View Full Version : plain,bevel or stepped

charger 1
12-26-2008, 04:52 AM
Not cheapest, not what I have already lying around, but if you could buy whatever you wanted to make a high speed 45 cal rifle PP boolit what base would it have?I'm thinkin bevel. Am I daft?

P Patcher
12-26-2008, 06:58 AM
Flat base or gas checked would be my choice. Bevel base drop's from the mold well but that seem's to be the only advantage, I can't make them shoot worth a hoot YMMV.

12-26-2008, 01:43 PM
Don't know if you have seen Dan Theoadore's site or not but it is a good read:


More specifically on your question, here is some work done on PP boattail boolits:


And some other work done by Brent Danielson:


I can't speak from experience because I have only paper patched plain base. I have read that bevel base and boattail bullets generally are not as accurate as plain base or rebated boattail bullets.

Maybe someone else here can give more specific answers.


12-26-2008, 08:35 PM
I only have experience with flat base castings.
So far, I am getting great results.
I can see, with a bevel, or boattail design, where twisting the patch could be an issue. Then, on snipping the tail and sizing, there could be displacement issues that might affect the boolitt.
I had thought, with a flat base, it doesn't matter if there is a wrinkle in the twist. It leaves the boolitt as it leaves the muzzle. With a bevel, I could see where the pressure could misshape the base during the movement down the barrel, then producing an offset down range.
With a flat base, there is no place to migrate to. The base remains flat.
Just my thoughts.
I am doing good enough with flat base. A concave base might be another plus. So far, I have had only confetti, no paper traveling to POI.

12-27-2008, 12:34 AM
I prefer the hollow base that way I tuck myn tail into the void of the hollow.

12-27-2008, 02:10 PM
I prefer the hollow base that way I tuck myn tail into the void of the hollow.
I thought it was just the 'far left' that is in favor of 'tail tucking'...

Lead pot
12-27-2008, 03:33 PM
A few years ago I made some base punches for the .50-90 I made several different types boat tail, rebated BT, they didn't pan out to good.
I had to come up with something that would protect the base of the bullet to keep it from getting hammered by the black powder that would push the base with all kinds of ugly deformities.
I even took pure B-wax and made a wad that I lightly swaged on the base using a flat punch (sort of like a sabot) and some of the red wax you find on cheese, this worked a little better and the accuracy did improve. I think it separated better when the bullet cleared the muzzle but I did find some on the target backer down range, so I know some stayed with the bullet or at best drafted behind the bullet.
The undamaged bullets I recovered with wax looked good but the bases with out protection were in bad shape using alloy of 1/20 to 1/35.


why do you feel you need a gas check with a PP bullet? sounds like you have a groove diameter bullet with that gas check on it because you ran it through a sizer to crimp that check on then with two wraps of paper will make that bullet .008 over groove groove diameter that would raise chamber pressure even if you could get that cartridge chambered, which I doubt very much.


12-27-2008, 10:04 PM
I thought it was just the 'far left' that is in favor of 'tail tucking'...

OUCH CHARLIE that one stung a tad.

Ken. :drinks:

12-27-2008, 10:36 PM
When I first started patching, I had some cast up, with checks. They became my dedicated mold for that caliber, but , the ones with the checks tore more patches twisting. I did not notice any lack of accuracy with either.
With paper patching, I believe, gas checks are indeed not neccessary. I now wrap all mine without, even though it is a gas check mold.

12-27-2008, 11:27 PM
I only have experience with wrapping gas checked (sans check) and cupped-base bullets.

The cup bases are easier to wrap straight. The gas check designs are marginally easier to load into case mouths. They both shoot well.

If I were going to order a new mold just for paper patching I would get one of the adjustable length, cup based, nose pour designs. The adjustable length feature gives you a lot of bullet weight options.


P Patcher
12-28-2008, 04:52 PM
Lead Pot
I don't feel that I need a gas check bullet for paper patching, I mentioned it as an option that one might have available and not think of for paper patching. When Charger1 asked about a bullet for high speed pp in the 45 cal rifle my fist thought was a .452 dia. flat base bullet patched up to .458-.459 or larger if needed. you are absolutely right, taking a groove diameter bullet and patching it up .008 being to big to chamber and shoot safely.
It is however possible to size a gas checked bullet down to proper size for paper patching and I'll give one example. I have a Krag sporter that measures 302 bore,311.5 groove, with a badly worn throat. I was trying to get this gun to shoot using a lyman 311284 bullet that drop's from my mold at .301and .311, groups were poor no matter what I tried. I decided to try paper patch and the only 30 call mold I had that was suitable was the 311284. I seated the gas check in a 310 die and then made a nose first die to further reduce it to .305, two wrap's of 9# onion skin brought it back up to .312. These loaded over 17 grns of 2400 will shoot much better than I can hold. I then tried the same bullet sized to .305 without the check's and the group's opened up by quite a bit. I have tried many time's thru the year's to paper patch gascheck design's without the check's and never have been as sucessful as with the check's. I will add that when sizing gas check's down this much it help's to anneal them.
I hope this has made my answer to Charger 1 a little more clear. Thank you for the head's up on oversize bullet's and high pressure, I'll watch for it.

Lead pot
12-28-2008, 05:34 PM
Sorry Addison I just took it for granted that it was a .458 rifle bullet you were trying to patch with a gas check.
My apologies.