New Mould

[Navahojoe]

Well, dang it, montanacharlie, did you ever recieve your new cleaning rod and git that boolit to shoot with your unknown formula lube, with accuracy, less fouling and no leading? I read 4 pages and wound up still not knowing if it works! Hope that this is not the end of the thread.
NavahoJoe

[montana_charlie]

No, Joe, I don't have that stuff, yet.
And, I haven't fired the remaining six rounds that are already loaded...though I did seat the bullets a bit deeper to try to avoid some of the powder fouling problem.

I also shared my results with Dan Theodore, and he advised me to change my lube application technique a little. That may be helpful with the leading...I certainly hope so.

We talked (here) quite a bit about the bullet shape, itself, so I also passed that on to Dan. His reply was that it looks good to him...'skinny' nose and all. As a matter of fact, this nose looks identical to the one on a bullet he is currently working on - which is a mini-groove design.

But, when something does happen, I will disinter this thread and carry on till the project succeeds...or the method proves to be too much hassle for me to stay interested. If that point comes, I will leave it to those more industrious (or smarter) than I am.
CM

[SharpsShooter]

Looks like I need to stir the pot a bit...What is happening? Anything?

SS

[montana_charlie]

What is happening? Anything?

Well...my Delrin rod arrived today so now it's possible to wipe between shots without disassembling the tang sight each time.

Other than that, not much...

I have an email from Dan Theodore where he recommends a minor change in the way I apply his lube. It may result in a thicker coating, and that might help some with the leading. He didn't say all of that...I just made the assumption.

Our weather is the main thing preventing new shooting trials.
While the winds were low the temperature was, too. Zero to minus ten, most days.
Now that the chinook is blowing, the temperature is up to 32° (today) but is expected to fall over the next few days. Might see something up close to 40° next week.

If that increase is due to a general improvement trend, things might get good enough to go out. But if it comes courtesy of the chinook, well, that means 'windy'.
CM

[SharpsShooter]

I suspected the weather had some influence. The wind will play havoc on testing, but I'm curious if the leading can be stopped or at least contained enough to see if this creation will fly.

SS

[montana_charlie]

I'm curious if the leading can be stopped or at least contained enough to see if this creation will fly.

I'm going to home in on that phrase, "contained enough" for a moment.

There is the question that asks 'how much containment is enough', and that can be compared with another question which asks 'how much leading is acceptable'.
In order for 'containment' to be necessary, it's must be determined that the leading is heavy enough to be classified as 'too much'.

I may not be the right guy to make that determination.

I base my beliefs on several things. First, there is my own experience, then there are those things experienced by others...things which they describe in enough detail to convince me they are right. Finally, there is simple logic.

As I mentioned in an earlier statement, I have never had a 'leaded barrel'. (At least, I don't think I ever have...)

When cleaning after a shooting session where regular bullets were used, I generally found a few slivers of lead on the patches. But, reading the words of others, a few slivers is nothing to worry about...so I didn't.

The kind of lead fouling where there are grey areas in the bore...well, that's something which still eludes me. When I look into a freshly fired barrel, the whole thing looks cruddy, and running a patch up the spout doesn't tell me much. And a 'drag' on the patch might be crusty powder residue just as easily as it could be lead.
I don't have the necessary 'touch' to feel the difference because I'm short on experience in that area.

So, when I say that these grooveless bullets leave a lot of lead, it's because I saw several (many?) of those slivers on each patch that passed through the barrel between shots. When cleaning after finished shooting, the first couple of patches were 'loaded' with lead slivers. (I didn't pick 'em off and count 'em, but there was somewhere between six and ten per patch.) To me, that's a lot of lead.
You, having a different experience background, might say, "Yeah, but they're still just slivers...nothing to worry about." If that's true, I might be raising Hell over nothing.

Then, as I continued to clean that barrel (which I believed to be well maintained) I thought I would never stop pulling 'black stuff' out of it.
Maybe that wasn't lead. Maybe it was layers of carbon left behind from earlier cleaning jobs. (I don't believe that...but maybe.) Heck, maybe that carbon was laid down before I ever got the rifle...just maybe. But the gunsmith who examined it with a borescope (before it got to me) only mentioned some minor traces of copper.

Anyway, it seems to be totally clean, now. The bore looks very pretty, but then it always has when I have finished with it. (Shoot, maybe I had a layer of lead in there which I had polished to a mirror finish....unlikely, but maybe.)

So, the question is...Do I have a leading problem with these grooveless bullets?
I think so, but your experience may cause you to disagree.

If that's the case, then we're back to that 'contained enough' phrase.
Dan Theodore recommends wiping between shots. Further, he says to do that after wetting the patch in 80% distilled water & 20% Ballistol. And the best way to do it is with a flexible rod inserted from the breech, then use a mop on a short handle to dry the chamber. He goes on to say that the patch should be centered on a nylon brush, and pushed slowly down the bore so it has a chance to wet the fouling well as it pushes it out.

That's not the way I did it. I didn't have those tools, so my method was a stop-gap effort using patches moistened with spit and run in from the muzzle.
Do it Dan's way, and perhaps you have 'contained enough' well in your grasp.
I now have the tools, so I will try it out...but not until the weather is nice enough that frostbite - from handling wet patches - is not an issue.

But for me, 'contained enough' is not the complete answer. I hope to find a way to shoot these devils with 'no leading'. Oh sure, I can live with a sliver or two, but not like the pile I found before. And I won't accept anything which results in smearing a layer into the bore that takes a basketful of patches and three days of scrubbing to remove. That kind of penance, for the pleasure of an hour of shooting, takes all the fun out of it.

I wish there was a way to lightly knurl the base bands on these bullets so - while still having no grease grooves - there would be a 'texture' that would hold a trace of lube after the case mouth cut most of it away.
That may not be enough lube to soften powder residue, but it might handle leading...I dunno. Just can't think of any way to do that without sizing the base band down in the process.

Once leading is conquered, there is the powder fouling issue. That can probably be handled with a lube cookie, so I'm moving toward a wad cutter (of some kind) to help with creating those. The cookie has the additional advantage of taking up room in the case...so I can drop the amount of powder a bit.

So, there you go, SharpsShooter. That's what I'm thinking tonight. It might be something totally different tomorrow.
CM

[martinibelgian]

CM,
THe grooveless bullet theory look sound to me - all the lube out front on the boreriding section. After all, you would want to have lube in the barrel before the bullet passes over it, no? So lube on the shank would just mainly leave lube behind for the next shot.
FWIW, when I tried wiping between shots with plain water with my 45-70 and GG bullets, my barrel turned into a lead mine, I could pull out strings of lead... No problems with mere blowtubing though. So wiping tehnique an materials seems to be important to me indeed. I'll keep my fingers crossed for you.

[45 2.1]

I wish there was a way to lightly knurl the base bands on these bullets so - while still having no grease grooves - there would be a 'texture' that would hold a trace of lube after the case mouth cut most of it away.CM

CM-
There is a way, one used for smooth-sided slugs and for patching up jacketed. Take a heavy single cut mill file and roll the boolit on a hard surface with it. It will impress the files teeth pattern into the smooth surface. You will see how hard to press when you try it. It works well for round balls and smooth slugs to patch against or to hold lube onto the boolit better.

[SharpsShooter]

The type and volume of leading you describe certainly fall outside of "containment". The fouling would be less of an issue with the use of a lube cookie. It seems to me if you treat it like a paper patch boolit, you might see better results. The lube cookie would keep the fouling soft and allow the boolit to pass with less resistance than a dry bore that has been wiped. This would only apply if you blow tube or possibly you could get away without blow tubing if you used Bullshops NASA lube for the cookie. I am not entirely sold on the idea of just a dip lube alone handling all the issues that shooting BP presents.


Just some rambling thoughts .................

SS

[montana_charlie]

I am not entirely sold on the idea of just a dip lube alone handling all the issues that shooting BP presents.

I share your doubt, but have elected to put my trust in the guy who developed the lube formula...and the grooveless design I'm using...in hopes of getting the improved performance that is supposed to be possible. Time will tell...
CM

[montana_charlie]

Those who are interested in this subject probably thought this old thread had been abandoned. Nope...it's just been on the back burner while I collect 'stuff'.

I did fire one of the rounds I had left from that first batch of fifteen...of which I only fired nine. Basically, I simply seated the bullet a tenth of an inch deeper to get a bit more compression on the charge...and fired it out into the coulee. Then I checked the fouling to see if it was reduced at all.
If it was, I couldn't prove it.

Then I cleaned the barrel to see how much lead was left by that one shot. There was plenty (from my point of view)...but cleaning it all out didn't take three days, this time.

I am not 'fully equipped', yet, so I have nothing new to report, but a new thread on the subject has started on the MSN BPCR site, titled "How much...really??". I posted to it (just a synopsis of my results) a few minutes ago, and plan to watch to see what develops. If you want to read along, it's here...
http://groups.msn.com/BPCR/general.m...04820061993604
CM

[Kenny Wasserburger]

MC,

Nope I dont shoot these bullest, I do shoot the Mono-Groove bullet aka the NASA II I think it was called.

I changed it just a tad shortened it to 1.425 (same length as my Ideal original Postell Bullet. WE call it the Neilson-Theodore Creedmoor Mono-Groove.

As for the lead patch or what ever bullet, couple things here:
1. First Saw Dan using this bullet in 2004 at Raton and the World Creedmoor Chamipionships that year. I think Dan had some leading issues, he has long since give up on this bullet design btw. The base band in my opinion is too big should be like 458 max!

When I first saw them thought they were PP bullets-I called em lube patched bullets after Dan pulled one out of the case. They shoot well and almost always have leading issues in any cut rifled barrel I have seen them shot in.
As to how they shoot in a Shiloh barrel? I bet they will still lead like hell. Saw enough in 2004 to make me certain I did not want to play with it.

Back to my MONO-Groove bullet.

Cut by Steve Brooks and is NOSE POUR! Perfect bases every time once mould up to temp.

Lubed with White Lighting lube, It wont fail in a 45-110.

First time this bullet was tested April of 2005 with a brand new lot of Goex Express Fg.

I shot it at 600 and 800 yards off my bench with my MVA scoped Creedmoor Shiloh.

I will refrain from posting Group sizes, I did have a witness to the groups, A very respected Shooter. We both about had a heart attack at the first group fired at 600 yards, at 800 the group was a tad and I mean a TAD smaller then the 600 yard group and by the order of 1/4 inch. Lets just say it was SUB MOA by a good bit.

After driving up and seeing the 800 yard group and then fainting dead away. WE collected our gear and called it a day. As the song goes I came home with a brand new plan.

I pretty much use that bullet all the time now in my 45-110 for long range Competition. in 2005 I was the top shooter at 1000 yards in scope at Raton, with this load-a bad mistake on my part day one at 800-900 yards, cost me the National Title. Day 2 of the Nationals I came back with a vengence and shot Master class and won the 1000 yard leg and the Agg for 1000 yards. A month later I went to the Sagebrush match and won the Scope class. In 2006 continued to use my Mono-Groove bullet. As we all know the 2006 season was a very good one for me. In Sept I repeated my winning the Scope Class at the Sage brush shoot and fired a perfect score at 1000 yards.

Quite a few people saw the group-I was in the bubble that day and Jimbo Terry was calling wind like noone else even could think of.

We did a rough measure of the group it was a bit hard as I had struck the center bolt on the Steel gong 5 out of my 10 shots the lead splat measured a rough 9-10 inches tall and about 12 or so inches wide. 5 of the ten shots struck a 1-7/8th inch size bolt head. The Scorer commented several times that the shots were hits but the radios sounded funny? Jimbo got to laughing and said thats because he keeps hitting the bolt in the center of the target! Many folks were watching this little show being played out. I was working very hard at shooting so did not notice our little crowd untill afterwords.

I could actually see the Lead splat developing in myscope and used it for a holding point, one reason I love Mil-Dots so much in that scope.

(Making me Give away one of my Secrets!)


I wish that would of been at Raton would of been a 100 with 6-8X count and A new national Record.

My pard Jimbo also had an excellent year, Jimbo has been shooting a Dan T Mini Groove bullet and just recently aquired a Micro Mini Groove bullet to begin testing soon.

Our Preception at this point in time is Jimbo's Mini Groove at 1000 yards requires a touch less Windage correction for a given condition then my Mono Groove. Its not much on order of 1 or 1.5 MOA usually but its enough we do notice.

This we have tested numerous Times pair firing our guns. I honestly dont think many shooters would be able to see the difference due to wind reading skills or varriables in rifles. However Jimbo and I both have 34 inch tubed Shilohs in 45-110 they are near as identical as we can have them.

So in closing we know how well Mini-Groove bullets work and the Mono-Groove also. The new Generation Micro-Mini-Groove bullet time will only tell.


Kenny Wasserburger

[montana_charlie]

Nope I dont shoot these bullest,

I think Dan had some leading issues, he has long since give up on this bullet design btw.

They shoot well and almost always have leading issues in any cut rifled barrel I have seen them shot in.

Saw enough in 2004 to make me certain I did not want to play with it.

Well, that pretty well tells me that more time and effort will not likely be any more fun than it has been so far.
Just wish Dan had been more forthcoming about the leading issue back when I first asked him for information about the design.

I am already following the discussions (on several forums) about the MiniGroove, and the MicroMiniGroove bullets. So I'll probably just skip the Mono generation...in spite of your success with it.

However, if you could post a diagram of it, there may be others who would like to look it over...
CM