Inline FabricationMidSouth Shooters SupplyRotoMetals2ADvertise here
Titan ReloadingGraf & SonsStainLess Steel MediaLee Precision

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 80

Thread: Why powder coat?

  1. #21
    Boolit Master flyingmonkey35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1,021
    Quote Originally Posted by noisewaterphd View Post
    Just a few edits you should make to an otherwise great post:

    1. PC is NOT a jacket. It is a coating. It's in the name of the product.

    Correct it is equivalent to copper plating and loads should be treated as such.

    2. Higher velocity means you had more pressure, meaning it was an inferior lubricant to those tested against.

    Again correct but were not comparing apples to oranges here. PC on its own stands up very well.

    3. PC bullets are not guaranteed to work in a bullet feeder. More likely than lubed, but there are still problems.

    This is a cast bullet issue not a coat vs lube issue it the lube grooves or micro bands that catch on the bullet feeders ramps. A smooth wall mold would hold no issues with a feeder. I think.

    4. And most importantly, do not claim accuracy equaling that of a jacketed bullet.

    Correct its vs plated. Not jacket. FMJ can be pushed really high. Like comparing a solid copper to a fmj.



    There is certainly other contestable information in your post, but you can probably get away with them.


    Here is the thing, powder coating definitely has it's place. If you want it to be taken seriously then don't make exaggerated/unverified claims about it. All it does is give haters ammunition, and make us all look bad.
    Just to point out the testing is there the data is there. For pistol. And some rifle.

    But its a different product and works different from lube or swage or factory fmj.

    Learn cast shoot.

  2. #22
    Boolit Master noisewaterphd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingmonkey35 View Post
    Just to point out the testing is there the data is there. For pistol. And some rifle.

    But its a different product and works different from lube or swage or factory fmj.

    Learn cast shoot.
    What?

    I don't understand your summary. Thank you for confirming my suggested edits.


    My points in black, yours changed to blue, my replies in red:


    Just a few edits you should make to an otherwise great post:

    1. PC is NOT a jacket. It is a coating. It's in the name of the product.

    Correct it is equivalent to copper plating and loads should be treated as such.

    I think that using plated bullet data (the same as cast lead data) is a good idea. Other than that they are in no way equivalent, at least I certainly hope not because plated bullets suck.

    2. Higher velocity means you had more pressure, meaning it was an inferior lubricant to those tested against.

    Again correct but were not comparing apples to oranges here. PC on its own stands up very well.

    We are not comparing apples to oranges, the OP gave the exact opposite of real world data, and presented it as fact for all to see. There is nothing wrong with PC creating more pressure, but it does. Claiming it creates less pressure is not a safe thing to do. This had nothing to do with whether PC "stands up well".

    3. PC bullets are not guaranteed to work in a bullet feeder. More likely than lubed, but there are still problems.

    This is a cast bullet issue not a coat vs lube issue it the lube grooves or micro bands that catch on the bullet feeders ramps. A smooth wall mold would hold no issues with a feeder. I think.

    It also has to do with the size of the bullet. Cast is consistently sized larger than jacketed, and bullet feeders are built for jacketed bullets. I never said it was a coat vs lube issue. The OP presented PC as a cure-all for bullet feeder problems, and it is not.

    4. And most importantly, do not claim accuracy equaling that of a jacketed bullet.

    Correct its vs plated. Not jacket. FMJ can be pushed really high. Like comparing a solid copper to a fmj.

    The OP specifically said that PC bullets equal the accuracy of jacketed bullets, not plated. This point has absolutely nothing to do with velocity, so what in the world are you going on about? If the point the OP meant to make was "PC bullets can go as fast as plated bullets", then why didn't he say so?


    Most of your comments are confusing, they had little to do with the topic being addressed, and frankly, it is frustrating.
    Last edited by noisewaterphd; 02-20-2016 at 04:41 PM.
    __
    42

  3. #23
    Boolit Master
    Dragonheart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Katy, Texas
    Posts
    1,225
    Quote Originally Posted by noisewaterphd View Post
    Just a few edits you should make to an otherwise great post:

    1. PC is NOT a jacket. It is a coating. It's in the name of the product.

    2. Higher velocity means you had more pressure, meaning it was an inferior lubricant to those tested against.

    3. PC bullets are not guaranteed to work in a bullet feeder. More likely than lubed, but there are still problems.

    4. And most importantly, do not claim accuracy equaling that of a jacketed bullet.


    There is certainly other contestable information in your post, but you can probably get away with them.


    Here is the thing, powder coating definitely has it's place. If you want it to be taken seriously then don't make exaggerated/unverified claims about it. All it does is give haters ammunition, and make us all look bad.
    #1 Powder coating is the process, but once applied the powder coating transforms and the properties change. It chemically bonds to the metal, it is now resistant to much higher temperatures, hardness and toughness has developed. This coating has encased the allow and now has benefits of a plastic jacket. Electroplating is a process, but it also can create a jacket around a bullet. Call it what you will. But what totally amazes me are those that can only see PC as a replacement for lube.

    #2 The point was PC did not leave any lead residue even at higher velocities, granted maybe this could have been better stated.

    #3 Nothing is guaranteed about someone else's process, but lubed bullets most definitely gum up feeders. Hornady says lubed bullets do not work in their feeders. My various powder coated bullets definitely work in three bullet feeders that I use and lubed bullets will not, so I think I am safe in saying powder coated bullets will work.

    #4 Nowhere, did I state that powder coated bullets across the board were more accurate than jacketed bullets. I said jacketed handgun bullets. In my tests powder coated handgun bullets will produce Bullseye quality groups at typical handgun ranges and I stand by that. I do not think powder coated or for that matter lube or any other coated bullet will out perform a jacketed rifle bullet at high velocity and long range.

    As far as claims, there are others involved in this PC testing with knowledge and skills far greater than mine and when suggested I was extremely reluctant to make this post because knew it would draw a lot of flack by those that haven't actually done any experimentation at all, but always have an opinion.

  4. #24
    Boolit Master noisewaterphd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonheart View Post
    #1 Powder coating is the process, but once applied the powder coating transforms and the properties change. It chemically bonds to the metal, it is now resistant to much higher temperatures, hardness and toughness has developed. This coating has encased the allow and now has benefits of a plastic jacket. Electroplating is a process, but it also can create a jacket around a bullet. Call it what you will. But what totally amazes me are those that can only see PC as a replacement for lube.

    #2 The point was PC did not leave any lead residue even at higher velocities, granted maybe this could have been better stated.

    #3 Nothing is guaranteed about someone else's process, but lubed bullets most definitely gum up feeders. Hornady says lubed bullets do not work in their feeders. My various powder coated bullets definitely work in three bullet feeders that I use and lubed bullets will not, so I think I am safe in saying powder coated bullets will work.

    #4 Nowhere, did I state that powder coated bullets across the board were more accurate than jacketed bullets. I said jacketed handgun bullets. In my tests powder coated handgun bullets will produce Bullseye quality groups at typical handgun ranges and I stand by that. I do not think powder coated or for that matter lube or any other coated bullet will out perform a jacketed rifle bullet at high velocity and long range.

    As far as claims, there are others involved in this PC testing with knowledge and skills far greater than mine and when suggested I was extremely reluctant to make this post because knew it would draw a lot of flack by those that haven't actually done any experimentation at all, but always have an opinion.

    #1 You know full well what jacketed means when we are talking about ammunition. Just change it.

    #2 That is not at all what your post said. Just change it.

    #3 We all know lubed don't work well in a bullet feeder, who cares? The point is PC is not a cure-all, so don't tell people it is, or once again credibility is diminished when they find out different. Just change it.

    #4 There you go having to qualify your claims again. Dude, your powder coated cast bullets are not as accurate as a Hornady XTP, or many, many other jacketed bullets. Just change it.


    I think it is a great post, maybe even sticky worthy, IF you remove the wishy washy claims from it. That is why I suggested edits.

    Keep it straight up, verifiably factual. A that point it is a great resource for all.
    __
    42

  5. #25
    Boolit Master noisewaterphd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonheart View Post
    As far as claims, there are others involved in this PC testing with knowledge and skills far greater than mine and when suggested I was extremely reluctant to make this post because knew it would draw a lot of flack by those that haven't actually done any experimentation at all, but always have an opinion.
    Nice try. And, we aren't dealing with opinions here. That is the whole point.
    __
    42

  6. #26
    Boolit Master Tenbender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Southwest Virginia Mountains
    Posts
    684
    I like the fact that I can use a softer alloy with PC. In a hunting bullet softer is usually better. For plinking a lube bullet does all I need and is much quicker. However most of the time I PC a lot of boolits after I get set up. I keep finding little tricks along the way to cut the time factor and waste.
    Another thing I like about PC. You can pick up a hundred or two fps with the same powder charge depending on the round.
    It is a hobby and experimenting will answer lots of questions. Reading the forum on the experiments of others also answers a lot.

  7. #27
    Boolit Master
    Dragonheart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Katy, Texas
    Posts
    1,225
    Webster's Definition of "jacket"- an outer covering or casing: as a thermally nonconducting cover.
    Thermoset non-conductive
    Plastic, encasing a bullet; Well you got me on that one I need to tell Webster to change their definition to Powder Coat because you tell us it's not a jacket.


    If the purpose of a lubricant is to prevent the transfer of lead or copper the the barrel then please show your finding that PC is an inferior lubricant? I have already agreed my two statement should have been separated as there is a velocity increase with PC.

    Do you own and use a bullet feeder? Do you actually have any experience or does anyone else have any experience to the contrary that powdered coated bullets do not work in bullet feeders, because I use two feeders that operate close to 100% with PC bullets, which is as good as I get when using plated or jacketed bullets. How about some posts from actual users of bullet feeders that tried PC bullets and have failed.

    Please show your proof that plated/jacketed bullets significantly outperform PC bullets in handguns at handgun ranges. I am sure those that are spending two bits for a bullet would like to know they are getting vastly superior performance for the money as you claim. I have done my testing so let's see yours.

    So far all I hear is your opinions, presented in a very belligerent tone and certainly not an exchange of ideas.

  8. #28
    Boolit Master noisewaterphd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonheart View Post
    Webster's Definition of "jacket"- an outer covering or casing: as a thermally nonconducting cover.
    Thermoset non-conductive
    Plastic, encasing a bullet; Well you got me on that one I need to tell Webster to change their definition to Powder Coat because you tell us it's not a jacket.



    If the purpose of a lubricant is to prevent the transfer of lead or copper the the barrel then please show your finding that PC is an inferior lubricant? I have already agreed my two statement should have been separated as there is a velocity increase with PC.

    Do you own and use a bullet feeder? Do you actually have any experience or does anyone else have any experience to the contrary that powdered coated bullets do not work in bullet feeders, because I use two feeders that operate close to 100% with PC bullets, which is as good as I get when using plated or jacketed bullets. How about some posts from actual users of bullet feeders that tried PC bullets and have failed.

    Please show your proof that plated/jacketed bullets significantly outperform PC bullets in handguns at handgun ranges. I am sure those that are spending two bits for a bullet would like to know they are getting vastly superior performance for the money as you claim. I have done my testing so let's see yours.

    So far all I hear is your opinions, presented in a very belligerent tone and certainly not an exchange of ideas.
    https://www.google.com/webhp?sourcei...ne%3A%20jacket

    I can find other definitions as well, but I don't see the point. I'm not sure why we are doing that. Again you know full well what a jacketed bullet is. Or maybe you don't, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt.

    Lubricant. Look at your original post. "PC is a superior lubricant because the bullets go faster than regular lube with the same charge!" I was commenting on your original post, and in that post you are the one that set the criteria as velocity. Your original post said nothing about transferring lead or copper anywhere, so don't try to change the subject now. At this point you just need to man up and own your mistake. Many people make the mistake of thinking higher velocity means better lubrication.

    Yes, I own a bullet feeder, 3 different bullet feeders in fact. So what? I'm glad you had success, congrats. It is interesting that you assume your success means that all PC bullets work in all bullet feeders for everyone else across the world.

    On the contrary, you please show your proof (anecdotal evidence does not count) that cast powder coated handgun bullets are as accurate as jacketed handgun bullets. Seriously, please, please show us. I have nothing to prove, you are the one making claims, so back them up. A current thread on this very site about cast vs jacketed accuracy would love to see your data.

    I never presented an opinion in this thread, not one single time. Please show me where I did.

    Additionally, just because I challenged you does not mean I'm being belligerent. Far from the truth. I was trying to help you be taken seriously. Believe it or not, we are on the same side. I wanted your post to stand tall for all to see, for all time. I was merely trying to help you achieve that. But whatever, I'm done, good luck. You really should stick to the facts, especially when attempting to present your post as information for newcomers.
    Last edited by noisewaterphd; 02-21-2016 at 05:50 AM.
    __
    42

  9. #29
    Boolit Master
    bayjoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    South Central Colorado
    Posts
    394
    Pistols SO EASY to clean after shooting PC boolits. Well worth the effort.

  10. #30
    Boolit Master flyingmonkey35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1,021
    Question. When you say compare a PC bullets to a jacketed bullet.

    So you would like a shot for shot comparison for the same type of bullet.

    For example

    9mm 124 grain round nose bullet.

    Cast powder coated / vs fmj round nose.

    Bench rest.

    What type of gun? How many yards is good?

    I want to know for a base line for my own studies.

    As I have shot the above and saw no difference in performance or accuracy in any of my guns.


    I don't own a crony so I can't test ballistics.

    And some of you dead shots out there can shoot a fly with a bent barrel at 50 yards. So your thoughts on accuracy can be skewed

    BTW federal is marketing PC line as target ammo. Not self defense loads.

    So we should do the same. Target loads cast PC vs lube vs fmj.

  11. #31
    Boolit Master
    Dragonheart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Katy, Texas
    Posts
    1,225
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingmonkey35 View Post
    Question. When you say compare a PC bullets to a jacketed bullet.

    So you would like a shot for shot comparison for the same type of bullet.

    For example

    9mm 124 grain round nose bullet.

    Cast powder coated / vs fmj round nose.

    Bench rest.

    What type of gun? How many yards is good?

    I want to know for a base line for my own studies.

    As I have shot the above and saw no difference in performance or accuracy in any of my guns.


    I don't own a crony so I can't test ballistics.

    And some of you dead shots out there can shoot a fly with a bent barrel at 50 yards. So your thoughts on accuracy can be skewed

    BTW federal is marketing PC line as target ammo. Not self defense loads.

    So we should do the same. Target loads cast PC vs lube vs fmj.
    Unfortunately I don't have a lot of test targets to post as I record my tests and keep the results in a spreadsheet. I am also hesitant to post load data on an open forum. Basically, I do all my tests from a well secured Ransom Rest confirming the handgun returns to the same position with a dial caliper. I believe that taking the human element out as much as possible is the only way to get a true compairson for a load. I shoot 5 round chronographed groups and repeat only if a group shows promise. I have run tests using guns from a number of manufactures Glock, Sig, Walther, Kimber, Colt, S&W. Typically all my tests are done at 25 years because I see no point in repeatedly walking 50 yards to post targets just to determine a good load for a handgun. I pay close attention to the assembly of loading the cartridge and each of the 5 cartridges tested are as close as I can make them without getting insane.

    As far as my personal criteria for what I call a "Good" handgun load is one that will consistently group under two inches at 25 yards. I consider loads that will consistently group under one and a half inches "Excellent" and I believe most Bullseye Competition Shooter would agree.

    I have tested plated, jacketed, lubed, moly coated and limited bullet weights of powder coated bullets. My test guns of choice for accuracy are 1911's in 45ACP and 9mm. I have also done some jacketed bullet tests of the .380. I have no preconceived bias as to the bullet, case, primer or powder as I do these test for my own information and my own use as my interest is finding the load that is optimal for a particular gun.

    So, when I say powder coated bullets are accurate, that means I have developed loads that fall into my "Excellent " category, not to say there are not other bullets that also fall into that category.

    As far as 9mm loads with a 125 grain bullet I have tested a number of jacketed, powder coated and lubed bullets and on the whole have had poor success with that weight bullet. I have found no loads that consistently fall into "excellent" under one and a half inches and just a few loads in the "good" under 2". Surprising to me those few good 125 gr. bullet loads were using PC bullets. I have gotten the best 9mm accuracy using bullets lighter than 125 grains, but to date I have not tested any 9mm light powder coated bullets. if you need some load data for the 125gr. PM me and I will give you load that should save you a lot of time, but I can also tell you the choice of handgun will make a difference, so it's just a good starting point.

  12. #32
    Boolit Master noisewaterphd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    246
    Guys, don't we already have years, and years worth of data from bullseye shooters telling us that cast bullets are not as accurate as jacketed bullets?

    Folks that are serious about handgun accuracy use jacketed or swaged bullets. And they do it for a reason.

    It is not hard to provide irrefutable proof in an open forum that powder coated bullets somehow make cast bullets as, or more accurate than jacketed. But nobody has ever done it to date. People may post targets, along with a novel full of qualifiers and strange, specific definitions of accuracy. But never actual proof.

    You want to do it? Awesome. Make it undeniable, unquestionable. Uninterrupted video, or better yet, just get a respected bullseye competitor to back you up in public. The latter seems easier to me.

    You have to use a ransom rest, and as far as components, use known accurate bullets. XTP, Zero SWC, etc.
    __
    42

  13. #33
    Boolit Master
    Dragonheart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Katy, Texas
    Posts
    1,225
    I see no need to respond to obviously an Internet Troll, so I will conclude my comments.

  14. #34
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    On the Left Coast of Michigan
    Posts
    448
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonheart View Post
    I see no need to respond to obviously an Internet Troll, so I will conclude my comments.

    I think he needs to Troll elsewhere.

  15. #35
    Vendor Sponsor

    Smoke4320's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Right here ..at least I was a minute ago
    Posts
    3,187
    Troll we don't need so stinking troll
    I carry a Nuke50 because cleaning up the mess is Silly !!

    http://www.bing.com/search?q=nuke50&...7ADE&FORM=QBLH

    Selling Hi Quality Powdercoating Powder and Sure-Kill deer and cover scents

    PULSAR night vision and thermal dealer !!!
    PM me for a good deal

    I am not crazy my mom had me tested

    Theres a fine line between genius and crazy .. I'm that line
    and depending on the day I might just step over that line !!!

  16. #36
    Boolit Master flyingmonkey35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1,021
    I don't want to feed the troll but this is going no where fast.

    Fortuncookie45lc has this test.

    But it sounds like you wouldn't believe the data or review if you did it yourself. So I'm out.

  17. #37
    Boolit Master


    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Northern Michigan
    Posts
    2,289
    Although I think this is a rather silly thread I would like to comment - as a former Bullseye shooter.

    First. If you want to determine accuracy with a pistol, NOTHING is better than a Ransom rest.

    Second. Accuracy testing is done at 50 yards - period. That is the distance for the slow fire target and it is the most difficult stage to shoot a good score on. If you have an accurate 50 yard load, it will run X's in timed and rapid at closer range. We shot 50 shot groups at 50 yards with a Ransom rest to determine accuracy. 5 shot groups are next to useless. Anyone who had done much testing, or has an elementary knowledge of probability, will know that.

  18. #38
    Boolit Master noisewaterphd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonheart View Post
    I see no need to respond to obviously an Internet Troll, so I will conclude my comments.
    I am not trolling in any way, shape, or form. That was a dead serious question. Maybe someone else has already done the work.

    It is extremely disheartening to see so many folks that I used to think rather highly of jump on a bandwagon so quickly...maybe not surprising in this particular forum it seems.

    So blinded with pride we are unable to accept constructive criticism?

    Quote Originally Posted by dverna View Post
    Although I think this is a rather silly thread I would like to comment - as a former Bullseye shooter.

    First. If you want to determine accuracy with a pistol, NOTHING is better than a Ransom rest.

    Second. Accuracy testing is done at 50 yards - period. That is the distance for the slow fire target and it is the most difficult stage to shoot a good score on. If you have an accurate 50 yard load, it will run X's in timed and rapid at closer range. We shot 50 shot groups at 50 yards with a Ransom rest to determine accuracy. 5 shot groups are next to useless. Anyone who had done much testing, or has an elementary knowledge of probability, will know that.
    There you go. Excellent criteria.


    But, I suspect we will all just go on living with the status quo rather than make any attempts at improving what seems to be a pretty great process. I really thought we were all collectively working towards something great. But, I guess you guys have it all figured out and have the greatest bullets known to mankind. I will continue trying to improve. Elsewhere.
    __
    42

  19. #39
    Boolit Master flyingmonkey35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1,021
    Wow I was looking up a ransom rest. Pricey. Pretty cool though
    I learned something new.

    I'll have to see if any local ranges have one to use for testing . and would let me use with cast / reloads.


    Rereading dragon hearts post.

    He said he used a ransom rest and found them to be on par with other bullets.

    He also clearly states that it is more like a cooper plating. But with out the load restrictions.

    The whole point of the copper plating and fmj was to encapsulate the lead core to prevent it from spinning apart at supersonic speeds.

    And to prevent leading

    This allowed us to push rifle rounds farther and faster.




    I also watched a great video by hickock 45 about what accuracy is.

    He states it has two meanings.

    Can you shoot the target your aiming at. Steel plates or paper.

    Are you happy with the loads you shoot? To 95% of of us shooting that is what makes us happy.


    Then there's Bullseye. Can you shoot one hole shot groups?

    How far can you push your gun and skills.

    Wich shooter are you?

    Now that I have deviated from the topic.

    Enjoy casting and shooting.
    Last edited by flyingmonkey35; 02-22-2016 at 10:45 PM.

  20. #40
    Boolit Mold
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    2
    I've lurked around these parts for years, and years. I have witnessed many a good debate, and I've seen some pretty bad ones.

    I've seen a lot of folks come, and go. A lot of it lately it seems. Tonight I finally went throught trouble of getting me an account set up. Im not at all good with computer I had to have my boy get me through all my email stuff. An I did it just to comment on this here topic. I think yall just went an alienated someone who cares about the same things you are passionate about.

    Mr. Noisewater - I think you are dead on correct with your ideas. There were quite a few posts before yours that talked to many of the same stuff you are. You somehow was more tenacious to see it through. Your problem however is that you wasnt all that tactful about it, and your frustration shines through by the end. It's an understandable frustration.

    Dragonheart and cronies: Troll? Yall aint been around the web very much have you? My dad used to say that a true man knows how to admit his mistakes, and a smart man knows how to profit from em! Dragonheart, your letter has some mistakes, and I see othes trying to help you.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Abbreviations used in Reloading

BP Bronze Point IMR Improved Military Rifle PTD Pointed
BR Bench Rest M Magnum RN Round Nose
BT Boat Tail PL Power-Lokt SP Soft Point
C Compressed Charge PR Primer SPCL Soft Point "Core-Lokt"
HP Hollow Point PSPCL Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" C.O.L. Cartridge Overall Length
PSP Pointed Soft Point Spz Spitzer Point SBT Spitzer Boat Tail
LRN Lead Round Nose LWC Lead Wad Cutter LSWC Lead Semi Wad Cutter
GC Gas Check