lee c309-200-r results

[Wisest.fool]

Thought i would share the results of my experiment with the lee 309-200. maybe it will help someone

Purpose: The purpose of this experiment was to see if i could get 1 MOA from a rifle with cast boolits(powdercoated gas checked). I am pleased to say I have succeeded. Previously I have only cast for pistols/revolvers and the fastest I sent any bullets was 1500 out of a powdercoated 454 casull. Since I had no leading with that, I thought I would see if what I read here about rifle bullets being able to be thrown faster with powdercoating than with traditional lube was correct (trust but verify). Also I wanted 1 MOA to be satisfied that this was worth it. I picked a 200gn bullet with the thought that if the test fails and I end up with a mold that I cannot shoot fast at least it will get there with a lot of energy and if its 1 MOA accurate I will trust it to take a deer.

Equipment:
Ruger precision rifle .308
lead sled
crappy nikon scope good enough for 50m (yes it will be replaced soon)
lee SS press
dillon .308 dies
lee case neck expander die
lee push through 309 sizer
sage outdoors 30 caliber .17 thick gas checks
COWW with 2% tin added water quenched and water dropped after powder coating for 1 hr to heat treat(i do not have a BHN tester so i know they are hard but not how hard) they chime when struck together
smokes raspberry powder coat
FC 308 brass once fired
CCI LRP
IMR 4895 powder

Process:
bullets were cast from lee production pot 4 into lee 309-200-r fairly hot needed to be hot to get them to fill correctly they came out .3095 at the base where they engage the rifling.
barrel of rifle was slugged with .311 round soft lead ball and came out .308 in the grooves
bullets were dropped from mold into 5 gal bucket of ice water
seated gas checks with no lube once dry and quality control passed (discarded any with any imperfections no matter how small)
powder coated at 425 for 1 hr and again dropped into ice water
sized again
cases were sized
trimmed to 2.005 if they were over 2.015
primed with CCI LRP
necks were expanded slightly with lee neck expander die so no lead was shaved when seated
powder was measured in 5 shot groups going up .5 gn from 31gn to 40.5 gn IMR 4895 with rcbs auto powder measure and powder trickler. (40.5gn being the max load for a jacketed 200gn bullet in my lyman 49th edition at 2300ish FPS and 59000 PSI)
seated to 2.60 OAL (this had the bullet seated deeper than the crimp groove will explain more later)
very light crimp to un-expand the neck and hold bullets.
fired in 5 shot group from 31gn to 38gn @ 50m(stopped at 38 gn due to pressure signs)
shots were recorded on magnetospeed chronograph on standard sensitivity.(the gas checks seemed to register just fine)
after every 5 shots the barrel was inspected for signs of leading
each 5 shot group was shot at a new target and targets were retrieved every 20 shots.

Observations:
-without powdercoating the bullet sat perfectly in the lands of the rifling barely marking the bullets
-with powdercoating the lands slightly engraved the bullet making it hard to chamber a round.
-seating the bullets deeper allowed the rounds to chamber without too much difficulty, however the rounds were definitely all engaged with the rifling once powder coated. since i was starting so far down the powder scale i accepted some risk in the chance of over pressure from already engaging the rifling. As the rounds were fired careful attention was paid to how difficult it was to extract rounds and what the primers looked like.
-no key-holing of any rounds was apparent.
- no rounds were recovered ( not feasible at this range although i will try this in the future to see if the bullet expands at all or fragments and how the rifling looks on the fired bullet)
- no leading was observed throughout the test, however at the higher end some powder coat dust was observed in the barrel.
- ruger precision rifles have 5R rifling. which is supposed to be not ideal for lead bullets, however this did not seem to be much of an issue.
- Standard Deviation (SD) was higher in lead bullets than i observed in jacketed bullets

RESULTS:

31gn - avg 1787fps - 45 SD ----- third most accurate group with ~1.4 MOA. lost data on one round due to chrono setup issue
31.5gn - avg 1847 FPS - 3 SD
32gn - avg 1911 FPS - 33 SD
32.5gn - avg 1920 FPS - 13 SD
33gn - avg 1947 FPS - 11 SD
33.5gn - avg 1970 FPS - 16 SD
34gn - avg 1999 FPS - 38 SD ----- most accurate group with 1 MOA
34.5gn - avg 2034 FPS - 13 SD
35gn - avg 2123 FPS - 45 SD
35.5gn - avg 2156 FPS - 46 SD
36gn - avg 2180 FPS - 50 SD
36.5gn - avg 2231 FPS - 41 SD
37gn - avg 2284 FPS - 42 SD - 2nd most accurate group with 1.25 MOA
37.5gn - avg 2290 - 14 SD
38gn - 2 shots fired. both were hard to open the action. primers were not flattened but test was aborted. This was as far as i expected to get anyway with max loads for jacketed bullets being 2300 as well.

Conclusions:
-yes it is possible to get fairly accurate(1MOA) with powdercoated gas checked cast boolits. the people on this forum know what they are talking about.
-More testing is needed to determine the failure velocity of powdercoating bullets. Most likely i will need to get a lighter bullet mold somewhere 120-150gn to get at least 2500FPS to see some leading.
- the weakest part of repeatability/accuracy on this test was probably human error(trigger squeeze/sight picture)
-i have a new (cheap at ~$.27/rnd since i got the brass and lead for free) round to load.
-Lead bullets will show signs of pressure at the same velocity as similar weight jacket round data. Only 1 data point right now so not proven, but it makes sense.
-lead bullets move faster out of the barrel than similarly weighted jacketed rounds with the same powder charge.
- i should probably get a BHN tester and see what harness these bullets are. I would be willing to send some to be tested if someone was curious enough to check them for me.....
- I will need to make some hardball alloy/softer alloy and try again to see if there is a difference.

Questions:

- Why are some of the groups SD under 20 and the others around 50. some part of my reloading must have changed slightly i think.
- What do you think of my experiment and how could I improve?
- Has anyone else done anything like this?
- has anyone figured out how to powder coat the base and not the tip of the round? this would let me keep the perfect size of the nose of this bullet(unpowdercoated) without having the powder coat engage rifling when chambered.
- I load mostly with IMR/hodgdon powders since that's what I can get my hands on. But is there a better powder for cast rifle reloading? Or for that matter cast pistol.
--rifle(imr 4895 or h4895)
--300BO/454 casull IMR 4227
--pistol titegroup/cfe pistol

[charlie b]

First, congratulations on your entry into casting for rifles. Sounds like you are doing ok.

- Why are some of the groups SD under 20 and the others around 50. some part of my reloading must have changed slightly i think.
This can happen depending on a lot of things. You did not mention sorting bullets by weight. It might make a difference. I sort my rifle bullets into batches, sometimes at 0.1gn but usually at 0.5gn. You might also try bench rest primers. They make a difference for me. Careful measuring of powder charge is another. Then you can get into things like consistent neck tension, case length, bullet seat depth accuracy, cartridge concentricity, etc, etc.
Gas checks. One of the most critical portions of bullet making. They MUST go on square to the bore and seated firmly to make complete contact with the base of the bullet. The bullet base MUST allow perfect seating of the GC. Some have made special dies just to seat the GC for this reason. My most critical part of bullet inspection is the base.

- Has anyone else done anything like this?
Yes, I did the same kind of thing with my .308. There are a lot of variables so work on one at a time to see what makes things improve. I will take a 'baseline' load to the range and then make up 10 rounds changing one thing (like seating depth). Another 10 rounds will have a different primer. Etc, etc.

- has anyone figured out how to powder coat the base and not the tip of the round? this would let me keep the perfect size of the nose of this bullet(unpowdercoated) without having the powder coat engage rifling when chambered.
My experiments have shown to me that a good engagement of the bore riding section is better for accuracy. If I can load and extract the round without the bullet being stuck in the bore then I call it good. If it bothers you then size the noses of the bullets, but, this can cause other problems (NOE makes sizers for this). Note: check the bullets for being out of round. Some have had Lee molds that make oval bullets.

- I load mostly with IMR/hodgdon powders since that's what I can get my hands on. But is there a better powder for cast rifle reloading? Or for that matter cast pistol.
I have used IMR4895, IMR4198 and Varget for cast. Many others will work. One I might try in the future is RL15 since it does so well with jacketed. Just about anything that works for jacketed will work for cast.


You mention leading. Powder coat bullets, if done properly, will not lead your barrel even at full jacketed velocities. But, if you have bare spots or spots that are too thin then you might get leading, even at lower velocities.

There does not seem to be a velocity limit with PC cast bullets made from harder alloys. The limit for std cast bullets is based on rotation speed. But, adding a layer of PC seems to make that issue go away. I have only tested my rifle (1:10 twist) up to 2400fps so have no other direct data on this.

[Wisest.fool]

@charlie b

i hadnt thought to weigh each bullet. that could account for it. i did weight 10 of the 125 i cast with gas checks on and they were all very close. i should have written the weight down.
I will say i am pleasantly surprised with the sage gas checks. i like them better than hornaday. i did have 1 or two bullets with slight imperfections where the sprue cut was but since it was going to be under a gas check i didnt think much about it. but they could have prevented the gas check from seating perfectly flat i think. i will test this.

im glad to think the engagement of rifling when chambered isn't as big of a deal as i thought it would be.

As far as going into the point of diminishing returns (more work than its worth) I have got eld and eld-x to under .5MOA and for those i would consider checking concentricity but for cast bullets i don't know that its worth the time investment. what is the best accuracy you have been able to achieve with cast rifle rounds?

Also, this is my wife's favorite rifle round. I love her very much but its disturbing how much match 308 she will shoot on a range day. I think i will load her a bunch of these with the 1 MOA load. at 27 cents a piece and much less time and effort. I wont tell her but she is a better shot than me with a rifle. And the last two times we went fishing she out fished me. I should stop teaching her my hobbies.

[northmn]

As one who has had more than a little training in the use of statistics and SD, I will offer an answer to the question as why, concerning groups and chronograph results using SD are puzzling. First of all the SD is a statistic designed to determine the probably of the sample or group as you term it to be an actual representation of the population, or what would be the total number of shot fired if you used up that batch of bullets, powder and primers. Its use depends on a larger sample size than most of us use for getting an average velocity which is commonly 5 shots. minimally 15 shots would be considered appropriate for that use. Because of my training in statistics I consider the SD to be about worthless for our applications. A better one would be average deviation or even total spread. Essentially what you are seeing is an inappropriate statistical measure for the number of shots fired. I am unsure as to why the SD is even include in Chronograph computations.

From another perspective, I have taken a deer with that bullet and it was very effective.

DEP

[Dapaki]

......- has anyone figured out how to powder coat the base and not the tip of the round? this would let me keep the perfect size of the nose of this bullet(unpowdercoated) without having the powder coat engage rifling when chambered.........

Yes, mask them with cap plugs then tumble coat them with your PC, stand them up and bake them. The cap plugs I use for masking are silicone and will last through several cycles without failure.

[tomme boy]

Water float method. If you don't want to coat the bore ridder. Were the groups actual 1MOA at 50? Or .5 actual? Just because it will shoot 1 moa at 50 does not mean they will farther out. That is the biggest misconception people make.

[charlie b]

Most of my cast bullet rifle loads are 1MOA plus or minus depending on my loads for the day. I have some groups in the .5MOA range, but, I am not at that level consistently with my rifle. My goal is to be just as accurate as jacketed (which are 0.5 to 0.75MOA in my rifle). And the reason I cast is also due to cost of match bullets.

FYI, try some Hornady AMax in your rifle. They aren't that expensive and they do as well as Match Kings for me.

[Silvercreek Farmer]

Good work! Consider using some dacron filler and 10 shot groups.

[charlie b]

Do try filler if you want. My loads have done better without the filler.

[Wisest.fool]

@ northmn its been a long time since i failed college statistics... so i will smile and nod. but i think i can see what you mean the most accurate group for me had a higher SD.

also its good to know this bullet is good deer medicine.

@ dapaki Cap Plugs??

@tomme boy water float method?? in reference to keeping noses of rounds unpowdercoated? also .5 inches at 50 yards for the best load so 1 MOA at 100. all bullet holes touching but spread horizontally. I have tried Amax. When i lived in Hawaii the local shop(the only shop) had them in stock always, but since i have moved back to the mainland i haven't found many. but you are right they worked well especially out of my remington 700 SPS 20". I tend to buy from local stores if i can.

@ silvercreek farmer & chrlie b what does dacron filler do? I used to have 80% dacron racing sails on my sailboat. i will have to research this.

[tomme boy]

You put the pc in a bowl of water and dip the bullet into the pc that is floating on the water. Then you stand the bullets up to let them dry over night before baking them.

You can control how much of the bullet gets coated this way.

[Dapaki]

Sorry, I forget that everybody doesn't know about them. https://www.caplugs.com/ultrabake-caps-sc-sh

[Dapaki]

You put the pc in a bowl of water and dip the bullet into the pc that is floating on the water. Then you stand the bullets up to let them dry over night before baking them.

You can control how much of the bullet gets coated this way.

Wow! That works?

[tomme boy]

send a pm to waco. he can walk you through it

[charlie b]

Dacron filler is used when the amount of rifle powder in the cartridge fills less than 60% of the case volume. The idea is that it keeps the powder up against the primer and provides more consistent ignition. A small tuft of it is used (the stuff is made for pillows and such, high loft). You can look up in here how it is used (there is a sticky thread for it).

Some like it and some do not. If done correctly it is not harmful to your gun or cases (do not use too much). There are other filler media that some use but I would stick with Dacron (FYI, Dacron is the brand name for polyester so when you go to the store look for polyester batting).

charlie

[megasupermagnum]

You seem to be worried about leading. If anything, rifles are easier to use cast bullets in, as they are generally more consistent than say a revolver. People use traditional wax lubed bullets at 3000 fps and higher without leading. I don't know that anyone has ever got superior accuracy at those kinds of speeds, but certainly not bad. I don't know if powder coat will be better or not, but those high speed guys don't seem to have switched over themselves.

[charlie b]

The velocity you can reach with regular lubed bullets depends on several factors.

-Bullet twist, slower twist means more velocity. Also, a faster twist with soft alloy can lead to 'skidding' as the bullet enters the rifling.
-Bullet lube, you need one that will stand up to the velocity and twist. Not all of them will work. This is a key factor for leading.
-Alloy, you do need a harder/stronger alloy for higher speeds. Some go to the trouble of adding copper in their alloy for max velocities.
-Bullet diameter, a smaller dia bullet can be spun faster than a larger dia bullet.

Some cases you can get jacketed velocities with cast, but, accuracy suffers dramatically (this seems to be due to rate of spin of the bullet). Others have claimed that if the bullet is cast perfectly it will perform at same velocities as jacketed. I have not seen enough of those to have an opinion on their claims.

Powder coated bullets are simpler for this and I have not seen a detailed test of the velocity/spin limit of PC bullets. Some have claimed same velocities as jacketed, but, I have not seen anyone get that kind of velocity AND sub-MOA performance on a regular basis. I suspect it is true. I'd like to see someone swage and then PC some bullets to see what happens.

[jaysouth]

send a pm to waco. he can walk you through it

We need a sticky!!!

[waco]

send a pm to waco. he can walk you through it

This might shed some light on powder coating just the base of bore riding bullets.
https://www.artfulbullet.com/index.p...e-riders.4791/

[Tripplebeards]

I love those crappy Nikon scopes when you’re ready to get rid of it let me know!