Forster Co-Ax vs RCBS Rock Chucker

[GW]

I've never dealt with Forster but I have used the RockChucker.
Anyone out there familiar with both?
How do they compare?

[hambam105]

I haven't pulled the lever on a Coax press, yet.

Can't really call oneself a True-American if you haven't used a Rock Chucker. I have spoken with a few serious completive rifle shooters, they love the coax. I asked the same question here some time back and got chewed-out for even asking. I am pulling the trigger on a coax this winter.

[jimmythebrain]

Forster for the win if you are looking for quick die changes and reliable/reproducible seating depths. But
NOT a really good press for heavy resizing of rifle cases, not useful for sizing bullets
RCBS can have quick die changes with a die bushing system (Hornady LNL or Lee) and can do just about anything with good to very,very results.

For match grade ammo I would go with the Forster CoAx press and Redding dies
For a general, "better than standard factory" ammo making press then I would get a RCBS press and whatever dies you like. I really like Lyman reloading dies with their M expander for pistol cartridges but they are pricey and probably do not do any better than Lee dies.

[NorCalFocus]

If you want a press for serious precision rifle loading you want the Co-Ax. If your looking for just an all around press, the Rock Chucker is one of the best.

[GW]

For all-around reloading, I use a Dillon
This press will be for reloading 6.5 Creedmoor and .308 for long range shooting.

[GILMORE619]

I have both. The rock chucker is what got me started with reloading. It's a great press all around. I've loaded pistol and rifle rounds on it. The de priming system sucks but there's an EBay fix for that. I mainly use the RC for sizing PC cast lead boolits now because I bought a Co Ax.

The Co Ax rocks! Being able to slide dies in and out with ease makes it a quick single stage. I load 460S&W, 500mag, 308, 300wsm 340 Weatherby with it.
I haven't messed with the priming set up because I have an rcbs bench priming tool. The de priming set up works perfect. I've had the most accurate rifle ammo I've ever produced hand loading with the Co Ax. If you your just going to load rifle with it I'd go with the Co Ax.

[hambam105]

Having absolutely zero experience with coax as never stopped me from having solid opinions on the Press:

I plan on doing all my full length rifle resizing on a Big Boss2. My 1978 Rock Chucker is still going strong, never let me down. Period. Was very much surprised to find that I'm not alone in my quest for the ultimate reloading press. (Ultimate quest when the best Press is probably already in use on my work bench).

I hear rumors of some of RCBS products being made, shall we say, Off-Shore. Same rumors claim that Snap-On as well as Mac tools are following suit. Sad day. Sad day indeed especially for the honest hard working American employees. Apparently some other reloading companies' reputations are not under that cloud.

[longrange1]

Originally Posted by GW

For all-around reloading, I use a Dillon
This press will be for reloading 6.5 Creedmoor and .308 for long range shooting.

if you want the best press you can buy to build the most accurate ammo you can spend the little bit extra and buy the COAX...hands down...and if your looking at dies for your creed go with the whidden dies.

ive used redding,forster and now whidden dies and the whiddens are by far the best with forster running a close second...redding i owned a set of comp dies in 300wm and 260 rem and did not care for either.

[eric n]

How does a co ax make better ''match'' ammo?
How much run-out do you generally see measured between tip and ogive with the co ax?
How does it make more reliable seating depths?

[rg1]

You need both. There are some tasks that the Co-Ax isn't as good as the RCBS such as bullet pulling. Buy the Co-Ax as it is a great press then look for a used Rockchucker at a good price. The Co-Ax with the floating dies naturally seat bullets straighter with less run-out and needing no playing around trying to get the least run-out with locked down dies. I use them both in tandem, seating on one and crimping on the RCBS, or sizing crimped primer pocket brass on one and moving to the other to swage. Sizing pistol brass on the Co-Ax and moving the case to the RCBS to expand. Buy both presses and you're set.

[MrElectric03]

I like the coax and it does produce more consistent results than my rock chucker did. That's said I had to keep the rockchucker to use my GrX die for .40 and 10mm. Just an example of something the coax cannot do. I don't like the primngbsyatem on the coax but honestly I think every press mounted priming system on any single stage is a joke. I use a hand primer and pistol/.233 gets loaded on the Dillons. If you are going for accurate consistent ammo then the coax is the way to go.

[GW]

Interesting
Midway, Optics Planet, Brownells and more are all sold out of the CoAx
I guess Forster only makes a run or 2 of them per year?

[GILMORE619]

Midway has them on sale every once in a while

[glock_nor_cal]

I have both. I recommend both. The Rockchucker is a tool every reloader should own. I have a Dillon 650 /w casefeeder, Forster Co-Ax, and Rockchucker IV.

The Rockchucker is used mainly for bullet pulling, full length resizing on .308 and bigger, priming for precision rifle, and decapping.

The Co-Ax is used for neck sizing and seating for .308 and 6.5 Creedmoor.

Edited to add: the priming thing on the Co-Ax sucks (I never use it) and the spent primer catch on the Rockchucker is a joke- it must be replaced with the Inline 3D printed upgrade.

[OpenSightsOnly]

Originally Posted by rg1

The Co-Ax with the floating dies naturally seat bullets straighter with less run-out and needing no playing around trying to get the least run-out with locked down dies.

This!

The Forsters Co-Ax press when *used with* the Forsters die (sizing or seating) will help to minimize run-out.

But if you have a quality single stage press, you can manage run-out by using quality brass and bullets then sorting the brass and bullets. But before you start sorting, ask yourself if you have a sub-MOA rifle.

[longrange1]

Originally Posted by GW

Interesting
Midway, Optics Planet, Brownells and more are all sold out of the CoAx
I guess Forster only makes a run or 2 of them per year?

gun stop has 2 in stock...

http://www.gunstop.com/products/relo...ction-w-s-jaws

[longrange1]

Originally Posted by eric n

How does a co ax make better ''match'' ammo?

as stated above eliminates bullet as well as neck runout.

Originally Posted by eric n

How much run-out do you generally see measured between tip and ogive with the co ax?

when i use to measure runout i typically got around .003 +or- with a redding big boss2 since i started using the COAX and whidden dies i sold my runout tools...after loading a couple hundred rounds on the COAX runout was typically .0005 to .001 which is not worth the time spent to measure

Originally Posted by eric n

How does it make more reliable seating depths?

seating depth issues are reduced because there is no flex in the press...i could vary the seating depth on the big boss2 i had simply by pushing harder on the handle...to vary seating with the COAX you REALLY have to lean on the handle and then it might be .001 +or-.

that said most times seating depth issues are related to neck issues(some thicker than others,sized to much and or crappy dies)more than the press.

[eric n]

Thanks longrange1.
I've been kicking around getting another press and the co ax was at the top.
My runout #s aren't far off with a rockchuker, nil at the necks and .0015 avg past the ogive with an occasional .003 but I don't seat with the press. I use an arbor press and inline dies.
I was going to scoff at it making better ammo like many claim but sometimes I forget that not everyone turns necks and uses comp dies and sorts and uses premium bullets. And I guess technique comes into play as well for seating depth variations... .001 seating variation is the norm with a good lot of bullets with the press.
I guess I should buy one for the primer catch... my wife jumps like a startled cat every time she vacuums up a spent primer I tracked from the garage. The primer catch on the rcbs is stupid.

[Meety Peety]

The COAX makes easy work of resizing anything ive thrown at it. The floating die and shell holder along with the lever over the center of the press keep things concentric and once you get the hang of it, the jaw type shell holder is really fantastic. I have heard some people complain that they don't like the ergonomics of the COAX. I am the opposite, I absolutely love it and loading on it feels very natural to me. The COAX has a mechanical stop which as mentioned produces very consistent seating. I personally am a fan of the priming system, though it definitely is slow. I haven't used every hand priming option out there but the COAX priming system will put the primers to the same depth every time. The other options out there may do this too, I havent tested them to find out. Some say that this shouldn't matter, I feel that if they're always the same, I don't even have to wonder if it matters. If it's always the same, it's a non issue whether it matters or not. I take my time while loading match rounds and priming speed doesn't really bother me. Ultimately there are plenty of other factors that go into making quality consistent ammo, but the less variables the better. Even if the COAX was making the same quality ammo as every other press, the ergonomics and floating die & shell holder jaws would be enough to keep me happy using it. I like it that much.

[longrange1]

Originally Posted by eric n

Thanks longrange1.
I've been kicking around getting another press and the co ax was at the top.
My runout #s aren't far off with a rockchuker, nil at the necks and .0015 avg past the ogive with an occasional .003 but I don't seat with the press. I use an arbor press and inline dies.
I was going to scoff at it making better ammo like many claim but sometimes I forget that not everyone turns necks and uses comp dies and sorts and uses premium bullets. And I guess technique comes into play as well for seating depth variations... .001 seating variation is the norm with a good lot of bullets with the press.
I guess I should buy one for the primer catch... my wife jumps like a startled cat every time she vacuums up a spent primer I tracked from the garage. The primer catch on the rcbs is stupid.

if you have the money get the COAX youll be glad you did...as Meety Peety mentions below if you use to a C type press the COAX is a little odd at first and takes a minute to get use to.
i also used hand dies and a 21st century arbor press until a bought the COAX...i still have the arbor and a 260rem hand die i need to get rid of.

also i have done every brass/bullet prep you can think of and maybe even a few you havent and for the type of shooting i do its not worth the extra work involved.

Originally Posted by Meety Peety

The COAX makes easy work of resizing anything ive thrown at it. The floating die and shell holder along with the lever over the center of the press keep things concentric and once you get the hang of it, the jaw type shell holder is really fantastic. I have heard some people complain that they don't like the ergonomics of the COAX. I am the opposite, I absolutely love it and loading on it feels very natural to me. The COAX has a mechanical stop which as mentioned produces very consistent seating. I personally am a fan of the priming system, though it definitely is slow. I haven't used every hand priming option out there but the COAX priming system will put the primers to the same depth every time. The other options out there may do this too, I havent tested them to find out. Some say that this shouldn't matter, I feel that if they're always the same, I don't even have to wonder if it matters. If it's always the same, it's a non issue whether it matters or not. I take my time while loading match rounds and priming speed doesn't really bother me. Ultimately there are plenty of other factors that go into making quality consistent ammo, but the less variables the better. Even if the COAX was making the same quality ammo as every other press, the ergonomics and floating die & shell holder jaws would be enough to keep me happy using it. I like it that much.

i agree with everything you say except the primer seating part...primer seating is a very important and over looked part of reloading...remember primers are the final step in tuning a load.
a primer not seated deep enough will cause FTFs and high ESs and a primer seated to deep will cause the same issues but more so high ESs than FTFs and both of these problems are more likely to happen from using a press to seat primers.

if someone was looking for the most accurate way to seat a primer the K&M tool with the gauge is hands down the best second would be the sinclair tool...i own both and have also used most of the other priming tools as well as the press.
the K&M with the gauge tells you as exact as can be where to seat the primer there is no guess work...the sinclair tool you can actually "feel" the primer bottom out into the pocket...something the old benchrest guys claim and i called BS on until i used the sinclair and is actually the reason i bought the sinclair.

[Meety Peety]

Originally Posted by longrange1

i agree with everything you say except the primer seating part...primer seating is a very important and over looked part of reloading...remember primers are the final step in tuning a load.
a primer not seated deep enough will cause FTFs and high ESs and a primer seated to deep will cause the same issues but more so high ESs than FTFs and both of these problems are more likely to happen from using a press to seat primers.

if someone was looking for the most accurate way to seat a primer the K&M tool with the gauge is hands down the best second would be the sinclair tool...i own both and have also used most of the other priming tools as well as the press.
the K&M with the gauge tells you as exact as can be where to seat the primer there is no guess work...the sinclair tool you can actually "feel" the primer bottom out into the pocket...something the old benchrest guys claim and i called BS on until i used the sinclair and is actually the reason i bought the sinclair.

Admittedly I haven't looked into this as far as I probably should but my understanding is that if the primer pockets are all uniform and the seating depth is consistent and controllable (mechanically or otherwise), the ignition should be consistent regardless if the depth ends up being .003 or .006 (.005 for me) and what the actual compression of the anvil ends up being, so long as it is always the same and always consistent. When working up a load and finding accuracy nodes, the primers all being seated exactly the same, I have never then tried to adjust primer seating depth as a means of tightening the group shot at a particular accuracy node. I could see the potential value to adjusting primer depth, I just have never done it. I am more inclined to stick to one primer seating depth that works reliably and then make sure I keep it uniform and consistent so that the compression of the anvil is always the same and the distance to the flash hole is always the same, regardless of what the actual number values are.

Things like ftf due to primer seating is not really in the same realm of discussion because in order to seat shallow enough to cause a ftf your anvil will not even be touching the base of the primer pocket and you would be talking about variations more than just .001 to .003 which is more realistic of the differences between seating by "feel" vs seating to a predetermined depth with a mechanical stop. Suppose you could have this issue if your primer pocket are deeper than they should be and you are only seating to .005 for example.. but then we aren't really talking about consistency issues we are talking about equipment problems. In other words, if I'm seating by "feel" and I get one primer at .006 and the next at .003, I can say without a doubt that they are both going to fire (albeit consistency would be affected). I don't know how far off you would need to be in order to produce a ftf, but I would assume at that point your primers would be protruding out past the case head and in terms of seating depth that would be negative. Doing something like that isn't really a result of press priming, it's a result of not taking your time and seating a primer properly, which could be done in any priming system, though to be fair it would actually be pretty difficult in a COAX, as you would have to short stroke the press quite a bit because the apex of the seating stem is reached before the press hits the mechanical stop.

[LynnJr]

Originally Posted by eric n

How does a co ax make better ''match'' ammo?
How much run-out do you generally see measured between tip and ogive with the co ax?
How does it make more reliable seating depths?

It doesn't
But if you think it does you have a phsychological advantage.
The brass floats in the shellholder of a typical press so having a floating die adds nothing to the equation.
If you think it does you can put a rubber oring between the die lock down ring and the press.
Stick with your proven neck turning and leave the latest gadgets to prove themselves.
You won't find stuff that doesn't work at a Benchrest match.

[longrange1]

Originally Posted by Meety Peety

Admittedly I haven't looked into this as far as I probably should but my understanding is that if the primer pockets are all uniform and the seating depth is consistent and controllable (mechanically or otherwise), the ignition should be consistent regardless if the depth ends up being .003 or .006 (.005 for me) and what the actual compression of the anvil ends up being, so long as it is always the same and always consistent. When working up a load and finding accuracy nodes, the primers all being seated exactly the same, I have never then tried to adjust primer seating depth as a means of tightening the group shot at a particular accuracy node. I could see the potential value to adjusting primer depth, I just have never done it. I am more inclined to stick to one primer seating depth that works reliably and then make sure I keep it uniform and consistent so that the compression of the anvil is always the same and the distance to the flash hole is always the same, regardless of what the actual number values are.

Things like ftf due to primer seating is not really in the same realm of discussion because in order to seat shallow enough to cause a ftf your anvil will not even be touching the base of the primer pocket and you would be talking about variations more than just .001 to .003 which is more realistic of the differences between seating by "feel" vs seating to a predetermined depth with a mechanical stop. Suppose you could have this issue if your primer pocket are deeper than they should be and you are only seating to .005 for example.. but then we aren't really talking about consistency issues we are talking about equipment problems. In other words, if I'm seating by "feel" and I get one primer at .006 and the next at .003, I can say without a doubt that they are both going to fire (albeit consistency would be affected). I don't know how far off you would need to be in order to produce a ftf, but I would assume at that point your primers would be protruding out past the case head and in terms of seating depth that would be negative. Doing something like that isn't really a result of press priming, it's a result of not taking your time and seating a primer properly, which could be done in any priming system, though to be fair it would actually be pretty difficult in a COAX, as you would have to short stroke the press quite a bit because the apex of the seating stem is reached before the press hits the mechanical stop.

actually i meant PRIMERS are the final tuning to a load but yes seating does make a difference in ESs...and im not arguing with you just sharing what ive found through actually shooting over a chrony.

a primer does not need to be protruding to cause a FTF...most times a FTF happens when the anvil is not touching the bottom of the pocket which is not hard to do and not because of sloppy loading it happens more so due to inconsistent primer pocket depths and or primers.

for instance...my 6 creed brass measures from about .125 to .129 with no pocket prep...a CCI200 measures .125 so if only seated flush with the head you have a potential FTF and the chances of a FTF go up as the pockets gets looser.

now my K&M PP uniforming tool measures .132 so if i was seating with the press(my COAX seats .004 past flush)and i was uniforming pockets id be approximately .004 short.

as far as the effects of seating depth on ESs i can tell you this....using my K&M tool if i seat a CCI primer just touching the bottom of the pocket or .001 short my ESs go up...seating the same primer with a .003-.004 crush(.004 past bottoming out)my ESs are at their lowest...same primers seated .005 and past my ESs start going up again.
a fed primer likes .001 to .003 crush anything less or more and my ESs go up.

i did a LOT of testing over a chrony when i first started loading because i was over whelmed by the inconsistent info i was reading on the forums...i am by no means an expert on loading and dont mean to come off as MR know it all but what i do know is from actual field testing not what ive read or heard.

[longrange1]

Originally Posted by LynnJr

It doesn't
But if you think it does you have a phsychological advantage.
The brass floats in the shellholder of a typical press so having a floating die adds nothing to the equation.
If you think it does you can put a rubber oring between the die lock down ring and the press.
Stick with your proven neck turning and leave the latest gadgets to prove themselves.
You won't find stuff that doesn't work at a Benchrest match.

actually it does make a difference and the differences can be measured...just because you dont find it at a BR match does not mean it dont work...ive seen BR guys that do EVERY little thing to wring out every last bit trying to perfect loads and others that do nothing and all of them have their day.

but i do agree 100% with shooting being a mental game...if you are unsure or doubting any part of your equipment your going to have a bad day at the range and 9 times outta 10 when it starts it just gets worse as the day goes on LOL!!

[longrange1]

GW sorry for the thread jack...

[17+1]

Rock chucker is the standard all other single stage presses are judged against. Only person I've know that had a co-ax also had a GAP rifle so I'm guessing they're more geared towards precision bolt action guys. None of the other shooters I've met have one. I would say majority, like 80 percent have rock chuckers.

I like semi autos so I would go for the rock chucker, good for FL sizing rifle brass. I currently have athe Lee press that came with the anniversary edition kit, which works well, but I will probably upgrade or add a rock chucker in a few years.

[longrange1]

Originally Posted by 17+1

Rock chucker is the standard all other single stage presses are judged against. Only person I've know that had a co-ax also had a GAP rifle so I'm guessing they're more geared towards precision bolt action guys. None of the other shooters I've met have one. I would say majority, like 80 percent have rock chuckers.



I like semi autos so I would go for the rock chucker, good for FL sizing rifle brass. I currently have athe Lee press that came with the anniversary edition kit, which works well, but I will probably upgrade or add a rock chucker in a few years.

Most ppl do not own a COAX because they are $300+ dollars NOT because the rock chucker is the greatest press.

I'm going to guess you bought the lee kit because it was less money and or it was what you could afford...I'm not knocking lee or RCBS I'm just saying there are better tools.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[eric n]

How much run-out is acceptable before it becomes detrimental to accuracy at 600/1000 or farther?
Hope I'm not coming off as grilling you longrange1. That is certainly not my intent, I'm merely curious what others find.
I can't seem to make it matter for me (runout), it gets lost among other things. I do agree that .004 primer crush matters though. I wish the 21st century hand primer was out when I bought my Sinclair... one at a time gets old.

[knucklehead0202]

Originally Posted by eric n

How does a co ax make better ''match'' ammo?
How much run-out do you generally see measured between tip and ogive with the co ax?
How does it make more reliable seating depths?

This. If you do your part, the press does a decent job. Some are better than others when it comes to leverage and such, but i'll be damned if there's enough "runout" in any press to make it produce "inaccurate" loads.

I am not a match-grade shooter, a rich man, or a nerd, but I do monitor my loads pretty closely. That said, I operate on a budget and also load for rather bizarre and rare calibers. I load on a LEE breech lock challenger press currently and absolutely adore it. Having tried a few other presses, although not a Forster, NONE of them have a spent primer system as good as the LEE.

Because i'm heading toward weirder and larger things, I just purchased a LEE classic cast press which has a removable bushing for large sized dies. The rockchucker also offers this feature, albeit at a higher price. In my experience, it also doesn't offer the "feel" that the lee does. Squashed some cases on my dad's rockchucker because I couldn't feel what it was doing. Never had that problem on a lee. Mind you, this was just seating bullets. RCBS and Forster both make good stuff, they wouldn't be around this long if they didn't. For my money though, LEE offers a lot for much less and I've never been let down by their products.

All depends on how big you need the rims on your escalade to be....

[longrange1]

Originally Posted by eric n

How much run-out is acceptable before it becomes detrimental to accuracy at 600/1000 or farther?

Hope I'm not coming off as grilling you longrange1. That is certainly not my intent, I'm merely curious what others find.

I can't seem to make it matter for me (runout), it gets lost among other things. I do agree that .004 primer crush matters though. I wish the 21st century hand primer was out when I bought my Sinclair... one at a time gets old.

I do not feel grilled at all but I'm sure it's coming and it's ok I've got thick skin and it's just the internet.

First I'll say that you and your rifle need to be up to being able to notice the effects of runout...in other words if your shooting a factory rifle or you can not shoot tight groups at 600/1000yds consistently your not going to notice the effects of runout.

As I've said I am not an expert, I am not a BR shooter or the next David tubbs but I can shoot pretty small groups pretty consistently.
When I was testing different things and the effects they have on accuracy I found that anything over about .001-.0015would start to open groups up and the more runout I induced the more the groups would open up.

The thing everyone needs to understand is that one thing does not make a huge difference in accuracy but everything combined does...I have done pretty much every step in prepping brass and bullets you can one thing at a time and have kept what made the biggest improvements with the least amount of time spent doing the work(reloading CAN become a second job if you let it).

IMHO the things in loading that have the biggest effects on accuracy are consistent charge weights,neck tension,primer seating and low ESs....if the above is all good low ESs should be the norm...in my last 5 barrels I have not had an extreme spread higher than 7fps and I don't do any prep work unless I have to.

With all that said the single biggest effect on accuracy is the shooter and there is no replacement or prep work that will make up for trigger time.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[eric n]

Originally Posted by longrange1

I do not feel grilled at all but I'm sure it's coming and it's ok I've got thick skin and it's just the internet.

First I'll say that you and your rifle need to be up to being able to notice the effects of runout...in other words if your shooting a factory rifle or you can not shoot tight groups at 600/1000yds consistently your not going to notice the effects of runout.

As I've said I am not an expert, I am not a BR shooter or the next David tubbs but I can shoot pretty small groups pretty consistently.
When I was testing different things and the effects they have on accuracy I found that anything over about .001-.0015would start to open groups up and the more runout I induced the more the groups would open up.

The thing everyone needs to understand is that one thing does not make a huge difference in accuracy but everything combined does...I have done pretty much every step in prepping brass and bullets you can one thing at a time and have kept what made the biggest improvements with the least amount of time spent doing the work(reloading CAN become a second job if you let it).

IMHO the things in loading that have the biggest effects on accuracy are consistent charge weights,neck tension,primer seating and low ESs....if the above is all good low ESs should be the norm...in my last 5 barrels I have not had an extreme spread higher than 7fps and I don't do any prep work unless I have to.

With all that said the single biggest effect on accuracy is the shooter and there is no replacement or prep work that will make up for trigger time.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts, its appreciated. Happy 4th!

[GW]

Originally Posted by longrange1

GW sorry for the thread jack...

LOL No worries.
It's been very informative and no one has been insulting...
Yet
As I am in no hurry, I ended up back-ordering the CoAx from Optics Planet for $280something plus free shipping.
Got Forster dies to go with it.
I am eager to try out the weird priming setup on the CoAx.

eta This will be dedicated for 6.5 Creedmoor. At least to start

[longrange1]

Originally Posted by GW

LOL No worries.
It's been very informative and no one has been insulting...
Yet
As I am in no hurry, I ended up back-ordering the CoAx from Optics Planet for $280something plus free shipping.
Got Forster dies to go with it.
I am eager to try out the weird priming setup on the CoAx.

eta This will be dedicated for 6.5 Creedmoor. At least to start

you will be happy with both im sure...the forster dies are really nice,you can order custom size expander balls for the sizing die to adjust neck tension and you can also send the sizing die in and forster can hone the neck to more closely fit your chamber so your not over working the necks.

[Elcid]

This is the impression I got from this thread.

RC is better for full length resizing or as an all around press.
Co-Ax is a better choice for neck sizing and bullet seating.

So for precision shooting the other alternative is to get the RC for full length resizing.
And an arbor press and Wilson dies for neck sizing and bullet seating.

[OpenSightsOnly]

Originally Posted by Elcid

This is the impression I got from this thread.

RC is better for full length resizing or as an all around press.
Co-Ax is a better choice for neck sizing and bullet seating.

So for precision shooting the other alternative is to get the RC for full length resizing.
And an arbor press and Wilson dies for neck sizing and bullet seating.

The Co-Ax with the Forsters FL die is really silky smooth.

The Co-Ax with other FL die brands is smooth but not as smooth.

[longrange1]

Originally Posted by Elcid

This is the impression I got from this thread.

RC is better for full length resizing or as an all around press.
Co-Ax is a better choice for neck sizing and bullet seating.

So for precision shooting the other alternative is to get the RC for full length resizing.
And an arbor press and Wilson dies for neck sizing and bullet seating.

arbor press $100+
wilson hand die $90 or so
RC press $100 or so

COAX press $300 +or- a few bucks...not sure why ppl think they can not or should not size with the COAX...i FL size every time and use my COAX for everything.

ive also used the arbor/hand dies and they do build concentric ammo but are slower and add time at the bench...i mostly used mine for load development out in the field...if you decide to go with the arbor press ive got a 21st century press ill let go at a good price.

[LynnJr]

Originally Posted by longrange1

actually it does make a difference and the differences can be measured...just because you dont find it at a BR match does not mean it dont work...ive seen BR guys that do EVERY little thing to wring out every last bit trying to perfect loads and others that do nothing and all of them have their day.

but i do agree 100% with shooting being a mental game...if you are unsure or doubting any part of your equipment your going to have a bad day at the range and 9 times outta 10 when it starts it just gets worse as the day goes on LOL!!

How does it make a difference? What about floating the die makes a measurable difference?
On my dies the bullet is inside of the die against the sliding sleeve and the only thing the press does is move the case up and down.

[17+1]

Originally Posted by longrange1

Most ppl do not own a COAX because they are $300+ dollars NOT because the rock chucker is the greatest press.

I'm going to guess you bought the lee kit because it was less money and or it was what you could afford...I'm not knocking lee or RCBS I'm just saying there are better tools.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think it's diminishing return, spend more and more for less and less improvements. My lee or a rock chucker will load MOA ammo for my semi auto military rifles, good enough for me.

I bought the lee in college, it was a cost based decision. If I replace it it will be with a rock chucker.

I think the co-ax is more for someone who is trying to squeeze all the accuracy they can get. Not going to apply to most shooters.

[longrange1]

Originally Posted by LynnJr

How does it make a difference? What about floating the die makes a measurable difference?
On my dies the bullet is inside of the die against the sliding sleeve and the only thing the press does is move the case up and down.

your right your press does move the case up and down but is the top of your press flat and concentric with the ram? is the ram concentric in the bore of the press? are the threads and lock ring a perfect match for the threads and top of your press? if you cant make it perfect(or VERY close)you float it.

i used a redding big boss 2 for 7 or 8yrs runout was was typically between .003-.005 with a set of redding comp dies both in 260rem and 300wm.

i bought a 260rem forster BR sizing die and micro seater and in the same press runout was typically .002-.003 and every now and then a .004.

same dies in a COAX runout was .001-.002 with a .003 now and then.

i bought a set of whidden dies when i switched to the 6mm creed im shooting now and after fired and sized i never measured anything over .0015.
so IMHO dies and presses DO make a difference.

all that said i dont worry so much about runout...or a lot of other little things...anymore because for the type of shooting i do i can not hold still enough to notice a little runout or a bullet not seated perfectly or a bullet that weighs 3/10s of a grain more or less ECT ECT but i do try to make my ammo as close to perfect as i can just for the mental aspect of it if nothing else...but does all of it matter? yes otherwise the BR and F-class guys wouldnt be chasing all of it looking for the perfect load.

[longrange1]

Originally Posted by 17+1

I think it's diminishing return, spend more and more for less and less improvements. My lee or a rock chucker will load MOA ammo for my semi auto military rifles, good enough for me.

I bought the lee in college, it was a cost based decision. If I replace it it will be with a rock chucker.

I think the co-ax is more for someone who is trying to squeeze all the accuracy they can get. Not going to apply to most shooters.

fair enough and for me its more of a mental thing...if my equipment and loads are as good as i can make them then at the end of a bad day at a match(and theres been a few LOL)theres only one thing to blame.