handgun load development (cast of course)

[subsonic]

What technique or strategy do you use when trying to develop an accurate load for a handgun with cast boolits?

I am inclined to beleive that using the same techniques as with a rifle or jacketed load will not be the best way to go about it. I think trying to find an OCW load for a 6" barrel is a joke. BUT there may be something to a ladder test for matching bullet hardness to the powder charge.

***SOME OF THE LOADS BELOW ARE DARN NEAR NUCLEAR IN SOME GUNS DONT USE THEM UNLESS YOU ACCEPT FULL LIABILITY FOR YOUR ACTIONS***

I have been fairly lucky in that I can usually just throw some stuff together and it will shoot OK, especially with GC boolits and very especially inside of 50yd. Now I am trying to develop a pair of 100yd handgun loads for a 6" 686 S&W and it has been hit or miss and not that successfull. My parameters are as follows:

Load A High velocity .357 load
I would like to use AA9, load to a "magnum" pressure and avoid gas checks. I need this load to fit into a short cylindered gun like an M28 also. I would like this load to go at or under 2" at 50yd, and make it easy to stay inside a paper plate at 100yd.

Load B Lower velocity .38SPL load
I would like to use Rex #3 powder, load to a maximum of a +P+ pressure and avoid gas checks. I'd just like to see 3" consistently from this load @ 50yd.

I tried some random small batches across the chronograph to get an idea of where I wanted to be with pressure and velocity with the plain base boolits I have moulds for, which include an LBT .359-160FN and a 4 cavity Lyman 358429 173gr (I wish this was an NOE! instead of a Lyman!).

The velocities for AA9 where about what you'd expect judging from AA's book, so I won't repeat them and didn't write them down - was mostly just a quick check to look for anything weird and see if I was in the ballpark.

The velocities for the REX #3 powder where to get a good baseline since there is very limited information on the powder that is reportedly similar to Unique or Universal. I have not chronod it with the 160gr, but the 358429 yeilded about 900fps @5gr, 1000fps @6gr, and 1100fps @7gr in a .38 case from a 6" barrel. I elected to stay <6gr for safety in any .38spl I might slip these into with the 173gr and <7gr with the 160gr-feeling this was even on the hot side of things and not something I would intentionally shove into my wife's S&W M15 - but it probably wouldn't kill it.

Loads I've tried:
#1 358429 @18BNH from water dropped WW, sized .3585ish and greased with LBT Blue. This sits on 13gr of AA9 in a WIN .357 Mag case and is primed with a CCI 550 SPM primer with a heavy crimp.
This load doesn't fit in the M28, but shoots pretty good (4-5") out to 50yd in at least 5 different .357s I've shoved them in.

#2 The same 18BNH 358429s from above over 6gr of Unique or 6gr of Rex 3. These shoot hard, but are not very accurate - turning in "paper plate sized" groups at 50yd. This load leads the bore.

#3 358429 from the same batch as above in a WIN .38SPL case over 12gr of AA9 with a CCI 500 SP primer and heavy crimp. These shoot about as well as load #1 and DO fit in the M28 - but it's scary having these on the same bench as the Model 15!

#4 125gr Hdy XTP over 17gr of AA9 with a CCI 550 SPM primer in Win .357 mag brass and crimped firmly into the cannelure. These fit the M28 but obviously not the 15 and will shoot under 3" @ 50yd from the 686 and M28! But are not cast boolits :oops:

#5 LBT .359-160FN 21BNH HTWW with LBT Blue, sized .358ish. Fill er up with 15gr of AA9 and a CCI 550 SPM. These produce a little leading and shoot decent, but not great. About a 5" group @ 50yds. These have to be seated as deep as possible while crimping in the crimp groove and sized down more to fit into the short .357"ish throats of the 686. They fit fine in the M28.

#6 Same as above but over 13gr of AA9 and with a CCI 500 SP. This load shot under 2" for 5 shots! and threw one flyer 7" left of the group for a total of 6 into about 9" :takinWiz: I wish I had made more of these to try. I have also decided to trim my .357 brass to 1.275" to give me a better crimp.

#7 .359-160FN ACWW BNH11, .3575" and 6gr of Rex #3, WIN .38SPL and CCI 500. This load needs more work, but showed promis with a roughly 4" group at 50yds including one low flyer that could have been me.

Where to go from here? I think I'm heading in the direction of loads 6 & 7 with some minor charge variations (no more than + or - 1gr) and a fresh trim on the brass - maybe some new Starline brass. I also plan to make a better attempt at culling my cast boolits - instead of just throwing out any with very obvious/major visible defects. I may also play with diameters, thinking that the smaller diameters are not hurting things in the 686. I also plan to try 358429 @ 11BNH over 5gr of Rex #3....

Any idears? Suggestions? Threats? :coffeecom

[Mugs]

Not to throw water on your quest, just my .02 worth. Why no GC ? I think the base and corners of a cast boolit are as important as the crown on the barrel. Best way to get good bases is with a GC. My favorite .357 boolits are the RCBS 35-180 sil. and the RCBS 35-200. Cast of WDWW sized 359-3595, LBT soft, over a case full of H-108 [AA#9] Starline brass, REM. 7 1/2 primer and Redding Profile crimp. In 30+ yrs. of IHMSA silhouette i've used these boolits in every thing 357 with good results. Since '92 its been a FA 353. This group was shot at 100 yrds. with the FA.
Mugs
IHMSA 5940L
http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm272/mugs_photo/th_100_0694.jpg (http://s298.photobucket.com/albums/mm272/mugs_photo/?action=view&current=100_0694.jpg)

[Bass Ackward]

Nice write up. My read is that you blame size and bullet quality and cases, crimp etc.

I would change or modify lube myself. LBT Blue generally is a poor performer in situations where the lube isn't used up. I know that Veral likes it, but Blue soft has always produced superior accuracy for me, even in rifles at HV. And you are fairly hard, so you aren't requiring much from your lube.

To make Blue soft from Blue, just add 1/2 teaspoon of Vaseline per stick. My guess is that you don't have to change anything else, but I would still play with diameter. Strange but some like'em big with some designs and others want right at bore with still other bullets. Me, I just do what Professor Target says.

[btroj]

I Am a bit confused here. You start off by saying you want an accurate load. You then say you want maximum velocities. These may not go hand in hand.
The fact that jacketed loads shoot into smaller groups at 50 than the cast says the gun is capable of it.
I agree with Bass, try different sizing diameters. This can make a huge difference in some cases. Bullet quality does also, especially the bases on a plain base bullet.
Since you are getting closer it is time to be pickier about everything. Case trimmed to same length, bullet quality, lube, etc. These all could make that last bit of a difference.

I would say that you are are at the point where you need to listen to the target and ignore the chronograph. Look for an accurate load first, worry about how fast it is later.

[subsonic]

I Am a bit confused here. You start off by saying you want an accurate load. You then say you want maximum velocities. These may not go hand in hand.
The fact that jacketed loads shoot into smaller groups at 50 than the cast says the gun is capable of it.
I agree with Bass, try different sizing diameters. This can make a huge difference in some cases. Bullet quality does also, especially the bases on a plain base bullet.
Since you are getting closer it is time to be pickier about everything. Case trimmed to same length, bullet quality, lube, etc. These all could make that last bit of a difference.

I would say that you are are at the point where you need to listen to the target and ignore the chronograph. Look for an accurate load first, worry about how fast it is later.

Not really worried about velocity, other than for staying above or below transonic and not having to hold on a cloud @ 100yds.

Also it is LBT Blue Soft. I didn't think there was enough difference between the LBT lubes to mention it.

[44man]

Bass is right about the lube, use a soft sticky lube instead.
I spent a lot of time fooling with fast powder loads in the .44 with PB and found the boolit needs to be harder to protect it from the sudden pressure rise and to stop skid. You can work around a gas check with hardness.
I started with soft lead, went to air cooled WW, then water dropped. Accuracy started to improve at 50 yards. I started to add antimony and tin and groups were best at 28 to 30 BHN after water dropping and aging.
Soft lead left lead in the bore because of skid and gas channels opening up. Leading stopped with WD, WW.
Some will say to go softer so the boolit while skidding will continue to slump and fill gaps that gas can get by. Make the boolit "obturate" while it is being destroyed!!!!! Others will say I have not learned to shoot soft lead!!!!
If I can shoot 1/2" groups at 50 yards with a good jacketed bullet, just why would I accept less from cast?
Use a slower powder and you can get away with good accuracy with WD, WW metal at about 22 BHN. All of my larger calibers shoot wonderful with this using PB, up to the 45-70 BFR at over 1630 fps, mainly because of the slower powders. On testing I have gone to 1800 FPS with PB in a revolver.
BHN is not the total answer because a softer alloy brought to 22 BHN by oven hardening starts to produce fliers with every group, many times 2 or 3 shots in one hole but the rest out. These do not lead the bore but consistency is gone.
Mugs has shown what a revolver can do with a GC but when you consider what the GC actually does, you can work around it. The entire boolit and it's base must be protected from any damage and hard is the easiest way.
I recover and study thousands of boolits and nobody will convince me to shoot a "blob" down my barrels. You can do that by loading a chunk of pure lead wire with LLA on it. Why bother to cast? Why pick a special boolit?
OH, OH, here it comes, I need to put on my cast iron jock strap! :kidding:
By the way, I can shoot groove size boolits into 1" at 50 through large throats with the right hardness. My .44 has a .430" groove with .4324" throats and a .430" boolit will do 1".

[subsonic]

Bass is right about the lube, use a soft sticky lube instead.
I spent a lot of time fooling with fast powder loads in the .44 with PB and found the boolit needs to be harder to protect it from the sudden pressure rise and to stop skid. You can work around a gas check with hardness.
I started with soft lead, went to air cooled WW, then water dropped. Accuracy started to improve at 50 yards. I started to add antimony and tin and groups were best at 28 to 30 BHN after water dropping and aging.
Soft lead left lead in the bore because of skid and gas channels opening up. Leading stopped with WD, WW.
Some will say to go softer so the boolit while skidding will continue to slump and fill gaps that gas can get by. Make the boolit "obturate" while it is being destroyed!!!!! Others will say I have not learned to shoot soft lead!!!!
If I can shoot 1/2" groups at 50 yards with a good jacketed bullet, just why would I accept less from cast?
Use a slower powder and you can get away with good accuracy with WD, WW metal at about 22 BHN. All of my larger calibers shoot wonderful with this using PB, up to the 45-70 BFR at over 1630 fps, mainly because of the slower powders. On testing I have gone to 1800 FPS with PB in a revolver.
BHN is not the total answer because a softer alloy brought to 22 BHN by oven hardening starts to produce fliers with every group, many times 2 or 3 shots in one hole but the rest out. These do not lead the bore but consistency is gone.
Mugs has shown what a revolver can do with a GC but when you consider what the GC actually does, you can work around it. The entire boolit and it's base must be protected from any damage and hard is the easiest way.
I recover and study thousands of boolits and nobody will convince me to shoot a "blob" down my barrels. You can do that by loading a chunk of pure lead wire with LLA on it. Why bother to cast? Why pick a special boolit?
OH, OH, here it comes, I need to put on my cast iron jock strap! :kidding:
By the way, I can shoot groove size boolits into 1" at 50 through large throats with the right hardness. My .44 has a .430" groove with .4324" throats and a .430" boolit will do 1".

Thanks for the input. The best shooter above (except that weird 7" flyer) was the hardest boolit with the slowest powder/lowest pressure.... My goal here is a "decent" pair of loads without a bunch of time/labor/cash to produce so I can spend more time working the trigger instead of making ammo.

If I read you correctly, you are saying that getting your hardness from a "better" alloy composition produced less flyers (more consisten accuracy) than simply heat treating a lower "quality" alloy like WW.

I do have a box of Lineotype.

Also, I have had poor luck with harder (20ishBNH) boolits and powders in the burning speed near unique/rex3.

[44man]

Thanks for the input. The best shooter above (except that weird 7" flyer) was the hardest boolit with the slowest powder/lowest pressure.... My goal here is a "decent" pair of loads without a bunch of time/labor/cash to produce so I can spend more time working the trigger instead of making ammo.

If I read you correctly, you are saying that getting your hardness from a "better" alloy composition produced less flyers (more consisten accuracy) than simply heat treating a lower "quality" alloy like WW.

I do have a box of Lineotype.

Also, I have had poor luck with harder (20ishBNH) boolits and powders in the burning speed near unique/rex3.
I will disregard hunting because that is different.
For target, what you find shoots best with fast powder will also shoot best with slow powders.
I hate BHN readings because it does not show if the entire boolit is "tough" or just the skin is hard. I have no idea what your WW's are and a lot have been contaminated with soft stick on weights during recycling.
Normal WW's are good quality alloys but it will depend on where you live and if there are high end cars with alloy wheels that take stick on weights.
The best way to work the alloy is to keep changing it for the fast powder until you get accuracy and just use the same for the hot loads. Don't go overboard and make them too hard and brittle, just reach accuracy and quit. Save good metals as much as you can.
Write down each change so you can do it again.
Use just one powder charge that you like.
Don't get too specific, there is a wide range where things work. Sometimes a few ounces of a metal can go from junk to WOW!

[subsonic]

I will disregard hunting because that is different.
For target, what you find shoots best with fast powder will also shoot best with slow powders.
I hate BHN readings because it does not show if the entire boolit is "tough" or just the skin is hard. I have no idea what your WW's are and a lot have been contaminated with soft stick on weights during recycling.
Normal WW's are good quality alloys but it will depend on where you live and if there are high end cars with alloy wheels that take stick on weights.
The best way to work the alloy is to keep changing it for the fast powder until you get accuracy and just use the same for the hot loads. Don't go overboard and make them too hard and brittle, just reach accuracy and quit. Save good metals as much as you can.
Write down each change so you can do it again.
Use just one powder charge that you like.
Don't get too specific, there is a wide range where things work. Sometimes a few ounces of a metal can go from junk to WOW!

I get my WW straight from the tire shops by the bucketfull. I throw the stick-ons into a pile for my muzzleloader and only use clip-ons for handgun stuff. I know there is still some variation with the clip-ons, but would really like to make this alloy work (cheap, easy to aquire and duplicate), rather than having to source and consistently duplicate alloys of tin and other goodies. IE, I want to throw and go.

When I BNH test I file the nose and base of the boolit to remove any burrs or mold parting lines, so I would assume if there is a skin that's a thou or 3 thick, it is gone from the nose where the tester is reading. How thick is this skin you are talking about?

I'm not sure I buy into one boolit hardness for all powders/charges as I've already seen accuracy changes with powder changes. I would assume that you can reach a point where your "windows of usefulness" overlap with hardness and loads, but ideal would only be ideal in a smaller window.

I have also had very poor success with "store bought" cast boolits for whatever reason - crayon lube or just poor quality alloy and castings.

[44man]

I get my WW straight from the tire shops by the bucketfull. I throw the stick-ons into a pile for my muzzleloader and only use clip-ons for handgun stuff. I know there is still some variation with the clip-ons, but would really like to make this alloy work (cheap, easy to aquire and duplicate), rather than having to source and consistently duplicate alloys of tin and other goodies. IE, I want to throw and go.

When I BNH test I file the nose and base of the boolit to remove any burrs or mold parting lines, so I would assume if there is a skin that's a thou or 3 thick, it is gone from the nose where the tester is reading. How thick is this skin you are talking about?

I'm not sure I buy into one boolit hardness for all powders/charges as I've already seen accuracy changes with powder changes. I would assume that you can reach a point where your "windows of usefulness" overlap with hardness and loads, but ideal would only be ideal in a smaller window.

I have also had very poor success with "store bought" cast boolits for whatever reason - crayon lube or just poor quality alloy and castings.
You should be good just water dropping clip on WW metal.
Don't file the boolit before testing. The surface hardens most and as long as it is as deep or deeper then the rifling it is good. Some alloys don't harden deep enough. The thickness can't be measured but it will still resist our BHN testers. Better alloys harden deep and maybe all the way through after aging. WW's do all I need except for the fast powders. I have not found a lot of difference with small powder changes of fast powder for accuracy, boolit hardness has more affect. 7 to 10 gr of Unique in the .44 shoots almost the same groups. So does 231. Working loads with slow powders can make a huge difference.
But yes, if you find what shoots with fast powder, it will also shoot with slow but not the other way around. I don't like to make special alloys for fast powder because I shoot very few like that and WW's work good enough for can shooting. Accuracy for me must be only hunting loads. I could care less about paper punching with light loads. Testing was just to see what worked.
If I go to air cooled WW's in the .44 I need a GC but have found annealing the check improves accuracy. Don't ask, I don't know, better bite to the rifling???
I never got any accuracy from any store bought boolit in bulk form. But I do from Cast Precision, Beartooth, etc. LBT boolits. Good alloys. Bevel base are the worst. Any Keith style is so-so.
I make my own molds and most will do 1-1/4" to well below 1" at 100 yards and the boolits are nothing special. My one .44 boolit did 1-5/16" at 200 yards doing a drop test and it is just WW metal.
My 45-70 boolit from the BFR once shot 4 shots in 2-1/2" inches at 500 yards---Just ONCE mind you, don't get excited! [smilie=1:I also kept 4 out of 5 on a 6" swinger at 400 yards with my BFR .475 with my boolit, a WFN PB. Again, don't get excited, I may never, ever do it again. The point is that cast will do it all, even better then jacketed. You just need to think a little and do some work.
My job here has been to promote the wonderful revolver and cast boolits, it is all I care about. Forget a lot of the old stuff and think outside the box. Never repeat any failures expecting it to get better. 5 shots at 50 will tell me it all and I sure will never load another 500 to see if I was wrong.

[subsonic]

Finally an update.

I tried 5 loads of 6 each.

#8 is a duplicate of the load that shot well last time, load #6 from the first post.
#9 is that same load with a .357 boolit
#10 is 14gr AA9 and .358 boolit
#11 is 14gr with .357
#12 is 15gr with .358

When I made these loads, I did a couple of things different with the brass. First, I used the tightest RCBS sizer die I had. I have several..... it was an old steel die, not carbide. Second, I chucked one of my RCBS expanders in a drill press and sanded it down to .352", which is .001" bigger than the ID of a piece of brass sized in the above die. It does not expand the brass, even though it is .001" larger. .001" springs back, but only helps to "round" the cases out if there are any dents, etc.

I also was more particular in sorting boolits this time and re-melted all but the best ones.

Lastly, when seating the boolits I used a seating arm that I copied from 44man. I did NOT sort by neck tension, but only observed due to the small batches. I noted that neck tension DID vary by about 1/2" on the scale, but did not record which loads at this point. I will do that next time around, but was not prepared to do it this time with only 6 per load.

The best load from this test was #8 which grouped as shown below (about 2 7/8"), but I think the other loads were shooting poorly because I saw leading at the end of the load #9. The .357 boolits could be too small for the situation? After that, all loads opened up quite a bit to more than 6". I contemplated stopping after load #10 when I saw leading and poor accuracy, but didn't. Probably should have. Next time I'm taking cleaning stuff with me.

The leading was only in the last inch of the barrel. Am I running out of lube or is something else going on from the .357 boolit? The second picture is of the boolit without lube. The smallest part of the rounded lube groove measures .330" and it's about .100" wide. Do I need a boolit with a larger grease groove or do I need better lube? Or?

[Bass Ackward]

Recommendations? No. Considerations? Yes.

LBT Blue is a lube that was developed for HV. It is very persistent .... and slippery. So depending on how you qualify "good" lube, it could be too good. What happens to a tire on water when it reaches a certain speed? Encase that effect and you get hydraulic pressure which will size down any hardness bullet eventually and then the lube is blown away. Make sense?

You are making several killer assumptions.

1. That all guns can and in fact will shoot a PB slug without leading and then accurately.

2. That all designs or at least THIS particular design can be made to work in all guns.

3. That all guns possess the same accuracy potential.

4. YOU can shoot all guns equally well.

At some point you must consider that maybe you are doing nothing wrong and have found the limits of this design in this gun. How do you know?

The general guideline is how the gun performs with jacketed "at these levels". And even then, it may still be prudent to consider the above.

[subsonic]

How about giving some causes for leading at the muzzle? I'm focusing on this gun first. If the load shoots well in it, then we'll try it in the M28.

This gun shoots jacketed very well and appears to be lined up nicely and has a smooth bore. It would really be a surprise if that's all it can do with this boolit.

[44man]

It sounds like lube is running out and since you said you are using LBT SOFT Blue, I can't blame the lube itself.
I have to look at the boolit and the one large GG. I make funny molds with narrow base bands and two to three lube grooves. I still have no idea how important it is but they shoot. I had to clean my .44 after a long time shooting because the thing was mucked up and needed new pin lube. I cleaned the bore which is rare and found zero lead. (10" barrel.)
I made a few boolits with one large GG like Keith liked but with truncated or RNFP noses, for different calibers. They just do not shoot good for me. Yet, they do not lead the bores. I shoot Lee TL boolits with Felix lube with accuracy and zero leading.
I have never figured it out because I feel lead itself acts as a lube because I can shoot one shot down a clean, dry bore with no leading. Remember white lead grease?
Leading at the forcing cone and a little into the bore is caused by skid and gas leakage, leading on the face of the cylinder and frame is from slump and deformation of the boolit.
Leading at the end of the barrel might be contaminants left that a boolit can't push out and over rides. I find LLA burns in the bore and leaves nasty ash behind.
Carbon has many forms, a diamond is carbon and cuts. Graphite is carbon and lubes. What are we leaving in the bore?
Just what does lube do? It is behind the front of the boolit. Is it lubing the lead to steel or is it conditioning the contaminants for the next shot?
Do different powders leave different junk in the bore?
Some of you don't remember what I did. I took every boolit lube, a piece of brass, a soldering iron and found every lube makes a great soldering flux.
Bass, explain LLA when you get a big puff of stinky smoke out of the muzzle. Did it burn in the bore?
Of all the things to work on, I can not cure your leading because I don't know how. I just never get leading in my guns and can't explain why I don't.
Nobody else can explain what lubes do either.

[Bass Ackward]

This gun shoots jacketed very well and appears to be lined up nicely and has a smooth bore. It would really be a surprise if that's all it can do with this boolit.


I see that you didn't like my considerations. That's OK. Time may make them more appealing. :grin:

So jacketed shoot great? You mean at the same 100 yard range? (Remember, many loads and designs will do great at 25, less at 50 and far less at 100.) Range is what separates discussions.

Muzzle leading is the easiest to diagnose of all. You either used up your lube or you sized the bullet somewhere and blew it off. Very unlikely that LBT Blue was .... used up in this velocity / barrel length scenario, so it leans toward the other possibility.

You may need a slower powder than AA#9 too.

[subsonic]

Anybody ever catch an un-lubricated boolit? Did the driving bands get closer together (hardness/pressure)? What did it look like?

If nobody has done this, would somebody that has a way to catch boolits without destroying them try it? I can get a barrel and mulch, but my range wouldn't like me leaving it there once it was full.... and I don't own a crane! :-)

[subsonic]

I see that you didn't like my considerations. That's OK. Time may make them more appealing. :grin:



I like them just fine. I already consider that I may not be able to accomplish this. Maybe I should just not try, huh?

Also, this is still at 50yds until I get it down under 2", then we'll try 100 and see what happens. Does no good to shoot boolits and not see where they went due to a group being larger than the paper.

[Bass Ackward]

I like them just fine. I already consider that I may not be able to accomplish this. Maybe I should just not try, huh?

Also, this is still at 50yds until I get it down under 2", then we'll try 100 and see what happens. Does no good to shoot boolits and not see where they went due to a group being larger than the paper.


You might not believe this, but shooting at 100 can provide dramatic information. If you are 4" at 50 that should translate to 8" at 100 if everything is stabilizing at that velocity using that design. This means accuracy is tweakable. In fact, 25 yards will provide information too. If you are shooing 1" at 25 and 4" at 50, then you aren't stabilizing properly either.

If they are not on paper at 100 yards, well, then they are not stabilizing for a reason that must be identified. Assuming you do get the leading stopped. Once in a very great while you will achieve a low velocity balanced load that will perform well at longer ranges. These don't happen in every gun though and certainly not every day. Generally you need more twist rate or velocity for range. One of those you control. And longer barrels have better success rates with PB than shorter for that reason.

Cast loads should always be worked up for the range of interest, but there is never a reason to confine yourself to one range when others can give you hints to potential problems. If you are not stabilizing THAT design at the range of interest, in this case 100 yards, then you are going to need more velocity which may or may NOT be possible in that gun with that powder / design. Essentially you are wasting time and money. You are leading already so you may need a slower powder. Once you have gone as slow as it gets to go as fast as possible, what accurate range you get out of THAT design is pretty much what you got and you move on to plan B if you are not satisfied.

[subsonic]

How do you sight in for 100yds, when you cannot shoot a group on the paper because you have not found a load that will even work at 50yds yet? One step at a time, ok?

[ktw]

How do you sight in for 100yds, when you cannot shoot a group on the paper because you have not found a load that will even work at 50yds yet? One step at a time, ok?

Berm shooting.

Near me there are several gravel pits where road material gets sorted into tall piles.

I like to do what Bass Ackwards is suggesting by putting an aiming point on one of the pit piles than backing off a couple of hundred yards. The loose material allows me to see every hit as they occur and the moisture difference between the surface and subsurface usually leaves a dark spot at the impact. The stability differences between various bullet designs can be dramatic at longer ranges. Not much point in wasting time with a design at 25 or 50 yards that isn't going to remain stable out past a hundred.

I understand that everyone doesn't have access to the same facilities. Just figured that by sharing my solution you might get some ideas of a berm situation that works for you.

-ktw

[white eagle]

How do you sight in for 100yds, when you cannot shoot a group on the paper because you have not found a load that will even work at 50yds yet? One step at a time, ok?
He is offering you advise
take it for what its worth :holysheep

[subsonic]

All I am saying is that testing at 50yds has to be done first. It seems like you guys have not attempted this before with a handgun, because as you change loads, point of impact can change drastically (much more than with a rifle) - what good is a great group that you cannot see because it landed off the target? If a load is junk at 50yds, it's not going to improve at 100yds. So far I'm close to having 1 load that works at 50yds. 6 shots at 100yds will then tell me what happens there.

Thanks for all of the advice. I think Bass could be onto it with something constricting or sizing the boolit. I have checked for a constriction in the barrel using pin gauges and found none. I think that the throats of this 686 could be the problem. Even if they're not sizing directly, even though they are the same as groove diameter, if something is off in alignment, that could cause the gap or "sizing/shaving" as the boolit enters the forcing cone off center slightly. Or at least that's my current theory. I will shoot a couple of cylinders full of only .358" boolits at 13gr, and if I have leading the throats will be opened up to .358". They are currently .357" and change.

[canyon-ghost]

Alright, firstly I'll challenge the notion that ladder testing a powder load will yield a superbly accurate load- in anything, anywhere!

I use a starting load from a Lyman manual because they usually err on the side of caution, slower loads. Then load 5 of each increment in 1/10ths grains, .1 grain increases. I shoot 5 targets at a time usually two tests to run a full grain of powder change. In all of this, there will only be one load that suddenly shrinks in group size. That isn't ladder testing at all. It's slow and deliberate.

Have I done this to 100 meters, yes:
http://i758.photobucket.com/albums/xx228/3rdshooter/contenders/32-20WCF800x6002.jpg

This is 32-20 in a TC Contender running a scope, these are cutouts of the targets from a full sheet of poster board.

[subsonic]

It looks like you changed more than powder charge on those three?

I have a hard time telling any difference in .1 of a grain, or .3 of a grain for that matter....

I exchanged an email with Veral and his suggestion was to not push it as hard or as hot.

[44man]

It looks like you changed more than powder charge on those three?

I have a hard time telling any difference in .1 of a grain, or .3 of a grain for that matter....

I exchanged an email with Veral and his suggestion was to not push it as hard or as hot.
I agree! [smilie=l: 1/10 gr of 2400??? No way! A fluke to never be repeated. Groups must be repeatable all year, in any weather, at any time you want to shoot. If ANY gun is affected by 1/10 gr, it is not possible to do that, not ever.

[44man]

One thing I have not injected here is the S&W grip sensitivity. A Bisley is almost as bad.
Any change in how the gun is held or picked up can move a group as much as 10" at 50 meters. Yes it will still shoot a group as long as you keep the gun in hand but not where the first was.
My 29 would do 1/2" at 50 meters all day. Put the gun down between targets and the 1/2" group could move 10".
I hit the first 5 chickens at 50 meters dead center and would miss the next 5.
I seen it with a K38 and a K22. I no longer own a S&W. I never learned to control them.
Call me nuts but I will not own a gun that must be held within 1/4 oz of pressure and 1/1000" of hand position. I can hold the SBH or BFR any which way.
I hate the Bisley. It can drive you nuts trying for consistent groups.

[subsonic]

In fairness, .1gr of a 7.3gr load is about 1.4 percent.

1.4 percent of a 25gr load is about .35gr, so I guess in his case it could matter.

One more advantage to shooting big stuff!

[PacMan]

On Canyon Ghost groups.
I learned a long time ago that nothing is impossible but having said that i would really shoot several groups with both charges before i would settle on that 1/10 grain diffrence. Heck it would be dang tough just to throw charges that close even weighing each one.

I have a accurate .244 AI that will always put five under my thumb nail at 100 yards and if my shakes compensate for my wiggles it will put 4 of five in one hole.Do i bet on it every time.Heck no.
More groups always to know for sure.
Dwight

[fecmech]

For your "A" load I would suggest 296/h110 powder instead of AA9. Both of those powders in my experience do a good job of protecting the base of a PB boolit at max pressures and velocities. The Lyman "Keith" with a max dose of 296/H110 will meet your "A" criteria out of my GP100 and also out of two previous .357's( Colt Trooper and Ruger BH)

[44man]

In fairness, .1gr of a 7.3gr load is about 1.4 percent.

1.4 percent of a 25gr load is about .35gr, so I guess in his case it could matter.

One more advantage to shooting big stuff!
Maybe with Bullseye or such, but not 2400. That is only a few particles of powder, less then a little lube on a boolit base will ruin.

[canyon-ghost]

Well, gents, that's not necessarily the case. I use a Redding #3 powder measure with micrometer, to throw these charges to a 502 RCBS scale, right before the trickler finishes the last tiny bit.

The 5 charge range of 25 rounds is then shot off sandbags onto a 3x4 sheet of plywood with a full sized poster board at 100 meters. I am shooting at the spot the size of a quarter through a Leupold VXII 4-12 AO scope (just look at my avatar). It's not only repeatable, it's match ammunition.
Does that 1/10th grain make that big a difference? YES, it does. And, when you're trickling in less than half that much- it's loading benchrest rifle style. These loads are for 40 round silhouette matches, every round is the same as the one before it. But, then again, it's not really interesting to make folks believe that's what I do. I just do it.

Ron

Here's 1/10th grain at a time in 41 mag at 15 yards when I first got the gun. This is the only photo of 5 different targets arranged like this that I have, the others you can see the date on them. I cut out the final 5x9 card from the poster board. http://i758.photobucket.com/albums/xx228/3rdshooter/contenders/142grainsof2400lightloadsin41002.jpg

http://i758.photobucket.com/albums/xx228/3rdshooter/powdertricklingandbulletseating002.jpg

[canyon-ghost]

Okay, the groups you see are the final ones, there's a group for 311008 bullet, 32-098-SWC bullet, and one for 7mmTCU. My point was that these are for 100 meters.

And I did check how much 2400 is in 1/10th grain, 44 man, there's about 50 of those tiny little particles there.

Ron

[subsonic]

Canyon-ghost, I appreciate your input, BUT, if I was shooting 15yd groups like that, I wouldn't even bother to keep or measure them. My worst 50yd groups from this thread were about the size of your average 15yd group. I'm not knocking your ability to load and shoot, I'm just saying I think you can do better and it's not the powder charge that's holding you back. I'm group shooting with a 6" 686 with factory 4 position iron sights.

I also shot a 5 shot group that measured 1.25" or thereabouts (didn't get out the caliper, just eyeballed it) @ 100yds with my .30 Herrett on Sunday evening. Load was 125gr NBT, 26gr AA1680, CCI 200, 2.325" and using 6.8SPC brass to form from. Scope was a 2.5-8 Leupold that I don't really like or trust (has been back to Leupold already). This thing fouls so bad with jacketed that I have not played with cast.

I guess I need to post more pics.

How many shots are you shooting at each of those targets and what is going on with more than one powder charge on each target? I'm having a hard time following what you are trying to show me there.

I would have to say that the smaller the powder charge, the more sensative the load will be to small weight changes and the inverse would also be true.

[canyon-ghost]

That wasn't necessarily the point, I was only showing the first set of targets. I just meant, yes, I shoot 25 at a time onto 5 different targets. lol.

That was not a test that I kept, at lighter loads that 220 grain Keith didn't do much but generate heat.

But I know where you're coming from. My camera went down recently so, I can't actually show you the targets for 41 mag and 44 special after changing bullet styles and finding the right grainage. But they do look a lot better than those. I had to reset the sights to the right (everything was off to the left side) and polish up my aiming skills.

The 41 magnum ended up at 15.7 grains with that bullet, a lot different from what you see.


Ron

[subsonic]

Alright, more work on this today. I'm partly writing all of this on here to journal it for myself, partly to get feedback, and partly for others to see what I did and how I did it so they may not have to repeat something I did that didn't work.

I had 19 cases left that were on the same loading cycle as the ones I had been working with. I loaded them with load #8 from post #11 using the same techniques as before with the undersized expander and tightest sizer. I also trimmed the cases to minimum to help with chambering the .358" boolits in the tight throats. I also used the previously mentioned seating arm and sorted them by seating force. I had 10 that were right on the money on the indicator pin. 5 easy and 4 hard to seat.

Each group was shot using random cylinders (trying to use all 6, except when I had less than 6) from a sandbag rest with the underlug resting on the front bags and a small bag under the grip using a two handed hold like I normally do. I would fire a shot, rest the revolver on the bags, get up, and look through the spotting scope to make a mental note of where each shot landed. After each group I went down range and took a picture of the group, measured it with a tape measure, then pasted the holes and numbered them from memory with a sharpie and took another picture.

I'll post the pictures of each group with it's own post below.

[subsonic]

This is group is 6 of the 10 rounds that had even seating pressure. This target arangement was difficult to see and I feel like it made this group larger than it should be otherwise. This group measured close to 9" at 100yds. All holes were round, no signs of wobble or sideways action. That extra hole by the big hole in the green thing was from someone before me shooting a rifle. My holes look like they were made from a hole punch, this one like a nitting needle (spitzer).

[subsonic]

This group is from the remaining 4 of the 10 that had even seating pressure. It measures about 6". I did adjust the sights up some before this group and shooting using the white piece of office paper floating on the front sight made for a much better sight picture. I went a tweak more elevation after this group. I did not take a picture before pasting the holes on this one, but they were round and looked like they were hole punched. Love that WFN!

[subsonic]

I moved back to 50yds for the next one just because I wanted to try to set the #2 position on my 4 position sights for 50yds. (just set #3 for 100, leaving 4 for.....)
This group measured a little over 4" for 5 shots. These were the ones that were easier to seat. Tried a playing card face down for an aiming point. The sights contrasted nicely on this white target, but the playing card was a little too small @ 50 for my eyes.

[subsonic]

Last group. These were 4 that were harder to seat. Measured about 4".
I should add that I used a copper bore brush and copper chore boy scrubber material to clean between groups followed by a clean patch (no liquid), as leading would build up by the 4th shot to where I though I should clean for the next group. It seems like more than once the first shot out of that clean barrel went left of the rest. I adjusted position #2 on the sights before firing this group and after the last one. I think elevation is sorted out at 50 & 100, but could use a tweak right.

[subsonic]

Those round things I'm shooting are plastic bellhousing covers that are installed on John Deere engines for shipping. We take them off and throw them away before we hook up a PTO or Generator at my work.

Here's a pic of the gun I'm using. It's the one that's upside down with the funny front sight.

[Changeling]

Have a known good/great shot shoot a series of targets the same that you have used. You just might get a big surprise. Your shots are scattered, indicating the shooter.

[subsonic]

You could be right, and if I knew someone that was a better or at least equal pistol shot as me, I'd have them try. I am great off-hand, but almost never shoot from the bench - usually I shoot almost as well offhand as I do from the bench. I am thinking about sticking a red-dot or low powered scope on this gun to see if it improves things. I know my trigger work is fine (strive very hard for this), but maybe my eyes are not what they used to be when it comes to iron sights. Then there's bench technique....

[EDK]

After reviewing the various posts and pictures, I'd go with the following.

Try an alloy about 12-to-15 brinnel hardness.

Try HP38, HERCO or TITEGROUP.

Boolit diameter to .359/.360

Has your S&W had a trigger job? Also changing to HOGUE or PACHMAYR grips? 357s are notorious for sensitivity to grip changes.

I did various changes...leading and acccuracy improvement, one at a time! to my 44 reloads for a dozen VAQUEROS that I have access to/reload for. I ended up with .432 diameter clone of 429421, HERCO, and BH of 10-to-12. My 357 VAQUEROS like .359/.360 diameter TITEGROUP, and BH 12-to-15 with no leading; also work well in MARLIN Cowboy rifles.

:Fire::castmine::redneck:

[subsonic]

Thanks for the recommendations. .359/.360 will not even chamber in this gun. .360 seated in brass will not even start into the chamber. 359 will not enter throats. .358 is the biggest I can get in when the gun is clean, and I even have trouble with that if it's dirty.

[subsonic]

Well, tonight I spent a couple of hours with 240 and 320 grit emery cloth and a 5/16" split rod opening the throats to .358something. I opened them up with 240 until the .358" pin gauge could be forced through with a little hand pressure, then used the 320 grit and a .358" sized LBT 359-160FN to set them up so that gravity wouldn't pull the boolit through, but a light nudge with a pencil would push them through. All 6 match for resistance. The .359" gauge will not start in any.

I will accuracy test more of the load #8 from post #11 and see what happens, maybe this week if time and weather cooperate (highs of 101 expected!) Hopefully the leading will be gone and I'll find a lube star. Accuracy might also improve.

Next step will be some light fire lapping if I don't get the results I'm after at this point - no leading. I beleive the bore might be a little rough near the muzzle - but it's hard to tell. I have found no restrictions.

[subsonic]

Back again. Shot today in 95-97* heat.
Tried that same load, 13gr of AA9 with the LBT boolit as before to see what opening the throats did. Loaded 18rds and sorted by seating pressure. Will make separate posts for each group. I tried to keep the gun in my strong hand while looking through the spotting scope to avoid changing grip. Short story is that it didn't seem to matter in that regard, or the opening the throats. Read on if anybody is still following this thread :lol:

[subsonic]

Group 1 here is 5 shots. I had 5 of the 18 that were not "in spec" in regards to seating pressure. Shot #1 here was very hard to seat, very tight. The other 4 were looser than average. This group measured near 9". If you throw out #1, which was the tight one that shot low, it would measure 7".

[subsonic]

Lost track of order here and wasn't able to number these. Leading is showing up again - opening throats did not fix. I did not clean the leading before firing this group. It was about 6.25". These were relatively even on seating pressure.

[subsonic]

This is 6+1, 7 shots. They are the ones with the "-" by the numbers. Relatively even seating pressure. I have to admit that the heat was giving me some trouble and I don't feel like I was able to focus 100% towards the end whlie firing this group. I had just walked 400yds now in 97deg heat. There was some mirage out there too. No excuses though, just an 11" group! [smilie=b:

[subsonic]

I originally checked this gun for a constricted bore by inserting the largest pin gauge that would fit and sliding it through the bore. I did not feel any tight spots. I just drove a lead slug through the bore and - guess what? Tight under that 4 position front sight and tight at the frame! I should have known something was up when this gun took a .001" smaller pin gauge than my wife's M28 and M15! That's why I didn't notice any constriction at the frame, because it was tight at the muzzle too! Fire-lap here we come.

[subsonic]

Back again to yack.

I firelapped with 122 rounds. 12 with 280 grit clover compound and 110 with Veral's LBT compound. The constriction at the frame is 95% or more removed. I just got tired of firelapping and the constriction that is left is so slight that you can only *just* feel it when pushing a soft lead slug through. I would guess it at less than .0003" - too small to consistently measure, but can be felt. I suspect this will go away on it's own with heavy use. The constriction at the muzzle is about 75% gone. I did not worry too much about that because I want it tighter there anyway.

This morning, (in a hurry before I had my coffee or breakfast) I loaded 12 rounds the same as the best load before. 13gr of AA9 and the 160gr LBTFN PB with CCI 500 primers. Cases were prepared as before. Normally I tumble, lube, size, and tumble again to remove the case lube (using steel dies). This morning I didn't have time to re-tumble, so I simply left the lube on the cases and was planning to wipe them off before shooting. When dumping powder into the cases I found a thin coat of AA9 stuck to the case walls where my Dillon spray lube had wound up. During seating, case neck tension was lower than before on all rounds and I could feel some "crunch" when seating. That would be the only thing different in loading. 7 were looser and 5 were tighter by one mark on my seating tension arm - 1 mark looser than normal for both groups compared to cases with no lube in them or powder stuck.

I shot the 5 tighter loads first (didn't remember to wipe them off). One of these I didn't seat the primer deep enough and it failed to fire on the first hit. I hit it again and it's in this group below which contains all 12 rounds fired in a row. I put the gun down 4 times during this composite group. The 1 round that is low left by a LOT is my fault. It is one of the tighter first 5, 3rd round fired to be exact.

The group (fired at 50yds) measures (throwing out the one that's my fault) 3.5". It's 3.25" tall by 2.625" wide. That "core" group is only about 1.5" wide. I think this is progress and I suspect more trigger time with this combination will shrink this group. These are the only 12 rounds fired since firelapping.

The bad muzzle leading is gone. There is some very slight fouling in the barrel at about 4 o'clock about 3/4 of the way down that may or may not be leading. I noticed when firelapping that after the first cylinder or two of the LBT compound leading was gone from firelap rounds and the bore stayed "mirror bright". Some slight leading re-appeared toward the end of my firelapping. I may run a couple more cylinders of lap boolits to remove that .0003 or whatever is left of the constriction and to see if that little bit goes away. Or I may shoot a box of jacketed.