Use of with results using Waltz die and Paco Accurizer to swage 22LR

[M-Tecs]

I too made my own version of the Waltz tool about 10-11 years ago, and found it gave me significant improvement of commodity ammo up to CCI MiniMags fired from a stock 10/22. It did nothing but harm to higher grade competition ammo, and it made little difference when the treated ammo was used in my competition-grade Ballard. The difference being that the Ruger has a chamber the size of Carnegie Hall, while the Ballard is much tighter. (My tool expands the bullets to a uniform .225", which fills the Ruger chamber better.)

I still have the drawings if anyone is interested. The parts fit into a Lee "Universal Expander" (which it isn't) body. Very simple to make.

Phil

Since you are already sending one out hopefully it's not too much trouble to send me a copy also? PM sent with e-mail. Thanks!!!!!!

[Chill Wills]

What's your email address?

Thanks! PM coming with email address

[303Guy]

So what I didn't show was the slight boo boo on the expander pin. I only discovered it when I was posting the photos as they blow up the image. So I sneakily used a smaller image so no-one would notice.

Here is the boo boo.



And here it is fixed.



I need a pair of watchmaker eye glasses for lathe work. Mmm .. I just found a pair for NZ$18 from China while I was looking up what they are called. They say $18 but it will come out at $30 after tax and shipping. But at least I would be able too see what I am doing!

Hi folks. It's been a while. I offered to make or produce a drawing on my version of a hollow point expander which works very well for me. Anyway, I've been a bit out of it since that time. Nothing life threatening but just not too well. I'm slowly getting back into things. I never slacked off going out possum shooting though! But it did slow me down. It was just some bug I picked up from my grand daughters but it hit me way too hard! I suspect there was more to it than just the bug. We won't go into it but I suspect y'all know what I mean. Anyway, I just thought I would touch base and let those of you who were interested know why I went quiet.

[Texas by God]

Welcome back 303guy!
I thought of you the other day while shooting my 510 Remington.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rapier]

303 best of luck with your recovery, hope you have no residual effects.

[303Guy]

Thank you guys. Time for me to get my 510 and 511 out to the range again!

I want to try actually expanding the bullet a little to see if it helps with the 511. That one unfortunately has a rough patch in the bore which I think is causing a build up that degrades accuracy potential. The patch is visible as just a dull area. No pitting or rust. It's as though some chemical agent got in there. There is also an area around the muzzle where the blueing has been damaged. Anyway, I'll give the expander a go and see what happens. I've got quite a bit of odd ammo that needs to be used up.

[Patrick L]

Going back to the start of the thread, I have a Paco Kelly tool. I have found that it can make a difference on "moderately good" ammo, but it is a waste of time on "not good" ammo.

What I mean is, I will shoot groups with any and all ammo just to see how it does. If a load shoots poorly, I've found that things like rim sorting, nose forming etc. are not going to improve things. You can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear, or something to that effect. But, if I get something that will stack 4 real tight and consistently throw 1 flyer, I find that such tweaking may help things, often eliminating (or at least reducing) those pesky fliers.

In terms what what constitutes poor or good, everyone's standards will vary. I'm shooting two sporter type rifles, a Ruger American Rimfire and a CZ 452 trainer. Both have sub $100 4-12× rimfire scopes. From sandbags, if I'm doing 1/2 inch 50 yard 5 shot groups ("dime size"), I consider that good. Now a quarter size group isn't exactly bad, but I know my equipment and abilities are capable of better. So that's what I strive for. Some would consider that poor shooting. Especially with better guns and glass. I won't argue

[uscra112]

Weight sorting made a difference when I was testing Thunderbolts, which back then anyway were "junk' ammo. As you would expect looking at the stats - it became obvious after a while that they were running three different bullet swagers, no two of which were producing equal weights, by as much as 2-3 grains, and loading the results willy-nilly on the assembly machines. Weight sorting plus swaging the bullets to a uniform .2250 cut groups from a bone-stock Ruger in half. Omit the weight sorting and those "pesky fliers" return.

[fiberoptik]

I always called them “thunder-duds”. Were usually 3-5 per hundred that went “click”.

[uscra112]

That, too. I chose them for my experiment because they were universally acclaimed as the worst .22 ammo commercially available. And because I'd naively bought several bricks during the first Clinton administration. I still have a couple. Haven't found anybody I disliked enough to give them to.

[fiberoptik]

I always seemed to forget just how bad it was and would pick it up in packs of 333, 555 etc.

[303Guy]

It surprised me to discover that Eley sub hollow nose shot so poorly in most of my rifles. I would have expected at least equal to CCI. Mind you, CCI seems pretty good.

Anyway, on Saturday evening I had two possum in my sight. Both shoulder shots. The first one broke its foreleg and surprisingly, the thing ran down the branch, up the trunk to the next branch, then out along that branch. Before I had the chance fire again, it dropped to the ground, kicked a bit then lay still. The bullet exited halfway down its side. I was expecting the bullet to stop in the body! Normally those opened up bullets hit hard and don't exit. They certainly hit much harder than the unopened up ones. Maybe I should widen the hollow more. Somewhere I recorded what I did to make the expander punch but I seem to have lost it. I'll have to start again. But I want those critters to decease and desist on impact.

[warren5421]

What DO I needed for a 10-22 using CCI HP:
o Range Delux Acu’rzr #3
o 22 SS (SuperShorts) Acu’rzr Deluxe
o Rimcheck
o NEW PHASE FOUR ACU'RZR
o MAXPRO THREE
o MAXPRO FOUR

[Antietamgw]

I always called them “thunder-duds”. Were usually 3-5 per hundred that went “click”.

I bought a couple bulk packs of these when .22 LR was about impossible to find. I figured to use it in training the grandkids with their 10/22's and save the better quality stuff. Horrible ammo but they got a lot of experience in clearing jams, failures to feed and misfires. They now know exactly how to safely handle a failure. That's some pretty valuable ammo!

[barrabruce]

Well just for theory.
If one could make the sizer with the same chamber reamer as the rifle and all things considered.
Would that be the ultimate?
You could still do nasty noses or dimples or things.

I seem to get a bare bit of lead ring down at the crimp after forming.
Anyone experience this?
I’ve wiped a bit of bw/vas on them but can’t seem to see much difference in group size.
Performance should be different thou.