Paper Patching...my way.

[montana_charlie]

Charlie, you are very close to patching the smokeless way.

Yes, I know. I weighed the information I read about smokeless patching against BP patching before I started this thread (last year). What I read led me to decide that groove diameter may be required for smokeless, but when shooting BP you could take your choice.

In an 'original' chamber, which leaves the case at the right size to accept a bore diameter bullet, patching to bore would only make sense...as was done in the old guns.
But I felt you could get the same 'smooth flow' of the bullet from the brass to the steel if groove diameter is used...when the chamber is going to leave the expanded brass at that size, anyway.

The only difference in the two configurations is that the bullet 'expands' to fill the grooves when patched to bore...but is 'engraved' by the rifling when patched to groove. Both cause minimal 'change' in the original bullet.

Patching to bore in a 'big' (read GG) chamber has several troublesome elements which guys have found ways to work around. But those 'adjustments' still require something extra to make them work, and the bullet must go through more 'change' between the time it's chambered and the moment it leaves the muzzle.

Patching to groove works if you are willing to wipe between shots. That was a tough requirement for me to accept. I am going to stop experimenting with the patching method...and get serious with finding my best load.
But, once that is accomplished, I will re-explore grease cookies and lubed wads...looking for something which allows 'shooting dirty'. That will occur when there is once again some snowbanks to deposit bullets into...

CM

[Lead pot]

Charlie you can shoot a patched bullet at groove diameter if you want.
Just seat that bullet off the lands like you would a grooved bullet. you just wont get that long range accuracy but it will work just fine for busting rocks and you will loose a little case capacity for powder.

Kurt

[Don McDowell]

You won't be able to "shoot dirty" with groove dia. patched. You can do it with bore- bullets tho.

[45 2.1]

What I read led me to decide that groove diameter may be required for smokeless, but when shooting BP you could take your choice. Not entirely true.

In an 'original' chamber I believe my trapdoor chambers are contemporary with the Sharps (and I have measured several original chambers in several Sharps, Ballard, Trapdoors etc.). All would except a 0.463" patched boolit in WW brass with little of the patch showing. , which leaves the case at the right size to accept a bore diameter bullet, patching to bore would only make sense...as was done in the old guns. Patching to bore was done to get more powder room, get the patched boolit into the rifling and allow for the fouled barrel condition. All items concerned with the BP fouling which had to be lived with.

The only difference in the two configurations is that the bullet 'expands' to fill the grooves when patched to bore...but is 'engraved' by the rifling when patched to groove. Both cause minimal 'change' in the original bullet. That change is sometimes a bad thing, especially if the boolit doesn't bump evenly. But, when it is patched right (see RMulherns pictures as he did a good job on it) the boolit shouldn't bump out of line (much at least).

Patching to bore in a 'big' (read GG) chamber has several troublesome elements which guys have found ways to work around. But those 'adjustments' still require something extra to make them work, and the bullet must go through more 'change' between the time it's chambered and the moment it leaves the muzzle. Accuracy depends a lot on the boolit being in line with the bore as well as a few other things.

Patching to groove works if you are willing to wipe between shots. That was a tough requirement for me to accept. I am going to stop experimenting with the patching method...and get serious with finding my best load. Whatever you decide, you should realize that your best load with either method my be equal or one may be superior to the other. This depends on the condition of the bore from shot to shot. A clean bore is the same while a fouled/dirty bore can vary with heat and humidity (as noted very well in the results from Raton) dependent on the time of year.
But, once that is accomplished, I will re-explore grease cookies and lubed wads...looking for something which allows 'shooting dirty'. Once a "lube" is found that allows you to do that, your troubles should stop. That lube is not now here though. You can use many of the others available, but you have to use quite a lot with a lot bigger grooves to hold it. And I believe that is not what you would think ideal. That will occur when there is once again some snowbanks to deposit bullets into...

[Don McDowell]

45 2.1, it's no great feat to "shoot dirty" but bore or under patched size is required to be able to chamber the patched rounds without rumpling the leading edge of the patch when chambering.
Bore sized patch bullets seated very shallow into the case stand alot better chance of being aligned with the bore than groove diameter patched do.
Either way works well, but it takes some time to get everything down pat, from the powder charge and wad column to the paper and the bullet alloy.
Of course there's a big difference in whether one is punching rocks,snow banks, etc for fun or whether one is shooting for score in competition someplace on what the final load combo ends up being.

[RMulhern]

FWIW......Kenny Wasserberger...from his 5@200 photos shows his PP bullets seated fairly deep into the case; moreso than what I seat my loads to however Kenny will tell you quickly that his bullets are patched to bore diameter. My bullets are seated no more than about .140" into the case. My thinking is that since I'm operating with a standard chamber that it behooves my accuracy to have as much of the bullet into the bore as possible thereby giving possibly the least amount of distortion to the bullets base due to the base being expanded outward at ignition and hopefully shaving off as little lead and patch as possible! I also use an 'under primer wad' in the primer pocket thinking that just maybe this inclusion will somewhat retard full ignition such that the bullets base is thereby moved fully into the bore prior to full ignition. Whether or not this is happening I have no way of knowing since I don't have snowbanks. Maybe I'll try my son's swimming pool! All of my PP loads have used bullets with an alloy of 1-16 however I am going to test some loads with an alloy of 1-10. My thinking is that with a harder alloy that this would be maybe a better way to reduce or prevent base distortion. I have looked at photos that Kurt aka Leadpot has posted using I think an alloy of 1-11 and even though the engraving marks of the lands were more shallow than the softer alloy bullets, I don't recall that Kurt stated that the accuracy was worse than the softer bullets. What I am thinking is that even though the engraving would be more shallow....this does not mean that this would cause 'skipping or skidding' of the bullet across the lands at initial ignition! In conclusion, reference using groove diameter or bore diameter PP....there are so many variables in this game that one has to use WHAT WORKS in a particular rifle and NOT what someone else is using!

[Lead pot]

....there are so many variables in this game that one has to use WHAT WORKS in a particular rifle and NOT what someone else is using!

You got that right.

Kurt

[RMulhern]

You got that right.

Kurt

Kurt

As to the title above....I cannot remove it from my mind that bore diameter has to be better than groove diameter for one main reason and that is because those shooting standard modern chambered rifles must deal with base distortion of the projectile! With groove diameter the bullet is seated deeply into the case and regardless of who the 'caster' is....and how well the bullet is patched or fitted into the case.....the more bullet into the case means that there is more chance of base distortion!! This I think mainly applies to the individuals shooting BLACKPOWDER! Depending upon the alloy used and whether or not one is shooting SP....this may not be the case but for BLACKPOWDER....I think it makes a whole helluva lot of sense!! Again.....all rifles are akin to people aka ALL DIFFERENT so it just takes a whole lot of work as to what works in whatever rifle!!

As for me and my testing and results....I'll stay with BORE DIAMETER!

[montana_charlie]

My bullets are seated no more than about .140" into the case. My thinking is that since I'm operating with a standard chamber that it behooves my accuracy to have as much of the bullet into the bore as possible thereby giving possibly the least amount of distortion to the bullets base due to the base being expanded outward at ignition and hopefully shaving off as little lead and patch as possible!

That is one of the 'workarounds' for bore diameter patching in GG chambers that I was referring to earlier.

I cannot remove it from my mind that bore diameter has to be better than groove diameter for one main reason and that is because those shooting standard modern chambered rifles must deal with base distortion of the projectile! With groove diameter the bullet is seated deeply into the case and regardless of who the 'caster' is....and how well the bullet is patched or fitted into the case.....the more bullet into the case means that there is more chance of base distortion!!

If the inside of the case is at groove diameter...and the bullet is patched to groove diameter...there is no empty space within the case for the bullet base to distort into.
Look again at this image from the bottom of Page 5.



You will see that the entire bullet is closely supported by either brass or steel as it sits in the chamber/throat. Any 'distortion' which can occur will have happened before the bullet starts to move...and (as you can see) there is no empty space for that distortion to fill.

Do these look distorted to you, Rick?


CM

[RMulhern]

Charlie

That 'ain't' the true view! Go back and take a look at the 45 degree area on some of the views Kurt posted of chambers! THAT'S WHERE....the **** end of the bullet gets blown into!

[montana_charlie]

Charlie

That 'ain't' the true view! Go back and take a look at the 45 degree area on some of the views Kurt posted of chambers! THAT'S WHERE....the **** end of the bullet gets blown into!

Examine the image of the loaded cartridge and you'll see that my chamber has that 45 degree step.
The image is an exact depiction of my rifle and my reload, accurate to a thousandth of an inch.
Still, the bullets come out undamaged, as that photo shows.

Here are some more...these were were patched wet.
I think the 'scruffiness' is caused by minerals in tap water.
The bullet on the right was sent to me...already patched to groove...by Joe C. from the Shiloh forum. I pulled one of my bullets and inserted his, and got two almost identical results.
His shows a little bit of lead to land contact at the leading edge of the patch.


CM

[Lead pot]

Rick.

I patch to 1/2 of the depth of the groove or .440 with my .438 bore .446 groove or I can patch to .446 and seat the bullet accordingly or patch to .001 under bore.
the best results I get is .003-4 over bore but I don't have the chamber like most are. It does not matter if I use the prolate bullet or the elliptical I patch it to .003-4 over bore.
The postell type PP bullet I patch the same but I seat it a little deeper, I have to even with the 5 degree tapered lead.
The drawing CM made that bullet is all well and good and it might chamber in a clean chamber but with the BT it wont chamber on the second shot the way he has it drawn up.
The bullet could be seated 5-10 thousands off the land and he will get by with it.
If I'm wrong Charlie tell me.

By the way that is some mighty fine illustration your doing. What are you using doing this??

Kurt

[montana_charlie]

By the way that is some mighty fine illustration your doing. What are you using doing this??

I am using software called 'Screen Calipers' to get all of the dimensions right, but the main image came from Tom Myers.
I took an image posted by him which shows a patched Money bullet in a Pedersoli chamber...and manipulated those elements to create 'my configuration'.

I used MS Paint for the manipulation, but Tom deserves credit for the image.

The drawing CM made that bullet is all well and good and it might chamber in a clean chamber but with the BT it wont chamber on the second shot the way he has it drawn up.
The bullet could be seated 5-10 thousands off the land and he will get by with it.
If I'm wrong Charlie tell me.

You are probably correct, Kurt. I have been wiping all along to keep everything standardized for the testing.

I will try other methods after I complete load development (which has never been done, yet) to see what charge gives best accuracy.

But, I won't be trying the cookies and/or blow tube until there is some snow...

CM

[303Guy]

montana_charlie, there's a marking on the R/H boolit that seems to coincide with the case mouth. Is this from too long a case so's it starts to crimp in the throat lead in chamfer?



I get this effect with my 303 Brit with smokeless but mine are an expansion band that gets preserved by the patch compression.



My cases don't 'grow' so I can't minimize the gap between case mouth and throat start. On this particular boolit I would expect an accuracy issue as the band only goes halfway round the circumference. (There's no visible rifling because it's a two-groove and the rifling impressions are on the edges).

[montana_charlie]

montana_charlie, there's a marking on the R/H boolit that seems to coincide with the case mouth. Is this from too long a case so's it starts to crimp in the throat lead in chamfer?

I looked for that particular case (back then), and I may not have indentified it.
But I found three which had a slight wire edge turned into the case mouth.
Perhaps they didn't get chamfered properly...or maybe the edge got turned when tumbling in ceramic media. But, none of them were trimmed too long.

Anyway, the mark never showed up in later firings of that particular 'set' of cases.
CM

[Don McDowell]

Looking at those bullets the case mouth is biting to hard into them,either from crimp or cases being just a touch long, and the grain of the paper being left into the bullet , would seem to indicate it's patched to tight.

[montana_charlie]

The 'ring' on that one bullet (out of many) has already been hashed out.

About the 'paper grain' imprint...
This post of Kurt's shows a bunch of his recovered bullets. The lighting is bright enough to wash out some detail, but I think there is some paper grain showing here and there.
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...3&postcount=12

Would you care to amplify on what you mean by a patch being 'too tight'?

CM

[Don McDowell]

Yes by the bullet being to large the patch is keeping it from fully expanding to the bore, that's why the grain is imprinted in the bullet. By it being patched that tight , it's liable to be doing all sorts of contortions when it comes out the muzzle.
Probably a good move going down in bullet size like you did, but I don't think you went far enough yet, but I suppose time well tell. I'm sure looking forward to seeing the results of your shooting with those.

[montana_charlie]

I have no words...

[RMulhern]

Yes by the bullet being to large the patch is keeping it from fully expanding to the bore, that's why the grain is imprinted in the bullet. By it being patched that tight , it's liable to be doing all sorts of contortions when it comes out the muzzle.
Probably a good move going down in bullet size like you did, but I don't think you went far enough yet, but I suppose time well tell. I'm sure looking forward to seeing the results of your shooting with those.

Don

Maybe I'm just stupid but I'm not quite following this posting! Can you maybe put it in plainer context so my feeble mind can understand?

Thanks!