Thread: Foster coax or Rock Chucker

Rockchucker type press is good. Redding boss is good. Co ax is very good. Only one thing I found with co ax is that the new hornady seating dies drop that inner sleeve down so far that the co ax is awkward with it. Conventional seating dies are fine though. As somebody already stated; the co ax floats the dies so everything centres nicely. I also like to use Lee hand press with Lee primer seater ad a seperate operation sometimes. Lee neck size collet die sometimes too. I have no regrets with my forster co ax. Its very good.

I've had both. Firstly the Rochucker for about twenty odd years; a good reliable press. Replaced it with the Co-Ax some time back now on a whim when I was earning a lot more than I do now. The Co-Ax is very well made, has tight tolerances and is very easy to use. I really appreciate the primer catcher. You should use the Forster die lock rings with it though because they're made of alloy and won't wear into the die slot on the Co-Ax like steel lock rings can. I've found slightly better concentricity of loaded rounds with the Co-Ax. Overall, if you can afford it, go the Co-Ax, if not then the Rockchucker will still do everything you want.

Maybe add the newer cast iron Lee press onto your list - it gets very favourable reviews on the net for concentricity and general build quality.

Yes the good old Lee loader with a hammer, not much different from the flash as Wilson in line die set. They certainly teach you the fundamentals very well.

Don't get me wrong @10-Ring, I love nice stuff. I've lost count of the amount of times I've stood in front of various makes of presses and scales and so on and nearly walked out with a bundle of goodies... One day, it will happen, sooner rather than later if @Wingman keeps sending me videos of his very cool new set up and how smooth and fast it is...

The question of affordability and "deprivation" is a good one, something that's very different from person to person obviously. I guess it's got a lot to do with the way you are programmed when you are young. I think the primary reason I haven't committed to high-quality super funky reloading gear is not because I can't afford it (I can), but because I was always taught that functional is more important than flash. (Maybe replace the word "taught" with "brainwashed".) This was when I was a teenager being taught by my grandfather how to reload on a shoestring and still bring home a fat deer of an evening. And that approach to life in our house is applied pretty much across the board, even though I hated it as a kid and I'm pretty sure my kids hate it now! We are just a chip off the old block after all...

Funny though, because put me in a situation where I must choose gear to survive a year in the remote outback, and I will buy the most expensive fridge freezer I can find (Engels - I have three), and then spend a small fortune on building a rocksolid auxiliary triple battery system with Redarc charge controllers, with solar.... Because the risk of warm beer is a risk I would never ever be prepared to take... Whereas my grandfather would have dug a deep hole and tried to keep the ice frozen inside a polystyrene box in 35°C, for a fortnight.

Can't deny though there is an element of (probably misguided) pride at being able to put together accurate rounds with a minimum of kit. I also like its portability - I can take my reloading bench into the bush and mount it on a Black & Decker Workmate and sit under a tree.

I'm reading a book at the moment about the early days of benchrest competition. Whilst benchrest is of no interest to me whatsoever, reading about how those guys acheived fantastic accuracy with 1950s and 60s kit, reloading at the competition under a tarp with their nerdy mates... kinda puts my old Grandpa's approach to life in perspective. They didn't really know any different.

Anyway. I'll stop waffling.

Flyblown,

Super accurate ammo can certainly be loaded with less expensive reloading gear if you're meticulous and take your time to get everything right.

There's nothing wrong with the No.8 fencing wire mentality. Our pioneering forefathers had to improvise because they had no choice. It worked well too most of the time. However, most of us these days do have a choice. Some like to load fast because of the volume they have to reload, some just like nicely engineered gear etc.

My Wilson hand dies and arbour press which I use to load my 6.5 Creedmoor and formerly a 6PPC certainly produce consistently more accurate ammunition than my Co-Ax press does with the Redding bushing dies. Does it make a difference in the field for hunting? Probably not at long range and certainly not at shorter hunting ranges. I use the 6.5 CM for target shooting as well though, so there, every bit of extra accuracy helps. Of course you have to have a rifle that can take advantage of that extra accurate ammo, otherwise you're pushing it uphill.

It's all fun at the end of day.

Cool as! I learnt to reload on that press. I have an old rock chucker now which is great but so is the co ax. You can’t go wrong

I went straight from a lee loader and hammer (just given it away with my .303) to a Co-Ax. A mate from the Warren Page era told me that was the best and I was fortunate enough to be able to afford it. So, I haven't had to buy again - only got one press - I don't understand the techniques needed to use a screw in sort of press and get the best out of it. I suspect the Co-Ax is easier to use and foolproof for someone like me with limited knowledge or understanding.

If you're already getting 0.5 MOA with your old press why change ?
@10-Ring Thanks for the tip about the aluminium Forster rings. I've used steel Sinclair ones and thought the Forster were cheap lite alt.