Greetings all! I'm new to the forum and new to reloading in general but I have just about decided that the Forster Co-Ax is the press for me.

My one question I have yet to see answered is how big of a hassle it is to do the shell holder changeover.

I'm going to be starting off reloading both Remington .223 for an AR-15 and Remington 300 Ultra Mag in my hunting rifle.

On the Forster Co-Ax instruction manual you can read online, it says that the smaller side of the "S" jaws work for the .223 and the larger side works for the bigger calibers like my Remington 300 Ultra Mag.

My big debate on this press is if its going to be a pain in the butt to changeover these jaws or not when reloading from one side or the other. The exploded view of the jaws shows a bunch of little springs and screws. Seems like a recipe for stuff getting lost.

Is there much to changing these jaws around or not?

The other press I was looking at was the RCBS Rock Chucker Supreme if I didn't get the Forster.

For my calibers listed, which would be better? I really like just about everything about the Forster press but this one area has me a bit concerned.

Welcome to the forum newguru. Rules are simple, be nice and join in.

I don't use a Co-Ax so can't tell you, but I'll bet some of our members can fill you in. I load everything from the 204 Ruger to the 300 Ultra-mag on my little Lee press without any trouble. I used an RCBS for years with no problems, but have to say I like the Lee better.

I know some of the guys here use the Co-Ax and really like it.

Having average dexterity, mental capacity and mechanical skills I've been using my Co-Ax for 25 years to load 25-06, 308, 30-06, 45-70, 405 Winchester, .243 and I' ve not lost anything outside of a few cases, lots of those rd, expensive bullets and tons of lead bullets.

Truth be known the only time I need to change the shell holder is when I switch to 45-70, 405 works fine with the settings for 30-06, etc.

Jim

I have used mine for many years now and the only thing you need to watch for is the two coil springs in the shellholder. I keep a spare set on hand but hav'nt lost one in long time. They can go flying out of thereif you are not carefull but take your time and it is not a problem.

Thanks for the replies.

I guess what I'm asking is how long does it actually take to change it around?

I'm debating on whether the benefits of the press outweight the time and issues of changing these around as I shoot both guns about the same so I can see having to swap these out frequently.

Are the benefits of the press worth the time and effort to constantly be swapping these around as opposed to being able to quickly change a shell holder in a RCBS or Redding, etc. press?

If the swap-out of the jaws concerns you, there is an optional plate that allows you to use standard shell holders. I have all three setups for my Co-Ax and load from the big rimmed 45-70 down to the little 22 Hornet. Never timed how long it took to swap around the holders (never considered the question would come up!), but by using the press and gaining familiarity with the plates, careful removal and installation probably takes less than a minute.

When first using and losing a spring, ordered the extra jaws and shell holder plate from Foster and explained about losing the springs. They shipped some extra springs at no charge with the optional equipment. Nice folks to deal with.

I'm betting it will take you longer to remember where you put the 'jaws' then it takes to replace them. Say maybe 1.5 minutes or less.
You can adjust the width of the standard jaws to suit 90% of all cases by opening them wider by turning a screw. The only time I need to replace the 'jaws' is to work with 45-70.
A calibers are you loading for?

Jim

Dad got our COAX press when they first came out about 35 years ago. I load everything from .222 to 300RUM in it with no problems. Like others have stated it's a mattrt of practice and patience when changing the jaws. I haven't got the adapter like kdub has but I do find the ease of changing dies well worth the extra $'s of having to buy additional lock rings whenever you get new dies. Here's mine with a 300RUM in it.

RJ

A lot of folks successfully use the larger end of the jaws for smaller cartridges than Forster recommends. I don't reload 223, or I'd try it on mine for you. I rarely change ends of shell holders on mine, but when I do, it isn't bad, probably a minute at most. If you're really paranoid, unscrew the shell holder assembly, slide the whole thing (including cap & wear plate) off and put it in a large ziplock bag. Holding the cap & wear plate together keeps anything from flying apart. Then change ends with your hands in the bag. But once you get used to it, you won't bother with that.

That is certainly not a reason to avoid the co-ax. It is the best designed, best built single stage reloading press available.

Andy

A lot of folks successfully use the larger end of the jaws for smaller cartridges than Forster recommends. I don't reload 223, or I'd try it on mine for you.

Now this interests me....

If I could use the same size for both my 300 RUM's as my .223 Remingtons, I would be all over this press and have no reservations about buying it.

Let me know if it works or if there are any drawbacks to using the larger side of the jaws on your .223's.

I've done as big JAke suggests, but only for a few rounds. As easy as it is to change the jaws, I just do it rather than risk getting a case stuck in the dies.

Just buy the COAX press, you won't be sorry.

RJ

newguru,

I don't load 223, so I cannot try it for you.

If this issue is the only one you have with the press, buy it. I guarantee its other advantages outweigh the really minor task of changing ends on the shell holder jaws. Think about it; you change dies 3-4 times more often than shell holders, so you'll still be way ahead with the snap-in, snap out die retention. Both the die and shell holder float while remaining parallel for better alignment. The linkage is designed to take out any play in the bearings, and the shell holder is always supported between four bearings, rather than cantilevered off the end of a single bearing as in most other presses. The spent primer disposal is well away from the ways to avoid wear from the abrasive debris. I like the over-the top handle motion, but that's my personal preference. The cylindrical grip provides a variety of hand positions to suit the leverage of the task at hand. They offer a shorter ball handle that I've tried, but I prefer the original handle.

Andy

This prompted me to get off my duff and reload some .223's, which I haven't done in the past 4 years. Last loading was for the 45-70 trapdoor, so that's what the Co-Ax was set up for.

Took longer to find the supplied Allen wrench than it did to change out the jaws! From the time of loosening the screws, carefully keeping the plates and jaws together, flipping them over and exposing the springs, swapping the jaws end for end, putting the plates back on and turning them over (again, carefully maintaining pressure to assure they all stayed together) and reinstalling with the screws took a whole 45 seconds! The longest time was spent realigning the bolt holes through the two plates and the jaws with those in the press frame and screwing in the retaining screws.

Have to adjust the spreader bolts to accomodate the cartridge base, but that is something that has to be done regardless. No big deal there, either.

Let me +1 everything said above.
It DOES take longer to remember where you put the other set of jaws than it does to swap 'em out.

The only reason to change them in my set up is for the .338 Lapua Mag, otherwise, everything else I re-load uses the same setup.
Man, I love that press and wish I had gone to it years ago.
Not that the RockChucker has not served me very well over 35 years of reloading but the Co-Ax is Soooo smooth and it dies center up the bullet every time with the seater die.
and yes, you can re-size a 30-06 without case lube-the thing is amazing.
Get one and you will never regret it.

Gary

If there is a fault worth mentioning with the co-ax its the clearance between the top of the handle bow and the top of a long die. Some competition micrometer dies are too long too work in it. I don't use those so its a non-issue for me. + 1 on best available.

If there is a fault worth mentioning with the co-ax its the clearance between the top of the handle bow and the top of a long die. Some competition micrometer dies are too long too work in it. I don't use those so its a non-issue for me. + 1 on best available.

Didn't Forster come out with an upgrade a year or so ago? I think they lengthened the handle yoke just to accommodate the newer micrometer dies?

The Old Guy

I have the 'new' handle. I think some dies could still have an issue even with the increased clearance but they would be few & far between. My experience is those using such dies frequently use special arbor type presses instead of the 'common' type presses I use. The new style handle is nice...