Get behind your DILLON XL650 and load up 1000 rounds.
Look at your left paw after handling all that lead. stained with lead.
Wash your hands and load up 1000 coated bullets, your hands are still clean
Get behind your DILLON XL650 and load up 1000 rounds.
Look at your left paw after handling all that lead. stained with lead.
Wash your hands and load up 1000 coated bullets, your hands are still clean
.
NRA LIFE Member
USPSA/IPSC
just a small differnce in trigger pull or the tiniest of differnce is sight pictue will throw you off much more then that at a 100yards. What makes you better at a 100 yards is actually standing on your feet and shooting at a 100 yards. Id dare say ive done at least as much long range handgunning then you and im talking way out past a 100 yards. Add to that there probably isnt a man here that is good enough (including myself) to ethicaly shoot at deer with a open sighed 6 gun at a 100 yards. If you think your one then grab yourself a scoped 44 mag and hold those crosshairs on a 6 inch target at a 100 yards. Ive shot with some of the best 6 gun shooters in the country at long range and a few linebaugh seminars. We shoot out to a 1000 yards there with revolvers. Aint my first rodeo. If you dont want to pc dont. Nobodys forcing you. I shoot well over a million lube sized bullets in my life and are the first to admit it works. Has worked and always will. Doesnt mean im close minded to something better. But bottom line is if your telling me you can measure the difference in group sizes off hand at a 100 yards standing on your own two feet between a gun that shoots a 1/2 better or worse at 25 the smoke isnt just coming out of your barrel. Add to that like i said a couple times. pc doesnt shoot worse. It just can be differnent in some guns. Stays the same in some gets better in some and gets worse with some (with the same loads) Ive yet to see a gun that with a tiny bit of fine tuning of a load still shot worse. But that said i havent seen to many super blackhawks shooting bench rest competition or being used as 100 yard off hand deer guns. At least not by anyone that cares about cleanly taking game.
reason you dont see alot of it at matches is its still relatively new and 90 percent of the guys i shot pistol comp with bought bullets and a very high percentage of them even bought factory ammo. I shot 3 leagues for about 10 years locally here and out of the probably 200 people that shot in them i knew of only one other guy that casted his own bullets. I can count on my fingers and toes the total of them that even shot a cast bullet. Look at the real pros in handgun comp. they dont waste there time handloading or casting. they shoot. Most of them get factory ammo for free. Bottom line is its because the reality is its easier for a handloader to find the best possible accuracy with a handgun using a jacketed bullet. Its what we all do. Chase jacked bullet performance for alot less money. Whens the last time you saw a high power rifle shooter or a bench rest rifle shooter using a cast bullet of any kind? Like i said i cast to shoot. I shoot alot so i have to cast. If i was a millionaire id buy my ammo or have someone else make it and then free up time to do what i love and thats shoot!
yup and are your measuring your ammo buy the coffee can full not by a 50 round box a week. ever wear out a sizing die tim. Ive wore out 3 in my life. Ever have to have a progressive press rebuilt? Ever have to rebuild your star?? I can walk into a loading room and about tell how much someone shoots. I see 10 year old 550 dillons that look like new and are wiped down after each use. star sizers that look like they just came out of the box. Reloading rooms that about look like a hosptial. Aint that way at my house. Ive got one heck of a loading room but you walk into it and you will see that everything is USED AND USED ALOT! You usually will find some spilled powder on the bench and floor spent primers on the floor and bench. Lube dripping out of my star. My presses look like 10 year old used equiptment. Why because i crank out ALOT of ammo and id rather spend my time shooting then polishing loading equiptment. Look in my drawers and youll see about every spare part for each press in the house. Why? Because they not only get dirty but they wear out if you actually use them. Im out of this one now. You do it your way and ill do it mine.
Last edited by Lloyd Smale; 11-27-2020 at 07:42 AM.
Shooting only about 200 rounds a month the extra time the powder coating takes is a non issue. Having loads dialed in on several handguns now I may try some tumble lube again.
Yes, the Lee is a bore riding bullet. I've shot many out of my .308. The nose section fits into the rifled portion of the barrel. The reason they shoot well greased is the nose is designed to fit the bore as it drops from the mold. When powder coated it is too big. The only way to 'fix' that is to use a nose sizer such as the ones that NOE produces.
I am past that. I did have that problem and now I know how to do it right. When I lubesize I only get lube in the grooves, not on the bases or noses. With cases properly expanded and flared the lube does not migrate out of the case. Every once in a while I crank the lube screw without holding pressure down on the bullet and I get lube under the bullet. That is a brain fart to be avoided but when it happens I clean up the bullet and size die so there is no excess lube to get spread around. I also set the stop on the sizer so I don't push the bullet down far enough to get lube forward of the lube grooves. Letting lube get into the crimp groove will make a mess.
Tim
Words are weapons sharper than knives - INXS
The pen is mightier than the sword - Edward Bulwer-Lytton
The tongue is mightier than the blade - Euripides
^^^^^ what I do also. No muss, no fuss.
Larry Gibson
“Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
― Nikola Tesla
Regarding:
"just a small differnce in trigger pull or the tiniest of differnce is sight pictue will throw you off much more then that at a 100yards."
Yeah, and it will cause you to miss the target. All the variables add up, you have to minimize all of them, accurate ammo is important. You forgot about consistent grip strength and position or follow through. I don't doubt that you have done more long range handgun shooting. I have not tried past 100 yards. I did shoot small bore hunter's pistol comps back in 80's/90's but the rams were at 100 yards.
Also regarding:
"Add to that there probably isnt a man here that is good enough (including myself) to ethicaly shoot at deer with a open sighed 6 gun at a 100 yards."
I have not hunted for more than 15 years but I think I could ethically shoot a deer with my revolver out to 50 yards. I was shooting at 100 yards for the challenge not practice for hunting. If I was deer hunting I expect that I would be using a rifle and probably jacketed bullets. I have never deer hunted with a handgun.
This is an interesting idea.
"But bottom line is if your telling me you can measure the difference in group sizes off hand at a 100 yards standing on your own two feet between a gun that shoots a 1/2 better or worse at 25 the smoke isn't just coming out of your barrel."
It would take a lot of shooting to prove or disprove that. Just the work of shooting the groups at 25 yards to set the stage with two different loads one of which is 1/2 an inch better than the other. I have a whole lot of handguns that I would not bother trying to shoot at targets at 100 yards, accuracy matters and two moa (1/2 inch at 25 yards) is not trivial.
You seem quite passionate about PC and this discussion. I have said PC is good, were you listening.
Tim
Words are weapons sharper than knives - INXS
The pen is mightier than the sword - Edward Bulwer-Lytton
The tongue is mightier than the blade - Euripides
reason you dont see alot of it at matches - in the past, coated were not allowed by rule. If PC will do MOA on steel @ 200, 2400 fps (308W 165gr) I figure it's good enough and NO first shot flyer. I started tumble LLA & progressed to PC. For reliability, PC wins. Solution for most is the proper mould nose design. Oh, I don't have to 'cook' a bunch of wax/oil/grease to make lube.
Whatever!
Not only are your hands clean at the end of a session but if shooting in matches the gun stays clean even after a few hundred rounds in a big match. PC boolits run as clean as j-words and several have reported increased velocities without changing the powder charge. When power factors are tested that’s a big deal.
I shot some Cowboy matches at my last range and most of the shooters used powder coated boolits. Lead boolits were mandatory. I was the only boolit caster. Everyone else used commercially cast and PCed boolits.
Sometimes life taps you on the shoulder and reminds you it's a one way street. Jim Morris
As soon as you saw you were getting leading you should of stopped. Something was wrong, 1 of the +'s of pc'ing bullets is no leading. Things like under cure, bullet scraping when loading, wider nose from pc coat being scraped off during chambers, etc.
While this post has information that is useful it is also extremely limited and not of any real value when comparing traditionally lubed/sized VS pc/sized bullet.
IMHO there 3 things in that test which makes me sat it wasn't a real test of if there is any advantages of pc'd bullets over traditionally lubed bullets.
The 3 things:
When you get leading with pc'd bullets something is wrong. There's 1000's of posts on this subject and I have yet to see 1 single post saying you're supposed to have leading with pc'd bullets.
You used a +/- 12bhn alloy and loads that were optimum pressure range wise for that alloy/cartridges (16,000psi to 19,000spi) to have the bullets base compress/lube distribute/seal/peak performance.
You only used 1 load in each caliber for all testing.
At the end of the day you used flawed pc'd bullets, an extremely small window pressure wise, used 1 load only for each caliber that was tailor made for your choice of alloy/lube.
Forrest r
Your own conclusion/opinion is flawed as you make erroneous assumptions and you miss several important facts;
The fouling and leading did not happen in all the firearms, only some of them. Also the fouling and leading were not consistent as some firearms only had PC fouling and some had both PC fouling and a bit of leading.
If you read through this forum and others there are numerous complaints of fouling and or leading problems with PC/HT. Additionally I have ran tests on numerous other PC/HT coated bullets supplied by various individuals of various calibers in various cartridges. Most often, not always, the fouling when it occurs is from the PC/HT. Those test were with handgun and rifle cartridges using PB and GC'd bullets with velocities appropriate for the bullet and cartridge from 800 fps to 2800+ fps.
I "used" the 12 BHN bullets because that is what was sent to me to test. Yes, I used a proven load with each cartridge (the bullets were tested in two cartridges in several different firearms) that were proven loads with the bullet tested. Since you're saying the load was "optimum" I fail to see the point as to how that makes it not a "real test"?
Yes, I used one load for each cartridge. When conducting a scientific test there is/should be only one variable. That variable is the object of the test. That variable was the PC'd bullets. I was not working up a load. Thus the load used in each cartridge was constant. That is the way a scientific test is conducted.
Thus, at the end of the day, The PC'd bullets were not "flawed" as they were cast and PC'd by a respected member of this forum who is really "into" PC and has many posts and threads on the topic here in this forum. There was not "an extremely small window pressure wise" as the loads tested are standard loads or vey close to it used by many in IPSC, IDPA and SASS competition let alone just casual shooting. BTW; in the 45 ACP cartridge 5 gr of Bullseye with a 230 gr bullet, cast or jacketed, has been a standard load since the inception of the cartridge. The 7 gr Bullseye load under a 230 gr load also has been a standard load used by many in days past.
I realize, Forrest, that many really like PC/HT bullets and that is fine with me. As I stated earlier, shoot all of them you want. I just reported the results of an extensive test. Have you conducted such and extensive test? If so please post the results. I and everyone else would like to see the results. I also am hoping PC or something similar really does work out, especially for high velocity rifle loads. But I've just not substantiated any of the claims [better accuracy, higher velocity, less pressure, etc.] with PC bullets with one exception; after being PC'd they are "cleaner" to handle. However during the PC process it certainly is far messier than lubing bullets with a lubrasizer. Additionally I never said, nor have I tried to dissuade anyone from PC/HTing cast bullets. This is a forum, a discussion and I've put forth the results of a test is all.
Let me quote myself from the report so you can read that i never said PC/HT sucked or wasn't any good and to not use it;
"I’m not going to draw any conclusions; I’ll let each of you do that by scrutinizing the data. Here are the correlated data for each cartridge:"
"As I previously stated so far PC/HT hasn't shown me any improvement to make it worth while to do. Also I'm not trying anyone not to PC/HT their cast bullets. If it works for you then have at it. PC/HT just doesn't work for me at this time. More power to all who strive to make it better, keep at it and who knows.....I might convert......"
So, again at the end of the day [isn't that cliché a bit over used these days, especially by the MSM commentators?], while I appreciate your criticism and your own conclusion, unless you can come up with actual test results confirming your criticisms and refuting, with actual test results not just your opinion, my test results your opinion is really just a dog that don't hunt........
Last edited by Larry Gibson; 11-28-2020 at 11:40 AM.
Larry Gibson
“Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
― Nikola Tesla
It really doesn't matter to me how anyone coats their bullets, what type of lubes they use, the types of machines they use or the sizing dies, etc. When pc'ing 1st started I read the different posts and thought it might be worth looking into. What sold me was the pictures of the "smash test". I wanted to cast rifle bullets & then pc them and run them up in custom made bump dies reshaping them to mirror the throat/leade/throat of the bbl's chamber. Then do head to head testing with traditionally lubed/sized/bumped vs pc'd/bumped.
Really nothing to do with clean, dirty, fast, slow, storage, round count at range time, smoke, etc.
Alloys have to be on the soft side to do any extreme bumping/re-shaping of the rifle bullets. It's a rather lengthy/time consuming process bumping the bullets. So I decided to do the initial testing with pistol bullets to see if there was any real difference along with how hard can a soft alloy/pc'd bullet be driven accurately.
Ended up choosing a beater S&W 629 to use as a test bed. Wanted a caliber that had a wide range of pressure from starting loads to max loads, the 44mag seemed like a good a choice as any along with I've shot countless 1000's of rounds thru it and had a pretty good idea of what it could do. Along with why not test for a blammo ammo plinking load that would do 1 1/2" or less @ 25yds.
I chose 8/9bhn range scrap for an alloy and cast piles of 7 different bullets to test. All bullets were cast from the same 100# lot of range scrap.
I pc'd the bullets with john deede green, lubed the bullets with ben's red in a .431" lyman 450. THen I took all the bullets and sized them in a lee .430" push thru sizing die.
Grabbed 5 different powders I had laying around (bullseye, clays, trailboss, am-select, unique) and put together ladder test loads with the 7 bullets/5 powders. The loads started in the +/- 15,000psi range and ended in the 25,000+/- range using 1/2gr increments.
The testing was done @ 25yds using 1 firearm, that 629 with a 4x scope using a rest. Only 6 rounds of each load were tested. Not really very scientific but it allowed me to test a wide range of loads to get an idea of how a pc'd bullet would perform.
Started with a clean revolver and shot fouling shots while getting the scope on paper/target. The is that sighting in target with a 8/9bhn +/- 20,000psi load that easily did a 1 1/2" 6-shot group @ 25yds.
[IMG][/IMG]
Shot all the pc test rounds & cleaned the revolver and shot a couple cylinders of fouling rounds and then tested the traditionally lubed/sized bullets. Clays did well with this alloy in the +/- 21,000psi range.
[IMG][/IMG]
At the end of the day using same alloy/bullets/powders/loads/firearm/etc the pc'd bullets produced 13 loads that would do 1 1/2" @ 25yds. The traditionally lubed bullets produce 3.
That's 7 different bullets, 5 different powders, I have no idea how many test loads were actually tested. Powders like clays/traiboss had a small window using 1/2gr jumps with a min/max of 2gr (4 test loads total). Powders like am-select, bullseye & unique has 6/7 different loads. Even if all the powders only had 4 test loads each, that 28 different test loads using 8/9bhn bullets in a 10,000psi pressure window.
13 pc loads VS 3 traditional loads that would do 1 1/2" 6-shot groups @ 25yds.
While not scientific by any means and 1 time testing of a 6-shot group really isn't telling in itself. The 28 test groups (minimum) of each type of lube and the 13 VS 3 is.
Myself I'd rather use a soft alloy and a wide range of pressures testing 28+ loads in 1 firearm rather then test 1 load in 8 firearms.
I shoot a lot of Hi-Tek commercial bullets and there have been several times after shooting that I dry brushed the barrel with a bore brush that I would get red puffs of Hi-Tek from the barrel when brushing so I know I get some buildup in the bore . For how I use these loads it makes 0 difference to me but I do get coating fouling in the bore on occasion.
Good info larry, no criticism!!!
Seeing how respected member on this website sent you the pc'd bullets and you trust what they sent. That give credence to operator error and scrapping of the pc to cause sporadic leading. At the end of the day the only 2 ways I'm aware of to get leading from a pc'd bullet is to have made errors in the pc'ing process or scrapping the pc coating off in places.
Borderline under cure. The nose of the bullet passed the "smash test" and the pc is still intact. The body of the bullet had the pc stripped off by the bbl. There was minor leading in the bbl.
[IMG][/IMG]
Anyway, matters not to me. If you feel that the pc'd bullets that leaded your bbl's had no affect/impact on your testing for accuracy. This speaks volumes of your results.
Forrest
You should really quit making assumptions. I "trust but verify" what members here send me to test. Particularly if it is loaded ammunition, I do pull a couple rounds apart to double check the load as we all can make mistakes. As to alloy and BHN and the kind of PC/HT or lube or whatever, I take the members of this forum at their word. Some things like BHN I can double check but others I can't so I take the members of this forum at their word and simply test what they send as close to as requested as I can. Unless something is unsafe I test what is sent and report the results....good, bad or indifferent.
"I pc'd the bullets with john deede green, lubed the bullets with ben's red in a .431" lyman 450. THen I took all the bullets and sized them in a lee .430" push thru sizing die."
You lubed the bullets? If that is correct and you lubed the PC'd bullets at all then I understand why you get no PC fouling.......I thought one of the benefits of PC was not lubing? I've shot lots of lubed PC bullets without any PC fouling or leading and very good accuracy also.
You say you PC with "john deede green" but the PC'd bullets shown are red? Is "green" really red?
Also, you should re-read my test results. The "leading" occurred only in 2 of the test firearms, one of each cartridge then only with a certain type PC. The bullets were not "scraped" during the loading process. The PC "fouling" was present in several but not all as previously stated a couple times.
My test consisted of a 12 shot test (2 foulers then 10 for group) not 3 or 6 shot groups.
Additionally, I never said or insinuated "that I "feel that the pc'd bullets that leaded your bbl's had no affect/impact on your testing for accuracy" in that test. What i have said is PC/HT cast bullets have not shown me any of the claimed improvement in accuracy. Also it does not appear, from the two target pictures [apparently with the PC cast bullet and a traditional sized and lubed cast bullet] you posted above that your PC'd cast bullets improve upon accuracy for you either. Leading of the barrel (only 2 of the barrels in this extensive test with only one kind of PC) does adversely affect accuracy as did the build up of the PC fouling in some of the test firearms.
Also you failed, obviously, to note or comprehend where I stated in the test report; "the Cardinal Gloss Black 1 coat worked well in all the firearms and rivaled the naked BAC lubed bullets for accuracy. It gave slightly less psi and slightly less velocity in all the firearms too." There were 4 different PCs tested in that test. That one worked very well. At the end I stated I would not draw any conclusions but left that up to the readers. I suggest you re-read the test setting aside your disdain and paying attention to what I actually said and what the test data actually reveals. I've stated elsewhere, perhaps in this thread also, that I don't PC because i do not find it quicker or less messy either when PCing or loading. I do not find, or haven't found yet, PC bullets gives any advantage in accuracy, velocity or lesser psi. I have found some PC/HT'd bullets that do as well in some applications but, so far, have found no incentive to switch. And once again, if you like shooting PC/HT cast bullets and they work for you then have it as you have my full support.
You're not the first to dislike the results of some tests. Mostly the dislike comes simply because what is posted is not read or comprehended but sometimes a personal bent can cloud ones interpretation. Seemingly personal attack comments like "This speaks volumes of your results" point out the "personal bent". If you don't like the results of my tests then you certainly don't have to. But like I said, your dog don't hunt with your arguments because you're arguing against yourself......
Last edited by Larry Gibson; 11-28-2020 at 02:51 PM.
Larry Gibson
“Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
― Nikola Tesla
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 |