View Full Version : Redding T-7 vs. Forster Co-Ax
Title pretty much sums it up. I already have the T-7 but its brand new and I've never used it. I'm now toying with the idea of shaking the Redding and Picking up the Forster. I am going to be delving into more 'long range shooting' in the near future if that has any bearing on advice given.
I have both the T7 and the Forster Co-Ax presses. They are really totally different animals. I use the Forster a lot for making test ammo and precision ammo. I believe the Forster is what the Army uses to make ammo for its rifle team. I use the the T7 for bullet pulling and decapping but it is over kill for these tasks. Any single stage press would work as well and cost about 1/3 as much. Once the dies are setup for the Forster changing operations takes seconds. The T7 never seemed to have the dies I needed mounted. I guess my bottom line is if I didn't already own the T7 I would not buy one again. The Forster is probably the last press I would sell given my reloading needs.
DBR, thanks for the reply.
Thoughts regarding ergonomics on both? I actually have the T7 already but have not mounted it up or anything. There's a lot of things about the Co-Ax that are really appealing and just 'make sense' when it comes to producing a precision product.
There are only two things that come to mind regarding the Co-Ax ergonomics. First, because of the linkage design cases, bullets etc have to be inserted more towards the front of the press than with more conventional designs. For me it is not as natural a hand position as other presses. Second, while I like the universal shell holder it takes a bit of practice to remove the case without snagging the rim on one of the jaws. I don't consider either of these to be a deal breaker but if I had to decap or resize many cases it would slow things down a bit. I don't use the Co-Ax for these tasks; I use my RCBS Rock Chucker.
One other thing, get the short handle if you co with the Co-Ax. It will provide plenty of leverage for anything short of very heavy magnum cases and it cuts the stroke travel by almost 1/2.
My end goal plan would be to get something like a Dillon 650 for 5.56/9/etc to do quantity. I imagine that loading 50-100 at a time with the Co-Ax would be the upper limit for a handloading session...
With the Co-Ax 50-100 rds at a time is very reasonable. I have owned A Dillon 550, a Dillon 650 and I still own a Dillon 1050 I bought about fifteen years ago. I use the 1050 for large quantity 9mm and 45ACP (more than 1000rds at a time). Caliber change with the 1050 is fairly complicated and kits are expensive. I probably would not buy a 1050 again.
The press I use the most is a manual indexing RCBS 2000. It is a five station press and IMHO better quality than the 550 and 650 Dillons. I like the manual indexing because it is more forgiving of any problems with operations. I particularly like the priming system because it gives a much better "feel" than most other presses. It is easy to detect a loose primer pocket or a missed crimp. Primers never go in upside down or are missed. Caliber changes are simple, quick and kits are inexpensive. IME RCBS customer service is as good as Dillon's. I do use Dillon dies pretty much exclusively.
The press I use the most is a manual indexing RCBS 2000.
Interesting. I'm going to check that press out. I like my 550b, but am interested greatly in more quality.
Ahhh.. deal breaker is that you feed the cases and place the bullets BOTH with your left hand. It'd take a lot to get me to change my habit of grabbing primed brass with the right hand and bullets with the left.
markm:
If you are always going to use primed brass then some of the advantage of the 2000 is lost. However, using the 2000s superior APS priming system you might not have to prime off the press anymore.
The way I have mine setup the sizing die is in station #1 and the powder measure is in station #2 (this is not the factory setup). I use either the drum measure that came with the press or a Dillon measure depending on what I am loading.
The sequence goes like this: (assuming a full shell plate)
Index to dump loaded round and place an empty case in station #1
Push handle back to prime case in station #2
Place bullet on case in station #4 and cycle handle forward to charge case in #2 and seat bullet in #4.
Right hand stays on handle - only left hand indexes and handles cases and bullets - bullet is placed while handle is being pushed back to prime case.
This setup frees station #3 for a powder checker. I modified my press to use a Dillon "buzzing" powder checker. Mod only required drilling a hole in the press frame.
I modified my press to use a Dillon "buzzing" powder checker. Mod only required drilling a hole in the press frame.
Was this difficult to do? Got a photo of your setup?
I would not consider the powder checker mod difficult. It does need to be done right. You need at least a drill press and a good quality HS steel or cobalt bit to get the hole straight and clean. It has to be in the right place +_ 1/32" unless you use an oversized hole. I am just trying to get setup to post pics, but if you PM me your email I will take a pic for you and give you the hole location and dimensions. I'm not sure I would recommend that someone without al least minimal metal working experience do this themselves.
PS: I don't do Facebook for anything - too much spyware and other crap
markm:
If you are always going to use primed brass then some of the advantage of the 2000 is lost. However, using the 2000s superior APS priming system you might not have to prime off the press anymore.
Perhaps not. I'll revisit this should I get to where I'm thinking of adding another progressive.
As far as the powder check goes. You could borrow a trick from the guys at Accurateshooter.com and put a small camera plugged into your laptop monitor.
You could powder check from a seated position. Those guys use this trick to look at their beam scale dial so they don't have to squat down to check when they trickle.
Interesting idea! On the other hand it still requires a human's attention to the monitor. It is pretty hard to ignore the buzz from the Dillon unit no matter what else you are thinking about.
Interesting idea! On the other hand it still requires a human's attention to the monitor. It is pretty hard to ignore the buzz from the Dillon unit no matter what else you are thinking about.
Direct visual is better in that you're already looking there to place the bullet.
I've had the dillon buzzers crap out on me. Back when I used to use the priming system, that buzzer was just a cheapo gadget.
I shed a lot of the accessories. I guess my press is an expression of my psych profile or something. :cool:
I agree the Dillon buzzers aren't the most robust units I've seen but I'm not sure a mini camera and a computer is a simpler way to go. I guess whatever works for a person is their best setup. The point is to have a reasonably reliable method insure powder in actually in the case.
Yeah... that mini cam deal would likely be an easier set up for the beam scale than it would for the press.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.