what is better about a bonanza co-ax than a convential press, such as a rockchucker. trying to justify buying one!
Printable View
what is better about a bonanza co-ax than a convential press, such as a rockchucker. trying to justify buying one!
Changing dies consists of just sliding them in once they are set. They are nice for depriming, the primers fall in to a list jar, instead of all over. Also is faster for depriming, due to the shell holder. You just flick the old one out and set the new one in. They do seem to have better leverage, makes reloading operations smoother. That being said, I wouldn't sell your Rockchucker. The Rockcucker can do thing the co-ax can't. Like resizing bullets with a lee sizing unit. I sold my co-ax because I wanted to downsize my reloading setup, also a Dillion square B, and a Redding T turret press. I bought a 750 Dillion and kept a single stage for the grunt work. Out of the three I sold, I do miss the co-ax. But I can easily get by without it.
The co axis set up is self aligning. Te dies slide in and float north south the shell holder clamps the case and floats east west. the die lock ring squares the die. Its a good solid accurate press with very good leverage ( a lot use it with the short handle). Priming is a little slower to set up and to do. but as mentioned depriming is quicker and contained completely. The new press have a hardened wear plate under the shell holder. I also removed the jar from the deprime and e clip installed a length of clear tubing and in to a 8 lb powder keg for more capacity. The set of shell holder jaws will do every thing but 22 hornet and 45-70 size case heads, for those you need a second set of jaws.
Collet pullers push thru sizers dont work well on the co ax do to the top handles swing over.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqcYI0G2hqM
gives you a good deal of information. Rock Chucker was one of the best presses!!!!
The bonanza one has a smaller “wishbone” handle that won’t allow use of some micrometer dies and other taller accessories that will for the current forster version.
The “why” is it’s unique vs other presses that require a bushings, threading dies in and out or shell holders for everything.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3AGbx5YVZk
That said, the dies you use make more difference that what press they are in. I can use good dies in a progressive and have less runout than other less than ideal dies in any single stage, including my rockchucker and co-ax.
If you have some handyman skills you can make a simple fixture to hold a dial indicator that will allow you to precisely adjust almost any die on a number of presses, for less than one “micrometer” die though and they will work even with the old co-ax presses.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ssw-AbNH7N4
I haven’t run one but I did have another “over the top” handle type presses and I found it much more straining for my body than a typical “O” press. Hold your arm up and out for 10 min and then hold it close to your belly for the same amount of time and decide which is easier. That, combine with its other quirks has kept me from buying one. I also don’t see the die arrangement as an advantage, as you must use set screw lock rings etc. the hornady die bushings are more convenient and solid imo. At 1/3 the cost my Lee classic O press with hornady bushings is tough to beat.
For me the co-ax seems like a solution in search of a problem.
ya that never made sense to me. If I want consistency in anything I want rigid. If I bought an rock chucker or something like it and the die wobbled around I sure wouldn't brag is self aligning. Id say its sloppy. I owned a co-ax back in the 70s when you had to have one to be cool. Never did a thing for me and collected dust for the most part. Lost it in my big fire and its one piece of loading equipment I never even considered replacing. Picked another one up about 3 years ago at a gunshop that was selling someone who had died stuff. I payed 75 bucks for it and went right home and put it on here for a 150 and it was gone the next day.
I have had one for over 45 years and love it. It does all my rifle loads.
I have a RC too for the heavy work.
It is a pain to prime on and dangerous IMHO as your hand is over the case as the primer seats. For small runs I use a hand primer and an RCBS bench primer for longer runs.
Love not having to adjust dies once I have a load dialed in...but that is no advantage if you load different bullets and different COL's. That could be addressed with additional seating dies if you have two or three loads. For example, I have one load for the .308 that is sub MOA in two rifles so the seating die is fixed. I will likely have two loads for the .223's, and they get more use, so I will buy another die for it.
I like the shell holder system as others have mentioned...it works.
I made up a larger bottle to catch primers. The RC is a pain with primers falling all over the place and it was primarily used to size and deprime military brass. I purchased a universal decapping die and do that operation on the co-ax.
If I had to get rid of one, I would resize the few thousand military cases I have and the RC would go. I do very little "heavy" work.
It’s 6 one, half dozen another. That above and down throw is why co-ax users say they are so easy to use because of the drastically increased throw. The more motion~the more leverage. If your holing you’re arm up and out for 10 min, it’s not on a handle and your not loading.Quote:
Hold your arm up and out for 10 min and then hold it close to your belly for the same amount of time and decide which is easier....the hornady die bushings are more convenient and solid imo.
I thought the LNL bushings were pretty cool until I had one self quick release on me, of course it was the one with the powder measure in it. The Lee Breech lock system with interrupted threads and locking button (first in the video in #5 above) is a better design.
i will say this about the "wobble" in the die holder of the co-ax (i've never used one). i think that it is a very good design. because; what makes you think that the threads of the die are in exact alignment with the threads and ram of your press. i don't tighten my dies in the press. i tighten them ,then crack them loose so that there is a little "wobble", then place a strip of duct tape across the lock ring onto the press; this keeps the die from backing off, but giving it some movement to center itself over the brass in both sizing and seating.
Short answer; for typical reloading a Co-Ax is better. I've had one for only 4 years loading mebbr 3,000 rounds. I have also used my Lee hardness tester on mine and sized some bullets with my Lee sizing dies (I made a longer"ram/stem" that fits the shell holder) . I don't do any swaging. I have heard a lot about the "long handle, long swing" but who says you have to grab the handle all the way out on the end? Out of curiosity I made a short handle, 8". It "worked" so-so but I just put the original back. For applications that don't need much leverage/force I just grab the handle by the yoke. No big deal.
I don't prime on my Co-Ax for every cartridge I reload as some are a bit harder to adjust the shell holder for. But it works with the same principle as a ram prime, very positive.This may because this 45 year old press has a different priming design (?), but my Co-Ax doesn't need my hands anywhere near the mouth of a case being primed.Quote:
It is a pain to prime on and dangerous IMHO as your hand is over the case as the primer seats.
Since 1971 I have owned several single stage presses, from a Lee Challenger to a Redding Boss and my Forster Co-Ax is by far the best, easiest to use, most precise press yet...
The video mostly deals with the shell holder jaws. Not the priming shell holder jaws. I have switched sell holder jaws hundreds of times and I bought the LS jaws to fit some cartridges I reload (one hint; I replaced the screws that holds the jaw assembly with phillips head screws. I use a 12" screwdriver which is much easier to remove/tighten screws than using an allen wrench). The priming shell holder jaws are the ones I mentioned as some cartridges have a pretty small/thin rim (380 and 45 Colt can be difficult to adjust). I don't consider this a "problem", it just takes me a longer to get this adjustment right with these two calibers.
Your ammo will never know the difference. So, which is "better" is a personal opinion based on the features.
If fast die exchange matters and if saving maybe a minute or two per loading session makes a difference to you, go Co-Ax.
If you find locating and exchanging snap-in shell holders to be clumsy or slow ((:) then go with the Co-Ax.
If you hate dealing with spilled spent primer grit on your ram, go Co-Ax.
If you hate sweeping your shop floor for scattered spent primer caps, go Co-Ax.
If you find dealing with the "straight out" lever of the Co-Ax impossibly awkward, go RCBS.
If you .... well, never mind, just go Co-Ax.
I guess I have to ask if its so superior why aren't they being sold in numbers. Gun guys tend to want the best or at least the best they can afford. Theres no way a co ax loads ammo any more accurate then a rockchucker or vise versa. Bench rest shooters today don't use either of them. If you want to get the same results and pay twice as much then well never mind just go co ax. If you want other loaders to think your cool because of what press is on your bench then just go co ax. Want the strongest longest lasting main stream press for the money. Get yourself a rock chucker or even a lyman orange crusher. Id include Hornady in with them but like another poster I don't care for there quick release dies that tend to quick release all on there own so mine about collects dust or is used for things like base swagging 40 brass or pulling bullets and my rock chucker gets the real work. If you want quick change and sloppy enough to self center you can buy two lnl presses for the price of a co ax.
I had to just choke! I looked up what a new coax cost and its over 500 bucks. Sorry but I can buy a like new 550 Dillon for that kind of money and they can be also be used as a good stout single stage when you want to. Sorry but NO single stage press is worth over 500 bucks to me. YOU just go get a co ax. I don't need to look cool. I spend a lot of money on loading gear. I don't scrimp when I do it. But I buy what works and don't spend money on something that doesn't save time or make the end product better or isn't made to last any longer.
I suspect they are, look around and try to find one in stock somewhere.
I’ll save you some time Midway, Grafs, Midsouth, Natchez, Brownell’s are all out of stock. You can get one from Forster, if you wanted to pay MSRP.
This is the only place I know of that has any in stock right now.
https://www.scheels.com/p/forster-co...725300268.html
FWIW I don’t have one to be cool but then again I don’t think my rock chucker, Lyman, Dillon’s or Lee’s make me any cooler either, just different tools for the same job.
They were $250 when I bought mine, maybe the fact that most resellers are out of stock on them in the low $300 price range and they are in stock at MSRP, we can see where the breaking point in price is for potential buyers.
Gee Lloyd, I didn't realize my Bonanza Co-ax made me one of the "cool kids"....good to know. I bought mine for $60, used, about 20 years ago, and love it. It was a great upgrade from my 60 year old Pacific. I have also had very good service from Forster dies. The Co-ax serves me better than my 550b for anything that is not loaded in bulk numbers. YMMV
From what I understand, Forster, which manufacturers many products other than the Co-Ax, produces them regularly and with all the other products they have to assign personnel and time for, they make as many as they can. They sell every one they make, there are none sitting in warehouses or on dealer's shelves.
One other plus to the co ax ( and rcbs summit) (I have both) is the large unrestricted opening and view of the shell holder case. While I wont say one press is better than another I do point out the differences and ergonomics as best I can. IN the end its up to the person to research and make up their mind. If possible hit some shops that have presses on display and look them over handle them and such. This can be an eye opener in itself.
I really like my co ax and its loaded a bunch of ammo. ( Ive wore out 2 sets of links and the shell holder base once. My was an earlier version that didn't have the wear plate it does now). Weight isn't bad when mounting moving it. Has plenty of leverage. My summit is much heavier and a real chore to mount move. THe shellholder die mount system works well. Its a comfortable well thought out press that is very useable
No one size fits all.
I have both the RC and Co-Ax. Prefer the Co-Ax. Bought 45+ years ago for $70...a lot more than a Lyman or RC I could have bought. The huge amount I over invested in the Co-ax would have been spent on whiskey, beer. and women instead. But I was a gun nut and knew I would never need another SS press for a few decades. Buy once, cry once.
Co-Ax is not a good choice if you are pinching pennies and want maximum value for your reloading $$$, or if you are not sure you want to reload for a few decades, or reload a few hundred rounds a year. Cheaper options out there for sure.
Just like a Star is not for everyone, or a Dillon, or a Spolar, or...…
I disagree with Lloyd a bit on this one. Some guys may want to buy the "cool factor", but I think many more buy higher end equipment because of real or perceived advantages. If RCBS charged $350 for a RC, it would not make it "cooler"....just overpriced...still a good press but not worth it.
I think it would be better to not limit your self to just the two mentioned presses. There are a number of other good choices out there, I would also look at Redding's and the Lee Cast series. Some assume that because the Lee Cast series cost less, that they may be lower quality, not the case. I actually found my Rockchucker IV disappointing based on the useless primer catching system, the Lee Cast series is pretty much bullet proof all the way around (IMO).
Well until someone can PROVE that they make ammo twice as good to justify twice the price ill stand by my overpriced opinion. Good press just not the great game changing press its toted as. im sure an argument can be made at me that the lee is cheaper yet and does everything the rcbs does. Cant argue it but I could sell either of my rockchukers today for more then I paid for them. I doubt you could say the same about a lee cast. Probably the only disadvantage though. I just have a thing against lee. The pro 1000 and pro master soured me on anything lee that's called a press. I just posted though that that new upside down lee press might find a place on one of my benches for sizing pc coated bullets. I look at the advertisement for those bonanzas and the floating die turns me off. Any bench rest shooter today was the most rigid press available. They don want there dies floating around. I could see back in the day its advantage in quick die change outs but today theres single stages with snap in dies and kits to convert any press to quick change dies. Like I said my lnl does it and even had enough slop in the system that it could be advertised and a floating die. Its why it collects dust or is just used for sizing brass or pulling bullets. Id never use it to seat bullets. to me its the 6.5 creedmore or 270 of presses. Get a few people back in the day that are well known to say its the ONLY press to have and it works better then anything else and is worth twice the money and they will come. Id have to ask why if its so darned good there such a poor seller today. I remember back in the 70s when I started seriously loading you could hardly find one because the sold as fast as they made them. Kind of again like the creedmore and 270. People saw through the advertising. They found out they were good but not game changing.
That’s not very easily done and why Lee sells so many rock bottom priced presses, lack of proof that more expensive presses load better ammunition. A Lee challenger is $75 new, a rock chucker is $180, yet there is no proof the RCBS will make ammunition 2.4 times better. I have loaded ammunition on that $60 Lee in #5 that has put 5 rounds into 3/8” at 100 yards, if I put the same dies in my RCBS and use the same components, I don’t get .156” groups.Quote:
Well until someone can PROVE that they make ammo twice as good to justify twice the price...
I could take the most precise single stage and install a mediocre die and get a worse final product than a great die in a mediocre single stage or progressive. So unless everything is identical in a blind side by side comparison, you couldn’t prove it, even if it were the case.
It would be nice if cost and improvement had a 1:1 relationship though. I can get a new 1 MOA rifle for $300, would be nice to spend $600 for one that just makes a single hole all the time.
Lots of benchrest shooters use small lightweight aluminum presses or even arbor like presses.Quote:
Any bench rest shooter today was the most rigid press available. They don want there dies floating around.
http://harrellsprec.com/index.php/ca...oading-presses
They also use dies custom made for the specific chamber in that rifle.
http://harrellsprec.com/index.php/pr...ull-length-die
It requires very little force in this case because you are not really moving much brass. I can load and fire a case 3 times in my 6mm ppc benchrest rifle without even sizing it, for example.
If you read David Tubb’s book he describes how he modifies Dillon tool heads and lock rings so they are floating.
John Whidden who has set a number of records himself, sells tool heads to float dies in 650’s. For people that want accurate ammunition without the added work of a single stage.
http://xcb.xanga.com/b76f50577053025...b204383403.jpg
His process
https://www.6mmbr.com/gunweek059.html
In any case their records are somewhat a testament to their processes. If floating is making their ammunition worse, that means they are even better shooters than everyone else thinks.
Roger that but it would be hard to make the "you get what you pay for crowd" admit it.
All of us can thank God for Lee, if not for them the prices of most of our tools would be much higher.
And, for what it's worth, there's no better conventional single stage available at any price than Lee's Classic Cast; it's better in every aspect than my old Rock Chucker. But, if someone wants a Co-Ax (or an RC) that's what he should get.
$500 is a lot, too much, really, for a single stage press. I've never heard the co ax equated with cool before. If it is, or is not cool to some forum critter, matters nothing at all to me.
I have both an old RCII and an old co-ax. Each is good at different things. The Co-ax is easier standing and the RC sitting.
Proof? Besides match results, proof might include runout results after sizing or seating. Both can produce for me zero runout ammo (with some inevitable rejects). One press can correct runout better. The other produces less runout. I see no need to dis one to laud the other. It's not a wife. You can have more than one. I never understood the need of some to own only one and piss on the others.
I bought a Forster Co-ax a few years ago and haven't set it up yet. I need to get to that. I sure didn't spend anywhere close to $500, though.
For all the reloading junk I have, the Rockchucker still does the bulk of all the tasks I do, like 95% or better.
I think we're back to what is the best press issue again....As for me, my original purchased (in 1967 for about $65 bucks) RCBS A2 is still loading top quality loads, I have owned and sold many many presses over the years, in fact my first press (Herters #3 purchased in 1965) reloaded as well as the Co-Ax I bought years later (and sold). From my experience I believe many people put more emphasis on tools used than on homework (preparation and measurements, and laying out good shooter skills). Accuracy is about 70-75% shooters ability, the rest to firearm choice and components. To hit a small target at 300-400 yards takes a hell of a lot of shooter skill......no so much as the press I used!...again IMO
I got lucky and got gifted an old Bonanza Co-Ax when I was first starting out. Cleaned it up and repainted it. Works great and does everything I need it to. However, I don’t know if I could justify the cost on a new one. My favorite thing about it is that I can throw in a universal decapping die, and can deprime all of my loose shells at once and sort as I go. The expandable jaws are a huge help in that regard. I do not like priming on it as it is a little awkward to do. I use a Frankford Arsenal hand primer for that.
Machined parts are not normally exactly specified as a single measurement point. Of practical necessity all interchangeable parts must have a tolerance range, meaning there's a maximum or minimum target number with plus or minus so many thousanths. The tolerance range can be narrow or wide but anything within the specified range is considered "spot on" for that measurement.
The dimensions and tolerances for ammo, the tools to make ammo and the chambers it's to be fired in come from SAAMI, the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Institute. ALL of our tool makers strive to keep their parts within SAAMI tolerances and they do pretty well. But tolerances in any system can "stack" in a good way or in a "bad" way and it can't be helped. Thus, assembled mechanical items will vary from "near perfection" to "barely tolerable but still works okay".
Parts by parts, the variations come randomly ... and from ALL makers. If any "brand" had proof of their tools being more accurate or made more accurate ammo than others of its type, they would advertize it everywhere. Advertizing laws being what they are, we have no maker crazy enough to say that.
Amature machine experts (like web reloading gurus!) often insist their favorite brand is "best" and that presses and dies and shell holders should be wrench locked in alignment. But machinists who know what's actually going on will say, "That's not so, there are too many variables that can't be controlled for ridgid tooling to work well in the real world." For instance, high cost custom rifle barrels are usually chambered in large lathes with the reamers held in costly "floating" holders that allow the tapered tool to actually move around enough to precisely follow the bore.
Ditto the alignment needs of our reloading presses and dies. Our round cases WILL precisely celf center themselves into tapered dies - they can't do otherwise - unless they're firmly held out of alignment (that's why Forster's CoAx and its floating die system works so well). All of the part tolerances involved in reloading insure there simply can't be any predictable locked down precise alignment. Confusion about that fact appears to get many presses tossed as "worn out", often just when the ram is finally worn enough to let it actually make better ammo!
It's been decades since I followed BR competition results but when I did NONE of the winners ever used our (generally flaky, IMHO) threaded presses and threaded dies in their determined pursuit of fine accuracy. That's probably still true. ??
I don't recall my Co-Ax being particularly expensive in comparison with other presses when I purchased it new more than thirty (maybe forty?) years ago. I don't know about the perfect alignment claims some attribute to the Co-Ax, but I do know that measured runout has been minimal with rifle cartridges loaded on my press. Perhaps it would also be minimal with other press designs. I've never loaded handgun cartridges on the press. I use an assortment of dies from a variety of manufacturers.
Some have mentioned a lack of versatility with the Co-Ax and this includes using a collet bullet puller, file-type trim dies, removing primer crimps from GI brass, etc. This lack of versatility is the reason I've always kept a heavy-duty single stage press such as an RCBS Big Max or Redding Ultra Mag bolted to my loading bench. I no longer work with wildcat cartridges or do any case forming. A Co-Ax could probably for case forming but it wouldn't be my first choice.
Priming on the Co-Ax works well if you overlook the setup part of the process.
However, for 95% of routine everyday handloading work, I like and prefer the Co-Ax over other presses. Opinions vary, sometimes a lot.
A while back there was a new press on here ( i believe it was German made) that used ball bushings on three rods and bearing in the linkage. I looked at it on their sight. It was a very nice press the preloaded ball bushing and ball bearings would make for smooth operation. The heavy plate design and leverage would also add to this presses desirability. But the price tag of several thousand dollars negated it. There are many expensive presses out there. What is a decked out Dillon 650 with feeder measures and tool heads going for now? How about one of the mark 7 hydraulically operated progressives.
I load ammo on several presses depending on use and rifle. I use a Co Ax, Summit, dillan 650 ( 2 on my bench loaded all my high power ammo on it. one is set up to use a harrels powder measure), rock chucker and lyman orange crusher, last is a small home made arbor press used with wilson or custom straight line dies, This does produce the best ammo in my tight necked rifles. Its slow and very methodical.
When looking at a new press you need to decide what your specifications are how accurate a press/ The needed leverage and stroke of the press. All of te intended uses, rifle ammo pistol, ammo, bullet pulling, file and trim, heavy case forming, speed, mounting some press over hang the bench making a drawer useless, Construction, die mounting I personally dont care for having to by extras to mount standard dies in a press, "color" you want, and last cost
I have two Rockchuckers. I was having concentricity issues producing rifle ammo for long range shooting. So I bought the Co-Ax. I'm thrilled with it, and use it for resizing and seating for all rifle ammo. I really like the far less mess of de-priming with it. The Rockchuckers I still use for pistol ammo. All priming is done with an RCBS benchtop primer.
All that said, if starting from scratch again, I'd probably go with the Hornady or Dillon progressive press.
About the value of wrenching dies in place, I've not paid attention to precision rifle match results lately but traditionally winning BR shooters used (unthreaded) hand dies and simply pushed their cases in and out with a lightweight arbor press; we can't get a looser "connection" between our dies and press than that! Well, okay, the Co-Ax press floats dies too ... but it costs a lot more than Lee's lock rings! :)
Fact is, locking threaded dies down hard into a press with a wrench is a noob mistake. If we can bring ourselves to let dies float in our press a little bit the proper case-to-die alignment will automatically follow. Lee's badly misunderstood - and much hated - rubber "O" die lock rings accomplish exactly that and they keep the dies adjusted too!
They are out of stock, could be priced at $1 if you can’t buy it. That said, the link I posted in #18 is only a couple dollars more.
I bought my Bonanza at an auction recently for about $20. The primer setup has been changed to take normal shell holders which makes changing them very easy and fast. I have 2 rockchucks, a JR , CHIII, Star, 550b, Lyman Spar t, Lyman AA, and 3 Lee pro 1000s. The Bonanza has become my favorite to load on other than the 550b so I don't even care if I paid too much.