Co-ax® reloading press
- Thread starter mr16ga
- Start date
- Status
ArchAngelCD
Member.
A Forster Co-Ax press is probably the best press on the market and it makes highly precise ammo.
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
What he said.
Plus I would add the Corbin S Press is a bullet swagiing press foremost, and a reloading press farmost.
It is vast over-kill for the power and strength needed to reload ammo with.
And it lacks a lot of features a good reloading press would have.
rc
Plus I would add the Corbin S Press is a bullet swagiing press foremost, and a reloading press farmost.
It is vast over-kill for the power and strength needed to reload ammo with.
And it lacks a lot of features a good reloading press would have.
rc
daboone
Member
Once the die's lock rings are set it's a breeze to pop them in and out. They're set and ready to go. Another bonus is the universal shell holder, one size fit 90% of cases.
The only thing I would suggest is to buy extra jaw plate springs. They have an amazing ability to disappear when cleaning or flipping them over to accommodate another cartridge.
The only thing I would suggest is to buy extra jaw plate springs. They have an amazing ability to disappear when cleaning or flipping them over to accommodate another cartridge.
MovedWest
Member
My wife bought me mine for my birthday last year. Let's just say I have two keepers. 
The lock rings make die changes a snap. It only comes with two lock rings, but it's fairly cheap and easy to pick up more. It's a great press and you should get one.
-MW
The lock rings make die changes a snap. It only comes with two lock rings, but it's fairly cheap and easy to pick up more. It's a great press and you should get one.
-MW
ranger335v
Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2006
- Messages
- 3,797
"A Forster Co-Ax press is probably the best press on the market and it makes highly precise ammo."
I often read that. No one ever cites any serious effort to support either claim. ??
I believe the CoAx is a very good press, so are virtually all others. Ammo is made in the dies, so long as the press isn't attrocious it really doesn't matter, all a press does is push cases into dies and pull them back out. I think. ??
A badly misaligned press can deform cases but no press can jam cases into dies any better than the dies will allow - and round cases seem to go into round holes in dies quite well if they aren't massively off axis. No press maker makes things massively off axis so that's a wash with any of them. Some guys love to lock dies in with a wrench so cases have the least possible chance to self align - but that's not the press' fault, is it?
A LOT of us find the ergonomics of the CoAx less than ideal. And fast die swaps isn't all that big a deal to very many people, certainly not at that price. YMMV.
I often read that. No one ever cites any serious effort to support either claim. ??
I believe the CoAx is a very good press, so are virtually all others. Ammo is made in the dies, so long as the press isn't attrocious it really doesn't matter, all a press does is push cases into dies and pull them back out. I think. ??
A badly misaligned press can deform cases but no press can jam cases into dies any better than the dies will allow - and round cases seem to go into round holes in dies quite well if they aren't massively off axis. No press maker makes things massively off axis so that's a wash with any of them. Some guys love to lock dies in with a wrench so cases have the least possible chance to self align - but that's not the press' fault, is it?
A LOT of us find the ergonomics of the CoAx less than ideal. And fast die swaps isn't all that big a deal to very many people, certainly not at that price. YMMV.
NeuseRvrRat
Member
the free floating shell holder jaws allow better alignment of the case in the die. theoretically, this provides more concentric ammo.
JimKirk
Member
My Co-Ax is a Bonanza... an old one...
It has set beside many different models and brand of single stage presses...
For those who doubt the precision of the Co-Ax ... have you taken the time to measure to see if there is any difference? I have and I can tell you that in fact there is a difference ... now whether that difference is important enough or not ... is up to you. Yes, the Co-Ax is ergonomically odd to some and it is no speed demon, it is precise and makes some of the most concentric ammo outside of the benchrest hand type dies. If you don't believe me do some measurements yourself. You will need "good" dies, but you would also need "good" dies in any other press too ... a bad die is not going to make good ammo in any press...
All the "other" brands of presses I've owned have moved on to other owners, I'm down to one press, it is the Co-Ax. If you are interested in producing precise ammo, then you will not go wrong with the Co-Ax.
It has set beside many different models and brand of single stage presses...
For those who doubt the precision of the Co-Ax ... have you taken the time to measure to see if there is any difference? I have and I can tell you that in fact there is a difference ... now whether that difference is important enough or not ... is up to you. Yes, the Co-Ax is ergonomically odd to some and it is no speed demon, it is precise and makes some of the most concentric ammo outside of the benchrest hand type dies. If you don't believe me do some measurements yourself. You will need "good" dies, but you would also need "good" dies in any other press too ... a bad die is not going to make good ammo in any press...
All the "other" brands of presses I've owned have moved on to other owners, I'm down to one press, it is the Co-Ax. If you are interested in producing precise ammo, then you will not go wrong with the Co-Ax.
ranger335v
Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2006
- Messages
- 3,797
".. theoretically, this provides more concentric ammo."
Theoretically that's true. In practice I doubt it makes a lot of difference. Seems the friction on the base plate/case head is too great for much slipping into alignment to occur at the point it would be most needed; ditto the die lock ring being loosely held in the slot. But I'm not suggesting anyone is 'going wrong' with any press.
To the extent a case may slide sideways in the spring loaded shell holder fingers I think the rather loose fit of most cases in most shell holders would do the same job - after all, we aren't talking about much lateral movement being needed in all this. And the question isn't how precise any single example of any press is, all that matters is how precise the ammo comes out and that's all I care about.
I too have done some press tests, but mine was on the loaded ammo. I didn't use a Co-Ax for my tests but did use a Rock Chucker II, a Lyman Spar-T turret, an old Herters Mod 3, a Lee hand press and two very small Lee 'Reloader' presses. Using the SAME cases, (pulled) bullets, shell holder and dies properly adjusted for each press, I found no statistical difference in the loaded runout from any of those presses, which tells me the dies and components are the critical eliments (and loading skill, but we can't buy that) for straight ammo. I believe that IF there was any valid statistical advantage to any press in the market the makers would be loudly citing that in all of their advertizing but no one does so I'm left to conclude the press is perhaps the least important 'accuracy' tool on our bench. Only hand dies (and very good ones at that) used in an arbor press will do much better and then not by a whole lot but again it's the dies doing the assembly, the arbor press simply contributes push power with absolutely no alignment capability.
Theoretically that's true. In practice I doubt it makes a lot of difference. Seems the friction on the base plate/case head is too great for much slipping into alignment to occur at the point it would be most needed; ditto the die lock ring being loosely held in the slot. But I'm not suggesting anyone is 'going wrong' with any press.
To the extent a case may slide sideways in the spring loaded shell holder fingers I think the rather loose fit of most cases in most shell holders would do the same job - after all, we aren't talking about much lateral movement being needed in all this. And the question isn't how precise any single example of any press is, all that matters is how precise the ammo comes out and that's all I care about.
I too have done some press tests, but mine was on the loaded ammo. I didn't use a Co-Ax for my tests but did use a Rock Chucker II, a Lyman Spar-T turret, an old Herters Mod 3, a Lee hand press and two very small Lee 'Reloader' presses. Using the SAME cases, (pulled) bullets, shell holder and dies properly adjusted for each press, I found no statistical difference in the loaded runout from any of those presses, which tells me the dies and components are the critical eliments (and loading skill, but we can't buy that) for straight ammo. I believe that IF there was any valid statistical advantage to any press in the market the makers would be loudly citing that in all of their advertizing but no one does so I'm left to conclude the press is perhaps the least important 'accuracy' tool on our bench. Only hand dies (and very good ones at that) used in an arbor press will do much better and then not by a whole lot but again it's the dies doing the assembly, the arbor press simply contributes push power with absolutely no alignment capability.
Last edited:
Rory McCanuck
Member
I have an old Pacific with a worn out ram, it allows for "free-floating" too
I didn't really see what the fuss was about with the Co-ax, until I worked the lever
a couple times. I'm now a convert. It is very, very nice.
I'm a mechanic, with more invested in my tools than in my house, but I realise that
the tools don't make a good mechanic, the mechanic does that. Tools can make things
much easier, and even enjoyable when they work well. I go shooting now to empty brass
so I can play on the Co-ax some more
I didn't really see what the fuss was about with the Co-ax, until I worked the lever
a couple times. I'm now a convert. It is very, very nice.
I'm a mechanic, with more invested in my tools than in my house, but I realise that
the tools don't make a good mechanic, the mechanic does that. Tools can make things
much easier, and even enjoyable when they work well. I go shooting now to empty brass
so I can play on the Co-ax some more
ranger335v
Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2006
- Messages
- 3,797
"I have an old Pacific with a worn out ram, it allows for "free-floating" too"
Not sure if your serious or not. I chose not to mention that but you're absolutely correct, 'worn-out' rams do tend to load straighter. What many people call "worn out" is finally able to load very concentrict cartridges! I know some serious BR competitors have actually turned their threaded press rams down a few thou to replicate what wear will do specifically so the ram can follow cases into FL sizers without misalignment interference!
Good rifle smiths use a floating reamer holder for chambering work because any effort to guide reamers generally results in less than perfect chambers. Same concept applies to making precision ammo.
Not sure if your serious or not. I chose not to mention that but you're absolutely correct, 'worn-out' rams do tend to load straighter. What many people call "worn out" is finally able to load very concentrict cartridges! I know some serious BR competitors have actually turned their threaded press rams down a few thou to replicate what wear will do specifically so the ram can follow cases into FL sizers without misalignment interference!
Good rifle smiths use a floating reamer holder for chambering work because any effort to guide reamers generally results in less than perfect chambers. Same concept applies to making precision ammo.
FROGO207
Member
Well as for me, I tied out a CO-AX press owned by another club member when we had the last reloading class at our gun club for new reloaders. The press was impressive enough but I have less invested in the RCBS Rock Chucker, RCBS Turret, Lee hand press and my Lyman SPAR-T Turret combined than the cost of the CO-AX. I am not THAT sold on any wonder press.
I would spend my money (IMHO more wisely) on a LNL or other progressive first if I was to add or replace another press.
I would spend my money (IMHO more wisely) on a LNL or other progressive first if I was to add or replace another press.
Last edited:
Arkansas Paul
Member
I too am considering a Co-Ax. I'm wanting to get another good press. We have a RCBS RS and it's a fine press, I just hate the small opening. I'm thinking either a Redding Big Boss or a Co-Ax. The Redding is $100 cheaper, so I'm not sure which way it'll go.
Rory McCanuck
Member
ranger335v
play, slop or tolerance, and then expect their ammo to be concentric. While a bunch of years
of being a diesel mechanic have taught me that sometimes a big hammer is a great tool,
most things go better and easier if you don't force them. If your die and shellholder are out
of alignment by 0.0005" and held rigid and the casing is forced into and out of the die,
something has warped. Hold it loosely, and it will find its own centre (path of least resistance)
FROGO207
I'd still be happily working away with the Pacific and Lee Challenger. The only real complaint
I have about either of those presses is the grit from removing primers gets on the ram,
and my Lee had definite scoring on the ram after only a couple hundred rounds. I cleaned
and lubed it, but some residue gets in and can't be easily removed.
It might seem a piddling little point, but having the spent primer go through the ram, like
the Lee classic and cast, or Reddings hollow rams, or completely removed as in the Co-ax,
or any of the old style H presses, became a priority for me when looking at other presses.
Almost stealing the Co-ax made up my mind for me in a hurry though.
Well, yeah, kinda. Everyone seems to get hung up on having a rock solid press, with no flex,
play, slop or tolerance, and then expect their ammo to be concentric. While a bunch of years
of being a diesel mechanic have taught me that sometimes a big hammer is a great tool,
most things go better and easier if you don't force them. If your die and shellholder are out
of alignment by 0.0005" and held rigid and the casing is forced into and out of the die,
something has warped. Hold it loosely, and it will find its own centre (path of least resistance)
FROGO207
Oh agreed! If I hadn't stumbled across one 20 minutes after the doors opened at a gun show,
I'd still be happily working away with the Pacific and Lee Challenger. The only real complaint
I have about either of those presses is the grit from removing primers gets on the ram,
and my Lee had definite scoring on the ram after only a couple hundred rounds. I cleaned
and lubed it, but some residue gets in and can't be easily removed.
It might seem a piddling little point, but having the spent primer go through the ram, like
the Lee classic and cast, or Reddings hollow rams, or completely removed as in the Co-ax,
or any of the old style H presses, became a priority for me when looking at other presses.
Almost stealing the Co-ax made up my mind for me in a hurry though.
FROGO207
Member
Any harmful grit from the brass should be removed from the precleaning you do to it IMHO. A little carbon that is left behind has not worn out my older presses any excessive amount at all over the years. I like being able to see the marks or problems when I deprime and with clean brass problems are more of a stand out by a long shot. If you are going to deprime dirty brass just use an expendable press and universal depiming die would be my thought. Agreed, the slop in a worn press allows the dies/brass to align more easily producing straighter brass with less runout.
Agreed, the slop in a worn press allows the dies/brass to align more easily producing straighter brass with less runout.
Clark
Member
I have two co-ax presses, they get used all the time.
I also use an RCBS partner press, which is cheap.
I sometimes use an RCBS Rockchucker.
I sometimes use (3) Lee Reloader presses.
I sometimes use a Lyman All American turret press with a Pacific shell holder adapter [So RCBS shell holders work]
I have never used my Dillon 550B set up for 9mm and .223.
Someone else might have had the opposite reaction.
The co-ax is fast to swap out dies and fast grab a case with the jaws close. Other presses, these days, have come up with other fast die swap outs, but the co-ax jaws still offer unique advantages. Also the leverage of the co-ax is very good.
Here is one minute of my depriming cases with a co-ax using one hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkT_s4jerLQ
Very observant watchers of my video might figure out one modification to that press, as the 37) Shellholder jaw housing is clearanced for the 44) Jaw opening screw (long) to pass through full diameter.
I have made my own:
37) Shell holder jaw housing
20) Button head screw
1231) "S" lower shell holder jaws
46) Wear plate
13) Handle
I was impressed with Clarance Purdie's 1969 patent.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3440923.pdf
I think that it was built by Gopher shooting supply, then Bonanza, then Forster, and now is off patent and still being built by Forster.
The first mod I did was to fasten the wear plate to the shell holder jaw housing. I had two sets of housings, wear plates, jaws, and springs. This made for a fast jaw size swap.
Then I went back and tried harder.
I was only able to improve on two parts:
37) Shell holder jaw housing
20) Button head screw.
I could make the 37) shell holder Jaw housing:
a) stronger so it will not bend when a case gets stuck
b) clearanced for the jaw opening screw
c) semi circular chamfers on the bottom, not the top, correct that error.
d) capture the 39) jaw pressure springs so they don't fly across the room
e) clearanced for a better screw than a 29) button head
f) milled from 1010 steel, not cast steel
I could make the button head screw:
a) From a knurled head screw, so I can screw it in with my fingers
b) pointed on the end so it lines up the holes in the 37) shell jaw holder housing, 46) wear plate, and 45) guide block casting.
I wanted to be able to change jaw sized in a few seconds while blind folded. I made a dozen of these set ups and sold them on line to the dozen or so I contacted. One guy got cancer and never paid. Another guy was so happy he paid triple, so it worked out. I just wanted to play manufacturing, getting their money was just a game. The engineering I did to make drawings of improved parts was nothing special, just what any engineer would have done to sustain the program.
I also use an RCBS partner press, which is cheap.
I sometimes use an RCBS Rockchucker.
I sometimes use (3) Lee Reloader presses.
I sometimes use a Lyman All American turret press with a Pacific shell holder adapter [So RCBS shell holders work]
I have never used my Dillon 550B set up for 9mm and .223.
Someone else might have had the opposite reaction.
The co-ax is fast to swap out dies and fast grab a case with the jaws close. Other presses, these days, have come up with other fast die swap outs, but the co-ax jaws still offer unique advantages. Also the leverage of the co-ax is very good.
Here is one minute of my depriming cases with a co-ax using one hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkT_s4jerLQ
Very observant watchers of my video might figure out one modification to that press, as the 37) Shellholder jaw housing is clearanced for the 44) Jaw opening screw (long) to pass through full diameter.
I have made my own:
37) Shell holder jaw housing
20) Button head screw
1231) "S" lower shell holder jaws
46) Wear plate
13) Handle
I was impressed with Clarance Purdie's 1969 patent.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3440923.pdf
I think that it was built by Gopher shooting supply, then Bonanza, then Forster, and now is off patent and still being built by Forster.
The first mod I did was to fasten the wear plate to the shell holder jaw housing. I had two sets of housings, wear plates, jaws, and springs. This made for a fast jaw size swap.
Then I went back and tried harder.
I was only able to improve on two parts:
37) Shell holder jaw housing
20) Button head screw.
I could make the 37) shell holder Jaw housing:
a) stronger so it will not bend when a case gets stuck
b) clearanced for the jaw opening screw
c) semi circular chamfers on the bottom, not the top, correct that error.
d) capture the 39) jaw pressure springs so they don't fly across the room
e) clearanced for a better screw than a 29) button head
f) milled from 1010 steel, not cast steel
I could make the button head screw:
a) From a knurled head screw, so I can screw it in with my fingers
b) pointed on the end so it lines up the holes in the 37) shell jaw holder housing, 46) wear plate, and 45) guide block casting.
I wanted to be able to change jaw sized in a few seconds while blind folded. I made a dozen of these set ups and sold them on line to the dozen or so I contacted. One guy got cancer and never paid. Another guy was so happy he paid triple, so it worked out. I just wanted to play manufacturing, getting their money was just a game. The engineering I did to make drawings of improved parts was nothing special, just what any engineer would have done to sustain the program.
Attachments
Certaindeaf
member
Some people just love to coax a round back to life.
har, that was a joke
har, that was a joke
Thanks All,
Everyone has made some very apropos comments. After watching several videos I think I am going to start saving for one of the Co-Ax presses because of the ease of resizing. I am not going to toss out any of my other presses, RCBS Rock Chucker, RCBS JR. or the $14 press I got just for depriming. I got to find out if the Co-AS shell holder can do the .45-75 WCF case.Same head size as the .50-70 Gov.
Everyone has made some very apropos comments. After watching several videos I think I am going to start saving for one of the Co-Ax presses because of the ease of resizing. I am not going to toss out any of my other presses, RCBS Rock Chucker, RCBS JR. or the $14 press I got just for depriming. I got to find out if the Co-AS shell holder can do the .45-75 WCF case.Same head size as the .50-70 Gov.
JimKirk
Member
The Redding Competitions are too tall for the yoke of the Co-Ax.
However Forester makes a Competition die that will hang right with the rest.... and it fits.
However Forester makes a Competition die that will hang right with the rest.... and it fits.
JimKirk
Member
I did say ammo, which to me means loaded rounds and I did use the Co-Ax for my test ...
I used the same brass fired from the same rifle with the same die ... The Co-Ax and three other press ...
uhh, use search. there are MANY threads on this topic with serious support to that claim
mine aren't. i have 2 or three sets of redding competition dies with micrometer tops. none have ever come close to touching the yoke. what cartridge are you loading for?
i'd rather have 1 co-ax than all 4 of those presses.
definitely are to me.
ranger335v
Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2006
- Messages
- 3,797
"A Forster Co-Ax press is probably the best press on the market and it makes highly precise ammo."
I often read that. No one ever cites any serious effort to support either claim. ??
uhh, use search. there are MANY threads on this topic with serious support to that claim
I don't have to search, I've read many of those supposed 'tests' but none of them mean anything, as Mr. German specifically stated in his article detailing his results. So, yes, there are many claims and stories but I said "serious" and I'm yet to see anything but 'I got this from that instead of the other'. But just as one shot groups are meaningless, when I say serious I mean something with tested measurements taken from a statistically meaningful sample that shows a better runout average when the same dies, components and skills are applied. Otherwise, it's all personal experience BS from a statistical point of view.
Again, if it was true that ANY press or dies or etc, had any consistant accuracy advantage over others they would certainly be using the confirming data in their advertizing, would they not? I've been doing this a long time and I've never seen any such claim, have you?
The Co-Ax is a good press but it's not the 'end all' of presses, nothing is. It's expensive and it's clumsy to use but it has other qualities that endear it to a lot of people and that's great, Forster's people need to make a living too.
I often read that. No one ever cites any serious effort to support either claim. ??
uhh, use search. there are MANY threads on this topic with serious support to that claim
I don't have to search, I've read many of those supposed 'tests' but none of them mean anything, as Mr. German specifically stated in his article detailing his results. So, yes, there are many claims and stories but I said "serious" and I'm yet to see anything but 'I got this from that instead of the other'. But just as one shot groups are meaningless, when I say serious I mean something with tested measurements taken from a statistically meaningful sample that shows a better runout average when the same dies, components and skills are applied. Otherwise, it's all personal experience BS from a statistical point of view.
Again, if it was true that ANY press or dies or etc, had any consistant accuracy advantage over others they would certainly be using the confirming data in their advertizing, would they not? I've been doing this a long time and I've never seen any such claim, have you?
The Co-Ax is a good press but it's not the 'end all' of presses, nothing is. It's expensive and it's clumsy to use but it has other qualities that endear it to a lot of people and that's great, Forster's people need to make a living too.
- Status
