Revolver Accuracy; Perspection, perception and reality?

[W.R.Buchanan]

Guys: may I interject some of my thoughts on BS here? And these thoughts are not directed any one specific person or group of people.

Brian Williams committed career suicide recently by telling tall tales that were easily debunked. He violated the first rule of public life,,," They always find out!" with todays internet, they usually find out faster!

I learned early on from the likes of Cassius Clay that if you open your mouth you should be able to back it up, surprisingly he always did back up his mouth, much to the chagrin of many people who didn't like him. After all it was the 60's and he was a mouthy black guy?

Everybody embellishes to some degree, however if you go more than about 10% you open yourself to undo scrutiny. I have found it is easier to just try to keep exaggeration to a minimum and used for entertainment purposes at most. You don't ever exaggerate anything that can easily be called out as BS! That is just plain stupid as it calls into question your Personal Credibility.

Credibility is one of your most valuable commodities at a site like this and in life in general. Once that goes you will have problems getting anyone to believe anything you say.

See; Brian Williams! He's done, and the smart money is saying that he is going to lose about $7.5 million of his $10 million dollar contract as a result of, "Believing his own BS!" ,,, and that's in addition to losing his "credibility" which is the most valuable tool in his business. He will never be able to make a living as a journalist again.

Yes, Brian's main crime was that he started believing his own BS! Normally Psych's call this "Delusional," but in reality it is the classic example of "Liberal Insanity." He actually thought that he was in those situations that he had dubbed into his memory. He was no longer able to separate Fact from Fiction, and/or,, he thought that no one would ever call BS. Maybe he thought they were "lies that were told so many times they become the truth?"

I have stories I can tell from the Viet Nam era that are pretty entertaining and in part are completely factual, but in some cases they are actually composites of multiple stories from multiple sources that I have ran across over my lifetime and my time there. I can tell a good story!

I can easily install myself into those stories in the "first person" and depending on the level of intoxication have told some very tall tales all of which directly happened to me at one time or another. Some were actually true to some degree,,, but none could be disputed or dismissed as Pure BS simply because nobody could actually trace the story any further back than my mouth. Simply put,,, "If you weren't there you can't call BS!"

However in my own defense ,,, I know which are which! and I can separate fiction from reality!

Another point:

If you have hard evidence of your assertions then your word should stand as fact.

For this reason I post a lot of pictures of what I am talking about, trying to make clear exactly what I am talking about so others can understand fully and use what I talk about.

One last point: If I say something, and it is proven to be wrong,,, I admit that I was wrong! Immediately!

I've done it many times here.

I have also found,,, that if you really think you know what is going on,,, You're probably FOS!

Once again this post is not directed at anyone personally but more a reminder that we all have to do our best to relate our knowledge in the most accurate manner possible.

Some of you might remember I started a thread on the Rimfire forum about Dave Scovill of Handloader Magazine purporting a 3/8" 100 yard 5 shot group from a Winchester M69 .22LR. We all pretty much called BS,,,

Well,,, I asked his wife about it at the SHOT Show, and she said it is on display on the wall of his office.

Just sayin',,, ya never know when someone really can back it up.

Another installment of my .02.

Randy

[cbrick]

I've very little experience with 2400 in the 44 or any of the mags for that matter. 296/H-110 are very close, some say they are the same though Hodgdon lists somewhat different loads for them. Jim goes with 296 while I've pretty much always used H-110. Either are for full power loads and preferably with heavy bullets. These powders need both for a good, clean, consistent burn and will not work well reduced.

Rick

[Thumbcocker]

On the subject of folks who have a lot of accumulated knowledge and a request that what they know be typed out, I have long pondered if this site could not invest in a few sets of voice recognition software to be loaned out to those who are willing to share their decades of boolit and reloading knowledge. They could dictate as their time permitted and then post. In exchange they could also use the software for family history or whatever their personal needs might be. When one person finished he or she could forward the program to the next person on the list. The only string would be that the boolit/reloading stuff become property of this site. I think we could create an incredible on line library of accumulated proven knowledge for the benefit of our hobby.


Just a thought.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Rick: I think the H110/ W296 having different data is a carry over from along time ago. These two powders have always been the same, however they used to be mfg'd in different lots and packaged in different styles of bottles so there was a perception that they were slightly different.

I questioned this and called and asked Hodgdons in 1976 when I started using it as I saw conflicting data in the manuals I had to work with.

They told me all the way back then that they were the same powder but made in different lots and packaged in different bottles. IE: One lot went to W296, while another became H110. This could account for small discrepancies in loading info.

Now the only difference is the labels on the bottles. They are both packaged from the same lots now and in the same black plastic bottles, and have been done this way for as long as they have been packaged this way.

There are several other Hodgdon powders that are identical HP38/W231, W748/BLC2 etc. They have the list published on their website I believe.

Are you back in CA?

Randy

[btroj]

I am scared to death even comment here but here goes.
I have a SRH in 44 mag. The throats are a snug fit with a .4315 bullet except for two. One is a bit tighter and the other even more so.

How much difference is that likely to make at 100 yards? I am no great shot but knowing the gun and ammo are capable makes a shooter better.

[bassnbuck]

Rick, I know Jim water drops his boolits, do you? Do you also use standard lp primers like Jim? Sorry for all the questions, but inquiring minds want to know.

[robertbank]

I am scared to death even comment here but here goes.
I have a SRH in 44 mag. The throats are a snug fit with a .4315 bullet except for two. One is a bit tighter and the other even more so.

How much difference is that likely to make at 100 yards? I am no great shot but knowing the gun and ammo are capable makes a shooter better.

It's an easy quick fix and one that is worth while if you are shooting lead. If you decide to get the cylinders throats cleaned up get the forcing cone cut to 11 degrees as well. Both my Rugers became different guns shooting lead once the forcing cones were cut for lead. The five degree forcing cone is just to steep for lead from my experience.

Take Care

Bob

[Seancass]

On the subject of folks who have a lot of accumulated knowledge and a request that what they know be typed out, I have long pondered if this site could not invest in a few sets of voice recognition software to be loaned out to those who are willing to share their decades of boolit and reloading knowledge. ... ....

Just a thought.

Such software can be found for free online or for any smart phone. just fyi.

[cbrick]

I am scared to death even comment here but here goes.
I have a SRH in 44 mag. The throats are a snug fit with a .4315 bullet except for two. One is a bit tighter and the other even more so.

How much difference is that likely to make at 100 yards? I am no great shot but knowing the gun and ammo are capable makes a shooter better.

All depends on your intended use. If it's a plinker and murderer of soda cans I would size to a mild snug fit in the tightest throat, if you want to get more serious about 100 yard groups I would have the throats uniformed. It's not an expensive thing but can help. Anything that helps with uniformity and consistency helps. If your not getting leading in the forcing cone area it may or may not help with accuracy to cut the cone to 11 degrees. I've yet to have a forcing cone cut myself, just never had the need.

Rick

[M-Tecs]

Guys: may I interject some of my thoughts on BS here? And these thoughts are not directed any one specific person or group of people.

Brian Williams committed career suicide recently by telling tall tales that were easily debunked. He violated the first rule of public life,,," They always find out!" with todays internet, they usually find out faster!

I learned early on from the likes of Cassius Clay that if you open your mouth you should be able to back it up, surprisingly he always did back up his mouth, much to the chagrin of many people who didn't like him. After all it was the 60's and he was a mouthy black guy?

Everybody embellishes to some degree, however if you go more than about 10% you open yourself to undo scrutiny. I have found it is easier to just try to keep exaggeration to a minimum and used for entertainment purposes at most. You don't ever exaggerate anything that can easily be called out as BS! That is just plain stupid as it calls into question your Personal Credibility.

Credibility is one of your most valuable commodities at a site like this and in life in general. Once that goes you will have problems getting anyone to believe anything you say.

See; Brian Williams! He's done, and the smart money is saying that he is going to lose about $7.5 million of his $10 million dollar contract as a result of, "Believing his own BS!" ,,, and that's in addition to losing his "credibility" which is the most valuable tool in his business. He will never be able to make a living as a journalist again.

Yes, Brian's main crime was that he started believing his own BS! Normally Psych's call this "Delusional," but in reality it is the classic example of "Liberal Insanity." He actually thought that he was in those situations that he had dubbed into his memory. He was no longer able to separate Fact from Fiction, and/or,, he thought that no one would ever call BS. Maybe he thought they were "lies that were told so many times they become the truth?"

I have stories I can tell from the Viet Nam era that are pretty entertaining and in part are completely factual, but in some cases they are actually composites of multiple stories from multiple sources that I have ran across over my lifetime and my time there. I can tell a good story!

I can easily install myself into those stories in the "first person" and depending on the level of intoxication have told some very tall tales all of which directly happened to me at one time or another. Some were actually true to some degree,,, but none could be disputed or dismissed as Pure BS simply because nobody could actually trace the story any further back than my mouth. Simply put,,, "If you weren't there you can't call BS!"

However in my own defense ,,, I know which are which! and I can separate fiction from reality!

Another point:

If you have hard evidence of your assertions then your word should stand as fact.

For this reason I post a lot of pictures of what I am talking about, trying to make clear exactly what I am talking about so others can understand fully and use what I talk about.

One last point: If I say something, and it is proven to be wrong,,, I admit that I was wrong! Immediately!

I've done it many times here.

I have also found,,, that if you really think you know what is going on,,, You're probably FOS!

Once again this post is not directed at anyone personally but more a reminder that we all have to do our best to relate our knowledge in the most accurate manner possible.

Some of you might remember I started a thread on the Rimfire forum about Dave Scovill of Handloader Magazine purporting a 3/8" 100 yard 5 shot group from a Winchester M69 .22LR. We all pretty much called BS,,,

Well,,, I asked his wife about it at the SHOT Show, and she said it is on display on the wall of his office.

Just sayin',,, ya never know when someone really can back it up.

Another installment of my .02.

Randy

Randy

That is an exceptional well thought out post and very good advice to live by.

Joel

[btroj]

All depends on your intended use. If it's a plinker and murderer of soda cans I would size to a mild snug fit in the tightest throat, if you want to get more serious about 100 yard groups I would have the throats uniformed. It's not an expensive thing but can help. Anything that helps with uniformity and consistency helps. If your not getting leading in the forcing cone area it may or may not help with accuracy to cut the cone to 11 degrees. I've yet to have a forcing cone cut myself, just never had the need.

Rick

It will be a plinker and hopefully soda can killer. I need to get a red dot on it. The scope is a bit harder to use in my opinion, shows so much wiggle.

I will size to fit the tightest throat and see what happens.

The forcing cone is pretty smooth. Unless I get stupid this gun doesn't lead much, least not after I discovered a .429 bullet wasn't right.

I Have never really gotten serious about accuracy with this gun after I shot a deer years ago with it. That was with jacketed and I wasn't too knowledgable back then. Will have to see what it, and I, can do.

[MT Gianni]

I am scared to death even comment here but here goes.
I have a SRH in 44 mag. The throats are a snug fit with a .4315 bullet except for two. One is a bit tighter and the other even more so.

How much difference is that likely to make at 100 yards? I am no great shot but knowing the gun and ammo are capable makes a shooter better.

To see what the accuracy could be shoot a group from each chamber.

[btroj]

To see what the accuracy could be shoot a group from each chamber.

Makes perfect sense. Easy to temp mark the chambers and shoot 6 groups, one with each chamber.

[apen]

All depends on your intended use. If it's a plinker and murderer of soda cans I would size to a mild snug fit in the tightest throat, if you want to get more serious about 100 yard groups I would have the throats uniformed. It's not an expensive thing but can help. Anything that helps with uniformity and consistency helps. If your not getting leading in the forcing cone area it may or may not help with accuracy to cut the cone to 11 degrees. I've yet to have a forcing cone cut myself, just never had the need.

Rick

My largest cylinder throat measures .4330. The smallest measures .4323.
My bore measures .4292.

How much over bore size can the cylinder throats be before there are problems? Should the 5 smallest be reamed to the size of the largest in my case for the best accuracy?
If that is the case, are there molds that drop a .433 boolit, or is that going to have to be some custom order?

[cbrick]

My largest cylinder throat measures .4330. The smallest measures .4323.
My bore measures .4292.

How much over bore size can the cylinder throats be before there are problems? Should the 5 smallest be reamed to the size of the largest in my case for the best accuracy?
If that is the case, are there molds that drop a .433 boolit, or is that going to have to be some custom order?

All depends on your intended use. If it's a plinker and murderer of soda cans I would size to a mild snug slip fit in the tightest throat. Your looking at .0007" difference between throats. That's 7/10 of one thousands. Unless you plan on bench rest matches I wouldn't loose any sleep over it. Even as a hunting gun at 100 yards your not likely see much difference by reaming those throats. With a .429" groove diameter you could maybe, possibly see some benefit from the 11 degree cone. If you should decide on that group it before and after just know of any change.

Rick

[cbrick]

Are you back in CA? Randy

Huh? What are you cussing at me for?

Your probably right about the 296/H-110 but Hodgdon is still publishing a slight difference between the two so I wouldn't presume to post otherwise and I mention that slight difference. Gotta keep the ambulance chasers happy ya know.

Rick

[apen]

All depends on your intended use. If it's a plinker and murderer of soda cans I would size to a mild snug slip fit in the tightest throat. Your looking at .0007" difference between throats. That's 7/10 of one thousands. Unless you plan on bench rest matches I wouldn't loose any sleep over it. Even as a hunting gun at 100 yards your not likely see much difference by reaming those throats. With a .429" groove diameter you could maybe, possibly see some benefit from the 11 degree cone. If you should decide on that group it before and after just know of any change.

Rick

Intended use is best accuracy...best groups. Not a hunter and don't shoot pop cans. I shoot paper 5 times and measure. How much over bore diameter can cylinder throats be before the very best accuracy falls off?
If there is a general rule, I'd like to know. What I want to do is is to be able to blame all bad groups on me. I know alot of people say guns always shoot better than the shooter, but that just isn't true in my experience in bullseye pistol. I can shoot tuned guns off hand at 50 yards better than ransom rested 500.00 1911's (the 500.00 1911's I've had).
I'm trying to get the best mechanical accuracy out of what I have.

[robertbank]

Huh? What are you cussing at me for?

Your probably right about the 296/H-110 but Hodgdon is still publishing a slight difference between the two so I wouldn't presume to post otherwise and I mention that slight difference. Gotta keep the ambulance chasers happy ya know.

Rick

Rick the Hogdon on line reloading centre shows identical loading's now. The powder has been the same for a very, very long time.

You may have an old manual.

Take Care

Bob

[cbrick]

Dunno, not something I've ever tested. What kind of groups are you getting with it now?

My approach has always been to molest the bullet as little as possible. What I mean by that is bullets sized to a mild snug fit in the throats that enter through the forcing cone and into the barrel that matches throat diameter with as little to no change to the bullet as possible. In other words what comes out the muzzle is what was chambered with the exception of rifling engraving.

My theory is that sizing bullets that get sized down in the throats only to be obturated back up to groove diameter as some recommend is the wrong approach for accuracy. That wouldn't be your situation because of your throats but you would still be sizing down into groove diameter. Interesting question. Great, now I won't sleep tonight with the grey matter chewing on this.

The only way I can think of at the moment to accurately get an answer to your question would be to get the best groups you can with it as it is, then come up with a cylinder that could be reamed to match your groove diameter. That would be quite the length to go to but the results would be fascinating reading.

Rick

[cbrick]

Rick the Hogdon on line reloading centre shows identical loading's now. The powder has been the same for a very, very long time.

You may have an old manual.

Take Care

Bob

Hhmmm . . . So it does. Can't be but just a few weeks ago I went to Hodgdon online to check that very thing and they were still listing a bit of a difference. I just checked on three different bullet weights and they are the same now.

Thanks,

Rick