How Do YOU "Assess" Rifle Accuracy???

[BruceB]

This question is being asked because I really haven't arrived at an answer in my own rifles.

So....here you are, arriving home in a sweaty state of elation with a NEW RIFLE ('new' to you, anyway, used ones count, too).

Since our major interest here is shooting cast bullets, what do you use for a baseline to decide what will be termed "good accuracy" with this particular rifle? Do you leap in with joyful abandon, cleaning the dickens out of that barrel and then starting right in with cast bullets? Or, do you do a load work-up with jacketed loads, and then say, "If'n this rifle shoots as good with cast as it does with these jacketed loads, I'll be happy."? Or, do you fire just a few jacketed rounds to "see what it'll do", and then clean and start the cast program?

I'm hearing in various quarters that some casters think that a new barrel needs to be fired quite a few times to wear the "new" off it, mainly meaning toolmarks and such. Some say as many as 500 jacketed bullets need to make that fast one-way trip before we start getting serious with cast loads in a brand-new barrel.

There are some rifles where this jacketed performance just doesn't enter the picture. One example is my Shiloh .45-70, which has a new barrel and which will NEVER see a jacketed bullet as long as I own it.

In most of my loading with cast boolits, it seems that I'm always experimenting. I never seem to settle on one "good" load, because I figure there's always some yet-unseen "Holy Grail" load just around the corner. Of course, this is also my reason (excuse???) for buying different moulds, sizers, scopes, lubes, and RIFLES to feed this monkey on my back.

Incidentally, this attitude over a period of time leaves me with substantial quantities of "miscellaneous" ammunition, and I always need the brass which these loads are currently occupying. I took my M1 Garand, the Krag, the Ruger 7.62x39, "Miz Liz" (a beautiful brand-new .303 #4 Enfield) and the .30 '06 M700 out today and fired about 300 rounds of assorted stuff which was taking up space in Der Schuetzenwagen. It amounted to a plinking session, 'cuz none of the rifles except the #4 were anywhere near zeroed for the various stuff being fired. It was fun, though, on a lovely 55-degree afternoon. Pretty good offhand practice, too, once two or three rounds indicated where they impacted with regard to the sights. Kentucky windage (and elevation) indeed.

[felix]

Bruce, accuracy, to me, depends on the total cost of shooting it. Effective for a BR gun is a whale of a lot more expensive than a riva' tin can shooter. If YOU enter into competition, and the gun does not print the boolit where required, then that gun is worthless even if it shoots .10" groups at a hunnert in the hands of an expert. If another guns hits tin cans at a hunnert 50 percent of the time with no more than a two second hold, then that gun is priceless. That kind of gun might shoot 1.5 inch group, but who would know or care. A good three inch gun would have high regard in my hands. ... felix

[XBT]

Felix makes a good point; it depends on what you will use the rifle for. In my case, I am mostly shooting “as issued” military bolt actions. All I ask for is plinking accuracy. If they shoot cast boolits as accurately as ball ammo, and they nearly always do, I’m happy.

The only modern scoped rifle I shoot many cast boolits in is a Ruger M-77V in .308. If I’m having a good day, it will shoot ten shots into around two inches at one hundred yards, which makes me smile every time.

[David R]

"Searching for the Holy Grail" That would be me. I have fun shooting, but seem to always be trying to improve my loads. Change OAL, size, powder or amount of powder, ........

If my rifle will shoot 3" with Iron sites, I am one happy camper with my eyes that day. Scoped guns should shoot "around" one inch at one hundred. My 2 scoped rifles will do that. One is a remington 700VL, the other my wally world stevens 200 in 308 which just happens to be a shooter like most savage.

My 24V 222/20 ga will only shoot 2" @ 50 yards, but I probably will never take a shot at a squirrel over 20 yards, so who cares?

It seems I keep trying this and that, but after a while at the bench, Like today, I just started blasting away at some clay birds at 100 yards.

David

[JohnH]

Interesting question. I think we'll all have a different answer that shoots our needs, with some overlap that will be useful.

I shoot mainly at 50 yards. My range is beside my house, so 100 yards before the front door, 50 more alng side. Firing at 100, my wife complains and the dogs whine. Shooting at 50, everyone inside is happy, which lets me seek my happiness.

If a rifle won't shoot 1" at 50 yards I'm not interested. It's a mind thing. Just something in my head about how silly it is to say "my rifle won't shoot into one hole at 50 yards." I've ridded myself of 4 rifles in 3 years because they wouldn't do this. Wouldn't even show the promise of it. If in 100 rounds there is not the sign of an evenly distributed group, the gun has problems. If after 300 there is stillno sign teh gun wants to shoot, bye bye.

As well, in 30 years of hunting I've made one shot that was 80 yards. All else has been insdie 50, generally inside 40, many have been at 20 one was at 10 maybe less. so 50 works really well for me.

But assessing the accuracy? What is the real difference between a rifle that gets my full undivided attention and one that finds another home? 6 shots in one hole, the other 4 within an inch and an even distribution of the group. I had a 45-70 that met Felix 3" standard, but one never knew where in 3" it would strike. It was not tincan accurate, unless it was a quart size can

[NVcurmudgeon]

I think I've been very lucky in being able to achieve acceptable (to me) accuracy with minimum effort. I only have one scoped rifle that I shoot cast in and its best load is good for 1.5" at 100 yd. My NRA Sporter Springfield, with excellent iron sights will stay 1.5" to 2" when I use all the little tricks I know. I think the limiting factor with the Springfield is that I can't see any better than that. I'm just starting to work with a sporterized, carbinized, Krag which is shooting into 1.5" at 50 yd. My No. 4 Lee-Enfield is good for 3" at 100 yd. and sometimes a little better. I have a Marlin Cowboy .44 Magnum that doesn't like to shoot off the bench because it shoots 2.5" groups at 50 yd. but specializes in breaking clays at 50-75 yd. offhand. Essentially I am lazy, and shoot almost the same load in most of my rifles. This load features a bore riding boolit heavy for caliber, .002" larger than groove diameter, Hornady GC, Javelina Alox lube, enough 2400 or 4198 for 1400-1800 fps, no fillers, and CCI 250 or WLRM primers. A couple of rifles are fed a change of pace load of Green Dot at 1200 fps for a shoot all day plinker. This stuff has been very easy for me AS LONG AS THE BOOLIT FITS THE BARREL.

[crazy mark]

I'm happy with 4-5" AT 100 YDS AND ELATED WITH 2-3" AT 100 YDS. I use most of my rifles and handguns for plinking and hunting. I have some guns and loads that will do 1" at 100 yds as I shoot 5 shot groups. I don't feel the need to shoot tiny groups as I am doing this for relaxation and not frustration. I have an 1891 Argie carbine that refuses to shoot cast so far. Out of 5 shots 1-3 will tumble. Crown is good and bore looks and feels good so I'm going to have a challenge with this one as milsurp ammo shoots without tumbling. It's just a hobby for me. Mark

[Frank46]

crazy mark, what boolit are you using in the 1891 argie?. Have you slugged the barrel?. And what alloy are you using for your boolits?. If tumbling you could have an undersized boollit for the inside bore dimensions of your barrel. Size your bullet to .002 over bore diameter. A good bullet for the argie is lyman's 314299. inquiring minds like to know. Frank

[Sailman]

BruceB

I am glad you posted this question. I have been shooting military rifles as issued for years. I normally shoot at 100 yd. When I can get a rifle to shoot good with cast bullets, the group size is usually between 2 1/2 to 3 1/2 inches. Yes, I have shot smaller groups but I can not consistantly shoot these smaller groups.

My 75 yr. old eyes give me a problem with issued sights. However, I am beginning to suspect my eyes are not as bad as I think. My new expariment is a K-1 Swiss rifle. I have a scope mounted on the rifle and I can shoot with the scope or the issued military sights without taking the scope off the rifle. I have not posted any results because It is early in the game. However, my early results indicate that I can shoot groups one inch smaller with the scope than with the issued sights. With this rifle I will shoot 40 rounds with a given load, 20 rounds scope and 20 rounds issued sights. As I had said before, it looks like I can shoot groups apx. one inch smaller with the scope. So far the best load that I have used with this rifle produces groups apx. 1 1/2 to 2 1/2 inch with scope and 2 1/2 to 3 1/2 with the issued sights.

On 5 Nov 05 Sundog posted a comment which I totally agree. After several years of shooting Military Bolt Action Matches, he said that he has observed that " good shooters can regualry shoot sub-three inch groups ". If this is true, and I believe it is correct, the average shooter shooting a military bolt action rifle with issued sights, will shoot groups 2 1/2 to 3 1/2 inches with a good load. Both Sundog and I belong to the same rifle club and shoot at the same range and have been shooting Military Bot Action Matches for the same ammount of time. From what I have observed, Sundog is absolutely correct in his observations.

Sailman

[Buckshot]

.................95% of my rifles wear the sights and triggers they were born with. Add to that, longish barrels and wood stocks usually complimented by a barrel band or 2 tying it all together. Most of these are over 50 years old, and several well over 100 years old, and may have been through a war or 2. At the least they may have been subjected to the gentle ministrations of illiterate conscript troops and corrosive ammo.

To that I will add that as a rule, boolits are visually inspected and loaded over thrown powder charges. They're loaded in over the counter dies. For such rifles and ammo, with my (now) 53 year old eyes I am satisfied with 5 round groups of 1.5" or less at 50 yards. This is assuming that the group is nicely shaped, or perhaps 'cohesive' is a better term. At 100 yards 3" groups suffice and I'm happy with them. Striving for better with the rifles is a lot of work at the reloading bench and the shooting bench.

I am also forgiving of the occasional flyer. They don't bother me in the least. If I drop 4 into a tidy group one that goes off a bit is just one of those things. I either flipped when I should have flopped, or the slug or something was off kilter. I have always bought and used Winchester primers for 2 reasons. Availability and price. Perhaps for many loads they're not the best choice. Yet for the rifles and what I'm doing, experimenting with primers seems such a boring waste of time and components, not to mention record keeping.

If all I had to shoot was 2 or 3 rifles I would certainly know them well and probably would have them dialed in a bit better. When I cast rifle boolits I am happy tossing junk in the pot to render something in the 12 to 16 bhn range so I can shoot them in the 1400 to 1800 fps range.

It does seem though that if you go through X number of guns you will happily accumilate a few that seem to exceed all expectaions with most any concoction that will chamber and go off. I'm lucky to have a couple like that 8)

It's kind of funny but shooting a fun little match each week makes it happen often enough to be a truism. You squeeze off the shot and then mentally scream at yourself because you just know it was a 6 or a 7 when it went off. You look through the spotting scope and what do you see? Dang if that one showing all that white didn't land in the 9 or even the 10 ring! An expletive loudly voiced alerts the others of a bad shot. Yet how do you explain your scream of anguish when they look and it's a 9 or a 10?

Sometimes those flyers work out real well!

..................Buckshot

[sundog]

Depends. Felix and I are currently experimenting with a 225646. This boolit in my .222 or newly rebbl'd 22-250 with a Douglas air guage is being asked to be sub MOA. Both guns are certainly up to the task. A 700 VS in .308 is expected to produce like results, as is my 35 Whelen with a Shilen bbl. So far I have not found THE LOAD for the 700 VS, but several have been promising. It shoots the condum stuff like there's no tonorrow.

Sailman's comments are right on. Most military bolt guns were design for one thing, hit a man size target at three hundred yard. That's roughly 3+ MOA, maybe 4. With a little tinkering on loads most of them will shoot cast out to 200 in sub 3 MOA. Some are certainly better than others if they have a half decent bore and trigger. The biggest single limiting factor are issue sights. Like sailman said, put something on a little better (iron or glass) and the group gets better. BUT, it's still an arm designed for what it was designed for - hitting a billigerent at 300 yards.

Felix is right on about lever guns. MOBC (minute of beer can). Certainly good enough to play cowboy games and dump runnin at 'da riva'. Most of them run of the mill levers are though of in terms of taking a deer out to a hunert - MOBC will do it. And again, there are some that are alot better.

Sooo, DEPENDS. Depends on wether you get one that all the variables, by chance are reduced, or whether you get one that are all extreme. And it depends on how much resources you want to throw at it, mostly in terms of time and money. Go play single shot for awhile and see what goes on there. Super sub MOA and alot of money thrown at it to get there. Or bench rest. Too me SPENDING that much is limiting and not practical in the sense that it is difficult to use that gun for other things, although it could be. sundog

[nighthunter]

I asked a similar question not long ago. I asked how much accuracy we really need. It all depends on what you are using the gun and load for.
I have a silouhette pig that I welded up so it doesn't have to be reset after being hit. It swivels fore and aft and it rings like a bell when hit. With hand guns I place it between 50 and 100 yards and with rifles from 50 to 150 yards. Its a whole lot of fun and makes for a good practice session.
When I hunt game from groundhogs to deer I usually hit what I shoot at. I do check the loads on paper to check the zero.
Most of my firearms are not capable of 1 hole groups at 100 yards. Thats not what I'm looking for. Nothing wrong with that if it is what you are looking for. Those super accurate rifles are rare in in mass produced firearms and very expensive in the custom market.
Just haveing fun.
Nighthunter

[sundog]

Buckshot, you mentioned being tolerant of the ocassional flyer. Well, I am not, if I am shooting a match. That's why I weight segregate boolits - for matches. Oh, and .22 boolits. Again it goes back to my comment about committing resources. In my case it's time and the expense of an electronic scale. Works for me. If the boolits are for plinking in a lever gun for example, it's really a waste of time and effort. Cast a pile of soup cans, add a little RD, and blast away. sundog

[44man]

I have learned a very important thing with this post; WE ARE ALL OLD FARTS and half blind.
So my answer is; if it shoots as good as you like, make more smoke! And print large here so we can all read about it. There, bestest I kin do!

[XBT]

44man nailed it!! [smilie=l:

[felix]

Yes, he did! Old is not only in the eyes, but also in the trigger finger connection with the brain. If the boolit and tin can miss each other, and was called before hand mentally to where the boolit would hit, then gun and load combo has no flies on it. ... felix

[9.3X62AL]

Lotsa good info here. I'm not real scientific in methodology--I follow a lot of what Curmudgeon and Buckshot explained, but have seen that dacron can do good things once in a while.

There have been some high spots, all right--the Rem 788 x 243 shoots a LOT better than it should, considering the eyeballed boolits and thrown charges. I really should try weighing boolits for that one. It did 5 shots @ 1.02" at NCBS last year, but it's more like 1.25" typically, and in a 10-shot group it will have 1-2 fliers. That's just fine with me, it's almost "minute of quarry" at ranges I'll engage ground squirrels or jackrabbits.

The Savage 99 x 250 is almost that accurate, and would likely benefit from scaling as well. One of these days!

Then, there's the Marlin 94CL in 25-20........an albatross, as per Coleridge. I haven't been able to duplicate its J-word work with the 75 Speer FN's using the castings--but it gets close just often enough to keep me swinging at the pitches. At times I think I'm facing a knuckle-ball, though. The Felix Doctrine on leverguns slips my mind at times.

"Minute of quarry" at the intended engagement range seems like my threshold with castings. I'm a LOT more critical of the j-words' work......I guess because I didn't assist in the birthing, I'm not as forgiving of their trepasses. At the cost of the redcoated things, they'd BETTER work.

[Dale53]

I am a bit accuracy minded. However, I try to be somewhat "practical" about what it possible.

With my revolvers I want to see .750" groups at 25 yards (12 shot groups [two cylinder fulls with all chambers used]). This from a Ransom rest. For instance, my K-38 PPC gun (original barrel with full length Bomar rib) will do .750" with my cast bullets - can not do better, period. However, with Remington factory wad cutters, it will shoot .500"). I would like to do better with cast but gave up a long time ago and settled for 3/4". My .44's (Special and Magnums will make my standard. My S&W Model 16 .32 H&R will not yet make my standard. I have been using Hornady hb wadcutters in my loads but have not yet found the "magic". However, I do believe that I will - maybe a better bullet? My match .45 ACP's will do my standard. My .22 auto (S&W Model 41 will easily beat it with the right ammo - like all .22's it is ammo sensitive).

My lever action Marlin 45/70 will do 1.5" at 100 yards (five shots) off the bench. I would have settled for 2.0" so this was a pleasant surprise. Since this is basically a 150 yard hunting proposition, 2.0" is more than good enough. Love the feller, I do...

My 25/20 Marlin (early late issue) will shoot NRA fifty yard 10 ring all day (the "x" count is not high) off the bench with a squirrel load, a medium load, and a high speed (just under 2200 fps) with Lyman's 258420 gc out of lino. It took me 500 rounds of very disappointing results until it suddenly started shooting well. Examination of the barrel shows a visible flaw in the rifling. However, it shoots so well that I would never send it back - might get it back with a "perfect" barrel that won't shoot!

I used to shoot a lot of short range big bore matches (National Match Course reduced targets at 100 yards) and my standard for those rifles with both .222 Remington and .308 Winchester heavy barrel varmiters (Remington 700 BDL) were .500" at 100 yards for three five shot groups. They would just barely make it but were consistent (tuned triggers and bedded properly).

My present day competition Schuetzen rifle must make .500" standard at 100 yards in near perfect conditions to be competitive(matches are fired at 200 yards). The German ring target has a center (scoring 25) of 1.5" at 200 yards. Off the bench you are required to have the bullet half into the scoring ring before you get the higher value. This is all with a plain base lead bullet.

Dale53

So, as most of you have already stated, it depends on the rifle or pistol and the task at hand.

[MTWeatherman]

If the rifle is as accurate as I can shoot...its an accurate rifle by my standards. With rifles, iron sights, and 61 year old eyes, thats now about a 3 inch group at 100 yards but getting bigger by the year.

Iron sights describe most of my cast bullet rifles which are levers and a military Mauser. I know at least some of the rifles and loads are more accurate than my standards of today because they delivered it years ago with younger eyes. I've aslo mounted a scope on a lever to develop a load...then pulled it off to replace it with a receiver peep. The rifles (loads) have about twice the accuracy I do with groups in the 1.5-2" range. Not much purpose in trying to improve accuracy with them when I couldn't take advantage of it anyhow. I also use cast in a couple of Hi-Point Carbines(which have scopes) but don't expect or get high accuracy from them anyhow...they're just "fun guns" which have the required accuracy for my purpose.

My cast bullet rifles are recreational guns that are not used for serious bench rest shooting anyhow. They are accurate enough.

[mike in co]

to determine a "rifle"'s accuracy you must take as much of you out of the picture as possible.

what is the desired end results...(huntin, plinkin, competition?)

i do little plinkin, no huntin and lots of competition....so

i use scopes>>>lots of us have mentioned old eyes.(4x,6x, and 10x weaver texas scopes are great !)

i test from the bench with proper frt rest and rear bag.

i own wind flags

i consider myself an ammo crafter, not just a reloader.

the condition and type of bbl will dictate what seasoning or breakin maybe required.

testing requires quality boolits, sorted cases and weight charges.

if iron sites are required, they are tuned after a quality load is found, to put the boolits where they should be based on hold(6 oclock for mbabr).

if any of you do not know, often point of impact will change based on moving away from the bench, so if prone or standing, a new zero must be established.
(shooting standing is a waste of good powder!!!).

sub 2 inch for most of my mil surplus rifles, sub 1 inch for any other rifle...at 100yds.
i plan on doing some 50yd shooting only because some of our internet matches are at 50.

[crazy mark]

crazy mark, what boolit are you using in the 1891 argie?. Have you slugged the barrel?. And what alloy are you using for your boolits?. If tumbling you could have an undersized boollit for the inside bore dimensions of your barrel. Size your bullet to .002 over bore diameter. A good bullet for the argie is lyman's 314299. inquiring minds like to know. Frank

Frank, I've tried about 8 different boolits and powders including the one you mentioned. They have been sized from .312 to .315 They are definately .002 over bore size. as this one slugged out to .312. Alloy is ww's and ww's with about .5-1% tin added and air cooled. all are GC'd. Once the rains slow down/ stop I will be playing with this some more. The bore looks good on this one compared to the sewer pipe 91/30 I have that is a challenge ro shoot cast boolits. The boolit weights have been from 150 - 214 grs. Mark

[Frank46]

BruceB, with me and my 59 year old cataract eyes accuracy is 2-3 inches at 100 yds on a good day. Most of what I shoot are military rifles and iron sights. Hopefully this year will be trying out a rem 700 varmint synthetic in 308 and my sako 75 in 30-06. Both have good glass on them and should be able to do better. I think accuracy might be a subjective thing with most shooters. If you get 2" groups with a marlin 94 at 50yds and are happy then thats it. But if you are shooting a benchrest type cast bullet rifle and get 1/2" groups at 100 yds and are happy then there you are. It all depends upon the shooter and what his expectations are and how he or she goes about his casting, rejecting, sizing, loading and of course shooting. Just my two cents worth. Frank

[Bass Ackward]

I'm hearing in various quarters that some casters think that a new barrel needs to be fired quite a few times to wear the "new" off it, mainly meaning toolmarks and such. Some say as many as 500 jacketed bullets need to make that fast one-way trip before we start getting serious with cast loads in a brand-new barrel.


Bruce,

Many people .... fear the use of jacketed bullets in a barrel for cast. From my experiece, there is no discernable difference in barrel life from either material if used at the same velocity / pressure levels. In fact, shooting strictly cast can expedite barrel failure because lead polishes. Since it obturates easier, this .... polishing (wear) never stops in a throat or down the bore. Powder impact roughs up a throat so the bearing surface is weakened and the lead polishes away the rough again. If this concept is hard to to understand you will get the idea when I discuss a Lee sizer below. If you have a barrel material that is soft, like stainless, throat wear is faster with cast than jacketed. This is why I always have the discussions about barrel materials and hardnesses (steel quality).

Witness the "accurate" life spans of truely competitive benchrest barrels. Pretty close if not less with lead. And jacketed are going faster. A jacketed bullet moving down a bore under high pressure will eventually harden (toughen) rifling and the bore to "resist" wear. Lead comes along and polishes off this temper. So not only is it good to shoot some jacketed in the begining, it is also good to shoot 20 about every 500 rounds too.

Once this hardening takes place, virtually all wear is throat wear from powder and muzzle from gas seal breakage. So the easier you shoot cast and at the lower pressures gives cast the advantage over jacketed for barrel life. When cast is shot like jacketed, all bets are off. OR .... when jacketed is shot like cast, no difference in barrel life is noted.

If you want to compare cast and jacketed accuracy, you must do it around the same velocity levels. It's a waste sure unless you are breaking in a barrel, but it will give you a great comparrison for your loads. If you like 18 grains of 2400 for a 170 grain cast, shoot 18 grains of 2400 and substitute a 170 grain jacketed instead until the barrel is broken in. But the best hardneing will take place with the heat and friction of full power loads. You simply have to exercise judgement with jacketed so that you don't go too low so that you stick one.

Anyone that has ever opened up a Lee sizer using lapping bullets experienced that the first .0005 comes off very easily and very rapidly as you take off the tool marks and high spots. The same with sanding wood if the analogy helps. Then it takes much more effort (time) from that point on. The exact same thing happens with barrel dimensions. The only difference is in your patience. NO MORE WEAR will have occurred to your barrel if you broke your barrel in with jacketed than if you used cast.

Barrel break in with lead takes place from 500 - 1000 cast. The softer the barrel steel the faster break-in occurs. The higher the pressure / velocity you run, the quicker wear happens. The HARDER your bullets, the faster wear occurs. The more antimony you use in your mix the faster barrel wear occurs regardless of the pressure / velocity. This is why benchresters have the problems they do. If you can get a benchrest barrel after they have trashed the throat, set it back and chamber it out to clean up the throat and re-crown it, you have a GREAT barrel again. Assuming it is long enough for your purposes.

With jacketed it takes 20 to 200 rounds to break in a barrel. The only difference is that the jacketed bore will be hardened somewhat while the cast bore is little changed. More hardneing will have occurred if it is chrome moly. Stainless doesn't harden much without much more heat and won't get as hard period. Which is why you don't see many stainless tool bits. Or military barrels made of stainless.

The debate really widens on how you want to shoot cast. If you never intend to run a cast bullet over 2000 fps using LOW PRESSURES, then there is usually little benifit to breaking in a barrel anyway. When I did my rifling height test the difference in performance of an 1850 fps load was 1 1/4" brand spanking virgin to 7/8" broken in. So you can just start shooting lead and forget about it. If you want to shoot over though, say for hunting purposes, then break-in is invaluable to you.

Again with cast, it depends on your use for the gun / caliber.

[carpetman]

Bass Akwards---I cant go along with you on there being no difference in barrel wear from cast or jacketed. Having said that,the folks at Lyman don't either according to their tests. You mention same pressure and velocity. Cast being softer and less friction,would require less pressure for the same velocity. Another thing that to me contradicts this is how many .22 rimfires have you seen with shot out barrels? All they shoot is cast--and lots get a bunch of miles.

[Bass Ackward]

Bass Akwards---I cant go along with you on there being no difference in barrel wear from cast or jacketed. Having said that,the folks at Lyman don't either according to their tests. You mention same pressure and velocity. Cast being softer and less friction,would require less pressure for the same velocity. Another thing that to me contradicts this is how many .22 rimfires have you seen with shot out barrels? All they shoot is cast--and lots get a bunch of miles.


Ray,

You could be right. I see both sides. But this is not my experience once you leave pure lead.

22s are soft (pure) lead with no antimony at extremly low pressures. Most bigger rifles that are reloaded for don't meet this gentle life style. Some of the roughest barrels you will ever see and remain so today can be found on older model 52 Winchesters after hundreds of thousands of rounds. But that is a 22. Different ball game once you add antimony. In fact, old timers used to refuse to add or shoot antimony bullets because of the increased wear. That is why you got all the 20 to 1 and 16 to 1 mixes. Think that they didn't know about antimony in those days? If that is all you shoot, then my argument is mute and you are correct. But today, WW is probably the most popular mix and it has antimony.

Once a jacketed bullet is sized, there is no longer any friction until it hits a high spot. That is why after 1000 rounds, you can still find tool marks down the bore in a copper barrel. If you want those marks removed and a finely polished barrel use lead. Those marks don't just disappear, they are worn away.

Dan of Mountain molds has worn out two barrels and has purchased a third now in a couple of years using HTWW at 60,000 psi. This is with a 30-06, A cartridge not noted as being a barrel burner. And I will bet that both have had less than 1000 rounds total between them. Think of it this way, benchrest calibers are extremely small cartridges that burn powder in the case as they are underbore. Very little powder impact is seen compared to larger cartridges. So you can't blame powder impact for the destruction. If lead never caused any wear, then a benchrest barrel would last many rounds longer than a copper benchrest barrel too. Do they?

[StarMetal]

Bass said: Once a jacketed bullet is sized, there is no longer any friction until it hits a high spot. That is why after 1000 rounds, you can still find tool marks down the bore in a copper barrel. If you want those marks removed and a finely polished barrel use lead. Those marks don't just disappear, they are worn away.

John, if that jacketed bullet doesn't have as much friction anymore once it's been sized....notice I said not as much and didn't jump on your "there is no longer any friction until it hits a high spot"..then how do you explain why jacketed loads heat a barrel up ALOT faster then cast loads at the same pressure/and/or velocity?????????? Friction my son..that's why. Try pound a cast bullet thru a barrel then a jacketed and tell my which one is harder to pound thru and don't give me you are expanding the back of the jacketed bullet as you pound. Use a push rod then hooked to a device that will tell you how many pounds thrust it takes to PUSH them thru.

Joe

[carpetman]

Bass Akwards---Sure, adding antimony will make the alloy harder than pure lead---but it's all relative. Oak is harder than pine but compared to steel the difference is fairly insignificant. The alloy,whether pure lead or water dropped,Matanuska Glacier water coooled alloied with antimony and babbitt is still soft compared to a jacketed bullet. Then again you might be able to tear up a railroad track with a rubber mallet.

[Bass Ackward]

Bass Akwards---Sure, adding antimony will make the alloy harder than pure lead---but it's all relative. Oak is harder than pine but compared to steel the difference is fairly insignificant. The alloy,whether pure lead or water dropped,Matanuska Glacier water coooled alloied with antimony and babbitt is still soft compared to a jacketed bullet. Then again you might be able to tear up a railroad track with a rubber mallet.


Ray,

Antimony makes it hard, but that in itself is not the problem. It's the abrasive nature of antimony itself. If the bullet is abrasive AND hard, then you have more wear.

Joe,

If you shoot a jacketed bullet with a cast load, heat is the same. If you shoot a cast bullet with full power loads like jacketed, heat is the same or worse from cast. Once sized, any bullet will stay the same unless it hits a high spot. But obturation will always be stronger with lead because it is weaker. Or stated another way, lead will obturate at lower pressures that occur farther down the barrel where jacketed will not. Even if a jacketed bullet has more friction, it is not abrasive like an antimony slug.

[StarMetal]

John,

I beg to differ with you and that cast loads that are shot full power are as hot or hotter then jacketed loads. Alot of members here know that old Joe doesn't shoot shotgun/pistol powder loads in his cast rifle loads. I've shot medium to full power loads most of my cast bullet shooting years.....so I would say that I have some hands on experience. Full power cast loads DO NOT GET THE BARREL AS HOT OR AS FAST AS JACKETED LOADS. Example was doing Dan's 200,000 rpm contest with my 7mm-08. Shooting a little over 135 gr cast bullet at 2700 fps DID NOT heat up the barrel as fast or as hot as my standard 139 gr Hornady jacketed loads. :veryconfu

Joe

[Bass Ackward]

Joe,

I told you cast can do just as much or more damage than jacketed at high pressure. I told you about Dan. You can ask him how much his throats walked and with how many rounds. He should have that information. Mine have moved too with a non over bore caliber using a maximum of 34,000 psi and about 800 rounds now through my Whelen. And diameter at the throat is starting to taper too. What was .358 is now just a shade over .359. Joeb told you of how his Savage 223 comp gun walked using nothing but lead. So I have seen what I am telling you. The reason I believe that more people don't report this and say uh huh is because we slug once when we start and then choke so it takes longer to notice there. And if you simply shoot cast like cast, you don't produce this effect.

Along this same line, the more you ask your throat to be and perform as a sizer, the faster you will see this effect starting from a new bore. And in my experience, balancing the antimony content with tin reduses the abrasive effect. That is why I use WW + 2% tin. But it doesn't stop it altogether.

I told you that HV cast will heat up a barrel. Mine do. In fact a lot more than copper because I have to use a slower powder than jacketed for the same weight bullets to get there and it is still burning in the bore when the bullet exits. So I see more heat the entire length. I didn't say the heat is solely from friction. And I will bet you can't either. At least I don't know how you seperate the two sourses.

Since I shoot nothing but hunting level loads in everything I own except handguns. And have been doing this for over ten years starting on new guns, I told you what I saw and read. The stories about antimony aren't mine. They are Keith and Harrison. You can read it anytime you like. I have Keiths material on hand and as soon as I find it, I will PM you page and para. I am just saying uh huh and passing it along because evidently some very experienced people are un aware of this effect.

The gist of this post was not to be afraid of using copper to break in a barrel or to keep it conditioned along the line. Especially if you launch the jacketed like cast at cast like velocities. I tried to provide my reasoning of such so people can see. You may not like my eval, but that won't change the wear. And launching a jacketed bullet at the same velocity as a cast is a logical way to see accuracy of your barrel at that harmonic range. It doesn't make since to compare a 3500 fps jacketed accuracy of a one hole group to a 2000 fps cast if you ask me.

Either way you choose to break in a barrel, the barrel will get to EXACTLY the same point / condition / dimensions whether you use only cast, jacketed, or fire lap to break it in. Same rifling height, same spacing between rifling, same everything. Speed and bore finish is the biggect difference. If you have a chrome molly bore, then jacketed will harden the rifling when shot. This will actually retard the polishing effect of lead if you are afraid of wear. My Whelen is not an over bore, but it has had nothing but a steady diet of cast since I broke it in with jacketed and I can tell you when the throat started to walk. @ 350 rounds because I had to keep buying new molds. And it continues. My 06 sees both bullets in higher numbers and while it HAS changed, the effect has been less than my Whelen. And the 06 sees much higher pressures and velocities than the Whelen. You are only "safe" if you shoot pure lead and tin. Of coarse we know what that limits us too.

After breaking in a barrel, lead does not reduce rifling height as much as jacketed because it wears evenly polishing the bore at the same time. Thus keeping closer to the same ratio. And everything you put down a bore from the point of break in will cause some amount of wear. These are my experiences.

[felix]

Joe, BA is absolutely correct, and without any contradictions whatsoever. My bench gun now has a mile long throat, and needs to be rechambered. It has had only about 750 rounds of competition ammo before the accuracy was deemed no longer kosher for the sport, and then about 10,000 rounds of "lead" after the fact. ... felix

[StarMetal]

John,

One was to see how much friction heat there is from a jacketed bullet is to have a barrel device attached to some very very high pressure air to propell the bullet thru the barrel, although compressing air makes heat in itself.

Here's another thing to look at. Cases get hot too upon firing, but not so hot that you can't pick them up. UNLESS they have been fired out of a semi-auto. Let me give you an example. My best friend Mike down in Tulsa, Ok I speak alot about had a semi-auto Remington 30-06. Believe it or not for years he reloaded for that rifle with Lee kit pound type die which we all know only neck sizes. So much for small base dies for auto's huh? Anyways we were shooting one day. He was using Rem brass at the time so on the bench was his rifle and the Remington box with the styrofoam insert out of the green cardboard box. He fired a group and we walked up to look at the target. Well when we got back I noticed one of the shells he fired had rolled down the bench and it hit that styrofoam insert and melted it's way thru it completely. I picked the case up and it burned my fingers and I dropped it. After it cooled I picked it up again and it had gotten so hot that the neck , shoulder, and some of the body had turned blue like you had annealed it. All the other cases laying around looked the same. Then we realized his rifle was still loaded and sitting in the sandbags pointing at the target that we both had just inspected. I thought God, those cases get that hot, wonder if the chamber might have gotten hot enough to cook a round off. Anyways I chewed his ass out for leaving the firel loaded like that when we left to do anything like check the target. He agreed. Back to topic. Grant you cases get hot from the powder burning, but no ways as hot as from the friction created from yanking a shell from the chamber in a semi-auto. That also goes to show you that althought your shell expands and grips the chamber walls upon firing and then shrinks back after the pressure subsides, isn't a shrink back as much as we may have thought. Either that or in some semi-autos the shell is started to be extracted before all the pressure is gone. Bottom line is that 90 percent of the heat in Mikes cases was from friction. So that, in my opinion, helps prove my jacketed friction theory. Unless a test is conducted I won't believe otherwise. In none of my rifles have I noticed that cast was as equal at making the barrel as hot as shooting jacketed, even using slow powders which I have used alot of.

Joe

[JohnH]

BA, Some of what you say about the difference between carbon and stainless steel makes sense and don't. I'm no machinist for sure, but I've had to do some machining on stainless, and lots of experience forming the stuff out in the feild. It is HARD. Not the same kind of hard carbon steel is though. Carbon gives steel the ability to hold an edge and is the primary agent responsible for steels hardness.

Stainless on the other hand is hard because of it's alloying elements, primarily nickel, chromium and in some, molyebdenum. Stuff work hardens like crazy, in fact it is nearly impossible to drill a hole through 1/4" bar (typically 316 but others as well) with standard jobbers drills like from the hardware as the stuff workhardens. In punching and shearing the stuff with mechanical ironworkers, stainless is noticeable harder than carbon steel (50,000 psi stuff not ASTM A36, common mild steel)

I've had to saw stainless that wouldn't saw, drill stainless that won't drill and bend stainless that bends about as freely as cast iron.

I believe most gun stainless's are 400 series. That stuff makes 316 look like mild steel. So while my gun barrel experience is not commensurate with yours, my day in and out experience with it is poultry processing and feedmill machinery applications says that 316 and 400 series stainless is everything 4140 ever thought of being.

4140 has one advantage, it has carbon and as a result will hold an edge, but in the areas of hardness and toughness stainless ain't no slouch. It is hard for me to believe that a carbon steel would work harden where a stainless doesn't. In my experience, stainless workhardens faster than carbon steel ever thought of, in fact, typically, that stainless workhardens makes it undesireable as a machine material. It makes it difficult and more expensive to machine, form, cut, shape and work in both the feild and shop. That is why we normally don't use the stuff except where it's corrosion resistance or it's toughness is desired.

As to lead polishing steel, it is interesting to note that the early free machining steels were leaded, lead being added in trace amounts to aid the formation the chip and possibly even to act somewhat as a lubricant. It is interesting to note that leaded steels do not take to heat treating very well. So it is likely that lead does polish to a degree, but I suspect that the anitmony is the greater culprit.

But we must ask, at what level is this a problem? Surely if this were a real problem, folks would be screaming about their lead boolits ruining their barrels... I don't hear anyone screaming. People running benchrest expect to have a competitive barrel life of 1000 rounds or so, and is actually an unfair comparison. Most of us don't shoot competitively, we are almost certainly not shooting cast competitively in benchrest matches and I'd be darned certain that the few who are are not pushing 60,000 psi, and those who do are seeing as much throat/land erosion from burning gases as they are from any lead polishing.

As I said, my barrel experience is surely not commensurate with yours, and I've plenty left to learn, but when I burn up my 375 JDJ throat with my lead bullets I'll send it to you for a throating job, and you can make a few bucks from my ignorance.... ought ot be pretty good compensation for putting up with my dumb ass, and will give you the opportunity say "I told you so" :)

[26Charlie]

I hesitate to get back to the original qestion, when it has veered off into a very interesting discussion of barrel wear, but I did get to the range yesterday and had some results that bear on what good accuracy is for a CB load. I shot three rifles and a revolver. My shooting is with military bolt actions or hunting-style rifles. I had recently acquired a .270 Rem M760 w/4X scope, made in the 1950's, a nice old hunting gun. Also I replaced a defective barrel on an Ishapore SMLE .308 rifle. I took along my only .308 hunting gun, a Win M88 carbine w/2.5X scope hoping to get a load that shot well in both .308's.

The two .270 loads were the 105 gr. 280468(short) with 10.2 gr. 800-X, and the 150 gr. RCBS 27-150-SP with 22.0 gr. Scot 4197.
The .308 load was the 175 gr. 311291 with the same 22.0 gr. Scot 4197. All loads using WLR primer.

The 105 gr. .270 put 5 into 4.3 inches, 4 of those into 3.2 inches at 100 yds. OK for plinking, minute of beer can, but I will keep experimenting with that bullet.

The 150 gr. .270 put 5 into 2.3 inches, but three of those into a nice 0.7 inches. At 100 yards. This is very pleasing; I feel I could hit a quarter at 100 yards more than half the time if required to do so.

The 175 gr. .308 load in the Ishapore put 5 into 7.5 inches, four of them into 3.8 inches, but he group was 16" above point of aim even with the sights as low as they would go - 100 yards. Definitely not a load suited to this rifle.

The same load in the M88, however, shot a nice tight 10-shot group - eight into 2.6 inches, with one shot an inch higher and a first shot 3 inches out to the right. I have had this first shot flyer to the right several times before with this carbine, and I think it is my bench technique - the trigger is not great on the M88's and I have to get used to it each time. So I will continue to use this load for the M88, and keep looking for one that works better in the Ishapore SMLE.

I should say that I shoot a magazine load or a cylinder full when possible each time, since I want to know how the load works and shoots through the gun as well - I don't load single-shot. I also shoot holding the gun in both hands, and resting the back of my forward hand over a padded block on the bench - I call this "wrist rest" - because the zero is thus the same for offhand or position shooting, whereas it might not be the same for a solid bag rest.

The revolver is a Ruger Blackhawk in 7 1/2 " barrel, .45 Colt caliber, and I tried two loads at 50 yards resting both elbows on the bench - "elbow rest".

An NEI 300 gr. round nose PB with 10.2 gr. 800-X gave so-so accuracy - 12 into nine inches.

An NEI Keith style SWC of 300 gr. with 10.0 gr. HERCO gave a nice circular group of 6 into 4.8 inches.

I will keep playing to see if the powder selection had anything to do with the disparity, or if it was only the bullet design.

So, I came back from the range with a fine 150 gr. .270 load, a good .308 load for the M88 Winchester, and a good 300 gr. SWC load for the Ruger. I also came back with ideas for more experimentation for the 105 gr. .270 and the 300 gr. round-nose. And I have to take a different tack with the SMLE - something to shoot more to the sights, maybe a slow plain-base load.

Three happys, one not-so-bad, and two fuhgedaboudits. Thats the way it goes with my stuff. And I have enough rifles to play with that I don't have to worry about bore wear because a couple thousand rounds spread through 40 rifles ain't that much for each one.

[StarMetal]

26charlie,

You #3 shot high because the load was on the slow side. Longer time for the bullet in the barrel doing recoil equals higher elevation of the muzzle when the bullet leaves. Try speeding it up some, possibly with a different and slightly slower powder to bring the bullet impact down some. You're the fellow I told about those barrels for that gun from GP's right?

Keep at it, you'll get the ones you want to shoot better shooting better. Those others are shooting dang nice.

Joe