Stock Rifle HV "HOW"

[TXGunNut]

OK everyone is really hung up on the hunting aspect so for MOA lets say 2-3 MOA, or do we need to go a little looser because really at most deer hunting here (Arkansas) is under 200 yards so would 3.5moa be a fair acceptable accuracy level. Understand I am proposing not driving, I feel that the OP should settle the answer on MOA.- Sgt Mike

I've been thinking about that, maybe this shouldn't be about hunting. Maybe we should pursue velocity for velocity's sake and leave it at that. Unless the distance is well over what I normally shoot velocities above about 2000fps are not necessary for my hunting loads. My personal accuracy goal is generally 1.5MOA, mainly because I'm simply not a 1MOA shooter and/or reloader. I think 3.5MOA is a reasonable goal. When accuracy begins to deteriorate at high velocities it does so in a big way. Chasing smaller groups may be a distraction.

[TXGunNut]

I like your report format, JWT. I've lost many hours of range and loading bench time to poor record keeping over the years.

I'll be casting boolits for this project at my next casting session and would like some input on alloy and hardness. I'll be shooting a stock (OK, I'll probably glass bed it) Winchester (FN) Super Grade in 30-06. I think I have the XCB mould stuck around here somewhere. I have COWW, SOWW, 20-1 alloy available, a fair bit of hard lead shot and a dwindling supply of tin on hand.
Assuming fit is very good and I have the optimal sizing die what be would my ideal alloy and should I HT my boolits?

[TXGunNut]

Thanks. I studied Goodsteel's post and learned that my technique is definitely lacking. I'll stick with oven HT'ing for now, I think water dropping is only effective if the time from the moment the pour hits the mould until the boolit hits the water is exactly the same, every time. I know I can't do that at this point so I'll do the oven method. Just pulled a second batch of boolits out of the oven (for a different project) tonight, it's amazing how the process changes the way boolits look, feel and even sound when handled.

I need to buy some tin for my hunting alloys, may go ahead and have them ship me some #2 in the interest of consistency in this project. Just realized I need to fire my project rifle to get some fired brass to help with ordering a collet die and inserts. Need to slug it as well so I can give an accurate report.

[Doc Highwall]

I have been reading this and I don't care if someone puts a custom barrel on their gun and glass beds it, if the twist is the same as the factory rifle, what difference does it really make? All they really have is hopefully a concentric chamber and a little tighter neck to cut down on over working the case neck.

They still have to set the dies up correctly and cast and size good bullets.

Alloy and lube are going to affect this and that is going to make a larger difference along with powder selection.

[vzerone]

yes heat treat them and then WQ some and shoot against each other in each of your alloys, try each one establish a bench mark at a lower velocity.
Casting methods will play a large role and will be the first.......
give Goodsteels post (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...stency-applied) a once over and then a re-read as it is like drinking from a fire hydrant the concept is simple make the best bullet you can within your ability and then try to make them better each casting session. next is size the bullet the absolute minimum, But it must fit the throat. you will see many say it must be concerntric to the bore oh heaven yes it helps... Try different lubes...

But make only one change at a time i.e lube. I suspect that you will find a even chance with Lyman #2 in the alloy dept.

neck turning--- I do do it but ONLY barely enough to make the bullet tension even.
use the same headstamp if possiable. pick a trim length and uniform the cases the idea is to make each case the same for the Bullet tension to be equal in neck thickness and length. it is minuate part that will play in latter priority one should be the diving into the casting techniques
dont expect perfection off the bat just keep plugging away at it (casting techniques) and improve.

Look on here for the online (lead) calculator. keep good notes

sgt.mike,

I hate to burst yours and Goodsteels bubble, but consistent casting is .3 grains or less variation.

[popper]

My BO target post#94 shows what a slightly bad base will do at HV, these are plain base. The bases were PCd and IMHO, the flyers are caused by irregularities in the coating on the base edge. First shots (?) were after shooting a lot of jacketed and not cleaning after last shoot. Different 'groups' are me, which I'm working on improving. I've loaded some more with uncoated and well inspected bases to validate my hypothesis. I think the 308 target shows the same effect, Hornady checks (annealed) put on with Lee push through, plus me. I do not sort cases or boolits by weight. I visually checked all loaded rounds for concentrically. BO is about at the threshold, 308 is way over. All are Heat treated for 1 hr then into cold water. Lets talk alloy. I started (308W) with #2, then H.T., Roto high Sb alloy, added sulfur, added Cu - group size kept decreasing, # flyers did also. I've only tested 308W with H4895 & H335. BO is H110. PSI should be ~ 50K psi for both rifles. We assume all the boolit 'damage' is done in the barrel. Both boolits are my mods to the 31-165A, sans lube groove. I must assume that base damage/imperfection is the only cause.

[vzerone]

popper....50k is really pushing them!

[Hannibal]

The steps of the scientific method are to:

• Ask a Question.
• Do Background Research.
• Construct a Hypothesis.
• Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment.
• Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion.
• Communicate Your Results

How to achieve goals:
Specific
Measurable
Attainable
Realistic
Timely


This is how I approached the subject.

I.P. check, can a brotha' get an I.P. check? I believe a currently banned member is here under a different name.

WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Say it ain't so.

GASP!!!! Blasphemy, indeed !!!!

Can't get the Purple font to work.

[Hickok]

Maybe some of you have already tried and know the answer to this, can aluminum gas-checks be pushed as fast as cupper checks with good accuracy? Not the thin pop can checks, but thick aluminum comparable to copper checks.

I would tend to think cupper gc's would be better, but I haven't tried it yet.

[popper]

50k is really pushing them - from Hornady manual, I don't have a way of measuring but adjusted down due to cast. I think Bjornb learned that Cu makes an improvement, as I have found but not the only way.
base damage/imperfection - I am making the assumption that once fully into the rifling/bore, excluding gas cutting, stripping, nothing can happen to the boolit to damage it - the pressure wave in the barrel is flat. I also assume the barrels were cut to SAAMI spec tolerances, no attempt by me to design the boolit to match throat, etc. Not arguing either way on that issue. IMHO, straight Pb/Sb/Sn alloy doesn't make HV easy.
From a comment posted here, I am going to try a new casting trick, hitting the sprue before solid & then cut to see if it makes a difference in quality of cast. Kind of a swage on the boolit to reduce fillout/void possible problems.

[vzerone]

Maybe some of you have already tried and know the answer to this, can aluminum gas-checks be pushed as fast as cupper checks with good accuracy? Not the thin pop can checks, but thick aluminum comparable to copper checks.

I would tend to think cupper gc's would be better, but I haven't tried it yet.

My findings don't agree with sgt.mike's findings at all. I've done extensive testing with aluminum checks and have found they are the equal to copper and factory checks. In many instances my aluminum checks gave better accuracy then the copper and factory checks. One thing with a homemade check you can tailor the fit to fit your bullet shank exactly.

Now as far as losing checks...just not happening with mine. I can't count the number of bullets I've recovered in the back stop that still had the aluminum checks on them and in some instances that's even after having passed through 1 inch oak.

Something not mentioned is that I have different thicknesses of stock material for different caliber range. For example the .014 flashing really isn't making the correct thickness of check for 7mm and up.

I've also done extensive testing of different materials for checks. This included mild steel, various types of aluminum with varying degrees of temper, all the way to even plastics. I even tested using different cup depths. I've been known to make gas checks from large primers for 22 caliber. In every instance I found aluminum and copper to be the best and the normal depth to be the best. I thought a tougher material and full depth (cover the whole bullet shank) would have been the best, but it was not. I even shot powder coated checks as I have much aluminum that is coated. They performed very well. I don't find any unusual fouling from the various check material in my bore ever.

Hope that helps.

[35 shooter]

Maybe some of you have already tried and know the answer to this, can aluminum gas-checks be pushed as fast as cupper checks with good accuracy? Not the thin pop can checks, but thick aluminum comparable to copper checks.

I would tend to think cupper gc's would be better, but I haven't tried it yet.

I have to agree with vzerone on this as my al. checks are more accurate than hornady copper checks in my rifle.
I also agree with the extensive testing part. You have to find the right thickness and also hardness of al. Not just to match shank dia., but to also eliminate springback.

For example i had to heat treat my .014" flashing to get it size on tight and eliminate springback, but Sage's Outdoors .010" half hard al. checks are supposed to be the same hardness as hornady copper and size on super tight just as they are.
In the case of .010" Sage checks i can't get them off after sizing with a pair of pliers without tearing the shank up.

.012" lith plate sizes on and shoots super accurate and can't be pulled off my 35 cal boolits without tearing up the shank either, but can be hard to find.

I,ve used al. and lith plate to 2600 fps. in the whelen with equal or better accuracy than copper...past that speed i digress for now...that's as far as i've tested it.

It may take a bit of experimenting with al., but that's just "fun time" at the range and worth it to me in the end.
Of course i can only speak for MY rifle.

[GabbyM]

Way I read Sgt.Mike's post. Was the aluminum checks were failing at a lower velocity than copper. Which also fails at some speed.

[vzerone]

Way I read Sgt.Mike's post. Was the aluminum checks were failing at a lower velocity than copper. Which also fails at some speed.

I didn't read it that way. I'll give an example of a test I done. I was really pushing a 30 caliber rifle at j-word high velocities with a regular alloy of 50/50 WQ. I was getting key holing I had them going so fast. I though, hey, maybe my aluminum checks aren't up to snuff for this kind of thing. So reloaded with Hornady checks. Got the same thing....the same exact thing. I don't believe aluminum gas check inferior to any other metals for what we are doing. They are a heck of a lot cheaper to make and shoot too!

[35 shooter]

Way I read Sgt.Mike's post. Was the aluminum checks were failing at a lower velocity than copper. Which also fails at some speed.

That may well be too, which is why i said i digress past 2600 fps. Lol that's as fast as i've pushed al. or lith checks.

Sgt. Mike ,Larry, and Bjorn have pushed much further in speed than i have.
I certainly respect their results.

I do know that al. checks can shoot well past the 2000 to 2200 fps. mark that many seemed to think was their limit in the past though.

It does take a tight fitting al. check to do it though, if they're coming off in flight...forget it!

[vzerone]

I'm not condemning any check material, unless it's real unappropriated, for use. I'm also not trying to get any of you to do what I do. You use what you like best. I'm just reporting my findings.

sgt.mike I don't know of anyone personally that counts their fliers. You don't have to reiterate they way you add your groups up.

[vzerone]

Reading else where on the forum there is a post on Wilke Checks. Something was said in the article that I believe pertains to this thread and getting accuracy. Here's what it said:

“There are no bad cast bullets, just bad bullet casters.”
That relates to quality control as well. If you can’t
get 1.5 MOA at 2,700 fps, chances are you are shooting bullets
that should have been tossed back in the pot.

[vzerone]

You members ought to take a look at that Wilkes Check PDF file that was posted on the forum here recently. I apologize for not getting the thread as I'm lazy sometimes. It has some interesting information about bullet weight, cast bullet versus j-word friction wise, and neck pull as we'll call tension. Basically boils down to cast bullets don't have as much friction going up the bore as do j-words and the lighter weight cast bullets don't offer enough resistance for the powder to burn properly specifically the slower powders. The heavier bullet help a lot as does more neck pull. It was funny they didn't mention crimp at all.

[Hannibal]

I believe this has all gone on long enough.

If you do not possess a rifle with a barrel of consistent bore diameter, groove diameter, and twist rate then it really does not matter what else you attempt to stuff into it. The results will be sporadic at best.

And likewise, if you DO possess a rifle with a tight action and wearing a barrel of the aforementioned criteria, none of that matters if you try to feed asymmetric bullets, loaded into asymmetric cases and expect symmetrical results, That is . . . . folly. To be polite about it.

Ignorance is the simple inability to understand something while stupidity is the inability to benefit or profit from experience.

Experiment and profit from those experiments.

And if you do possess information as to how to correct for asymmetrical bullets/cases/barrels then PLEASE do divulge these secrets upon the unknowing masses, for it would appear that this has perplexed ballisticians since the dawn of the firearms age.

[GabbyM]

My idea on high velocity in my 30-06 rifle is simple and not world changing. I am looking to just get close to the original 03 ballistics of the pre 06 military round. The 03 used a 220 grain jacketed bullet at 2,300 fps. I'd like to see 2,200 fps with a 220 grain cast lead bullet. I already shoot the Lyman 311299 at over 2,000 fps. Have the Lyman 311672 in 160 grain weight that runs well at 2,400 fps.

Had this mold almost a year but not had time to work with it. I shoot a 150 grain cast boolit in my 30-30 M94 over 26.0 grains of Rx7. Not clocked it but figure over 2100 fps. I can aim at the cap of a gallon milk jug at 150 yards and hit the jug center. Will need to use a harder alloy than the BHN #9 I load the 30-30 with. Just a given with the ten twist rate 30-06. But if I can run the 220 grain as fast as my 30-30 shoots a 150 grain. Then I've achieved greatly increased power. Even if I only find happy at 1,950 fps a 220 gr flat nose will swat anything on our continent. My grandson shot some over 42 grains of AA 4064 this summer. Group was under palm size at 80 yards prone. 50 round box. By the book that's 2200 to 2300 fps. But I did not witness as had work to do. You won't be doing that with any little 308 Win. Just my opinion but. 30-06 will give you all you can get from a 30 caliber. Cast or jacketed. This bullet at 2,000 fps has around half the wind drift as a M-193 ball round. As does the 311299. Last time we were out shooting the AR carbine at our 325 yard gong. We were holding over 36 inches into a 25 mph cross wind. My cast bullet 30-06 Is now mounted with a new 3x9 scope with an elevation dial. After I get this big 220gr bullet worked up. I'll pay the $80 to have a dial calibrated to it's trajectory.

Bullets life started with a Lyman 311284 drawing. I placed the nose of an RCBS 30-180-FP onto it. Then removed the front scrapper grove and reduced the grease grove depth. As suggested by Larry Gibson and to the thought process of the Goodsteel XCB project of making a tough bullet. It's a thumper for sure as the 311284 has always been. he old bullet did not like velocity above 1800 or less. Larry thought that was because of the front scrapper grove and the deep lube groves. Bending bullet fault. so far it works. One fellow here on the board bought one from Accurate and is shooting in an M1 with good results. If all we get is 1,950fps with no flyers it's a big dog hitter. Any faster is just gravy. I'll be thrilled with 30-40 ballistics from my 30-06.

Plan is to lube with LARS 2400 then tumble lube in BLL one thin coat.