Re: Redding Competition Seater Dies- No Comp. Loads
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">COMPETITION BULLET SEATING DIE
“No seating die on the market is built to this level of precision.”
The Redding Competition Seating Die has quickly established itself as the “state of the art” in straight line bullet seaters.
This design has beat the concentricity problems inherent in all other seating dies of this type.
Tighter manufacturing tolerances have been made possible due to the details of the seating stem system. The bullet guide to seating stem fit is so precise that the seating stem can actually be demonstrated to “float” on a column of air.
The seating stem is precision ground to exactly match bullet diameter. No seating die on the market is built to this level of precision. Alignment and accuracy are enhanced by the cartridge case and bullet being completely supported and aligned in a close fitting, precision ground sleeve before the bullet seating begins.</div></div>
I am speculating here, but I don't like the .003" clearance between the Forster seating stem and the die bore.
I thought about buying or building larger seating stems and turning them down on the lathe to fit the Forster slider with tighter tolerance.
Then the Forster sliding shoulder positioning sleeve went off patent, Redding started selling one with add that say more precision.
Now I read this thread, and I am suspicious that Forster had a reason for making it sloppy. The thin lips of the bell shaped concave opening of the seater mouth can get deformed.
Why can't we make better concave seater stem shapes?
Ones that don't make rings on bullets, don't get bullets stuck in them, and don't have thin edges that can bend?