# Wax Press comparison



## My-smokepole (Apr 14, 2008)

Great reveiw. It sounds like you called it the way it is. I wish more people would do this with out the hipe.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Yes, very good review. Is the honey exiting the machine of similar quality with all three or are there issues with tiny air bubbles incorporated in the honey? Also what percentage of honey remains in the wax with each machine?


----------



## taskipe (Sep 22, 2015)

jim lyon said:


> Is the honey exiting the machine of similar quality with all three or are there issues with tiny air bubbles incorporated in the honey? Also what percentage of honey remains in the wax with each machine?


This comparison project started in the begining of this years harvesting season. First in use was Paradise press, performance was good, but the capacity of the press wasn't enough to keep up with the uncapping machine (aproximately 6 frames/min). So we changed to Lyson press which provided similar good performance and was able to process the cappings wax at the same speed as the uncapping machine produced it. We were also keen to test Honey Paw press and actually ended up using it duiring the time what was left of the harvest season.

I didn't notice any air bubbbles beeing formed in to the honey when using any of these presses. Or if there were, after letting the honey rest in the container over night there were none. I don't know how the different types of the honey affects processing result with wax press, but I think it has to matter someway. I noticed that the key for best results was to finding optimal speed for the press. I would say that the lower screw rotation speed = better result. I know that percentage of honey leftovers in the wax is intersting topic. I would like to say that some press performed better than the other, but that wouldn't be ture. The rotation speed has the biggest effect on the end result and drynes of the wax. So there were no major differences with honey remains in the wax between different machines or atleast I didn't notice. I wouldn't make buying decision based on the addvertisment that promise the best results since in my oppinion the differences are very minimal and all presses performed well in that area. If I had to estimate, the result with all machines was approximately 90-95% pure wax.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

taskipe said:


> If I had to estimate, the result with all machines was approximately 90-95% pure wax.


I assume this means that 90 to 95% of what emerges from the press is beeswax? My real question, though, is (on average) what percentage of the honey that goes into the press remains trapped in the cappings and can only be recovered through the wax melting process.


----------



## taskipe (Sep 22, 2015)

jim lyon said:


> I assume this means that 90 to 95% of what emerges from the press is beeswax? My real question, though, is (on average) what percentage of the honey that goes into the press remains trapped in the cappings and can only be recovered through the wax melting process.


I would say that there is 5 to 10 % honey of the input honey & wax mixture what is trapped into the wax after processing and needs to be separated by other means. Also some of the wax will drop along the honey to the sump. Most of this should stay on the honey sump filter and can be thrown into the wax press funnel to be processed again.


----------



## gmcharlie (May 9, 2009)

Excellent! I am really in the market so this was a fantastic review.

One question In discussion with some who have a Paradise press, they mention that chain flail type gives teh presses more problems due to the finer nature of the cappings to start. what typo of uncaper were you using and did you see any issue with the "fine" particles needing to be repressed??


----------



## jackrath (Nov 30, 2012)

A couple comments on the Lyson wax presses also referred to as extruders. We at Betterbee distribute Lyson equipment in the US. We used the 100 KG model this season and ended up with a total of 5 pails of extruded wax from about 2500 pounds of honey. Each pail weighs about 30 pounds.The extruded wax glistens with a thin coat of honey but the cappings seem very dry. Have not rendered the cappings to calculate actual honey percentage. We had similar experience that the slower the extruder runs, the better it works. Attached is a photo of the cappings.
Also we have sold the Lyson 200KG models and they are 220 volts but not 3 phase. Lyson offers some equipment as 400 volt 3 phase as that is common in Europe. All 220 volt equipment is single phase. The smaller 50 and 100 kg extruders are available as 110 or 220 volt models. Lyson also makes a 500 kg extruder (220 volts) which we have not yet used.

Jack Rath
Betterbee
8 Meader Rd
Greenwich, NY 12834


----------



## zhiv9 (Aug 3, 2012)

Depending on the motor horsepower, variable frequency drives are available with 1Ph input and 3Ph output. They also provide speed control and a soft start for the motor.


----------



## zhiv9 (Aug 3, 2012)

What are the screws made of? Its hard to see in the photos, but looks like Delrin or UHMW. How will this hold up to wires/nails? Any idea what the life expectancy is?


----------



## taskipe (Sep 22, 2015)

lazybhoney said:


> One question In discussion with some who have a Paradise press, they mention that chain flail type gives teh presses more problems due to the finer nature of the cappings to start. what typo of uncaper were you using and did you see any issue with the "fine" particles needing to be repressed??


Here are some photos of the pressing



















Ase you can see the wax presses produced some fine particles on the honey sump filter that were repressed. But very easy to empty filters once in a while in to the hopper to be repressed.
The uncapper used in uncapping was slide feed, water heated uncapper with smooth blades.


----------



## taskipe (Sep 22, 2015)

zhiv9 said:


> What are the screws made of? Its hard to see in the photos, but looks like Delrin or UHMW. How will this hold up to wires/nails? Any idea what the life expectancy is?


Screws are made of nylon in all presses. Nylon screw is actually quite elastic and if you drop nails, rocks, nuts etc.. in to the screw the only thing that will break is the metal grid/mesh directly under the funnel. Nylon screw may take some damage, but the press will still function. In careful and proper use, the motor might the first part to break, so I would expect the press to serve many years.


----------



## zhiv9 (Aug 3, 2012)

How did the units compare from a pricing perspective? What is one of these units worth?


----------



## Honeyboy (Feb 23, 2004)

Great reviews, we have been thinking of going to a wax press.


----------



## taskipe (Sep 22, 2015)

zhiv9 said:


> How did the units compare from a pricing perspective? What is one of these units worth?


I don't know the exact prices in time of purchase as I don't own all the wax press my self and borrowed these for testing and to decide which one to choose.
The prices difference clearly comes from components, how the press is manufactured/built and enginering work. In example honey paw and paradise press comes with power inverter so that you don't have to worry about electricity compatibility. Lyson and Honey Paw are bigger in structure and has more capacity.

I didn't preliminary pay much attention to price difference, since wax press is a production investment for me. Price is ofcourse important but as the press will serve many years in use, the usability, material quality and suitability for my needs are more important.

But here are the prices approximately in Europe (without any delivery costs) Fall 2015. (EUR-USD rate ~1,078. 11/13/2015)
Paradise Honey 4600 euros (~4960 USD)*
Lyson 5200 euros (~5600 USD)
Honey Paw 6600 euros (~7100 USD)

*As mentioned earlier about the capacity confusion, you need to but 1000-2000 euros (1100 - 2150 USD) more to get same size press as the Lyson and Honey Paw


----------



## Alan (Feb 13, 2006)

In all of the videos that I have seen, the wax press is only processing wax cappings and honey from the uncapping machine. Can these wax presses handle honey from the extractor as well? Can a 500kg/hr rated machine actually handle 500kg of wax and honey or is it too much honey all at once? Thanks


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

No, you will need a settling tank/sump for the extractor and for pieces of wax that work through the press. The sump skimming can be sent through the press.
This machines is what I needed before I bought the spin float.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

This machine certainly has a sideline to small commercial market. Frankly the residual honey level retained in the cappings would give me pause.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I know a guy selling his spin float for the press. I'm not sure I follow his logic. I went to the spin float to get away from skimming tanks and to get away from below grade sumps . He is switching to the press for its quiet operation.
I have to say, I owned a Fager, I will never buy a press again in my life.


----------



## zhiv9 (Aug 3, 2012)

It's pricing is more in the range of a good spinner than a spin-float setup. As has been mentioned before, with the spin float comes the cost of a heat exchanger, progressive cavity pump etc. This could be setup for less that $10k. Is 90-95% recovery much better than a good spinner?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I pulled 1 1/4 barrels of melter honey off 1700lbs of rendered wax from my spin float. And that comes from a weekly drum cleaning. It would be interesting to hear of a comparison from a press.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Ian said:


> I pulled 1 1/4 barrels of melter honey off 1700lbs of rendered wax from my spin float. And that comes from a weekly drum cleaning. It would be interesting to hear of a comparison from a press.


That's pretty good Ian, I'm guessing that would be a little under 1% of your crop. We have been running just a bit over 1% each year since we have run the system. Lower moisture honey perhaps? Of course, unlike the press, the slurry going into a spin float is getting pre warmed.


----------



## HiveOnTheHill (Jun 17, 2011)

jim lyon said:


> I assume this means that 90 to 95% of what emerges from the press is beeswax? My real question, though, is (on average) what percentage of the honey that goes into the press remains trapped in the cappings and can only be recovered through the wax melting process.


We have had a Paradise press for 3 yrs.
For every barrel of pressed wax we render - we get approximately 12-15lbs of honey - so essentially an ice cream pail/barrel


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

HiveOnTheHill said:


> We have had a Paradise press for 3 yrs.
> For every barrel of pressed wax we render - we get approximately 12-15lbs of honey - so essentially an ice cream pail/barrel


So about 2%. Yes that's certainly acceptable.


----------



## gmcharlie (May 9, 2009)

well I see a numbers issue, Paridise says 1.5 %, this reviewer mentions a lot higher, hive on the hill is saying 1-2% also?? hmm it seems teh press is a lot simpler to run than a spin float, but wondering what it takes to get to the 2% number??


----------



## zhiv9 (Aug 3, 2012)

lazybhoney said:


> well I see a numbers issue, Paridise says 1.5 %, this reviewer mentions a lot higher, hive on the hill is saying 1-2% also?? hmm it seems teh press is a lot simpler to run than a spin float, but wondering what it takes to get to the 2% number??


Heat? Higher moisture honey?


----------



## HiveOnTheHill (Jun 17, 2011)

zhiv9 said:


> Heat? Higher moisture honey?


As the original post states - the slower you can run it the better. 
Our moisture content was from 17.3-18.6 and there was no heat applied whatsoever


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

jim lyon said:


> That's pretty good Ian, I'm guessing that would be a little under 1% of your crop. We have been running just a bit over 1% each year since we have run the system. Lower moisture honey perhaps? Of course, unlike the press, the slurry going into a spin float is getting pre warmed.


Approximately 1/3 of a %. 
Moisture varied this year from 19.5%-17.5%
Most of the wet wax put into the melter this season was during or weekly drum clean out and from the exchanger cap during production cleanup. The spin float wax cuttings were dry as wood shavings and my bulk tank had zero impurities. Quite amazing. No sump or tank skimming all season !


----------



## gmcharlie (May 9, 2009)

Ian said:


> Approximately 1/3 of a %.
> Moisture varied this year from 19.5%-17.5%
> Most of the wet wax put into the melter this season was during or weekly drum clean out and from the exchanger cap during production cleanup. The spin float wax cuttings were dry as wood shavings and my bulk tank had zero impurities. Quite amazing. No sump or tank skimming all season !


What spin float did you get??


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

lazybhoney said:


> What spin float did you get??


Cooks & Beals spin float wax separator. 

In respect to this post, the spin float satisfies a different list of needs than the list these wax press machines covers.


----------



## gmcharlie (May 9, 2009)

Could you elaborate Ian? From the outside looking in it seems honey in the wax and capacity are the two issues? The wax press looks easier to clean and operate, definatly takes up less room, and doesn't need a heat source or progressive pump. What other factors weigh in ??


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

lazybhoney said:


> Could you elaborate Ian? From the outside looking in it seems honey in the wax and capacity are the two issues? The wax press looks easier to clean and operate, definatly takes up less room, and doesn't need a heat source or progressive pump. What other factors weigh in ??


I think you have pretty much covered it. With a C&B separator setup expect to pay $20,000+ for the separator/heat exchange/pump components. Of course when running large quantities the difference between 1 and 2% residual honey in the cappings will offset the higher initial investment pretty quickly plus having bulk tanks free of wax is a huge bonus.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

lazybhoney said:


> Could you elaborate Ian? From the outside looking in it seems honey in the wax and capacity are the two issues? The wax press looks easier to clean and operate, definatly takes up less room, and doesn't need a heat source or progressive pump. What other factors weigh in ??


With the spin float, all honey wax is sent through the machine separating all wax and impurities from the honey. Wax and impurities out the bottom as dry shavings and honey into the tank. No tanks to skim, no I floor dumps to dig .


----------



## gmcharlie (May 9, 2009)

Ian said:


> With the spin float, all honey wax is sent through the machine separating all wax and impurities from the honey. Wax and impurities out the bottom as dry shavings and honey into the tank. No tanks to skim, no I floor dumps to dig .


Thanks Ian, I was pondering that. I have a Equinox extractor and am seriously pondering which way to go. Seems that a wax press that can handle the uncapper and the skim is the way to go. seems like less floor space and grief with the heat exchange. 
I guess what I am really trying to figure out why NOT to use a press instead, seems to be a lot cheaper overall for someone doing less than 100k lbs of honey.
the only downside may be a little more honey in the wax, but from what I read here its a tiny amount, and a lot less maintenance.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Asked, 
Why not use a press instead:

- In floor sumps
- skimming wax press and extractor wax from the settling sump and bulk tanks
- % of salvageable honey 

Like I had mentioned, Beekeepers choosing the centrifuge have a different list of priorities than a beekeeper choosing a press


----------



## zhiv9 (Aug 3, 2012)

Ian said:


> Like I had mentioned, Beekeepers choosing the centrifuge have a different list of priorities than a beekeeper choosing a press


I think that this is it. Presses serve beekeepers that are working with a reduced floor space, capital budget and possibly restrictions on maximum honey temperature.


----------



## gmcharlie (May 9, 2009)

Ian are you saying that a press will have more stuff in the bulk tank to skim??


----------



## zhiv9 (Aug 3, 2012)

lazybhoney said:


> Ian are you saying that a press will have more stuff in the bulk tank to skim??


Yes, because the extractor honey doesn't run through the press, you will have more wax in your bulk tank. With a spin float, both extractor honey and cappings are run through at the same time.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

zhiv9 said:


> I think that this is it. Presses serve beekeepers that are working with a reduced floor space, capital budget and possibly restrictions on maximum honey temperature.


I wouldn't overstate the space a separator requires. If you can spare approximately a 5'x5' area that's about all you would need. Probably not a whole lot more space than a press requires. Remember the heat exchanger that feeds into it is mounted overhead.


----------



## gmcharlie (May 9, 2009)

well at the moment i planed to run extractor honey back to the press via auger(to avoid sumps) It seemed much simpler to me than plumbing and pumping capping and honey thru a heat exchange. so my line concept is that the press is UNDER the uncapper and the Auger for the extractor back to the press is under the in feed table of the extractor, which would make it very compact and no spinfloat to master or heat exchanger, or sludge pump. Downside may be a little higher honey in the wax? Thanks for the thoughts and unputs so far guys, very much appreciated! That 20k plus for a spin float has me spinning right now.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

lazybhoney said:


> well at the moment i planed to run extractor honey back to the press via auger(to avoid sumps) It seemed much simpler to me than plumbing and pumping capping and honey thru a heat exchange. so my line concept is that the press is UNDER the uncapper and the Auger for the extractor back to the press is under the in feed table of the extractor, which would make it very compact and no spinfloat to master or heat exchanger, or sludge pump. Downside may be a little higher honey in the wax? Thanks for the thoughts and unputs so far guys, very much appreciated! That 20k plus for a spin float has me spinning right now.


Understood. You just have to see how the pieces fit into the available space. Actually I understated the prices. Currently the spin float is a little over $16,000, the heat exchanger $10,000 and a SS pump will cost around $5,000 and remember you still need a second pump to move the honey into your bulk tanks. Also electrical upgrades are often needed and if you choose to go with SS piping throughout that can easily cost you another $10,000 and on and on it goes.


----------



## zhiv9 (Aug 3, 2012)

What is the minimum honey/wax slurry temperature for the spin float to be effective? Will it work at 100F or are higher temps required?


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

zhiv9 said:


> What is the minimum honey/wax slurry temperature for the spin float to be effective? Will it work at 100F or are higher temps required?


C &B recommends between 100 and 105 f and I would agree with that. I have seen input temps as low as 90 but the wax tends to contain a bit more residual honey at lower temps. Lower moisture honey also tends to not seperate as well.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Don't forget the noise factor. Although the Fagor press was not a stroke of genius, it was quiet.


Crazy Roland


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Roland said:


> Don't forget the noise factor. Although the Fagor press was not a stroke of genius, it was quiet.
> 
> 
> Crazy Roland


My spin float is so quiet you don't know it's running. It's a new model


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

lazybhoney said:


> well at the moment i planed to run extractor honey back to the press via auger(to avoid sumps) It seemed much simpler to me than plumbing and pumping capping and honey thru a heat exchange. so my line concept is that the press is UNDER the uncapper and the Auger for the extractor back to the press is under the in feed table of the extractor, which would make it very compact and no spinfloat to master or heat exchanger, or sludge pump. Downside may be a little higher honey in the wax? Thanks for the thoughts and unputs so far guys, very much appreciated! That 20k plus for a spin float has me spinning right now.


Sounds like it might work but actually allowing the extractor honey to settle in a sump is what needs to be done. The press is not designed to handle large volumes of honey, it will simply overwhelm the system. And you also need to drain the press into a sump afterwards to collect the bits of wax that press through the press. 

Which ever way you look at this option, it involves a sump.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Don't mis understand my comments. 

The most efficient machine hands down is the spin float. But for smaller ops with smaller honey volumes and budget, a press set up with settling sumps is the best route. I wish I had this screw press available when I was expanding operations. It would of made me $$$$. Now that I have the honey volume and a facility to suit it, there is no other thought than a centrifuge. It's a machine that eliminates all those annoying time consuming relentless jobs and provides you with a superior end product on both sides which steadily increases your bottom line over all other options.


----------



## gmcharlie (May 9, 2009)

Many thanks guys. Trying to understand the pros and cons in the real world is a pain. not a lot of info out there on "midsized" production lines.


----------



## jean-marc (Jan 13, 2005)

I know of some fairly large guys switching to the screw systems... 3000 hives. Not sure why. I will have to ask. It is not a budget thing. Seems to me the Paradise has it's own above floor sump, so does Cowen. Likely some skimming still involved in the holding tanks though.\

Jean-Marc


----------



## davidsbees (Feb 22, 2010)

My dad got a spin float in the early 1960's then sold it to try the fager we thought it would be the answer but where sadly disappointed. After a few years we went back to the cook and Beals.


----------



## Broke-T (Jul 9, 2008)

I am interested in the Lyson wax press. Anybody here using one yet?

Johnny


----------



## ian bissonnette (Dec 9, 2021)

i know this is an old thread. but there is not a lot of info out there so i thought i would share my experience. i have a paradise 300 press under a cowen uncapper on a 60 frame cowen line. it is an older line and i modified it to raise it up a bit so the press and a small sump will fit under at ground level(no hole in the floor). i mostly run it myself and put less volume than the larger outfits. 100-300 colonies. 
the press gets the bulk of the wax out, but i would not say it is perfect. there is a fair bit of skimming off of the sump and the bulk tank. of course the majority of this comes from the extractor, which you have mostly pointed out, and i don t think the press could handle the honey out of the extractor. as others have stated. i agree, skimming is a pain and i can t stand it. there is a fair bit of fine particles that come out of the press as well, and it creates a bottle neck at the end of a session because you keep putting skimmings through it and keep getting fine wax out. 
on the paradise model the drip screens don t work for me. they constantly get plugged up and need to be scrapped clean and it is a pain to get them out. and i have enough to do if i am running it all on my own. keep in mind i am running the honey through at room temp, so they might be better with warm honey. even if i put them on for the last skimmings they get plugged right away. i find it easier just to let the wax find it s way to the sump and skim it. there instead of constantly doing it. 
the other thing i hate about the press is the finish on the metal. not sure how it is cut, laser or water jet, but it is sharp all over and i have cut my hands many times on the thing. there are few welds and it is mostly bolted together. 
it is not loud, but the inverter drive has a high pitch scream to it which is annoying, but i wear ear plugs mostly cause my pump motor is real loud. 
if you spray it down it is actually not that hard to clean. wet it. then come back a couple more times and spray again and most of it comes off. 
spin float would be better but we have no space, like cold honey, and small budget. so for now it works. 
one idea i have just had is why not run one of these presses for the cappings and then a smaller version of the spin float with no heat exchanger to clean up the rest of the honey. there would not be a lot of wax and the cost of the heat exchanger might cover a smaller version of the spin float. 
the other idea i have is to use the pump to skim the tanks. but right now our pump is a little unwieldily to be moving around, it is an italian liverani flex impeller with a big home rigged mot. maybe a special pump to suck up the wax on top of the tanks.


----------

