Reloading Equipment Quality

[Phil3]

I am brand new to reloading, and just received from MidwayUSA my Co-Ax press, Redding full length resizing die, and micrometer type bullet seater, for 223 Remington. I noticed that the Co-Ax press has some vertical scratches in the two rods at one end, and the Redding bullet seater has some small scratches and a nick or two in it. The white lettering on the black micrometer top seems a bit uneven as well. Is this normal for reloading tools of the trade? Seems like a number of things I buy related to firearms are beset with quality control problems. So far, one barrel, one AR lower receiver, one bent Tipton cleaning rod (which they said to send back). But maybe what I see on the Co-Ax and dies is the norm?

- Phil

 

[GerryM]

Redding stands behind their products
If there are finish problems give them a call. I'm sure they will replace it. free of charge.
They are of the highest quality that i know of.

 

[Winchester69]

Demand for these products is high, and there are unusual demands placed on the production force. If the scratches and marks are cosmetic is one thing. If they are detectable with a fingernail or to the touch and are on a working surface, they can be dressed with a needle file and polished with fine emery paper. Any definite production defects should be returned to the manufacturer or supplier for rework/replacement.

 

[Phil3]

The defects are cosmetic. I am not complaining...just wanting to find out what is the norm. If Redding is supposed to have exterior finish like that of a Snap-On tool, well, these don't. If not, then OK, I know what to expect, and am OK with that. Rather like being OK with the normal rugged rough finish of some parts of a drill press, or some other tools. I figured the micrometer portion of the Redding would be very nice, like many mics, but it isn't. I will try to attach some images here.

26A = Less than clean white lettering.

28A = Minor nicks in resizing die.

31A = Black finish worn through on edge of top. Small nicks (not good pic) below "PAT".

- Phil

 

[GermanS1]

Phil, those look pretty normal to me. The real beauty is the ammo they produce. I'm not trying to be clever or trite, but these are just functional pieces of tooling and I don't think cosmetic perfection is high on the manufacturer's priority list. They will, however, give you genuines satisfaction with their performance.

 

[GerryM]

Sorry to disagree But.
If they are not crisp enough for you i'm sure redding would like to know.
They are very proud of their fit and finish.
Maybe just a little bit of a tired inspector .

 

[dlong]

Most of my reloading equipment is Redding. T-7 Turret press and most of my dies are the micrometer type. Yes, they are a bit rough, dirty and almost used looking, but thats just the way they are. They produce good bullets. If your looking for pretty, most of the Sinclair stuff is very nicely made. I also have a lot of Sinclair items. They can be pricey, but you get what you pay for.

 

[Phil3]

I sent a message to both Forster and Redding to ask what they think. The scratches in the rods on the Forster press really surprise me. You can catch a fingernail on some of these. The marks are all at one end, on both rods. Anyone else's Co-Ax have similar marks?

- Phil

 

[Winchester69]

It's a sign of the times. Dealers are selling everything they can get their hands on. Mfrs are running flat out, and have been for a while, and shipping everything they can produce. Frankly, it's not a good time to be buying. Someone I know got a Redding mic die that hadn't had the markings painted; he complained, and they sent him a paint stick for him to correct it himself. He had also bought a Redding press, and everything on it is loosely fitted. I've encouraged him to make Redding get a decent press to him. Lower demand, resulting in lower production rates, would resolve many of these issues.

You're ahead of the game if you can correct any problems yourself. The mfrs are overwhelmed.

 

[Phil3]

Please see the pic attached.

It is one of two hardened steel rods used in a Forster Co-Ax press I mentioned in my OP. I asked Forster about the heavy scratches in the rods and sent them the same pic attached here. I was told the scratches were not normal, and they asked I send the press back. I did. Robert, an owner at Forster, called today and said in so many words, they despite the photo, they thought it would be worse than this and basically considered it normal (I think it is worse in person). I was told these rods are like the rods used in hydraulic cylinders finished to a "6" (whatever that is) and because they are so finely finished, any scratches show up easily. Really. And I guess that includes scratches (gouges) so deep I can catch my fingernail on them? Forster dodged this observation. I know it is a tool, and the press does operate smoothly, but the idea that these rods are even in the same ball park as hydraulic cylinder rods is laughable and it is disappointing Forster even attempts to make that comparison. Hard to accept a product with polished steel rods that look like they have been dragged through a bore with sand in it.

Forster is going to replace the rods, and am hopeful the result is better than what I first saw. From their tone, I am not so confident.

I contacted a couple of other Forster owners. They said their rods are glass smooth and do not look like this. I would like to know what other Forster owners have seen on their press. Pics are welcome.

- Phil