• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

Prazi press

M-61 you say a press means nothing to your loaded ammo so tell me then why do you put an "O" ring under your die.
No factual reason at all. Other than “Why not?”
The brass is going in the die and centers itself if I haven’t pushed it all the way back in the shell holder. The ‘O’ merely lets the die float a bit. It is something I’ve always done, probably not needed at all. For the price of an ‘O’ ring, I’m in!
As I stated above the press has nothing to do with accurate ammo.
Do I think the ‘O’ is a cheap and maybe helpful? Yup. Am I recommending anything or giving instructions? Nope.
As I’ve said in many of my posts I’m not giving advice or instructions to anyone. Everything I write is merely my experience with my reloading or rifles. Not anyone else’s. Eventually I’ll not post anything.
It’s easier.
 
Last edited:
I thought I read somewhere that Tony Boyers had the ram rod turned down a couple of thousandths to get better shell to die alignment. Point being to put some slop into the ram...
 
Last edited:
Example would be MEC. Beautiful. However the designer never went to engineering school. The method used to mount the handle is the worst and weakest imaginable.
I'm no mechanical engineer, but can you give more detail on this 'worst and weakest'?
 
I'm no mechanical engineer, but can you give more detail on this 'worst and weakest'?
Sure. Handle installation. Anytime you cut threads you weaken say the cylinder you are cutting them on. But there are a few ways to help that. Always remember the first three fully inserted threads carry 70% of the load.
Now let’s use the press handle as an example. You screw the handle in. The first exposed thread is the weakest. That’s where the handle will snap. How to help? Not that there’s the same force on them (direction) what you want is the same way say a barrel screws into an action. (Not Savage) it stops at a shoulder. That shoulder eliminates any exposed thread and that problem. An RCBS A-4 is one example amongst others. Now no way should anyone be applying that amount of force on a handle to size a case, but yes they are out there. That MEC is an example of a beautiful press with threaded handle and exposed threads. Really a shame. As I said in a previous post LEE Cast Iron really did some thinking. No threads at all. An ingenious way to connect the handle and as a bonus it allows infinite adjustment.
I tried to keep this short.
 
Last edited:
I recall a similar question about forster coax loading better ammo because of floating shell plates etc. I compared the coax and my redding bb2. Used same dies, shell holder, loads on each press. Absolutely no difference whatsoever on target. The dies are in control.
 
LEE Cast Iron really did some thinking
Most the Lee stuff is well, or least cleverly, engineered. Then they save money on finish (pretty coatings, etc.) and we get reasonably priced stuff, most of which works great.

I use a Co-Ax because all the forces, including that of the handle, are aligned (it is overall very well engineered), and because of primer disposal, case holding / releasing, and easy die in-and-out. With the curved linkages I lose camover but gain ease of access, so I made that trade off.

Having said that, the last time I compared runout on the Co-Ax to runout on the Hornady LNL AP, the LNL AP was better :(

The Praxi 120, with linear bearings, beautiful finish and so on, will likely last longer (although my Co-Ax is labelled Bonanza and is still going strong and the Praxi's off-axis handle forces introduce twist that will raise wear) and look nicer, and might feel smoother. I don't think it will make better ammo or bring any quality-of-life improvements. I do think the pricing, as with that of the Nexus (which is no doubt smooth and has a better handle, but loses the easy case holding/releasing compared to the Co-Ax, requires non-standard shell holders and takes a lot more space on the bench), indicates a classic case of reverse elasticity.

I remember when the Gucci press was the Co-Ax and people complained about its price. But it brought some good quality of life things, so I bought one and sold the RCBS.
 
I also recall a discussion on tight and worn presses. I think this was about the time the zero press was coming out. A well known gent at the time tested a new tight press against a worn out rcbs rc press with quite a bit of ram runout. He found that the worn press loaded more accurate ammo and concluded that the wear allowed better alignment of the brass in the die.
 
Most the Lee stuff is well, or least cleverly, engineered.
Yes I agree and especially with the finish.
I don’t know why I had this in my head that LEE was not good. In addition to a fabulous
Strong press , the interrupted thread die holder was a really nice touch. No idea if they were the first with this or not but it was new to me. Not the interrupted threads but their application in a press.
I’ve changed thousands of ( no exaggeration) interrupted thread barrels in my early years so I guess seeing that was a trip back in time.
 
I also recall a discussion on tight and worn presses. I think this was about the time the zero press was coming out. A well known gent at the time tested a new tight press against a worn out rcbs rc press with quite a bit of ram runout. He found that the worn press loaded more accurate ammo and concluded that the wear allowed better alignment of the brass in the die.
Yup. One day I’d like to use my bench vise to push the case into the die. This vise is nothing special in any way and used for everything. I have to withdraw the case from the die….. maybe I can tack weld a shell holder to the jaw? My guess? The case will be perfect as if using a press. Or at least as perfect as the die. My bench vise is about as sloppy as you can get. It was sloppy 50+ years ago when I bought it. Those acme threads had plenty of slop from day one.
 
Yup. One day I’d like to use my bench vise to push the case into the die. This vise is nothing special in any way and used for everything. I have to withdraw the case from the die….. maybe I can tack weld a shell holder to the jaw? My guess? The case will be perfect as if using a press. Or at least as perfect as the die. My bench vise is about as sloppy as you can get. It was sloppy 50+ years ago when I bought it. Those acme threads had plenty of slop from day one.
Or just use an arbor press
 
Most of my reloading life I have used a RCBS Rockchucker and a Redding T7 turret press. Almost all of my dies are Redding. They do the job well in my experience, however I have never really gotten very low runout. Ok, but not great.
About five years ago I ordered a Prazipress 120mm, and a set of Triebel 1 1/4 inch dies in 7x64 Brenneke. Treibel requested that I send them the exact bullet that I would be seating in my 7x64. In this case it was a Nosler 160 gr Accubond. They contoured the seating stem to match that bullet precisely. Anyway my runout has dropped remarkably, so much so that in most cases it’s very hard to read. I doubt the press reduced the runout but it certainly works well with 1 1/4 inch dies, and the pleasure in using it, is worth every cent to me. I now just use the Redding T7 for primer decapping and bullet pulling duties. IMG_6323.jpeg
 
Most of my reloading life I have used a RCBS Rockchucker and a Redding T7 turret press. Almost all of my dies are Redding. They do the job well in my experience, however I have never really gotten very low runout. Ok, but not great.
About five years ago I ordered a Prazipress 120mm, and a set of Triebel 1 1/4 inch dies in 7x64 Brenneke. Treibel requested that I send them the exact bullet that I would be seating in my 7x64. In this case it was a Nosler 160 gr Accubond. They contoured the seating stem to match that bullet precisely. Anyway my runout has dropped remarkably, so much so that in most cases it’s very hard to read. I doubt the press reduced the runout but it certainly works well with 1 1/4 inch dies, and the pleasure in using it, is worth every cent to me. I now just use the Redding T7 for primer decapping and bullet pulling duties. View attachment 1696871
Thanks
This is what I was looking for, feedback from those who have one what it's done or didn't do for them
 
Odd that the Co-Ax does not get a mention, the shell holder/spring jaw setup allows for the case to directly align with the die and helps ensure that there is no misalignment between the the die and the case being held in the press platen.
That alone is the selling feature of the press and can contribute to the concentricity of the case and bullet as the original question was about “Run Out”.
My Bonanza {the original Co-Ax before Foster bought it} loads ammo so close to perfect that I no longer bother to check case to bullet alignment and have never seen any difference on target between the 1/2 thousandth runout to the 3 thousandth ammo…
On another note, M-61 missed correcting the use of “Sight” for “Site” on the question about the Rodzilla press… ;)
I’ve processed / assembled some 18,000+ 600/1,000 yard handloads w/a Co-Ax, never an issue
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
166,970
Messages
2,225,683
Members
80,071
Latest member
GWL
Back
Top