.22 flat nose and accuracy.

Hello to all. I was a really big fan of the CCI small game bullet that CCI produced before this latest re emergence of that bullet witch is NOT the same. I was instrumental in having it brought back into production, but they decided to change things!
I found it (originals) to be extremely accurate in my ruger 10/22, and Mark 1 pistol. With the best effect on small animals of all bullet designs.

However the question I would like answered is the quality of the ammunition lead bullet that can be produced by the people that make the various devices to make "Flat Point" .22 bullets out of regular 22 bullets.

Are these devices any good insofar as producing a CONSISTENT bullet from an already loaded round.
I would really appreciate your findings with these devices.

I use a Paco Kelly tool in .224" to swage the diameter of .22LRs to a consistent diameter and to reform the nose. The flat point it makes is actually a concave point. I use an arbor type press to make them consistent in size. The tool comes with 3 nose punches; The nasty nose (concave), a HP punch and a post. If used consistently it improves the accuracy of most regular .22LR ammo by 20 - 30% or more. The accuracy of top end match ammo isn't improved but the terminal ballistics are greatly improved by changing the nose shape. The amount of nose change is easily controlled from very little to a lot which resemble a SWC.

In my M504 Remington rifle Blazer ammo (currently still around $20 a brick) shoots 10 shot groups of 1 1/4 to 1 1/2" at 50 yards. By putting a Nasty Nose (concave) that also completely and evenly swaged the bullets sides to .224 groups shrinks the groups to consistently around 3/4" at 5 yards and 1 1/2" at 100 yards. The solid "whop" when these hit a squirrel is awesome, very much like the high end HPs that cost 3 - 4 times as much. The Federal Bulk 36 gr HPs will shoot into right at 1" at 50 yards also with 10 shot groups. Using the HP punch to enlarge the HP and make a small flat nose improves accuracy to .6 - .6 for the same # of shots at 50 yards. The increased whop and terminal effect is very impressive out to 100 yards (my own limit for squirrels with the .22LR).

Left picture shows Blazer ammo in front row with unmodified round on the left. The next 4 rounds show vaeying degrees of "Nasty Nose". Note the sides of the driving bands are evenly swaged. You can swage the bullet out to a full WC if wanted. However, reliable feeding from the magazine is a consideration in how much to swage if a repeater is used. The back two rounds are the Federal genaric bulk (525 rds per box). The left is an unmodified round and the right one is with the HP enlarged and deepened and the nose flattened. The right picture shows how the profile of the bullets changes with each amount of swaging.

Larry Gibson

Larry you are evidently into this very much, a good sign of a man that knows what a .22 can do!

How have you found accuracy with the various 'Flat nose" changed bullets vs the originals or whatever?

How long does it take to reconfigure 50 rounds to a flat nose and is this done in a standard reloading press (mine is a Hornady, single stage)?

Sorry to ask so many questions but I would really like to achieve the accuracy/effectiveness of the flat nose that I lost due to CCI stupidity.

A bit of information that you might be able to us is the Remington Thunderbolts, cheapest stuff Remington makes I think. I have popped a few ground hogs lately and these things have sailed right through them. If you check them with a "Scratch" they seem to be "HARD"! This is something I would really like if changing the lead would give better accuracy. As is, well you know!

BTW: Ruger 10/22, glassed action, custom SS fluted barrel, Free floating, Trigger work by a guy in NM, knows is stuff ! Sightron 3-9, I really like this scope! There are some other little cosmetic things, but every thing pointed towards accuracy.

I just added that to let you know I can judge accuracy, thanks for your help.

I use a ho'made tool and a pair of very sharp, modified side cutters. I have no complaints and the accuracy is at least as good as factory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Changeling

How have you found accuracy with the various 'Flat nose" changed bullets vs the originals or whatever?

How long does it take to reconfigure 50 rounds to a flat nose and is this done in a standard reloading press (mine is a Hornady, single stage)?

---

I have the Neal Waltz die that works in a standard reloading press; after getting it set up I can do a box of 50 about as fast as I can remove the "processed round, install a new round in the shell holder, lower then raise the press's arm.
My set up comes with 3 top punch's; an ESP type flat nose, a HP that you control the size opening & depth of the HP and a normal looking round nose.
My testing shows that others at "RIMFIRE CENTER.COM attest to; that is this tool works best at improving accucary with the lower cost ammo, Fed. 510, Rem lighting, WW wildcat, and the [at one time] <$$ Agulia

My main test beds were T/C Contender W/ match chamber and for testing a 24X Loupy BR scope and an Anny Exlemper with a Loupy bumped to 40 X BR scope. And most testing was at 50 & 77 Yds.

Changeling

Larry you are evidently into this very much, a good sign of a man that knows what a .22 can do!

I do enjoy shooting and hunting with the .22LR. I have 3 handguns and 6 .22LR rifles that I use. Long ago when I was 12 years old I discovered the increased effectiveness of HPs vs solids on grey diggers and have been using the Winchester HP LRs to hunt with over the years. Before I began modifying the rounds I used CCI MiniMags and Remington Yellow Jackets to hunt with starting around '68. I did use a lot of solids for plinking and, of course, match solids for small bore matches.

How have you found accuracy with the various 'Flat nose" changed bullets vs the originals or whatever?

Accuracy is dramatically increased (usually a 20-30% improvement) with all of the lower priced ammo I have tried. With the top end HPs and quality match ammo accuracy isn't usually improved but the terminal ballistics are greatly improved. Simply re HPing and deepening the HP works wonders on the HPs and of course so does flattening the nose and/or HP the match stuff. Definately a lot more "whop" on target.

How long does it take to reconfigure 50 rounds to a flat nose and is this done in a standard reloading press (mine is a Hornady, single stage)?

The instructions with the Paco tool say you can use a small mallet but I've not done this. I use a small drill press stand (old Sears one that you put a Craftsman hand drill on to make a drill press) as an arbor press, the real arbor press used by bench resters would work very well. With the drill press stand I can easily control, with precision, the size of the nose alteration with the drill depth adjustment. I haven't bothered to time myself but it goes pretty fast; a round is thumb pushed into the die, the die and rod are put onto the drill press, the handle is pulled down which pushes the arbor down on the rod and swages/alters the nose, a push on the rod with the palm and the round is ejected.....then do it again with the next round. Doesn't take long at all.

The Neal Waltz tool is done in a press as Wayne S describes. It probably is faster and certainly is more portable. I have emailed Neal several times and get an unable to connect return message. Aparently he has moved to Ohio and isn't connected yet. I will continue to try to contact him.

On the other hand my Paco tool has two different swaging sizes; .223 & .224. You can also get a Paco tool with 4 different swaging sizes but I'm not sure what all the sizes available are. Thus you can tailor the swaged size of the bullet diameter to different rifles chambers and bores. It does make a difference as .223 sized bullets do not shoot near as well in my M504 Remington. However the .223 swaged bbullets definately shoot better in my 144LS than do .224 swaged bullets. The Paco tool seems a little more versatile with tailoring rounds to different chamber/bores.

Another thing that effects accuracy is the amount of nose alteration. I've found that accuracy improves when 100% of the bearing surface of the bullet is swaged. On the Blazer ammo in the pictures this occurs with the smallest flattening of the nose. Also some ammo will take more nose flattening than others without uneven distortion of the nose which causes inaccuracy. It's just a matter of testing different degrees of nose flattening or HPing to determine where accuracy is the best, kind of like developing a load. I use 10 shot groups at 50 yards for intitial testing. When I narrow it down I will do final testing at 100 yards early in the morning with no wind. With the M504 I expect 10 shots in no more than 1.2" at 100 yards. Of course each gun has it's own accuracy requirements and maximum ranges that I use for hunting squirrels and 100 yards is my personal max for quick sure kills with the M504.

Sorry to ask so many questions but I would really like to achieve the accuracy/effectiveness of the flat nose that I lost due to CCI stupidity.

A bit of information that you might be able to us is the Remington Thunderbolts, cheapest stuff Remington makes I think. I have popped a few ground hogs lately and these things have sailed right through them. If you check them with a "Scratch" they seem to be "HARD"! This is something I would really like if changing the lead would give better accuracy. As is, well you know!

I have not tried any of the Remington Thunderbolts. Good to know that they are hard. Hping them might not be worthwile but flattening the nose definately would make them better game getters. Accuracy probably will get better also.

BTW: Ruger 10/22, glassed action, custom SS fluted barrel, Free floating, Trigger work by a guy in NM, knows is stuff ! Sightron 3-9, I really like this scope! There are some other little cosmetic things, but every thing pointed towards accuracy.

Just have to get the right size and adjust the amount of flatness for reliable feeding/chambering. I have to do that with my 10/22 and M16A1 with M261 device. also for the Browning Challenger and Colt Ace come to think of it.

Larry Gibson

Larry I can't think of a single thing to say (you won't see this often, LOL). Thanks very much for the information. Let me take some time to absorb all of this and i will probably be getting back to you.

I'm interested in what the tool looks like and how it works. Any pics anyone?

Blammer

The Paco Kelly tool or the Waltz tool?

Larry Gibson

Look here for a discussion on the "Flat Pointer"
http://levergunscommunity.com/viewto...276fd48791068f

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Larry Gibson

Blammer

The Paco Kelly tool or the Waltz tool?

Larry Gibson

---

For me it would be the Waltz tool? I favor the speed of the tool. What I don't know is can I vary the degree of nose flatness? That would be important to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Changeling

For me it would be the Waltz tool? I favor the speed of the tool. What I don't know is can I vary the degree of nose flatness? That would be important to me.

---

There is an ajustment similar to a seater die for the Waltz tool. It can be precisely adjusted to vary the amount of flatness. With the Paco kelly tool I do the same with the drilldepth adjustment on the drill press to precisely vary the amount of nose flatness.

Larry Gibson

I have one of the Paco Kelly tools also. I did a bunch of testing when I got it. I used it sized to .223 and .224 with cheap white-box Winchester .22LR cartridges. The group size with unchanged bullets was tested for 10 ten-shot groups from a rest. The .223 was tested with a slight improvement. The .224 ones gave approx 1/4 to 30% smaller groups than the original cartridges.

I also tested it with some Remington target ammunition. There was no noticable improvement with those.

My conclusion is that it improves the accuracy of cheap ammunition, but does not do anything for more expensive ammunition.

Heck I didn't know there were two types!

What ever one you like best.

How is the bullet reshaped without messing up the rest of the cartridge?

Looks like the 22 mag is just 'trimmed' off.

This reshaping is what i'm interested in.

I got bored today and did a little "free styling" on the lathe.

BABore

Just a thought; If the punches had a collar on them that was screw adjustable like the seater on a Lee Loader then the noses could be altered any amount with precision by simply adjusting the collar to control the depth of the punch. Then it could be a really portable die and the use of a small plastic mallet would work fine. I've been thinking of making one for my Paco Kelly AccuRizr. Feasable?

Larry Gibson

I thought about doing just that. I think a 2-pc shaft collar may work without slipping because it has two cap screws to lock it down. Doesn't marr the shaft that way either. They also make a collet style with locking nut. An even better way would be to put a step or shoulder on the pin head. A sliding bbl, with a brass set screw for locking it in place. Use shim washers to set the depth by putting them between the bbl end and shoulder. That way it can't shift upward on you.

So far I've just been doing it by feel and am getting pretty good consistency. Diameter always comes out right because of the die size, 0.224.

Harry O

My conclusion is that it improves the accuracy of cheap ammunition, but does not do anything for more expensive ammunition.

That is pretty much what I found also. However, by modifying the nose of even the best target .22LR turns them into much more efficient killers on small game. Accuracy improvemnt was only part of the equation that I was looking for. My main interest was in making the bargain (not so sure about that anymore :-( ) variety .22LRs more efficient on small game, particularly ground squirrels. The difference of the impact on small ground squirrels between a regular RN Blazer and one with just a "flat point" has to be seen to be believed. Re doing the HP of the Federal bulk HPs gives them an impact similar to hypervelocity .22LR rounds with much better accuracy also. However if just punching hole in paper and using the good match ammo I wouldn't bother with the tool as the accuracy is already there and the tool doesn't seem to improve it in my sporter rifles either.

Larry Gibson

Being a squirrel hunter with Mt. Curs and all that goes with that I dearly miss the old trunacated nose flatpointed 22 ammo. This ammo "smacks" a squirrels brain alot harder than a round nose and does not rip it off like a HP does. The accuracy improvements would be a really good side benefit even though most my shots over the dogs are relatively short. Nice thing about the tc boolits is that if you happen to misjudge the angle and hit meat on the way out it does not destroy it. I even have one of them old craftsman "make it a drill press" stand thingies. I have been using standard velocity remingtons with the round nose and although they work....I sure do miss the TC boolits.

You guys have inspired me yet again....thank you.

Let me just relate a story I have told many, many times on RFC.com:

I took a new built 10/22 to the country one weekend with the sole intent of relaxing (no chores to do at all that weekend) and shooting that .22. I must have had 25 or 30 different .22 loads. I set up a 4x8 sheet of plywood 43 yards away - just happened to be the distance I could set it up.

I shot, cleaned, shot, cleand and shot some more all weekend. I have no clue how many rounds I shot, but I tried to shoot at least 5x5 shots groups with every load. All my data is recorded and stored somewhere.

I got down to the best (most accurate) 7 loads and started to pare it down from there to try to find the best 3 shooting loads so I could choose from there. While setting up for that, I remember I had my Paco tools with me and went 'hmmmmm....I wonder what would happen'.

Well you know I had to try it. Now these best 7 loads were not all match/taget loads. One of them was the CCI SGB - I'm a big fan of it too as it shoots really well in several .22s of mine. Now keep in mind that these were the best shooting loads out of many. After Paco-ing a (is that a word?) a bunch of each load, I tested again.

Out of 7, 6 loads showed an improvement in accuracy - some by as much as 30%! These were not flukes. These were 5 x 5 shot groups that were all micrometered and shot in exact same conditions, dead calm and warm. I later tested and found that even match loads with a nice Paco HP provides a surprising amount of thump when shooting small game. Turns them from tiny hole through to POP on impact.

Am I a fan? You better believe it![smilie=w:

several years ago a fellow on Evilbay sold a SGB die tha removed a portion of the bullet with a file, die was reversable to make 2 different sizes of flat tips. didn't need a press, could do it while watching TV. positives was that the bullets were lighter and you got more velocity. negatives was that they wouldn't feed in some rifles. I bought one and have had good luck with it. very tough on tree rat heads.

TTC