Forster co-ax worth it?
- Thread starter Stanm70
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Shooter264
Well-Known Member
They are worth every penny!!!!
Team Roper
Well-Known Member
Yes
I will be the desenter, I didn't care for the press. Not saying it's a bad press but I didn't care for the ergonomics or the fact I was always pinching my fingers trying to seat bullets in long cases.
I may not be the best source because I didn't care for the Rock Chucker either. I have Redding Ultramags and Lee Classic series presses on my bench and recommend them to anyone.
Remember, making quality ammo is more a function of paying attention to detail and learning how to use your equipment properly than it is name brand.
That being said there are features you can look for on a press that make your life easier and more pleasurable to use. I happen to like what I have better than anything else I've tried and I've tried a lot.
I may not be the best source because I didn't care for the Rock Chucker either. I have Redding Ultramags and Lee Classic series presses on my bench and recommend them to anyone.
Remember, making quality ammo is more a function of paying attention to detail and learning how to use your equipment properly than it is name brand.
That being said there are features you can look for on a press that make your life easier and more pleasurable to use. I happen to like what I have better than anything else I've tried and I've tried a lot.
SidecarFlip
Well-Known Member
Thats the best statement of the entire thread.
He said that she said that we said, don't count for squat and I to don't consider Chucker to a Forrester an upgrade but rather a lateral move.
Both have their quirks and strong points. With a Forrester, you have to set the adjustable shell plates instead of using shell holders and unless you get the Forrester Co-Ax priming tool, you'll stell need shell plates (or a derivative) to prime so why not just keep the chucker.
The Forrester has a better leverage ratio than the chucker so if you are FL sizing magnum length cases, thats an advantage but the fiddle factor on a Forrester is much higher than a Chucker or a Lee or a Lyman. I don't want to fiddle, Drop in a shell holder, set the die and size brass.
Trickymissfit
Well-Known Member
OK, back to square one! The adjustable shell shell holder is over hyped from the start, and you actually don't need it to hold the case, but you'll want it to extract the case from the die! Now I also know that every member of the board loads a little differently than the next guy. People have often looked over my shoulder with that "is he nuts?" look! OK, you don't like those sliding jaws, but you also don't have to use them. Yes you can use the non adjustable holders as well. I would never consider using them in that press. But others do of course, and it's their own business.
I have my sliding jaws setup very loose on the press. I even went so far as to grind three or four thousandths off them. When I adjust the jaws I also leave that part pretty loose as well, and only grip the case strong enough to pull it out of the die. I can size a .223 case, and then swap dies to a 22-250 without ever making any adjustment. I do flip jaws when doing mag cases and some rimmed hand gun cases. (I have not readjusted my jaws this year!) But I also have a bitch about the jaws not doing 22 Hornets and 45-70's without buying another set of jaws.
One thing I'd like to see Forster do, is to come out with a couple optional handles that will put your wrist parallel with the presses bolster plate. You'll find you may see a little better feel. Too much leverage can also create other problems when something is going wrong. I tend to size at a very fast pace once I have the setup rolling along. So you must always be aware of pressure changes and little bumps in the feel. When I first started using my press, I liked to wore out Fred Sinclair's ear two or three times a week! But he was always there for me, and I thank him to this very day.
The press is much nicer to use with a riser between the bench and the bottom of the press. Right now I'm using a 6" one (maybe 7.5"), but have used them from as low as 4" all the way up to 9". First one I built simply elevated the press. But after that I started experimenting with rolling the press back a little bit at an angle (I think I'm using 20* right now). Kind of helps you see things better, and really helps us old folks that wear bifocals!
gary
Clark
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2006
- Messages
- 772
I feel like I wasted 10 years of my life with a rockchucker before I got my co-ax presses.
I have designed and built a couple of improved parts for the co-ax.
I hand load over 60 different cartridges, and so the co-ax is best.
For someone how only loads a few rounds and all the same cartridge, probably the rockchucker is best.
For someone who loads zillions of rounds of the same thing, maybe a progressive is best.
I have designed and built a couple of improved parts for the co-ax.
I hand load over 60 different cartridges, and so the co-ax is best.
For someone how only loads a few rounds and all the same cartridge, probably the rockchucker is best.
For someone who loads zillions of rounds of the same thing, maybe a progressive is best.
boomtube
Well-Known Member
That's an interesting way to word it; it's more costly than most and the egronomics are quite a bit different from others but in what way do you think it would be an "up-grade"?
IF I were to spend that much for a new press it would have to be new, not used, AND it would be for a Redding Ultramag to obtain the massive strength and great leverage it offers, along with better ergonomics than the Coax. And I don't see much time or effort penalty in exchanging 'snap-in' shell holders in conventional presses. ??
Trickymissfit
Well-Known Member
Ultra mag anything is never gonna run with that Co-Ax. Plus it's not that much different than a basic RCBS other than getting jammed for the Redding mark up! You pay to loose power, ergonomics, accuracy, repeatability?
must be some new Redding made out of unobtanium
gary
Sully2
Well-Known Member
I tried a Forster for awhile and thank the Lord I didnt have to buy it. Went back to a Chucker and will stay until I cant load anymore
65WSM
Well-Known Member
I seat all of my bullets with Wilson dies on an arbor press so I don't hurt my fingers. All of my"Bonanza" and Redding seaters I gave away because the Wilson system is a better way to seat bullets.
The Coax press is great for sizing cases.
I have an RCBS press but it relys on shellholders.
The only thing that Coax press will not do more accurately than threaded presses is use Lee "Factory Crimp" die on the 375 H&H bullets. I have sucessfully used the Lee Collet neck size dies with Coax press from 22-2250 Ackley to 300 Ultra Mag.
The Coax press does not have much room for the Micrometer seating dies in the Ultra Mags or 30-378 Weatherby and the like. The Forster dies will fit in the calibers they come in. Again I prefer the Wilson seaters for calibers they cover. Even better if you can get your Riflesmith to ream the Wilson seater to match your chamber.
The Coax press is great for sizing cases.
I have an RCBS press but it relys on shellholders.
The only thing that Coax press will not do more accurately than threaded presses is use Lee "Factory Crimp" die on the 375 H&H bullets. I have sucessfully used the Lee Collet neck size dies with Coax press from 22-2250 Ackley to 300 Ultra Mag.
The Coax press does not have much room for the Micrometer seating dies in the Ultra Mags or 30-378 Weatherby and the like. The Forster dies will fit in the calibers they come in. Again I prefer the Wilson seaters for calibers they cover. Even better if you can get your Riflesmith to ream the Wilson seater to match your chamber.
