Anvil11-87
Well-Known Member
I'm looking at getting a competition seater die for my .308 loads. Any opinions on RCBS vs Redding dies??
RCBS vs Redding dies
- Thread starter Anvil11-87
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Anvil11-87
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the info, I will look at the forster dies.
For what it's worth, I found that if the sized case neck's straight, one can seat bullets very straight with a ball peen hammer or a conventional bullet seating die. No in-line "competition" seater I've tried does all that well with bent case necks. I've tried Wilson, RCBS, Vickerman, Bonanza and a couple other "in line" seaters, all with pretty much the same results. After seating bullets in even slightly bent case necks with these dies, they're still bent almost the same amount at the same place.
Expander balls are the biggest cause of bent case necks. Use a gelded die, such as the full length bushing dies made by Redding or RCBs with the bushing diameter about 2 to 3 thousandths smaller than a loaded round's neck diameter. They ain't got any balls so case necks are much straighter coming out of the sizing die.
Expander balls are the biggest cause of bent case necks. Use a gelded die, such as the full length bushing dies made by Redding or RCBs with the bushing diameter about 2 to 3 thousandths smaller than a loaded round's neck diameter. They ain't got any balls so case necks are much straighter coming out of the sizing die.
boomtube
Well-Known Member
I' ve tried a lot of die sets and die combonations over decades of reloading to otain straight necks and straight seating. My best is a combination of anyone's body die and a Lee Collet neck die followed by a Forster BR seater, with or without the micrometer head. (Note that no part of that includes an RCBS die.)
I'm not surprised. A lot of how good the reloaded ammo ends up depends on the techniques used for a given set of tools. Which is why there's a few good tools out there for us to choose from.
Sierra Bullets gets best results (cartridge straightness and best accuracy) using Redding full bushing or standard Redding full length sizing dies. They agreed with me that the RCBS versions of both dies would perform the same. The minute differences between them aren't worth a hoot.
Over the years I stumbled upon the Forester BR dies and have never looked back. I get some very good, (concentrict) reloads.
boomtube
Well-Known Member
Sierra Bullets gets best results (cartridge straightness and best accuracy) using Redding full bushing or standard Redding full length sizing dies. They agreed with me that the RCBS versions of both dies would perform the same.
Four things:
First, I think you mean Redding's copy of Forster's full length sleeves in their seaters rather than bushings in the sizers. ??
Second, I disagree about the value of the RCBS/Hornady/old Lyman PA dies with short sleeves that ONLY align the bullets and necks since they are not any better fitted than most common dies.
Third, common dies are, on average, pretty good so even the Forster/Redding dies may not make any great difference in concentricity all by themselves.
Four, contrary to poplar opinion, an unskilled reloader won't make good ammo no matter how much his tools cost nor how precisely he measures his powder charges. But a skilled reloader can make good shooting stuff on virtually anything.
Good load development is critical for good performance. A load can be as precisely assembled as a Swiss watch but if it's not matched to the firearm the accuracy will be atrocious!
Four things:
First, I think you mean Redding's copy of Forster's full length sleeves in their seaters rather than bushings in the sizers. ??
Second, I disagree about the value of the RCBS/Hornady/old Lyman PA dies with short sleeves that ONLY align the bullets and necks since they are not any better fitted than most common dies.
Third, common dies are, on average, pretty good so even the Forster/Redding dies may not make any great difference in concentricity all by themselves.
Four, contrary to poplar opinion, an unskilled reloader won't make good ammo no matter how much his tools cost nor how precisely he measures his powder charges. But a skilled reloader can make good shooting stuff on virtually anything.
Good load development is critical for good performance. A load can be as precisely assembled as a Swiss watch but if it's not matched to the firearm the accuracy will be atrocious!
Trickymissfit
Well-Known Member
look for a Forster .308 national match die set. Half the price of a Redding and probably a little better
gary
Trickymissfit
Well-Known Member
the Forster sizing die is different than the other two, which are pretty much the same design. The difference is in the neck sizing sequence. The Forster does it after the case body is completely traped in the die body; not when the sizing cycle is first started.
gary
Last edited:
No, I'm talking about fired case sizing dies. Not about bullet seating dies.
My old RCBS standard bullet seating dies put bullets in .308 Win. cases just as straight as my old Wilson chamber type seating die. Those bullets are in virtual perfect alignment with the case neck which happens with all seating dies.
If you're talking about seating dies, that may be true. I've never used a Redding or Forster seater except for a short test that showed they did pretty good.
Good point.
There are a few hundred (thousand?) top ranked long range rifle shooters around the world that disagree with this premise. Best example was when a few of us developed the load for Sierra's first Palma bullet then made several thousand rounds of it on two Dillon 1050 progressives. Metered powder charges with a 3/10ths grain spread, bullet runout up to 3/1000ths in new Winchester cases and Fed. 210M primers. After a few thousand rounds were shot in the first match using them, a few dozen folks from all over said it easily held 1/2 MOA at 600 yards. Their barrels had different chamber, bore and groove dimensions as well as different barrel contours. All on 5 or 6 different actions. Even a good lot of commercial match .308 Win. ammo would shoot inside 4 inches all day long in a variety of M1 and M14 match conditioned service rifles. Arsenal made lots of ammo used in international Palma competition is very accurate in virtually all rifle-barrel combinations.
boomtube
Well-Known Member
"A load can be as precisely assembled as a Swiss watch but if it's not matched to the firearm the accuracy will be atrocious!
"There are a few hundred (thousand?) top ranked long range rifle shooters around the world that disagree with this premise."
Okay, but I think you missed my point. And it seems you did use a well developed load, if by chance or long experience with the cartridge I won't guess. ??
But, change the powder, primer and charge, keep the same good bullet but change the OAL by 20 thou. Then use the same dies, press and methods precisely and see what happens. Just meanimg that no matter how precisely the cartridge is assembled, if it is a bad load all that precision won't make it shoot good!
"There are a few hundred (thousand?) top ranked long range rifle shooters around the world that disagree with this premise."
Okay, but I think you missed my point. And it seems you did use a well developed load, if by chance or long experience with the cartridge I won't guess. ??
But, change the powder, primer and charge, keep the same good bullet but change the OAL by 20 thou. Then use the same dies, press and methods precisely and see what happens. Just meanimg that no matter how precisely the cartridge is assembled, if it is a bad load all that precision won't make it shoot good!
Changing all that stuff's exactly what happened after Varget became the powder of choice for .308's shooting the Palma 155-gr. bullet. Charge weights varied from 45 to 47 grains in both my Palma rifles for cases weighing between 150 and 170 grains. Both the very mild RWS 5341 primer as well as Fed. 210M and Rem. 7.5 small rifle primer was used. Depending on how much throat had been eroded away, the three barrels, each with a different contour and length needed a spread of about 20 thousandths in cartridge OAL to have the bullet seat about 5/1000ths deeper in the case when chambered for a constant start-up resistance for each shot. All combinations shot about 5/10ths MOA at 600, 6/10ths at 800 and 7/10ths MOA at 1000.
I'm a firm believer that if everyone shot at least 20 shots per test group, the number of "favorite loads" for a given round would diminish by at least 80%. There's not a very high probability that a 5-shot group represents what all shots fired will produce; not over 50%. 20 shot groups have about 80% chance of being what all will do. And four 5-shot group atop one another are bigger than any one of the individual 5-shot ones. Most folks don't shoot enough shots per group to make a meaningful decision about it's accuracy. Which is why I'm not really impressed by 5- or 10-shot benchrest records; they're more luck than human and hardware performance because they represent only a very small percentage of all groups fired. I prefer to look at aggregate averages then add 20% to that; the result is much closer to what one can expect accuracy wise all the time.
boomtube
Well-Known Member
I'm a firm believer that if everyone shot at least 20 shots per test group, the number of "favorite loads" for a given round would diminish by at least 80%. There's not a very high probability that a 5-shot group represents what all shots fired will produce;
VERY true, unless that five shot group is LARGE! I have to laff at those who obviously got - maybe - a .3" three or four or five shot group from their factory sporting rifle in a hunting caliber saying he can get .25" all day!
A group of twenty shots is reasonably relivant, but a tiny group of three or four or five shots is more likely a statistical fluke meaning nothing at all. Averaging a series of five shot group sizes also means nothing except in BR competition, only groups that include ALL of our hits has any real world significance!
So far as 'favorite loads' goes, I rarely even read those threads but it's always amusing when I do; some poor soul wants a short-cut and asks "What's your favorite good shootin' loads." If he gets thirty responses no two will be the same so he still hasn't a clue what may work in HIS rifle without experimentation and load work-up. I believe he would be better helped just by directing him to his loading manual and saying "go for it."
VERY true, unless that five shot group is LARGE! I have to laff at those who obviously got - maybe - a .3" three or four or five shot group from their factory sporting rifle in a hunting caliber saying he can get .25" all day!
A group of twenty shots is reasonably relivant, but a tiny group of three or four or five shots is more likely a statistical fluke meaning nothing at all. Averaging a series of five shot group sizes also means nothing except in BR competition, only groups that include ALL of our hits has any real world significance!
So far as 'favorite loads' goes, I rarely even read those threads but it's always amusing when I do; some poor soul wants a short-cut and asks "What's your favorite good shootin' loads." If he gets thirty responses no two will be the same so he still hasn't a clue what may work in HIS rifle without experimentation and load work-up. I believe he would be better helped just by directing him to his loading manual and saying "go for it."
Last edited:
