Forster CO Ax press

[PigButtons]

I'm not an expert so you can take my advise for what it cost you. With shooting, golfing, or just about any other precision task, confidence is at least as important to outcome as the equipment involved. So if you like the feel, looks, and operation, of the equipment it leads to more confidence. Repeated results also add to the confidence level that can be achieved with a particular set of service equipment. If your press, rifle, clubs, racquet, etc. feel good to you and yield repeatable results, your brain translates that to confidence and allows you to perform "in the zone". The value of the Co-AX, Redding, Lee, Dillion, press is to a great extent subjective, just like pistol grip vs thumbhole stock.

I have Lee presses and with due caution and attention to detail I can produce excellent ammo. The Forster Co-AX just lets me do it more effortlessly and with greater confidence since the "feel" of the press's operation is much smoother. Again, just my opinion.

 

[savagedasher]

I have two presses on my bench. Lee cast iron and Forster CO -AX without a handle. I do all my prep work with CO-AX Priming is a big plus because of the dead stop feature. My dies are set up with Forester rings. With out a handle I can full length size.
The only draw back I can see is that I should of had a Forster 30 years before.
Larry

 

[chkunz]

First let me say that the CO-AX press is a good press, I have one and have used it and as I reported in my reply #9 and #10 to this thread and in other Accurate Shooter Forum threads I have measured and recorded and reported data that is statistically significant to compare this press to two other brands, RCBS, Redding. I reported my findings in Precession Shooting Magazine. So far in this thread I am the only one that has presented actual data (in the PS report) that compares the CO-AX to other presses although the comparison was limited to RCBS and Redding presses. The CO-AX has some attractive features but my data did not show any increase in accuracy as indicated by cartridge run out so the justification for the higher price is not accuracy, for some folks it could be in the other features of the press that you consider desirable. But for me those other features were not significant and in some cases undesirable. We all try to justify our decisions for spending the extra money on a product but sometimes that makes it difficult for us to do an objective evaluation of performance. Opinions are sometimes all we have but we should always strive to form opinions based on statistically significant data and let the data guide our decisions.

 

[chkunz]

I have two presses on my bench. Lee cast iron and Forster CO -AX without a handle. I do all my prep work with CO-AX Priming is a big plus because of the dead stop feature. My dies are set up with Forester rings. With out a handle I can full length size.
The only draw back I can see is that I should of had a Forster 30 years before.
Larry

Larry, I am having difficulty understanding what you are saying about using this press "without a handle". Please explain, I am in no way being critical and it is probably just my part timers kicking in. Best regards, Clyde.

 

[ridgeway]

I have two presses on my bench. Lee cast iron and Forster CO -AX without a handle. I do all my prep work with CO-AX Priming is a big plus because of the dead stop feature. My dies are set up with Forester rings. With out a handle I can full length size.
The only draw back I can see is that I should of had a Forster 30 years before.
Larry

Larry, I am having difficulty understanding what you are saying about using this press "without a handle". Please explain, I am in no way being critical and it is probably just my part timers kicking in. Best regards, Clyde.

The factory handle is ungodly long. I shortened mine and you can certainly operate it without a handle.

 

[savagedasher]

I leave the handle off . The press has enough leverage where I can use it without. Larry

 

[Richard Jones]

........And as stated previously studies by Precision Shooting Magazine showed that there was "NO" advantage using the Co-Ax press.

I shouldn't, but that's not me.....

The author can correct me if I'm wrong, but there was no 'study' done by PS. There was an article published in PS by a benchrester about runout in a small sample of presses. He even stated above that only 2 other presses were tested. I think it was a great article and along with some relevant data, suggested all kinds of options/methods/modifications, but I don't believe that intelligent folks saw it for anything other than what it was.

If you don't feel the need for one, that's fine with me. BR guys think nothing of spending an equivalent amount of money on a paint job, and I'm pretty sure that doesn't enhance accuracy in any way. This isn't letsseehowcheapwecangoforums.com. For the most part, we work hard for our money and we can spend it like we want. I bought my Co-Ax from a buddy's dad years ago for $50. It is used more than my other presses, a Partner, a free (yes, they used to really give them away) Lee, and an arbor press, but all of them are capable of making superb ammo for my guns.

I guess I just don't understand your constant desire to be/have something that you feel is "The Best" and anything not done your way is wrong, berating anyone not 'enlightened' to your ways. If you show me, great, I'll change my methods and applaud your wisdom and creativity and overall general greatness, but to just talk is just that. I don't have time for rude.

Richard Jones
Rice, VA

 

[chkunz]

........And as stated previously studies by Precision Shooting Magazine showed that there was "NO" advantage using the Co-Ax press.

I shouldn't, but that's not me.....

The author can correct me if I'm wrong, but there was no 'study' done by PS. There was an article published in PS by a benchrester about runout in a small sample of presses. He even stated above that only 2 other presses were tested. I think it was a great article and along with some relevant data, suggested all kinds of options/methods/modifications, but I don't believe that intelligent folks saw it for anything other than what it was.

If you don't feel the need for one, that's fine with me. BR guys think nothing of spending an equivalent amount of money on a paint job, and I'm pretty sure that doesn't enhance accuracy in any way. This isn't letsseehowcheapwecangoforums.com. For the most part, we work hard for our money and we can spend it like we want. I bought my Co-Ax from a buddy's dad years ago for $50. It is used more than my other presses, a Partner, a free (yes, they used to really give them away) Lee, and an arbor press, but all of them are capable of making superb ammo for my guns.

I guess I just don't understand your constant desire to be/have something that you feel is "The Best" and anything not done your way is wrong, berating anyone not 'enlightened' to your ways. If you show me, great, I'll change my methods and applaud your wisdom and creativity and overall general greatness, but to just talk is just that. I don't have time for rude.

Richard Jones
Rice, VA

I was the one that wrote the article that was published in PS where I gave the summary of data for run out for various combinations of dies and presses. The data did not show an advantage of the CO-AX over Redding or RCBS presses as far as run out goes. The CO-AX is a different design with advantages and disadvantages as compared to the other press designs but the data I presented did not show improved run out as an advantage. The reason I brought this up was that some folks in this thread gave the opinion that the CO-AX produces more accurate ammo that other presses but did not give any data that showed that was the case. I was simply giving the results of the data that I measured that was relative to this topic. There are reasons to chose the CO-AX over the other designs but my data said improvement in run out is not one of the reasons. I was not trying to be rude or disrespectable to any one, just presenting data.

 

[logger3006]

........And as stated previously studies by Precision Shooting Magazine showed that there was "NO" advantage using the Co-Ax press.

I shouldn't, but that's not me.....

The author can correct me if I'm wrong, but there was no 'study' done by PS. There was an article published in PS by a benchrester about runout in a small sample of presses. He even stated above that only 2 other presses were tested. I think it was a great article and along with some relevant data, suggested all kinds of options/methods/modifications, but I don't believe that intelligent folks saw it for anything other than what it was.

If you don't feel the need for one, that's fine with me. BR guys think nothing of spending an equivalent amount of money on a paint job, and I'm pretty sure that doesn't enhance accuracy in any way. This isn't letsseehowcheapwecangoforums.com. For the most part, we work hard for our money and we can spend it like we want. I bought my Co-Ax from a buddy's dad years ago for $50. It is used more than my other presses, a Partner, a free (yes, they used to really give them away) Lee, and an arbor press, but all of them are capable of making superb ammo for my guns.

I guess I just don't understand your constant desire to be/have something that you feel is "The Best" and anything not done your way is wrong, berating anyone not 'enlightened' to your ways. If you show me, great, I'll change my methods and applaud your wisdom and creativity and overall general greatness, but to just talk is just that. I don't have time for rude.

Richard Jones
Rice, VA

I was the one that wrote the article that was published in PS where I gave the summary of data for run out for various combinations of dies and presses. The data did not show an advantage of the CO-AX over Redding or RCBS presses as far as run out goes. The CO-AX is a different design with advantages and disadvantages as compared to the other press designs but the data I presented did not show improved run out as an advantage. The reason I brought this up was that some folks in this thread gave the opinion that the CO-AX produces more accurate ammo that other presses but did not give any data that showed that was the case. I was simply giving the results of the data that I measured that was relative to this topic. There are reasons to chose the CO-AX over the other designs but my data said improvement in run out is not one of the reasons. I was not trying to be rude or disrespectable to any one, just presenting data.

With all due respect. Doing a test with just a few presses, and only using one press of each brand is not a very good test. Its like saying that Remington shoots better than Savage, but you only have one Remington and one Savage rifle. Using two or more presses of the same make would be a more compelling test. I would prefer 3 or more myself. But two would be more convincing.

 

[Richard Jones]

T-Rex,

It wasn't directed at you. Your data was very enlightening and the article was thought and idea provoking. Your comments on this forum have been all about the search for accuracy and are never pushy or disrespectful of others. Please continue to teach, as I for one love to learn.

My comments were directed at bigedp51.

Rich

 

[chkunz]

T-Rex,

It wasn't directed at you. Your data was very enlightening and the article was thought and idea provoking. Your comments on this forum have been all about the search for accuracy and are never pushy or disrespectful of others. Please continue to teach, as I for one love to learn.

My comments were directed at bigedp51.

Rich

I understand and thanks. Sometimes opinions are all we have. But data is better than opinions and even though we sometimes have data we never seem to have enough. I would like to see more folks share the data that they have and encourage others that normally do not record their results to do so and share.

 

[jvw2008]

How many drugs have you seen passed by the FDA after millions of dollars have been spent testing them for safety - only to have them be pulled from the market after they were found to be unsafe when used by thousands of patients in real life instead of the 100 test subjects employed by the FDA research? It happens all the time. I am a scientist with two doctorates and am totally ingrained with the advantages of controlled research. That said - there is NO substitute for real life experience. Dump as much technology as you can into a rifle and it's load development - it's only as good as what it does on the range. IMO no one has done valid comparative testing on the presses we use and citing data from a poorly controlled test is worse then no test at all - it's misleading. I have five presses that I've operated over the last fifteen years. The CO-AX is my go to press and that seems to be the opinion of most of the folks who have experience with it.

Jerry

 

[LHSmith]

A few more disadvantages:
* Primer seating is manual operation only, so there is a chance of contaminating primers as opposed to other presses that have a feed tube.
* A Redding Instant Indicator will not work in the CoAx.
* It is a "C" design press which offers less resistance to flexing as compared to an "O" press of the same size
* The 4 inch "window" may be difficult to use with large tall magnums and heavy vld bullets
* Limited to 7/8" dies. Many other presses can accomodate 1-1/2" dies.
* Some case designs require a special shell holder for cases with thick rims, some odd ball cases with overly large rim diameters won't work at all.
As I mentioned before, loose the shell holder plate springs ( and you do have to take it apart to go from large to small primers) and your reloading is at a standstill.
IMO the good does not outweigh the bad considering it costs 2 to 3 x more than a decent "O" press even factoring in the cost of a Lee set of S/H's (11)

 

[logger3006]

A few more disadvantages:
* Primer seating is manual operation only, so there is a chance of contaminating primers as opposed to other presses that have a feed tube.
* A Redding Instant Indicator will not work in the CoAx.
* It is a "C" design press which offers less resistance to flexing as compared to an "O" press of the same size
* The 4 inch "window" may be difficult to use with large tall magnums and heavy vld bullets
* Limited to 7/8" dies. Many other presses can accomodate 1-1/2" dies.
* Some case designs require a special shell holder for cases with thick rims, some odd ball cases with overly large rim diameters won't work at all.
As I mentioned before, loose the shell holder plate springs ( and you do have to take it apart to go from large to small primers) and your reloading is at a standstill.
IMO the good does not outweigh the bad considering it costs 2 to 3 x more than a decent "O" press even factoring in the cost of a Lee set of S/H's (11)

Have you used the CO-AX? If so you will see by its design the pivot axle for the linkage is at the die mount so when its operated it has zero chance to flex. As far as the shell holder if you lose a spring, look for it! it doesn't vanish into thin air. And with quick thinking and a trip to Tractor Supply you can be up and running in no time...

 

[bddc2012]

Thank you to everyone who has replied to this post or who intends to .
It appears I have stirred the pot so to speak not my intentions but healthy discussion is good to keep one sharp.
I have been using a 30 year old rock chucker along with a 30 year old Dillon RL 450 for all my reloading and am happy with both.
The Forster CO AX has been on my mind for a few years and was wanting feedback on it.
Thank you all

 

[gojones]

Logger3006, I assume you can purchase some extra springs from Tractor Supply. I have one just down the street. Do you happen to have the size or just take one to the supply and find the size? By the way, I have a Hornady LNL AP, RCBS Rockchucker, and the Forster Co-Ax. I basically us my Forster for rifle and AP for pistol. The Rockchucker is an all purpose and my first press. I really love working with the Co-Ax though. I bought it really because I wanted it. It's like a fine handling sports car. Everything feels balanced and with more leverage than I could ever use. Haven't lost a spring yet, not even had one shoot out on to the floor. Just interested in having extras if they are as readily available as my Tractor Supply.

Don't worry about justifying your purchase, if you want one buy it. You'll never regret.

 

[logger3006]

Logger3006, I assume you can purchase some extra springs from Tractor Supply. I have one just down the street. Do you happen to have the size or just take one to the supply and find the size? By the way, I have a Hornady LNL AP, RCBS Rockchucker, and the Forster Co-Ax. I basically us my Forster for rifle and AP for pistol. The Rockchucker is an all purpose and my first press. I really love working with the Co-Ax though. I bought it really because I wanted it. It's like a fine handling sports car. Everything feels balanced and with more leverage than I could ever use. Haven't lost a spring yet, not even had one shoot out on to the floor. Just interested in having extras if they are as readily available as my Tractor Supply.

Don't worry about justifying your purchase, if you want one buy it. You'll never regret.

Sorry I don't know the spring size, for I have never lost one or even had one fly out of the press either. But my tractor supply has a assortment of springs and it wouldn't be hard to find one close to the size, or cut and trim a spring to fit. I use my CO-AX for my standard bolt face cartridges, and my lock n load single stage for my AR and pistols. There seems to be some people that don't like the CO AX for some reason or another. But I wouldn't trade mine for 10 of the other brands.

 

[BenPerfected]

Logger3006, I assume you can purchase some extra springs from Tractor Supply. I have one just down the street. Do you happen to have the size or just take one to the supply and find the size? By the way, I have a Hornady LNL AP, RCBS Rockchucker, and the Forster Co-Ax. I basically us my Forster for rifle and AP for pistol. The Rockchucker is an all purpose and my first press. I really love working with the Co-Ax though. I bought it really because I wanted it. It's like a fine handling sports car. Everything feels balanced and with more leverage than I could ever use. Haven't lost a spring yet, not even had one shoot out on to the floor. Just interested in having extras if they are as readily available as my Tractor Supply.

Don't worry about justifying your purchase, if you want one buy it. You'll never regret.

Sorry I don't know the spring size, for I have never lost one or even had one fly out of the press either. But my tractor supply has a assortment of springs and it wouldn't be hard to find one close to the size, or cut and trim a spring to fit. I use my CO-AX for my standard bolt face cartridges, and my lock n load single stage for my AR and pistols. There seems to be some people that don't like the CO AX for some reason or another. But I wouldn't trade mine for 10 of the other brands.

Save the trip to a Tractor Supply.....buy online.

http://www.forsterproducts.com/catalog.asp?prodid=700702&showprevnext=1

 

[Patch700]

I personally do not own a co-ax but I have used one when over at a buddies who lives some distance away and I didn't want to bring my entire shooting box for a weekend of varmint shooting.

My impression of it was it felt nice , and was well made... which leads me to this piece of advice, if you've been considering it I recommend buying one..
If you don't feel it's worth the price or that it suits your needs I'm quite sure you could sell it without taking a loss.

Good luck.

 

[LHSmith]

For the record, the intent of my posts was not to trash the CoAx, but to give real disadvantages as asked for by the OP to counter those that claim it is the best reloading tool ever developed.
I like the following features:
* The manner in which it is mounted to the bench allowing for the handle to operate at a more convenient position
* The design does not put undue stress on the bench
* Primer catcher
* Floating die design
If it had a means to accurately adjust shoulder set-back on the fly, then I might consider purchasing one.
I will add that I would defer from using one for competition use as I believe it offers too much mechanical advantage and I want to "feel" the effort required to size each case and segregate and more closely inspect the ones that give abnormal resistance. This is similar to our seating bullets by feel where you select a tool that allows you to do just that.