Loading for a match.

[Distant Thunder]

I could have taken a few pictures earlier in the process but didn't think of it. I have elsewhere described my loading procedure and thought a few pictures might be helpful.
I am loading for the fall long-range match (800, 900 & 1000 yards) at Lodi, Wisconsin in two weeks. The rifle I use is a Hepburn I built just for long-range matches. It is chambered for .45-70 with Brent Danielson's paper patch reamer. The rifle is very accurate with the ammo I load.
The bullet is one I designed and made the mold for in 2009 and has been adjusted diameter wise to fit this rifle perfectly when sized in my custom sizing die. The paper is 100% 9 lb. onionskin, .002" thick and adds .007" to the as cast diameter.
Before I thought to take a few pictures the fired and cleaned cases were inspected and primed with Remington 2 1/2 lg. pistol primers. They were then charged with 83.0 grains of Swiss 1 1/2 powder and a .060" LDPE wad was seated to a depth of .085".

I Then began dry wrapping, sizing and seating the bullets.

The bullet is dry wrapped.


The sized bullet.

For some reason the picture of the seated bullet won't upload. So use your imagination.


A Lee Factory Crimp die is used to close up the cases mouth just a little. The bullet can still be removed and reseated if a little care is used. The isn't closed up more than .002-.003". Just enough so I can carefully lift the cartridge by the bullet and not lose the case and get it in the chamber without fumbling around with a loose bullet.


That's it, the round is then put in the cartridge box and there it will remain until I send it down range to the X-ring.

I have said many times and can't stress enough how easy it is to load the ammo I use. As loaded this ammo is fully capable of winning the match in two week. This year I seem to have gotten my fouling control under control with my revised bore pigs and assuming I keep my head out so I can breath easily I expect good results.

DT

[rfd]

more good stuff - thank you for sharing!

[Lead pot]

Well DT I was in your neighborhood on Rt. 2 yesterday listening for the distant thunder to give you a hand loading but heard nothing so I keep going
Kurt

[flatsguide]

DT, do you use the same loads for Silhouette as you do for long range ?
Thanks Richard

[Distant Thunder]

Kurt,

I know you go by here every so often in your travels. US2 is about 8 miles north of my place, so you were close. Yesterday the thunder wasn't booming, it was reloading.

Today however, I was making some noise, but with leverguns. It's time to start getting ready for deer season and fall gets so busy with all the prep for winter that I thought I'd get an early start on the levers. JK2's wedding is taking a bite out of my time this fall, what with all the family coming to see the big event. By the time the dust all settles two weeks will be gone. Right smack in the middle of all the activity is the Lodi match and while I really want to go it's going to be a push to get there. And I have to do well too.

I'm looking forward to sitting with either my bow or my levergun in my hands in the quiet woods where a man can have a few thoughts of his own! And no women around to tell him he is wrong! Just sayin'.

DT

[Distant Thunder]

Richard,

I use a .40-65 for silhouette, I think it weighs around 10 pounds. My .45-70 that I was loading for yesterday is almost 15 pounds and would not be legal for silhouette. I'm doing much better with my .40 now that I have switch it over to paper patch bullets. The loading procedure is exactly the same for both calibers and components are nearly the same with allowance for caliber. The only difference I can think of is the brand of brass I use, Starline in the .45-70 and R-P in the .40-65.

I use the same primer ( Rem. 2 1/2), the same powder (1 1/2 Swiss), the same alloy (16-1), the same paper (9# 100%) and the same wad material (.060 LDPE). That keeps everything pretty simple, but it's just how it happened to work out and not that I planned it that way. Once in a while I get lucky.

It's just my opinion, but I think a silhouette weight rifle shooting a 528 grain ppb over 83 grains of 1 1/2 would be more than I would be comfortable with. There are bigger (younger) men than I who will disagree with that. I'll stay with my .40.

DT

[Lead pot]

I just had CPA build me a .40-65 last fall and I shot it during silhouette practice and getting sight settings at Alma last fall using several loads and three different bullets. I had some problems seeing the silhouettes that blend in with the back ground but with all different bullets and loads as light as 57 grains of 1.5 Swiss All the rams went down but some very slow.
This year at the Quigley and the Baker shoots I shot the .40-65 in some healthy breezes all the way out to the 1026 yards and it did not fail hitting it, but for the match I went with the .45-90 and I must say I got pretty frustrated because the problems I had on the close 500 yard and the 700. I couldn't buy a hit on them but cleaned the 1026 so go figure.
But I think I would have done just as well with the .40-65.
I'm really starting to favor the little .40 and I will use it at Alma in September for it's first silhouette match.

Kurt

[Distant Thunder]

Kurt,

I look forward to hearing how it does for you. I know I am very happy with mine and I am saddled with a 382 grain bullet due to my 18-twist. So far I have shot at 50 ram during matches and more in practice and sighting in and everyone hit went down. They probably didn't go down any too fast but down is down. I know I will ring a ram now and then especially in unfavorable conditions, but I can live with that for the increased chicken count and turkey count. I just plain shoot the .40-65 better than my .45-70 and I get to do it with paper patch bullets. I'm happy!

Good luck at Alma.

DT

[flatsguide]

Thanks DT! I just read an piece you wrote over on the Shiloh forum a year ago about your .40-65....”...long freebore and 1:18 twist.” A couple of things are of interest as I contemplate on building up a Silhouette rifle on a .40-65. One is the difference between a two diameter and one diameter pp bullet and the other is freebore and leade. It seems to me that using a two diameter bullet one might have to fuss about getting the freebore/leade optimized for the bullet or vice versa, as opposed to a single diameter bullet one could dispense with any freebore/leade and just patch to bore. What about twist in a .40 caliber? Maybe a bit quicker? What are your thoughts on a shorter barrel in the neighborhood of 28 inches. I’m a small old fart and my Browning BPCR in .45-70 is murder to hold on chickens, only hit one in the last match and I think a lighter rifle will help me. I don’t have problems with recoil.
Thanks Richard

[Distant Thunder]

Richard,
I'm not really a silhouette guy, more of a long-range shooter. When I first got started in BPCR in 1991 I bought the rifle that is now my .40-65 and silhouette was the main goal. Unfortunately there were not then and are not now anyplace close where silhouette can be shot. I made a set of silhouettes and shot them just for fun in a farm field near me. In 1997 I went my first long range match and I was hooked. Silhouette became something I did once or twice a year and so it remains for me today. I'd shoot every month if there was something closer.
I still believe a .45-70 is probably the best cartridge for silhouette, but the .40-65 is just more fun because of the less recoil. Also less lead and powder is easier on the money supply now that I am retired. The two disadvantages of a .40 compared .45 are 1) knock down on the rams and 2) the hits and misses can be harder for the spotter to see under certain conditions. The big advantage is reduced recoil. You say you don't have a problem with recoil and that may be, but in a two-day or three-day match it will take its toll on most people. With my .40-65 I don't even use a recoil shield of any kind. The rifle is lighter and much easier to hit those **** chickens with and I need to hit more of those.

A 28" barrel wouldn't bother me at all in either caliber, my .40-65 has a 31" barrel. It's 31" because that was the longest it could be made from the blank I had to work with. It has worked well and I would change it though 30" would be good. The original barrel was 28", but was chamber in .4090 SBN and I just couldn't make that work back then. Maybe today I could, but the .40-65 is so easy to get to shoot well.

As for 2-diameter vs. bore diameter, you have to make the bullet fit YOUR chamber. That's the most important things. if you're planning on making an existing rifle shoot paper patch you must make the bullet fit YOUR chamber. Depending on your chamber that could be bore diameter, groove diameter or 2-diameter.

If you have a tight grease groove chamber with NO freebore and a fairly short throat there is a good chance that you can get bore diameter ppb to shoot very well with only have to size your cases a minimum. If you end up have to size the cases a lot then a 2-diameter will eliminate that and may actually work better. They can be a little trickier to wrap but that's just a matter of learning how.

If you are working with a rifle that is chambered for a longer case and don't want to dump 100+ grains of powder in the case for silhouette shooting then a groove diameter ppb might be your best choice. Or if you have a very long freebore and don't want to learn to wrap 2-diameter bullets.

If you're building a rifle you can, to some extent, make the rifle fit the bullet. If you are set on shooting paper patch and have NO desire to use grease groove then go with a special paper patch chamber and bore diameter bullets then you can leave all the extra effort behind. Not all paper patch chambers are the same and a bit of research is needed for best results.

Hope that helps. I gota run.

DT

[Lead pot]

Shooting a rifle with a lot of freeborn like the early Wolfgang Droege Shiloh's or the Pedersoli that had excess of some .400" freeborn will take some work developing a bullet and load that will give you some accuracy you will be satisfied with before pulling out your hair. And it makes no difference if your trying to use a GG or PP bullet. The freeborn was common when they wanted to fire many consecutive shots with out fouling control at close range where accuracy was much of a concern.
Shooting a freeborn chamber you will find suggest better if you design your PP bullet that will fit the freeborn diameter or just shoot a groove diameter PP and work up a two or three shot ladder load starting at around .050" compression and work up one or two grains till you see your group tighten up.
A duel diameter were the base will fit the chamber mouth diameter and the reduced portion fits the freeborn diameter is a good way to get the most out of a freeborn chamber. A GG bullet in a freeborn chamber forget the bore riding ogive the GG have. Even back in the 1800 rds the Sharps Rifle company made moulds for the Manard rifle Co. GG moulds with out the bore riding step down on the ogive to fit the freeborn.
I have shot the freeborn chambers for quite some time and in the beginning I pulled out a lot of hair and this is why I have very little left But they can be made to shoot but they need some development work.
Just .050" freebore in a standard chamber is not a problem shooting GG or PP. Just work up some ladder loads and you will find a load that you can tweak up to get fine accuracy with.

Kurt

[Distant Thunder]

Well said, Kurt. With long freebore rifles I make the mold to patch to the freebore diameter and that will usually fit the fired cases well. I have 3 such rifles, 2 are playing nice with ppb, the 3rd needs to learn how yet and I'm working on it.

DT

[flatsguide]

DT, Kurt thank you! It appears there are a number of different .40-65 chambers around. I don’t know if one really needs a short straight neck section on a chamber strictly for ppb’s since in my case very little of the neck would be holding the bullet. Neck turning would be required too I would think as the case neck wall would end up pretty thick. So a reamer needs to be thought out with that in mind.
You are right recoil wise on a two or three day match would be cumulative, but I don’t need to worry...I’m generally pooped out after a one day match, lol.
As an aside ,when I got my Browning I new I wanted to shoot ppb’s and had no thoughts to any match shooting. Wanted to get thicker brass for ppb’s so I bought some longer brass as in 45-90 and I think 45-100 with the thought of using that brass shortened. Bottom line the brass thickness at the 45-2.1 length the brass was the same thick eddy as the Starline 45-70 brass
Gotta run Er walkR

[Lead pot]

I design and have my reamers made for my rifles and they are especially designed for the PP bullet and the brass I use. My chambers will not except a GG bullet seated in a fired case and they have a very shallow 4 degree transition into the 1.5 degree lead, in other words a very long tapered compound lead in line what was used in originals and this chamber shoots very well I just wish I could do it justice. The chamber has a short straight cylinder case neck so it holds the wads and the bullet base seated very shallow in the case mouth so most of the bullet rests on the lead and tight in the bore by at least one thousands over bore diameter and not less then 1/2 thousands over bore diameter. I can shoot a GG breach seated it I want or a groove diameter breach seated.
The only draw back with the .40-65 is this tight chamber cuts down on the powder capacity. It will only hold 64 grains of 1.5 Swiss with a .060"wad over the powdered seated .100" in the case.
Plus when I order a barrel cut I ask for .003" deep grooves instead of the normal .004".

[Distant Thunder]

I don't know enough about designing chambers to say anything about what is best there. There certainly is more than one opinion on what's best and that may be a problem to sort out. It may not be easy to judge which is actually would best.

All I know for sure is I have a Danielson designed chamber in my .45-70 and it has proven to be extremely accurate under match conditions and has won several matches for me. The only problem I've had is with about 12 sticky Starline brass out of 200 pcs. I have removed those and have not had any problems since, but I'm still keeping an eye on it. I don't think it is a chamber problem, I don't see how it could be.

I don't shoot a lot of groups from the bench for show and tell, all of my shooting since I developed my basic load has been in matches where it counts. I've been shooting this rifle for 5 years and I don't believe I have placed any lower than 5th in any match I shot in the past 4 years. The first year I was still doing load development and testing at matches. I finally quit screwing around with everything last year and have had the best year I've ever had. These are mid-range and long-range paper matches.

The point being that paper patch bullets shoot very well when properly assembled and shot in a good chamber. They are not the same as grease groove and the rules are slightly different, but I find match winning paper patch loads to be easier to assemble and shoot than grease groove.

My Hepburn is the only rifle I have built specifically for ppb, I all my other rifles are greasers and I designed the pp bullets to fit the rifle rather than the rifle to fit the bullet. In most of them designing a ppb has worked at least as well as building a rifle and in everyone of them it has been less expensive. Nothing wrong with building a new rifle, it's just a different approach.

I think I would study match results of those using ppb, then try to find out what kind of chamber they are using and see if there is anything in common there. That's probably not going to be easy because most match results wouldn't identify the pp shooters, we are kind of the black sheep. That's unfortunate because paper patch and these rifles have a long history and deserve some recognition.

Just my thoughts. YMMV

DT

[Lead pot]

Jim I also have the sticky case problem when I first shoot my new rifle with new cases for a couple loadings and then all is well. My fired cases never get sized again as soon as they extract from the chamber properly and this will take around three loadings and all is well. Seating a bullet in the clean fired case is snug. When I have a uncommon chamber reamer made I also have a reamer made for cutting a proper sizing die and this helps when you cut chambers like the .44-75 Ballard reamers that you can't order off the shelf.

[rfd]

... All I know for sure is I have a Danielson designed chamber in my .45-70 and it has proven to be extremely accurate under match conditions and has won several matches for me. The only problem I've had is with about 12 sticky Starline brass out of 200 pcs. I have removed those and have not had any problems since, but I'm still keeping an eye on it. I don't think it is a chamber problem, I don't see how it could be. ...

DT - as we discussed, i have the same sticky fired case issue, only 90% more frequently. maddeningly frustrating, but the accuracy is incredible if i do my part. since a .45-70 PPB chamber is tighter and more tapered than a gov't greaser chamber, this sticking thing is baffling. headed to the range now to test out again, will bring a brass case knocker outer, too - thanx for the head's up on that.

i think that most folks really into PPB would absolutely benefit from a chamber specifically made for PPBs. it's no big deal to sleeve a breech and rechamber, been there, done that, works just fine - so you can turn most any grease gun into a paper gun. the real question for current and potential pilgrims of the paper patch way is, what PPB chamber reamers are available and what's their track record?

[Distant Thunder]

Kurt,

That is very interesting that you have some case sticking issues too, especially since your rifles were chambered with totally different reamers than mine and rfd's.

I never size any of my brass once it's been fire formed either. I have about 10 firings on this batch of .45-70 Starline brass. I can't find any measurable difference in the dozen brass and I've marked them and segregated them. Last night I resized them all the way to the rim and will test them eventually and see if they still stick. If they do they'll be sent over to the levergun box and live out their lives there.

Rob,

Keep me in the loop on your brass issues please, I'd like to know how it goes.

"...the real question for current and potential pilgrims of the paper patch way is, what PPB chamber reamers are available and what's their track record..."

That is the real problem right there. There are plenty of people who try ppb and fail, then others who see that and go no further. I would like to see more people succeed with ppb and that's why I post the stuff I do. I'm not sure I've helped anyone out yet, but I am trying and others are too. Paper patchers are growing in number and that is a good thing. We can all learn something from our combined efforts. I learn something new every time I talk to another patcher. Keep the conversation going.

DT

[flatsguide]

I design and have my reamers made for my rifles and they are especially designed for the PP bullet and the brass I use. My chambers will not except a GG bullet seated in a fired case and they have a very shallow 4 degree transition into the 1.5 degree lead, in other words a very long tapered compound lead in line what was used in originals and this chamber shoots very well I just wish I could do it justice. The chamber has a short straight cylinder case neck so it holds the wads and the bullet base seated very shallow in the case mouth so most of the bullet rests on the lead and tight in the bore by at least one thousands over bore diameter and not less then 1/2 thousands over bore diameter. I can shoot a GG breach seated it I want or a groove diameter breach seated.
The only draw back with the .40-65 is this tight chamber cuts down on the powder capacity. It will only hold 64 grains of 1.5 Swiss with a .060"wad over the powdered seated .100" in the case.
Plus when I order a barrel cut I ask for .003" deep grooves instead of the normal .004".

Good info Kurt, why do you think it is beneficial to go a thou. Less on rifling depth ?
That is a real head scratcher on why you guys have difficulty with extraction can you see any areas on the cases that show excessive concentric reamer marks? Or too soft cases with not enough spring back? Maybe try different brass. I know Brent designed that case with The short Starline brass in mind.
Regards R

[Lead pot]

What I found with my sticking cases is the tight chamber I use. My Shiloh chambers run .505" at the base and the new Starline cases I use has a base diameter of .498" to .499" and once in a while there is one at .500"+ a little. I have my reamers made with a .501" base and a couple at .502" this is to keep the base of the cases from bulging out like they are shot in the large standard chambers with a .505" base or larger in some of my rifles like the Browning that has a .507" base. When the sticking comes in is when my new Starline brass sneaks in a case or two with larger then there .499" or I use some of the cases fire in a factory chamber after running them through a sizing die with the case in a shell holder that don't let the case go into the die clear to the rim and that will cause a extracting problem. I made a base swage die to use for old cases fired in other rifles if I feel I need more.
I know all this sounds like a pain but it's worth the effort using a tight chamber with the accuracy you get with them.
But I just order new cases for the new rifle and mark them so I don't get them mixed and there is no problem.

New Starline brass is hard and even annealing the cases your only doing the neck and there is a lot of spring back below the soften neck that when running it through the sizing die it springs back some till it is fired a few times then the sticking stops and from that point the cases never get run through a sizing die again and they never grow in length that they need trimming.

I like the shallow grooves because they just work better using a PP bullet. Also the fouling is easier to control. I have looked at original Sharps rifles that shallow grooves.