I am using several different bullets in my .243 Win, been thinking about getting one of the micrometer topped bullet seaters.  I have identified three on the market.  What is your opinion or experience with any of these three (Forster, RCBS or Redding).  As always, thank you.  Odessa

I have used the Redding Comp. seating die for 308 Win. and .454 Casull loads.  Works exactly as advertised; seates every bullet to same depth every time, adjustments very repeatable, manufacturing tolerances quite tight.  Not cheap, but in my mind worth every &#36.01.
Good shooting
Mark

Odessa,

I match Mcassill's experience --- Redding Comp. die set that supports the better than MOA from the .223. It's really nice to be able to experiment with the seating depth, which can be a critical factor for accuracy, with the level of accuracy and repeatability the Redding supports.  While I can't speak to the quality of the other two, I can comment that my impression from favorable comments in various articles that the Redding is recognized as a good option.

Dan

Odessa,

Although RCBS makes a good product, my vote goes for the Redding Dies.  I can't say enough positive about them, and after the last two posts my comments would be redundant.

Get the Redding Dies, and don't look back!

God Bless,

Marshall

It seems folks prefer Redding dies for rifle cartridges. *Are Redding dies considered superior for pistol cartridges also?  If so....why?

Alan,

I'm not qualified to say the Redding is "superior" for the pistol usage.  What I can say is that the Redding microadjustable seating die I use for my .44 loading is of excellent quality (accuracy and repeatability as Mark said) and it sure is nice for someone that uses various bullets requiring frequent seating die changes.

It's difficult, as I'm sure you know better than I, to develop an accurate load, need to change the dies for a different load and then try to accurately replicate your previous settings for your preferred load.  I seem to have darn gremblins that can make it difficult to duplicate a previously developed accurate load so I sure like to remove as many potential variables as possible. It's sure fun to develop the loads, it isn't fun when you get different results the next time around (maybe that's just me?)

Dan

Gentlemen, thank you for your interest and your answers.  Odessa