I want to start another thread to confirm I am getting a good deal.

Thanks to everyone who showed me a warm welcome and shared lots of valuable information.

Chuck