1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Hornady 366 - shell removal

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by birdogs, Sep 29, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. birdogs

    birdogs TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,775
    Has anyone ever seen a Hornady 366 from which you could remove a shell from any station? It would seem that the shell retaining ring could have a spring loaded
    piece at each station which could be pushed open to allow removal of the shell. Has anyone tried this?
     
  2. Tom Ruble

    Tom Ruble TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    197
    Tony, Have you ever tried using your 366 with the retaining ring removed? I have considered doing just that but have never gotten around to it. Lack of ambition on my part, I guess. I have seen 366s with sections of the retaining ring removed at the powder drop and wad inserting stations. The next time I load, I'll try to remember to try it. It will be a week or so before I have a chance to try it. By the way, is your e-mail address still the same as the last time I e-mailed you? Break 'em all! Tom Ruble
     
  3. birdogs

    birdogs TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,775
    ToM,

    I haven't seen you is some time. I had shoulder surgery and have not shot this whole past target year. It is coming along fine and I will certainly try to be back soon. Please e-mail me. I would love to chat.

    Tony C
     
  4. 333t

    333t Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    281
    The retaining ring holds the cases in position as they rotate around the platen. If you cut out a section of the ring, the case in that station will tend to move out of position and that is not good. It is very easy to lift up the pawl and then you can move the shell plate forward or backward which makes it pretty easy to remove a case if need be.

    In my experience with the 366, the need to remove a case is rare and should only be a last resort remedy. It is preferable (in my opinion) to let the affected case ride through and correct it later. Disturbing the sequence of operations by removing cases or moving the shell plate manually is a major cause of spilled shot and powder and/or double charges. The 366 Auto is very well designed and while there are several minor modifications that are convenient, I don't think cutting the retaining ring is one of them.

    Phil
     
  5. Klay_Buster

    Klay_Buster TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    216
    If you want shell removal at any station, buy an RCBS. It's a little more money than a 366 but is by far an easier loader to use. RCBS factory support is the best. And its for the lifetime of the machine.
     
  6. Old Fowler

    Old Fowler TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    228
    Doggai has described it perfectly. Here's a photo of what he described and what my dad has done with all of my Hornady 366 loaders. This really helps because I typically weigh about 4 powder charges each 25 reloads. Have never had a problem with cases moving out of proper placement/alignment with this small piece of retaining ring removed.
     
  7. Easystreet

    Easystreet Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,463
    I suppose that cutting a small section out of the retaining ring wouldn't hurt anything as long as the shells don't get out of line, but I'm not convinced that it's a BIG time saver. I timed myself on removing a shell from my uncut 366 loader after it has had powder dropped into it and it took a whopping 5 1/2 seconds to do so. If you are going to remove a shell from the station before it has powder dropped into it, you can reduce that to about 4 seconds. So just how much time is being saved???? Not much, in my opinion.

    Also, I've never felt the need to weigh the powder charges 4 times for each box of 25 shells. Once the machine is set up and adjusted properly, checking the powder drop once every 100 to 200 shells is sufficient for me.

    Likewise, if the primer drop is set up and adjusted properly, then the machine can go almost indefinitely without failing to drop a primer.... assuming you don't let it run out of primers.

    One final drawback to the method described by Doggai is that the operating handle has to be left in an "in between" position. This means that it's neither fully up or fully down. To me, that seems like an accident waiting to happen if you accidentally bump the handle while it's sticking out forward in front of the edge of the reloading bench.

    I don't mean to be critical of those who have chosen to cut the retaining ring and engage in the "in between stations" inspection of a hull. It's just that I don't see that it's saving much (if any) time and it increases the chances for an "accident" if you happen to bump the operating handle the wrong way while it's in "no man's land".

    Easystreet
     
  8. ricks1

    ricks1 TS Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,545
    sell it and get a mec 9000 rick
     
  9. Easystreet

    Easystreet Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,463
    Hey, John, calm down. I'm not criticizing your idea of cutting out a portion of the retaining ring on the 366 reloader. I'm simply pointing out that if a person is doing it to save time, there isn't really much time savings involved...... just a few seconds at best.

    I'm also pointing out that there could be some drawbacks to the idea (such as the protruding operating handle that is "in between stations") that others might not be aware of.

    As Bill O'Reilly would say, "I'm presenting a fair and balanced presentation of the situation and will let the viewers (readers) decide." <Grin>

    Since this is a discussion board for the exchange of ideas, I think it's only fair that if we are going to point out the possible advantages of some change, that we should likewise point out the possible disadvantages of the change. This happens all the time in nearly everything we discuss. Whether it's forcing cones, backboring, 1 ounce loads, tight chokes, or whatever...... it's only fair that if we are going to look at the possible advantages, we should also look at the possible disadvantages.

    No offense intended. Just trying to explain "the rest of the story" as Paul Harvey would say.


    Easystreet
     
  10. blizzard

    blizzard Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,583
    Hey rick- I sold my 9000g's to get a couple of 366's. I just recently sold my extra 366 when I realized that I wouldn't be needing a backup.:)
     
  11. birdogs

    birdogs TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,775
    My original idea was slightly more complex. I imagined a retaining ring which had a sping-loaded section at each station. It could be pulled back, clearing the base of the shell for removal. I know that this is not a simple modification to the existing retaining ring due to the limited number of screw which hold down the ring. it may require drilling and tapping additional holes. I am surprised that Hornady does not offer such an upgrade. Together with the shot/powder shut-offs, auto turret advance, auto shell eject, primer shut-off and spring-loaded primer ram it would make the 366 a thoroughly modern reloader.
     
  12. birdogs

    birdogs TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,775
    John,

    Let me know of your progress. If I were a machinist I would have already made a prototype. I don't think it has great commercial value but it would be fun to tinker with.

    Tony C
     
  13. birdogs

    birdogs TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,775
    Frank,

    I was a marketing executive in the computer industry for many years prior to my retirement so I fully understand the economics of developing such a product improvement and what it means to extending a prodcuts market appeal and life. However, Hornadt did develop a new base casting to provide automatic shell eject, auto turret advance and swing-out wad guide. A new retaining ring with swing out "gates" does not seem a great development expense especially if it give the 366 EVERY feature of more recent (and expensive) reloaders.

    Tony.
     
  14. birdogs

    birdogs TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,775
    btsteve,

    Did you actually see such an arrangement and did it work or is this a proposal someone once made?

    Tony C
     
  15. snarepeg

    snarepeg TS Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    38
    Havn/t got a ring on mine to worry about.

    Its one of the older manual type but it works fine.

    The cartridge going into crimp starter mode is the one to watch most but i don/t wirl it round so very rare on this station either.

    a good reliable m/c sat alongside my ponsness 800 next to my ponsness 600 in 28 guage surrounded by 2 ponsness 375 in 410 x 3" and 2.5" overlooked by 3 grand americans, reddings, texans,mecs,lymans. ( wife says they are breeding.)

    shot dropping good also. john. ps. shot prices this side of the pond,$126 for 25 kl. and yo think your getting ripped off.
     
  16. blizzard

    blizzard Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,583
    John,


    Would like to hear about your 500 cap. primer system, if it doesn't make the unit taller.
     
  17. birdogs

    birdogs TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,775
    Blizzard,

    Ditto on the 500 primer set up.

    Tony C
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.