Spent patches - smokeless

[Black Jaque Janaviac]

Those of you who paper patch for smokeless high-power cartridges - What do you find as far as spent patches go? Bits in pieces of confetti? Or large chunks of paper?


All my patches are usually thin strips of confetti with occasional larger sections which I can identify as being the inner layer closest to the bullet. The outer layer I'm guessing is sliced into the strips that I find. However the larger chunks still aren't that large.

[pdawg_shooter]

Just scraps, I size my bullets .001/.0015 over bore dia. Both layers get sliced up well.

[docone31]

Yeah, confetti.
Just got back from the range. Saw it for the first time. Good confetti all around the muzzle.

[Black Jaque Janaviac]

OK. I was wondering because whenever I see pictures I notice that other guys are getting huge chunks of paper. But I also noticed that those pictures seem to always be from black powder loads.

I'm thinking that when the paper hits the atmosphere at >2000 fps it tends to shred the paper. Whereas the milder BP velocities might preserve the patches better.

[longbow]

I think you will find that there are several things that will affect the size of the shredded patches:

- paper thickness
- paper quality (strength/rag content)
- boolit hardness
- velocity
- rifling depth

When I paper patch for my .303 or .308 I tend to use a 0.301" to 0.304" boolit (about bore diameter) then patch to a little over groove diameter using paper of about 0.002" to 0.003" thick. I have used paper as thick as 0.005". These thicker papers tend to leave reasonably large pieces of paper oftern with recognizable rifling on them ~ even with fairly heavy loads.

I find the same with my .44 mag Marlin using a 0.421" boolit and 0.003" paper. Here I often find quite large pieces of paper.

However, a fellow asked me to test out some 0.424" boolits so I used a thin tracing paper of about 0.0015" and it was shredded so fine it was hard to find.

I am normally patching ACWW so reasonably hard.

Longbow

[bcp477]

I usually get large bits of paper, even almost whole patches, just shredded. Since I use cotton wool filler in my loads also, I leave quite a mess in front of my bench, at the range. I always offer to sweep up after myself, but the guys at the range always decline (nice bunch of fellows, they are). At least my "trash" from shooting IS biodegradeable.....

[rhead]

I would describe mine as ribbons the width seems to be the distance between lands and the length runs up to nearly an inch but it averages much less. The longer ones will average less length on the higher pressure loads. I see some that are two grooves wide also.

[mommicked]

Mine looks like confetti. I pay a lot less attention to the paper in front of the muzzle than I do the paper on the target backer (very humbly, but quite sincerely).

[montana_charlie]

If you wrap two layers of .004" paper, and your rifling is .004" deep, only the outer wrap will get cut. You should see one layer's worth of confetti and one layer of 'sheet' with (perhaps) some tearing.

With .003" paper in the same rifling depth, the inner layer should get scored .001" deep. That may be enough to make the inner layer fragment when it hits the air, but probably won't produce confetti.

Two waps of .002" paper will just fill the rifling...and should turn the entire patch into that hard-to-find confetti.
CM

[45 2.1]

If you wrap two layers of .004" paper, and your rifling is .004" deep, only the outer wrap will get cut. You should see one layer's worth of confetti and one layer of 'sheet' with (perhaps) some tearing.

With .003" paper in the same rifling depth, the inner layer should get scored .001" deep. That may be enough to make the inner layer fragment when it hits the air, but probably won't produce confetti.

Two waps of .002" paper will just fill the rifling...and should turn the entire patch into that hard-to-find confetti.
CM

Hmmmm...... Do you actually believe the paper doesn't compress? It's being hit with the same pressure the boolit is. Take a hammer to paper on a steel plate and tell us about it.

[montana_charlie]

Take a hammer to paper on a steel plate and tell us about it.

Some paper may compress, some might not. Paper varies by type, but the numbers don't.

While you're waiting for me to hammer paper, why don't you explain to the folks why some patches don't shred into confetti?
CM

[45 2.1]

Some paper may compress, some might not. And this is from reading.. or from actual tests? Paper varies by type, but the numbers don't. Nor do results. Try it for yourself sometime. When you've measured the patching material before you patch, then after you've shot (provideing you can find something to measure), then you'll know what happened. Just popping it up the bore some and pushing it out doesn't do it.

While you're waiting for me to hammer paper, why don't you explain to the folks why some patches don't shred into confetti?
Most of those recovered patches from the old articles were bank note paper, thin and tough unlike any paper we can get now. Some patches aren't paper and are tough enough to withstand full loads to the point of being able to be shot again. For those rifles that you can retrieve a patch from, those don't have much rifling depth and usually are quite old and expensive. They also don't shoot naked boolits with any semblance of accuracy either. Some of the current H&R rifles seem to be like that too. I'll be glad when you finally try these things out for yourself as real experience is the best teacher, reading only gets you so far.

[montana_charlie]

Most of those recovered patches from the old articles were bank note paper, thin and tough unlike any paper we can get now.

What's with the ancient history? Look at the comments:

Black Jaque Janaviac: All my patches are usually thin strips of confetti with occasional larger sections which I can identify as being the inner layer closest to the bullet.

pdawg_shooter: Just scraps, I size my bullets .001/.0015 over bore dia. Both layers get sliced up well.

docone31: Good confetti all around the muzzle.

longbow: I have used paper as thick as 0.005". These thicker papers tend to leave reasonably large pieces of paper.

These are 'current events'...not observations from old articles where antique paper was used.
A guy participating in this thread who wants to blow confetti from his three year-old H&R doesn't give a rip about what happened in 1951 when bullets were patched with pages from the original Gutenberg Bible.

Some patches aren't paper and are tough enough to withstand full loads to the point of being able to be shot again.

Well, THIS discussion IS about paper.

For those rifles that you can retrieve a patch from, those don't have much rifling depth and usually are quite old and expensive.

I translate that sentence as saying that a rifle which produces paper chunks large enough to find probably has rifling which is shallow(er than the thickness of the paper patch).

WHAT! Do I detect some slight belief on your part that paper thickness and rifling depth DOES have a correlation when it comes to how the paper shreds?

Does that mean that paper DOESN'T get hammered so thin that it always gets shredded?

I'll take that as confirmation that my 'numbers' have some validity, and forego that paper hammering experiment you dreamed up.

I'll be glad when you finally try these things out for yourself as real experience is the best teacher,

For that you (and I) must be patient. There are many things that can occupy time...and delay those 'fun things' we like to indulge in.

Meanwhile, mathematics combined with logic makes a fairly useful tool when developing plans to avoid those 'problems' that others experience.

reading only gets you so far.

That is why I limit my reading to current information. It usually starts where your old histories left off...

CM

[45 2.1]

What's with the ancient history? Look at the comments:
Your the one that said: why don't you explain to the folks why some patches don't shred into confetti? You might try reading something that was from the era that developed the method. You'd learn a lot more than what you've read here.

A guy participating in this thread who wants to blow confetti from his three year-old H&R doesn't give a rip about what happened in 1951 when bullets were patched with pages from the original Gutenberg Bible. Is your name Larry..........

Well, THIS discussion IS about paper. There are a lot of other things that work as well or better. If you want to limit yourself, by all means...go ahead.

I translate that sentence as saying that a rifle which produces paper chunks large enough to find probably has rifling which is shallow(er than the thickness of the paper patch). Try it for yourself, then you won't be wondering about it. Some of that unread history you won't go into has many answers.

WHAT! Do I detect some slight belief on your part that paper thickness and rifling depth DOES have a correlation when it comes to how the paper shreds? Not in relation about anything you know about now.

Does that mean that paper DOESN'T get hammered so thin that it always gets shredded? Again, some of that history you don't know about. Some so called papers have "rag" content. You might want to study what that means and its relation to intact patching.

I'll take that as confirmation that my 'numbers' have some validity Only in your dreams., and forego that paper hammering experiment you dreamed up. You've wasted more time talking about it than it takes to try it. Get out a micrometer and figure it out yourself.


For that you (and I) must be patient. There are many things that can occupy time...and delay those 'fun things' we like to indulge in.
Your retired, twice. I would think you've managed to learn what to do with time by now. If you can keep a farm going in the cold, you can shoot also.

Meanwhile, mathematics combined with logic makes a fairly useful tool when developing plans to avoid those 'problems' that others experience. If that will get you perfect results the first time, you may be right, but that probably won't happen. There is a learning curve via trial and error even when you know how to do something.

That is why I limit my reading to current information. It usually starts where your old histories left off... Your just cheating yourself doing that.

[Maven]

Those of you who paper patch for smokeless high-power cartridges - What do you find as far as spent patches go? Bits in pieces of confetti? Or large chunks of paper?

I've paper patched grooved CB's for 2 metallic cartridge rifles and 1 BP in-line with a 1:28" twist and found neither strips nor confetti. In the first instance, I was PP an obsolete Lyman plain based bullet meant for the .32-40 up to .326" for my 8mm Mau. In the second, I used a Lee 405gr. plain based bullet first sized to .452" and then PP to .458". In the last instance, I PP a .50 cal. 250gr. Lee REAL, cast of Pb (the others were WW's + 1% Sn) so that it would fit my rifle better. The constant here was using 2 wraps of the same paper (ca. 1962 Eaton's Erasible Bond from my college days) and sizing the lubed, patched CB in the appropriate sizer die. In every trial, accuracy was at least good, but often excellent (e.g., the Marlin Microgroove .45-70). Although there were no "chunks" or "confetti," there was a ring of paper in the chamber of my 8mm Mau., but I dismissed it as a chance result given that I fired no more than 3 such rounds.

[Lead pot]

I been shooting patched bullets longer than most you are old, in slug guns and cartridge guns, not just an occasional shooter but a constant shooter and I will say this paper dont get crushed like a hammer hitting it.
I use 100% cotton rag .002 thick and most of the first wrap is still intact.
If the wrap is thicker then the groove is deep how can it cut through both wraps?
Some paper is tougher to cut through and you will find larger portions of the patch that still has the folded under portion of the bullet base attached when you use a vellum paper for patching paper.

[docone31]

In the book, The Paper Patch, Mathews wrote about getting a paper ring in the throat after firing. He gave no explanation, just an observation.
With my Ishapore Enfield, I get definate confetti.
That was with a slightly underpowered load. 2gns off my usual percentage. I listened to one of us. I had carbon fouling on the neck, definate confetti. It was easy to see, spread out in 360*.
With my #1MKIII .303 Enfield, I do not get visible confetti, or can I find any. There is no paper on the castings either. It is an higher powered load, the 2gns up over the .308, which I will also load the .308.
Both loads do not produce key holes, are dead accurate.
I have no explanation why there is no confetti with my Smelly. The Ishy is easy to see. It is right there immediately after each shot.

[Lead pot]

A paper or lead ring is mostly caused by a case to short for the chamber.
When the patched bullet obtrudes when fired it fills the space between the case end and the 45° angle leading into the troth and shaved off as the bullet moves down the bore.
If you cant find the patch the wind blew it away or it rode down range with the bullet.

[Digital Dan]

Confetti. Smokeless - bore diameter lead, groove diameter paper. 9# onion skin (.422") or tracing paper (.450"). No twisted tail on the .422" bullet, just folding an 1/8" over the base and using a card wad. Twisted tail on the .450" bullet, no card............confetti. MOA +/- fractions in same order.