Forster CO Ax press

[bddc2012]

I am thinking about purchasing a Forster Co Ax press and am interested in the advantages / disadvantages of this press.

Experiences are most appreciated.

 

[savageshooter86]

Advantage: won't regret purchase
Disadvantage: none

 

[LHSmith]

Disadvantages :
1/ Cost....the overwheming majority of reloading tasks can be accomplished with a less expensive press like the Lee Classic Cast, Redding Boss, or even the RCBS Partner and they will produce as accurate ammo as the CoAX. The dies are what makes accurate ammo.
2/ The universal S/H may prove troublesome....especially if you loose the tiny springs.
3/ Apparently you can't use die shims, PMA's micro-adjuster, or Redding competition shell holders to precisely adjust shoulder bump like you can on a normal press. There is an adapter available to use standard S/H's, but now you are foregoing one of the presses virtues. :

 

[coford]

I have been using one for several years now and would never go back.
Advantages:
Lots of compound leverage - better than most large O frame presses
Super quick die changes
Loads very straight ammo because of the ability of the die to float
I really like the universal shell holder
Spent primers are caught in a jar - not spilled all over the place

Disadvantages
Loosing the little springs in the shell holder is a pain
Forster die rings work better than most other brands when using this press and they are a little pricey

 

[logger3006]

If I had to give up my CO-AX and use just my Lock n Load single stage, I don't think I would enjoy reloading as much as I do. Don't let the scare of losing small parts scare you. Everything on that press is replaceable. That being said I have never lost anything on my press. It is the most accurate thing I ever purchased out of all of my shooting equipment including my guns. Most people hate on the CO-AX because they can't justify the price.

 

[Gene66]

I agree with logger3006.

 

[jimcasey01]

Over the years I have used numerous makes and models of presses, the co-ax is by far my favorite regard ease of use and nearly rivals an arbor press for accuracy. I have never lost a spring nor any other part, but if that is a fear of yours, buy an extra set to keep on hand, or use shell holders, then no need for the spring. For speed a progressive wins hands down.

 

[hepburn45110]

I have a COAX. It won't load as straight as my Sinclair. If I am loading for prairie dogs , I use it . It's a little quicker.

 

[amamnn]

A co-ax thast won't load straight? I'll bet Forster would like to see that press..............assuming Forster's locking rings are being used on the dies............

 

[chkunz]

I have made several comments on my experience on the Co-AX press on other threads. I will copy one of them below:In reply to OleFreak, I wrote a report on the results of the research that was published in PS so thankfully I do not have to depend on memory. My point was that I did not get better results with the Bonanza Co-Ax over the RCBS so based on my experience there was no advantage for the Co-Ax as far as accuracy goes and that is what I thought was relevant here. We have one reply that reports better accuracy for the Co-Ax and now one report that did not get more accurate ammo as least as far as run out goes. My data did not reveal anything unexpected relative to run out but just quantified the parameters with data. As you would expect, case neck wall thickness variation translated almost directly into run out, the expander ball was the next big contributor and I showed with data how much replacing the expander ball with the expander mandrel was worth (at that time this was not as well known as it is today). I quantified the improvement that many have reported by putting O rings under the dies and letting them float (I think the Co-Ax does this somewhat in its design). I also showed that you could mix the dies and press and find a combination that worked best. Nothing new here but the reloader can get run out down to 0.001 by doing these things. But the important question was what is the reduction in run out worth on the target? Creighton Audette had shown that with the 308 target rifle of the day and the NMC target it was not significant. I found the same thing with the M14. It would be interesting to see meaningful data on run out vs accuracy with the more accurate F Class rifle and demanding F Class target.

 

[chkunz]

I have copied another reply on this subject from another thread. I will give you a different opinion on the Forster (Bonanza) Co-Ax press. Many years ago when I started reloading I started with the simplest most basic press, a Lyman C press. That was all I could afford at the time an it worked well. I looked at the Bonanza Co-Ax and it was of a radically different design and I thought about how great this press must be and eventually I saved the money to buy one. It was like getting into a hot bath, it is not nearly so hot once you get into it. It worked ok and for some things there were advantages but there were also disadvantages. At one time I did a rather extensive study on bullet run out that was published in Precision Shooting Magazine, the data did not show any advantage of run out with the Bonanza over the RCBS and Redding presses. So I concluded that the Bonanza Co-Ax was different but not better and I now use it for depriming only, it is really good for that. I would recommend that the beginner start with a Lyman, RCBS or Redding single station press and then add a Redding T-7 when he can afford it. After that if you would like to try the Bonanza Co-Ax go ahead and see what you think but do not start there.

 

[Joe R]

I have the Co-Ax, its the only single stage press I've ever owned. I do use a Hornady progressive press for things like de-priming, expanding necks and other non-critical things, but all my resizing is done on the Co-Ax. It works.

I know that some people complain about the price, but that seems silly to me. Compared to what I spend on bullets its trivial. The bullets are used only once, the press gets lots of use.

 

[Minesweeper3433]

Forster did take very good care of me when the pins that the linkage arms rotate on galled and wore down. It was nice being able to call them, and someone answer the phone, listen, then ask for an address and tell me the parts are on the way.

 

[Richard Jones]

I'll have to say, I really like mine. I'll add that I got it for a song a few years ago........

'Features' liked/used:
Quick die change
Dies free float
Built like a tank
Excellent leverage

'Features' not liked/used:
Priming(never used it, way too slow and can't feel as well as my K&M)
Universal S/H--used it only until the standard S/H adapter plate came in the mail. The std. S/H is quicker to change and also 'floats'.

All of the above is strictly the author's opinion and should not be construed as judgmental or anything approaching gospel-like.......

Rich

 

[Hoser]

I have one am very happy with it. Previous presses were a Rockchucker and a Redding Ultra-Mag.

I added a Dillon Strong Mount to mine.

 

[Joe R]

Hoser
I have one am very happy with it. Previous presses were a Rockchucker and a Redding Ultra-Mag.

I added a Dillon Strong Mount to mine.

Hoser,
I see that you have the Sinclair bullet comparator in the background, but with a different indicator than mine. Is that an upgrade?

Thanks,

Joe

 

[LHSmith]

Looks like a Mark King comparitor, Sinclairs is much smaller base and only 1/2 dia. post.

 

[bigedp51]

bddc2012

The Forster Co-Ax press allows the die to float in the press and the Forster dies allow the high mounted expander to float while the neck of the case is supported in the neck of the die. Both of these "floating" methods help produce minimum neck runout and a very concentric resized case.

You can make your dies float on any press by using a rubber o-ring under the die lock ring and only make the lock ring finger tight. And you can add the Forster expander and spindle unit to the majority of dies and you will have a floating expander. By adding the o-ring under the dies lock ring and Forster spindle unit I turned my 42 year old RCBS Rockchucker into a Co-Ax press for hundreds less.

The full length RCBS .223 die below is now producing resized cases with .001 or less runout.

 

[Joe R]

bigedp51,
Using O rings is a very good way to improve your RockChucker. Several books I have read recommend the addition of O rings to reduce runout to many O style presses. I hope that the O rings help you produce good match ammo, however the addition of O rings does not turn a Rockchucker into a Co-Ax. At the end of the day you have an improved Rockchucker. Thinking otherwise is simply wishful thinking.

Kindest regards,

Joe

 

[bigedp51]

bigedp51,
Using O rings is a very good way to improve your RockChucker. Several books I have read recommend the addition of O rings to reduce runout to many O style presses. I hope that the O rings help you produce good match ammo, however the addition of O rings does not turn a Rockchucker into a Co-Ax. At the end of the day you have an improved Rockchucker. Thinking otherwise is simply wishful thinking.

Kindest regards,

Joe

My dies are floating like a Co-Ax press and are self aligning along with the decapping spindle, and my o-rings and expander spindles didn't cost $300.00. I'm also using Redding competition shell holders and once the die makes hard contact with the shell holder the press is removed from the equation. So my Ford press produces ammunition just as good as your Lexus press and I get better gas milage and spend less per mile. (and that ain't wishful thinking, its a fact)

And it wasn't wishful thinking seeing .001 or less runout by this simple and "cheap" modification. And as stated previously studies by Precision Shooting Magazine showed that there was "NO" advantage using the Co-Ax press.