Forster Co-Ax Press

[kapt]

Have been considering buying one of the Forrester Co-Ax presses but have not fully convinced myself yet. Curious to anyone who uses one if they live up to the hype advertised. Have been using Rockchuckers for the past 45 years and even wore out one after 35 years which RCBS replaced for free.
Any input as to pros and cons for them would be appreciated.

Ron

 

[Ledd Slinger]

Believe the most of the hype. You can read all day long about them with a Google search. I like my Coax for seating on hunting rounds. Prefer my RockChucker for FL sizing on most everything. Use my Redding T7 for high volume varmint rounds. All 3 very good presses. My favorite things about the Coax is how quickly I can change out my dies and the fact that I don't need to change shell holders. Very fast and convenient when loading multiple calibers

Though for seating in rifles with custom tight neck chambers, I use a 21st Century Gen II arbor press with an arbor die made with my reamer from Wilson seating die blank

 

[dickn52]

I kept breaking the 'claws' on the shell holders. After three replacements I sent it back.

 

[Richard Coody]

I kept breaking the 'claws' on the shell holders. After three replacements I sent it back.

Obviously operator error.

 

[dickn52]

Obviously operator error.

Ok, but it didn't work for me Mr Snark. Who asked you anyway?

 

[BP1]

Ok fellas cut it out,OP I pretty much do what ledd slinger does I seat with the co ax and full size with my big boss ii.

 

[msinc]

The Co-ax press is the "Colt Python" of the reloading world. Not until you actually own one do you come to realize that it is really not something special. I had one once and didn't feel the love...my biggest question reading this thread is; if you still gotta have multiple other presses to get the ammo done how can it be so fantastic??? Don't get me wrong, I like and use a lot of Forster/Bonanza tooling and there are some things they make that there is no substitute as far as I am concerned. But, the Co-ax press is just not one of them. I will go one step further and say that as far as a company to deal with....any reasonable person would be hard pressed to find one better.
I am still trying to figure out what this press is supposed to do that makes it so great. The name implies and it is advertised to produce some sort of better, more precision aligned and thus more accurate ammo. Sorry fellas, it is not there. Is it quality made??? Yes. Is it more expensive??? Yes. Does it replace everything else press operations wise because it is faster and better??? Nope. Does the end resulting ammo loaded on one shoot better and more accurate than any other quality press can produce??? No. Will you buy one anyway??? Probably. Will you think of this post and admit, "darn, that Maryland hillbilly was right??? Yep!!!!, if only to yourself.
Go back and read this thread up to this point...3 out of 4 said they have to have "another press" to get them thru the night...must be some of that "obvious operator error"???

 

[nakneker]

The Co-ax press is the "Colt Python" of the reloading world. Not until you actually own one do you come to realize that it is really not something special. I had one once and didn't feel the love...my biggest question reading this thread is; if you still gotta have multiple other presses to get the ammo done how can it be so fantastic??? Don't get me wrong, I like and use a lot of Forster/Bonanza tooling and there are some things they make that there is no substitute as far as I am concerned. But, the Co-ax press is just not one of them. I will go one step further and say that as far as a company to deal with....any reasonable person would be hard pressed to find one better.
I am still trying to figure out what this press is supposed to do that makes it so great. The name implies and it is advertised to produce some sort of better, more precision aligned and thus more accurate ammo. Sorry fellas, it is not there. Is it quality made??? Yes. Is it more expensive??? Yes. Does it replace everything else press operations wise because it is faster and better??? Nope. Does the end resulting ammo loaded on one shoot better and more accurate than any other quality press can produce??? No. Will you buy one anyway??? Probably. Will you think of this post and admit, "darn, that Maryland hillbilly was right??? Yep!!!!, if only to yourself.
Go back and read this thread up to this point...3 out of 4 said they have to have "another press" to get them thru the night...must be some of that "obvious operator error"???

I'm thinking about buying one. This is the first lack luster comment/review I've seen. I would think a concentricity gauge would be able to show whether or not it loads to higher concentric level. I like that you can set your dies and simply pull them or insert them. I like the lack of shell holders. I'll be interested to see who chimes in. I've never owned one, like I said, but your definitely swimming against the flow.

 

[msinc]

I'm thinking about buying one. This is the first lack luster comment/review I've seen. I would think a concentricity gauge would be able to show whether or not it loads to higher concentric level. I like that you can set your dies and simply pull them or insert them. I like the lack of shell holders. I'll be interested to see who chimes in. I've never owned one, like I said, but your definitely swimming against the flow.

When you get one, and you will...trust me we all had to give one a try, you will realize that all the time you save and the convenience of popping the dies back and forth is quickly negated by the time you will waste finger jacking around with having to change back and forth the shell holder from standard to small case size. First time that stupid little spring flips away and you have to spend 20 minutes recovering it you will want to throw the whole mess out the window.
Then there's the fallacy of "setting the dies up once and forever" and just pull or insert them...yes you can load that way, but if you are sizing to headspace then you know that unless all the brass you are sizing is the same brand and hard or softness level you have to adjust the dies anyway.
I'd be just as "swimming against the tide" on the Colt forum if I posted that my Python's forcing cone looks like some idiot tried to cut a thread in it.....I'm used to it, it's never stopped me..... I will tell you the truth.

 

[Jarhead6870]

I have to agree with the "Maryland Hillbilly" in that you can, and many do, reload quality ammunition on presses other than a Co-Ax. Reloading is an entire process and only as good as the weakest link. With the many presses I've reloaded on, the press was never the blame for ammunition that did not perform as expected. This isn't to say there aren't presses out there that have issues and won't perform properly, but I also don't think there's one press manufacture that hasn't had a bad one show up that needed to be repaired or replaced.

Ergonomics are another consideration of a press. The Forster design has the handle much higher than most as well as needing to have the cases inserted more from the front of the press in the line of travel of the handle whereas some of the "O" frame presses allow you to rotate the shell holder and insert the case more from the side. There are aftermarket products to help the Forster but there are trade-offs for this modification.

Don't get me wrong, the Forster Co-Ax is a very good press. But my experience has shown that it is not going to magically produce ammunition that is better than what can be loaded on another press.

 

[IdahoSharpshooter]

1st off: Everybody should own an A4. Especially if you have the big cartridges, like a 338 LM or 375 LM or Chey-tac. I used (and loved) my Forster for more than 20 years. But, I went to an Arbor Press and Wilson inline dies once I started shooting BR.

 

[nakneker]

When you get one, and you will...trust me we all had to give one a try, you will realize that all the time you save and the convenience of popping the dies back and forth is quickly negated by the time you will waste finger jacking around with having to change back and forth the shell holder from standard to small case size. First time that stupid little spring flips away and you have to spend 20 minutes recovering it you will want to throw the whole mess out the window.
Then there's the fallacy of "setting the dies up once and forever" and just pull or insert them...yes you can load that way, but if you are sizing to headspace then you know that unless all the brass you are sizing is the same brand and hard or softness level you have to adjust the dies anyway.
I'd be just as "swimming against the tide" on the Colt forum if I posted that my Python's forcing cone looks like some idiot tried to cut a thread in it.....I'm used to it, it's never stopped me..... I will tell you the truth.

I like the honesty. You make some valid points and your right, I'll probably try it for myself. Your Python analogy makes sense, couldn't agree more on that.

 

[ireload2]

The Coax press is covered with marketing gimmickry to differentiate it from other presses.
That is not really Forster's fault. The gimmickry was designed in by the original owner of Bonanza Reloading, Clarence Purdie. You will notice that everything Purdie sold was a bit different from the competition to make it seem as if you were getting a Cadillac and allow them to charge Cadillac prices.

The marketing is like the heavy layer of batter and skin on piece of fried chicken. If you like chicken skin I guess it is ok. Underneath the chicken skin is just ordinary chicken in a different shape.

I give my presses very heavy use forming cases that would destroy a Co AX. It seems to fill a role for people that think fast, fast, fast for changing dies but there seems to be no other significant benefit. Given me a break if you think changing shell holders is an onerous chore.

I like some Forster products such their dies and their case trimmer. The Co Ax press is not things I like. If they were that great everyone would own one and the other companies would not sell thousands of conventional presses.

 

[nakneker]

The Coax press is covered with marketing gimmickry to differentiate it from other presses.
That is not really Forster's fault. The gimmickry was designed in by the original owner of Bonanza Reloading.
The marketing is like the heavy layer of batter and skin on piece of fried chicken. If you like chicken skin I guess it is ok.
Underneath the chicken skin is just ordinary chicken in a different shape.
I give my presses very heavy use forming cases that would destroy a Co AX. It seems to fill a role for people that think fast, fast, fast for changing dies but there seems to be no other significant benefit. Given me a break if you think changing shell holders is an onerous chore.

I like some Forster products like their dies and their case trimmer. The Co Ax press is not one of the things I like. If they were that great everyone would own one and the other companies would not sell thousands of conventional presses.

I'm seeing a trend here. If your a site contributor you like it. If your not you don't like it just kidding, don't bite my head off, it's a joke. Another not so glamorous opinion. Food for thought.

 

[ireload2]

The CoAx press seems to have a me too following just like Lee... the marketing gravy drowns out the reality.

I'm seeing a trend here. If your a site contributor you like it. If your not you don't like it just kidding, don't bite my head off, it's a joke. Another not so glamorous opinion. Food for thought.

 

[LHSmith]

IMHO a simple single stage press and in-line seaters and arbor press will set you up for a lifetime whether just plinking or full blown BR(It is the careful matching of the FL die to your rifles chamber that produces the best positive results on target).
The Coax presses negatives: 1/Does not allow use of resizer die shims or micro-die adjusters to tweak shoulder set-back on cases that resist sizing........This is the #1 deal breaker for me.
2/ Not very convenient for transporting for loading at the range
3/ Universal shell holder design- IMHO the worst feature........universal shellholder designs are just over-engineering and create nothing but problems.

 

[Shrek]

I love my Co-Ax. I've had a couple of "O" presses and when I switched to the Co-Ax I lost a thousandth of runout. Looking back I could have put a rubber o-ring under the dies and done the same thing with the other presses but what a pita it would have been to get a consistent batch to batch sizing when I changed out the dies. I snap them in and out and load. Sometimes I need the slightly adjust for brass spring differences but I'd have to do that anyway. I've never had a problem with changing out the shell holder jaws and very rarely do it. Never broken the jaws. The Co-Ax isn't a panacea for all things related to presses but they're a great press and easy to use. I love the spent primer catcher. Works the best I've seen and helps keep the reloading room clean. I might try an arbor press next but I don't shoot benchrest and I don't see it making any difference as my ammo is straight and consistent down to a thousandth. Any of the common presses will get you there but the Co-Ax is easier than most to use imo. A Lee Classic Cast is a lot cheaper and just as good if not better than any other "O" press if cost is of any concern. In the scheme of things the differences in costs of a presses that will last a lifetime are negligible. If you think of what you spend on the consumables you run through a press every year it becomes clear that you can afford to buy a couple of presses and try them to see what you like. It's what I did and settled on the Co-Ax. Sold the others and got some of my money back.

 

[msinc]

"Given me a break if you think changing shell holders is an onerous chore."

I don't when I change them on my Rockchucker. I wouldn't necessarily call it "onerous" on the Co-ax either, but in comparison it is, at the very least, a lack of convenience for certain.

Well, when what you think you need to own is discussed in terms of Colt Pythons and chicken skin there's your first clue to think about the "need" for something else...I mean, GD!!!!!!!!

All jest aside, it is not a bad press. I had mine and used it from 1991 until about 6 months ago. I didn't use it much, but it wasn't like I got it and a week or so later decided to loose the thing. One good point about it, again shared with the Python...you are probably not going to loose any money on it when you get sick of it.

 

[Bob L.]

Have been considering buying one of the Forrester Co-Ax presses but have not fully convinced myself yet. Curious to anyone who uses one if they live up to the hype advertised. Have been using Rockchuckers for the past 45 years and even wore out one after 35 years which RCBS replaced for free.
Any input as to pros and cons for them would be appreciated.

Ron

I used a Rockchucker for 35 years and then bought a Coax. I still have the Rockchucker set up on my bench, but rarely use it and then only for removing bullets or a stuck case. The Coax is not magical, but I do find it easier to use, except for changing the shellholder. In loading approximately 15,000 rounds I have never damaged a shellholder, but do not do any heavy forming.

Can you try one at a friend's or a local gun shop? You can probably tell pretty quickly if it's what you want or not.

 

[jdh47]

The co-ax is a pretty good press. It's best feature is the ability to change dies quickly. I took the shell holder off and changed it out for a standard shell holder so I don't have to fight the dysfunctional spring thing. Eventually I will build one that captures the springs so I don't have to fight the things.

It is not as robust as a Rock Chucker. It is just a different design and I don't hold anything against it. It is sort of a modified c-frame press. Reloading good ammunition is more a product of attention to detail and using good dies and components.

The various O-frame presses are all good. So is the Co-Ax it is just expensive and different. All have their devotees.

Joe