Real Accuracy (2 moa or less) with Coated Rifle Bullets at 1800 fps or greater.

[dverna]

I expect this will be a very short thread but here goes.

I have been following all the coated threads and frankly they have become onerous. So the purpose of this thread is very specific. The only posts should be of coated bullets that have given groups no larger than 2 moa for 5 shots or more.

This is being done to provide a "Cliff notes" for coated bullet performance (this comes from a well known poster who made that comment).

Posts of "purty" rifle bullets without group data are discouraged - people looking for performance do not care how "purty" they look. Pictures of ugly bullets that meet the 2 moa threshold are OK. Pictures of "purty" bullets that shoot are OK too.

Many people do not want to post load data due to liability concerns. If you feel this way, it is suggested that you post the powder used and velocity data. If you do not have a chronograph, post "estimated" velocity; as we can work back to get the likely charge weight. Good data will be:

1. number of fouling shots if any
2. coating used, how applied; time and temperature of cure
3. Bullet used, alloy, and sized dia. - any culling criteria used (eg bullets weighed to +/- .2 gr)
4. powder used and estimated or measured velocity
5. Rifle used and caliber
6. How accuracy compares to jacketed and/or traditionally lubed in the gun
7. GC data
8. number of shots in the group
9. Number of groups before accuracy deteriorates.

By limiting the thread this way we can provide a repository of "what works". People new to coatings are going to ask "stupid" questions and most will not wade through two or three 80+ page threads. So let's have a thread that is succinct and to the point.

Although my opinion is that PC will prevail, should HT users find a coating that works, this will be a great boost to their marketing efforts. Again, no "fluff"; and keep useless banter down. Just the facts.

I originally thought that 2200 fps should be the demarcation point but dialed it down to 1800 so some of the "thumpers" can participate.

What works!!!

Don Verna

[runfiverun]

Dick I think Don is asking the question all the fence sitters wanna hear the answer to.
will the stuff perform with accuracy or not.
he could calm it down a notch or 2 though.

I can get over his 2200 fps requirement with naked boolits with regular lube and maintain accuracy [on par to the rifles performance] in several rifles, regardless of the twist rate.


so will the powder coat perform or won't it ??????
or is it too soon to tell?

[btroj]

Run, I think you might need to send off some bullets to a volunteer to get em powder coated. Maybe Don could do likewise.
I think it is too soon to know for sure.
No better way to know for sure, is there?

[Skip62]

Don, if you want to send them to me, I can tumble powder coat or Klass Kote, and send them back to you. I don't load rifle, don't shoot rifle much. PM me if your interested.

[theTastyCat]

This is a great thread, guys. I've been wading through the big PC thread for a couple of days and I'm only on page 29. This is great and highly appreciated by guys like me.

[theTastyCat]

Sure didn't mean to kill it though :( *sigh*

[waco]

I'm getting ready to test some Lee 180grain ..311 boolits in my .308
I'm going to try sizing and installing the gas check, powder coating. then sizing again to .311
Anyone PC over a GC?
I'm going to shoot for 2300-2400FPS
Hope accuracy will be there. I'll coat and load tomorrow, but not sure when I'll be able to hit the hills and test.
My Rem.308 has a 1:10 twist
I'm thinking 3031 or 4895 will be a good place to start.
Waco

[waco]

Oh yeah. HF ES PC if it matters....

[theTastyCat]

Hit it, waco!! Looking forward to a range report!

[sparky45]

I ordered a PC gun this afternoon. I have been using PC in my vibrating tumbler and getting good results, but they weren't as pretty as I'd like. So, I'll post some pics when I get the gun set up.

[waco]

Four more posts Sparky and you got yourself a nice lead boolit!!!!!!

[leadman]

waco, I have tested boolits in my 30-06 to over 2,500 fps for a 200gr. These were heat treated linotype and did ok. You are going to need a hard alloy, probably at least 20bhn from my experience. If you start to see a light gray puff of smoke out the barrel this is an indication you have reached the yield strength of the alloy. I was using the Hi-Tek coating and doing 2 coats with a modified baking. Ran the temperature of the oven up to 375 degrees, then lowered it to 325 degrees IIRC and finished out the 10 minutes. Baked twice and was able to keep a BHN of 32 from the HTd lino of 35 BHN.

[sparky45]

waco, I have tested boolits in my 30-06 to over 2,500 fps for a 200gr. These were heat treated linotype and did ok. You are going to need a hard alloy, probably at least 20bhn from my experience. If you start to see a light gray puff of smoke out the barrel this is an indication you have reached the yield strength of the alloy. I was using the Hi-Tek coating and doing 2 coats with a modified baking. Ran the temperature of the oven up to 375 degrees, then lowered it to 325 degrees IIRC and finished out the 10 minutes. Baked twice and was able to keep a BHN of 32 from the HTd lino of 35 BHN.

With your modified baking technique, would the cast pass the acetone/smash tests?

[waco]

88616

So here is the Lee 180grain .308 boolit. I gas checked and sized them to .311, before PC. Not sure on what powder I'll use, but I'm going to shoot for 2400-2500 FPS. I re-sized them to .311 after the PC process.
Has anyone else PC over a GC boolit before?

[waco]

88620

They seem to pass the smash test.

[sparky45]

Did you follow Leadman's baking routine? I've been using 400 degrees for 10 minutes and then dropping them in water.
BTW Waco, very nice looking bullets.

[xacex]

I have been doing p/c over g/c for 50 Beowulf without issue. I tried it to see what diameter I got after sizing .501. Tey ended up .5025, and shot fine, but I am now trying re-sizing and heat treating for 45 minutes at 425 deg. F. to see if the group tightens up. I am trying the same thing with the 30 cal boolits.

[waco]

I was going by what the directions on the paint said. 20 minutes @ 400 deg.

[xacex]

I was going by what the directions on the paint said. 20 minutes @ 400 deg.

I do that then tried H/T later like what Popper is doing. I did notice the coating got soft again slightly at the higher temp. If you are doing heat treating you may want to go higher on temp on p/c cure, or H/T at the temp you cured at. I will see if hard, heat treated coww sized right will make the difference this week. loaded 335s, and 440s. Once that one is nailed I intend on working down to the 30 cals, then the 22 cals.

[sparky45]

Actually I don't really have a problem with a lower temp bake cycle because I only coat for my 45ACP; 45LC; and my 44/40. My PC Gun is supposed to be here in 7 - 10 days. I hate the way that most retailers ship anymore. It's shipped FedX and they still drag it out.

[leadman]

My modified baking works with the Hi-Tek coating and it does pass both the acetone wipe and smash tests.

[MacFan]

I have some Lyman 311334 bullets that have been produced from a sinlge cavity mold using Linotype and culled to a +/- .2 grain tolerance. This is a good bullet for the .308 (my preferred target caliber) and the .30/06. The mold produces a very consistent bullet. If anyone wants to coat them, shoot them, and post the results I will send them to you. Just PM me. They should work in most .30 caliber rifles but may be a bit long/heavy for the .30/30. I have a bunch sized to .309, with Lyman GC's, and lubed with 50/50 to use as a "control". I live in Northern MI so testing is not fun to do at this time of the year. My outdoor range is not complete and the closest decent range is almost 30 miles away.

You get some free bullets from a mold that is pretty scarce and very desirable to play with. My request is that you shoot them in a known accurate rifle at over 2000 fps at 100 yards. If you achieve the 2 moa for 5 shots threshold, you will post the targets and the data on the rifle used, estimated or actual velocity, and powder used. I would appreciate a PM or email on your results if the bullet does not shoot to 2 moa.

If more than one request is made, I will give preference to ES PC as I think it is the best option to reach the goal at this time. I do not have a lot of bullets made as the single cavity is a labor of love - but a single cavity should provide the best platform for an accurate bullet.

Don Verna

PS: If popper wants them, he gets them. He has done the most work on this quest with decent results.





Don, If you want to test some powder coated bullets yourself send me a PM. This way you can set up your own control group and see what the PC bullets do in comparison. I'd be happy to coat a few dozen for you and mail them back (I'll pay the return postage). I'm curious as to what you'll find. Let me know, all I'd ask in return is for you to report to the group any data and pictures you get.

[leadman]

I just started shooting again after surgery so hope to have something useful to post soon.

[RP]

I have just gotten into the PC craze and tried the tumble method which worked but I really like the slick shiny look of the gun. So I picked up one and been coating everything. So far I have shot a few different weights in my 300 BO the ones that worked before coating still grouped good the ones I was hoping to perform still were lacking. I coated some 405 gr for the 45/70 loaded with 40 gr of imr 4198. I let my son try them in his marlin and 5 shots at 60 yards (distance from shop door to backstop) grouped under a inch. The same load in my BFR kicked so hard I had a bad flinch so pasted it off to my son that soon flinched but two of our shots were touching. So if nothing else so far I have a load for his rifle. Still working on using almost pure lead in my 300 BO since at the lower speeds expanding is the problem I believe its failing me on deer.

[Russel Nash]

From an AR15.com thread:

Powder coating rifles and high power handguns though, that's the stuff! It's super easy to apply and holds up perfectly at any velocity you might want to shoot them at. I've done over 2900 fps with powdercoated rifle slugs with very good accuracy. Not top tier jacketed bullet accuracy, mind, but excellent practical accuracy- generally a hair over an inch to 3 inches depending on gun and bullet at 100 yards.

PC does add maybe 1-2 cents in cost to your bullets for the ultimate cost min-maxers, but it is easier to apply than tradiitional lubrisizing and doesn't require a lubesize press and dies- just a cheapo electrostatic gun and a spare toaster oven you probably already have.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1576801_I_BET_you_can_t_reload__45_for_under__30c_ a_round_.html&page=3

[Oreo]

From that craphole of a forum? I call bullchit till we see some kinda proof.

[xacex]

Maybe he is talking about two shot groups? I have yet to see (or do) a 1 inch group of more than 3 shots with P/C. I don't even know why a 3 shot group is standard with so many shooters anymore. Is seems on this forum the standard is 5 shot groups, but shouldn't it be 8 or 10 to really call it accuracy instead of a fluke?

[Russel Nash]

From that craphole of a forum? I call bullchit till we see some kinda proof.

I was hoping he is a member here. When I can get to a real computer, I will send him an IM/email.

[Russel Nash]

Maybe he is talking about two shot groups? I have yet to see (or do) a 1 inch group of more than 3 shots with P/C. I don't even know why a 3 shot group is standard with so many shooters anymore. Is seems on this forum the standard is 5 shot groups, but shouldn't it be 8 or 10 to really call it accuracy instead of a fluke?

I like 5 shot groups my self.

[Russel Nash]

I just sent that guy an IM, so..... we'll see, I guess.

[freebullet]

Nice I wouldn't complain about that.

What boolit/alloy?

I'm going to try lee155-312 pc in rifle length20" w/varget. Maybe spring before I get that far though.

[Mike Hughes]

I have been using Freightmans dry tumble method, Freightman was the pioneer for the dry tumble method (it's the fastest, cleanest, easiest way to coat) Loaded some 30-06 with Rx7, unique, and 2400. The Rx7 looks to have the most potential. 27 gr of Rx7 with the 150 gr Lee boolit was 2100 fps out of my cheap Mossburg ATR 100

930829308093081

[Russel Nash]

If I ever spring for a .308'ish mould, preferably a hollow point mould, just to give you a baseline, this is what I did with jacketed in my 7.62X39 chambered AR:

http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt112/gryphon1994/AR762X39hundredyardgroup.jpg

Soooooo... is the gun going to do any better with lead, powder coated lead? The velocity probably will never get above 2,200 fps since it is a 7.62X39 .

Maybe I will spring for an AR-10 in .308 one of these days.

[fcvan]

My goal with PCd cast boolits is cheap projectiles for rolling tin cans. I am doing so with all of my pistol calibers, .223/5.56, and 30 Carbine, so far. I have some 30-06 loads to test, and am waiting on my 300 blk upper to test those. I am certain I will be able to roll tin cans at 100 yards as easily, if not easier than using my AR or Mini 14 shooting .225 PCd boolits. Plinking accuracy has been easy thus far, but bench rest type accuracy from PCd boolits will certainly be a challenge. I'm sure I'm not the only one to consider the following hypothesis.

In order to get bench rest type accuracy I think the projectile will need to be swaged rather than cast, and then PCd. Swaging should provide a projectile without voids and with greater consistency as to weight. A good alloy could be developed, that alloy swaged into wire, and that wire cut precisely as to weight. That slug could then be formed into the projectile with fewer steps than swaging a core and jacket into a formed projectile. That projectile would then be PCd and likely be the most consistent as far as boolits go. Chime in folks, I'd like to hear other opinions.

[Oreo]

Perhaps we need to experiment with casting under a vacuum to remove voids. It would not be Too absurd to build a vacuum chamber with window and gloves so that the furnace and mold fit inside and can be seen and operated.

[MUSTANG]

Perhaps we need to experiment with casting under a vacuum to remove voids. It would not be Too absurd to build a vacuum chamber with window and gloves so that the furnace and mold fit inside and can be seen and operated.

1. Put together a "Test Box" and ask NASA to cast some on a space walk, then you get the micro gravity effect too. Ooops, guess the molten lead would just float around.

2. I tried Swaged .224's, coated with Harbor Freight Red. Not pleased with the results yet.

See thread: http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?211708-224-65gr-SP-Pointed-Tip-Mould-Group-Buy!/page2
Posts #23 and #24.

I have some more loaded up using 15,16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 Grains of IMR4895; hope to shoot them later this week to see how lower velocities fare.

[fcvan]

Thanks for the input, I appreciate the additional comments. I would think the process of swaging the lead wire would deal with the void issue and from that point you are forming the slug/wire into shape. I don't know from personal experience but I've read as many threads as I can and that's how I perceive the process. Oh, that and I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express a few times.

Seriously though, some folks cast cores for swaging and some folks swage the wire first to avoid imperfections and voids. I'm just thinking that swaging the wire into the projectile and then powder coating might create a boolit of greater consistency for use in chasing the tighter group.

Don, I typed the above while you were apparently posting as well. My 'minute of soda or tin can' reference is a tongue in cheek way of adding some redneck reference of accuracy. I read somewhere the standard for the military is 4" at 100 yards. That is also what Ruger claims for the Mini 14. Yes I know the AR and the Mini are both capable of greater accuracy than 4" and soda cans aren't 4" across.

Anyway, the issue is accuracy at greater than 1800 fps. My .223/5.56 loads are over 2250 fps and holding an 1" to 1.5" either lubed traditionally or PCd. I haven't started pushing the .223 faster as of yet but will soon.

I've got some 30-06 loads ready to test out and I will be working them up in increments to find the sweet spot. I think it will be doable and I promise to take lots of pictures. The rifle is dad's sporterized 03-A3. I'd like him to be able to blow off some rounds punching paper with a gun he hasn't fired since I was a kid. It grouped 3 rounds under a quarter with factory so that will be my mark. Heck, dad put 3 under a dime once but I think there was some mystical planetary alignment going on. It will be fun to see what this rifle will do with PCd boolits.

[gewing]

In jewelry casting one method of reducing voids is to place the investment flask on a vacuum table. The plaster usually used is porous enough to allow the air to be pulled out.

I wouldn't want to try large scale casting that way...

[leadman]

I cast some 22cal Bators out of Lino and coated them. Did not heat treat this time so will see what happens tomorrow. Hope my cheek does not cause me pain like it did a few weeks ago.. Got some handgun stuff going along also so will shoot it first. I'm going to put my 21" 22 K-Hornet barrel on a Contender pistol frame. Loaded the 45gr Lyman with no gc with 3 coats of the Extreme Hi-Tek catalyst. Should have starting velocity with 7625 of about 1,300 fps and when it tops out have some loaded with WC680 that should top out around 2,700 fps. Will be an interesting experiment.

[waco]

I'm very excited to get back to this test with my .308

I just ordered a new NOE 311365 5 cav. mould. They finally have them in stock. They should be right at 200gr after GC and PC.

Should be a better match for my 1:10 twist over the Lee 180

I still have about a half a pound of HF black. I think I'll try to get some red.

[leadman]

I did make it to the range today and had some sucesses, but for some reason my Chrony would not read the 22 cal boolits. Maybe they were faster than the speed of light?? LOL. I did shoot some of my sighters with the Bator boolits and the accuracy at 100 yards was pretty good at an estimated speed of 2,400 fps. Did not measure any of the groups yet and it might be a couple days before this gets done.
I did change primers in my RBH Hunter in 41 mag. from Win to Federal 155 magnum. This made a big change in how the Alliaant 300 MP burned. With the 220gr Saeco TC GC and 23.5grs of 300MP the velocity was over 1,550 fps with excellent accuracy. There is no load data for the 41 and this powder as Alliant said it was not worth it for them to do this. Also used in my Mosin Nagant with the 314299 and had several moa groups.

[MUSTANG]

Leadman:

I have had problems with .224's (both Cast and jacketed) not registering in my choronograph in the past. Had to "Paint Them" with a black felt tip to get reliable readings.

[MUSTANG]

The Celt had a pretty good looking Target, but since it was shot at 50 Yards it becomes problematic when considering the longer range performance. I used "On Target Precision Calculator" to get an MOA on the target. My calcs are it was a 2.801 MOA group for the Target on the left. (See Below).

93840

[TheCelt]

The Celt had a pretty good looking Target, but since it was shot at 50 Yards it becomes problematic when considering the longer range performance. I used "On Target Precision Calculator" to get an MOA on the target. My calcs are it was a 2.801 MOA group for the Target on the left. (See Below).

93840

WOW!!!! That is pretty cool Mustang!!!! Is that freeware/shareware?? Thanks for posting!!

[MUSTANG]

TheCelt:

1. There is a 1.0 Version that is free, and a 2.0 version they sell. Go to: http://www.ontargetshooting.com/ to download. You can download a 15 day free trial on 2.0 Version.

2. It is critical that you "Scale the Photo" each time you use a new picture with this software. You do that by using the icon that looks like: X----X . You mark two points of known distance with the icon marker, then put the distance in inches between the two points. That scales the picture. Also, you have to set the distance and caliber in the table for every picture (Group).

In my military career, we used to do the same thing with aerial photos using objects of known size, and a ruler. Or, one can compare it to using a mil-dot reticle for estimating ranges. This is an automated tool of the same concepts.

[TheCelt]

Thanks Mustang, that is an interesting application! Thanks for sharing.

[leadman]

I had a request to post pictures of my Mosin-Nagant groups so even though they do not qualify for the 1,800 fps they do have info on the Alliant Power Pro 300 MP powder when used in a rifle with reduced load. This powder is slower than 296/110 or SR4759. Groups were shot at 100 yards with a 2X7 pistol scope.
I intended to shoot my Contender rifle in 223 Rem but as posted earlier the Chrony did not read the velocities. In the past there never was a problem but a shadow on the Chrony might have been the problem. 9394993950

[doctorggg]

Leadman

What distance did you shoot these groups? I would presume 50 yards.
Thanks

[leadman]

Those were 100 yard groups. I edited the post to include the range. Knew I forgot something.

[doctorggg]

Excellent shooting with open sights, coated bullets and an old Mosin. Thanks for the info. I plan to try that load with dry tumbled coating and a scoped sniper mosin

[leadman]

I replaced the rear sight with a 2X7 pistol scope on the Mosin.

[NVScouter]

Popper you really should ditch the Lead Sled. They are hard on the rifle/scope and dont truely align the shooter to scope exactly the same way every time like a good shooting position. Your not shooting .458WINMAGs and getting your shooting form down is the first step to applying any accuracy you get out of your rifle/load.

[leadman]

I have to shoot off a Leadsled due to spine issues in my neck. There seems to be a point with each gun in which the accuracy will be affected by the Sled. A gun without a recoil pad seems to be affected at a lower velocity than the guns with pads. Power level comes into play also.
I can shoot full power loads out of my Savage 110 in 30-06 with pad with no problems, but my Encore ProHunter in 7mm Rem mag with pad won't get the best accuracy from full power, even with the muzzle brake.
My reduced cast loads seem to shoot as well on the sled as off.

[leadman]

I had anticipated posting some photos of my 223 Rem loads with the Bator boolits today but due to the ocular lense of the scope loosing up it is not to be.
I do have one target shot with my old 1903a3 Smith Corona sporter to post that qualifies for the 1,800 fps and 2 moa. This was my first test of this boolit and it does qualify but the heavier boolits like the 200 gr Lee shoot better in this gun.
The boolit was the Lee 30 cal. 150gr flat nose with gc, Hi-Tek Red Copper coating, sized .310".
23grs of IMR SR4759
WLR primer
velocity was 1,949 fps average for 5 shots
Group size 1.608" for 5 shots
Range was 100 yards.

[TheDoctor]

Almost oofed and put this in the shot show thread, but figured that sucker had gotten far enough off topic. lol. So far, I do not shoot cast in rifle. Honestly do not shoot rifle very much at all, and do not label myself as a rifle shooter. But, will start tinkering with casting for rifle in the upcoming future. My big question: WHY is everyone having a difficult time coating rifle bullets and getting equivalent results to traditional cast? Is it an alloy issue, using too soft? Is the baking of coatings softening the alloy too much? I have read about heat hardening bullets in an oven. Wouldn't a coating that cures at the proper temperatures be able to be used and leave a heat hardened bullet as a result? Or are the coatings being used just too slippery, and giving erratic pressures and velocities? Possibly irregularities the coating thickness? To me, it seems that there HAS to be a simple answer. Then again, I may be totally off... Hard to fix something if you don't know what's broke.

[Oreo]

The issue is of accuracy not leading so primarily the inconsistent thickness of the coating is the issue. I suppose the "slipperiness" of the coating might be an issue if it is causing inconsistent muzzle velocity but I haven't heard this yet from the rifle shooting crowd. I have heard a few reports about changes in mv from the pistol shooters but not enough to form a consistent story. It goes to show that we are still in the infancy of the powder coating methods.

Case in point: I pulled up a powder vender website yesterday to look at clear powders. There were something like ten different ones! Never mind the various colors or mixing of colors or the chemical types of powder coat. I believe the best performing powders have yet to be identified. Application methods will be developed for the rifle crowd. These are just a couple of the growing pains that will happen as the method matures. Go do your thing and come back in five years. The conversation then will be totally different.

[leadman]

I think that comparable accuracy to wax based lubes with one of the coating can be done consistently in the near future. I am close with my Contender with 23" bull barrel. My shooting session Thursday produced a velocity over 3,600 fps with accuracy just under 3". My jacketed load for this barrel is a 55gr SP at 3,100 fps but it a 1/2 moa load. A previous wax lubed boolit load was shot at just over 3,000 fps with 2" accuracy.
I am also going to load my Savage 30-06 with the same load of IMR4350 (when I can find some) and a 200 gr boolit. This shot into less than 1" with Carnuba Red at almost 2,600 fps. I hope it will work out as well with the Hi-Tek coating.

[Mbedwell1971]

I have some test results to share. I am shooting a Remington 700 .308 AAC-SD with Nikon 3-9x50 optics. These are my first rifle bullets that I have cast to shoot at normal velocities. http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/01/27/mazety2y.jpg

These were cast from a Lee 309-170gr mold. They average 174gr after PC and sizing thru a .311 push thru sizer. I used Cu gas checks. All groups were shot at 50yds

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/01/27/9yqa6uje.jpg
This group was loaded over 34gr IMR 4895. Average velocity at 1896fps. Not real impressive at 1.2".

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/01/27/ze4a3eju.jpg
These were loaded over 35gr IMR 4895. Average velocity at 1930fps. Again not real impressive at 1.26" group.

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/01/27/u3ure8e4.jpg
This was my best group, but only has three shots. I had two primers that failed. I don't count his as valid, but a good starting point to continue testing. They were loaded over 36gr of IMR 4895. Average velocity 2030fps. Three shot group at 0.65" equivalent to 1.18MOA.

My plan is to do three more five shot groups starting with loads of 37gr going to 39gr. Once I find the best of these I will load 25 of the best charge and do five, five shot groups.

Any thoughts or suggestions.

Just as a side note, I shot three 165gr SGK HP to check zero on my scope to start. This is that group. This rifle is Capable of sub MOA accuracy. http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/01/27/9yzamega.jpg

[leadman]

Dverna, I have shot many sub moa groups with Hi-Tek coated boolits. Most have been around 1,600 to 1,700 fps but some have been up to around 2,400 fps. Most were before this thread was posted and I do not save my targets. I just enter the info in my notebooks.

[USMCamp0811]

I have just recently gotten into casting and I'm putting together a 300blk upper for my AR. Spent the past few days looking for .30 bullets to load for my 300blk but they are expensive! or maybe I haven't ordered bullets in a while. In the past I had been against casting for rifle for fear of leading. But the wallet is starting to drive me to the idea even more. I've been trying to read up on this powder coating and it sounds really neat till I started reading this thread.

My question is can powder coating cast bullets provide a good cheap bullet for an AR for general plinking and say be able to put all the rounds in a say a hand size target at 100 yards?

[USMCamp0811]

I've only got soft near pure lead right now.. should I work on getting some stuff to make it harder? This is one of the things I've yet to really get a good clear answere on. Some places I saw mention of using pure lead and other say harder wheelweights and so on and on to 100+ pages.. lol

[Mbedwell1971]

Popper - I noticed the same trend. I plan on testing again in the morning if time allows. Definitely by Saturday. I will post some more feedback after.

[Oreo]

Don is right. If you're new to casting you need to learn about casting first. Powder coating is not a panacea, it is an accessory still going through beta testing.

[Mbedwell1971]

I would agree with that distribution being shooter related except that with the SGKs I shot did not have that issue during the same shooting session. I have more results to post from today. I will try to get them up tonight.

[Mbedwell1971]

So I finally got around to more accuracy testing today. I shot 5-5shot groups. Each group was 175gr lead PC gas checked cast from straight WW. They were loaded over 37gr of 4895. Average velocity is 2108fps. My five groups averaged 1.604 MOA. Not real good. I think a better shooter might have better results. My last group improved to 1.18MOA. Still far from stellar results. Targets are posted below. Squares are 0.50".
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/02/05/vuba4y8u.jpghttp://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/02/05/ezyba7yb.jpghttp://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/02/05/7ybamu5a.jpghttp://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/02/05/anyra6an.jpghttp://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/02/05/e5udyze2.jpg

[doctorggg]

Mbedwell1971 thank you for posting your results. They are encouraging. I presume you are still shooting at 50 yards?

[Mbedwell1971]

I guess that is important info! These are at 100yds!

[doctorggg]

Great groups! Keep up your posting. It has been too cold for me to shoot.

[Mbedwell1971]

I am casting with wheel weights only. These were coated with a gloss blue powder for TC Coatings applied with the HF ES gun baked for 15 minutes at 400 then water dropped. I am using Lyman Cu gas checks.

I did shoot one 5 shot group with 38gr of 4895 and it was terrible at 50yds. Might try pushing them a little faster with some Varget.

[Mbedwell1971]

What led you to that long of a bake time? I am shooting a Rem 700 with a 1:10 twist 20" barrel.

[leadman]

I have found that a harder alloy of around 17 bhn at least is needed in a 30 cal. and lino in a 22 cal up to around 2,500 fps. Going up to 3,600+ fps in the 22 cal requires heat treated lino and a modified bake schedule with the Hi-Tek coating to maintain most of the bhn.
I coat with Red Copper with the Extreme catalyst, bake and when the oven temp gets up to 400 degrees I turn the temp down to about 300 and let the 10 minutes finish, then repeat for the second coat. I am able to maintain 32 bhn from an original bhn of 35.

Awhile back I had some zinc contaminated lead that the bhn was around 30 and it shot very well in my 30 calibers. Just a real pain to cast with.

[220]

Hiteked some 22 boolits today with red/copper plan is to run them in a 222 at 22mag velocities.
Hopefully I can manage 2moa.
Rifle has bit of pitting and won't quite shoot moa with J-word shoots the odd 3/4 group but just as often 1 1/4 - 1 1/2.
Should get some testing done in the next month so I guess I will see.

[Mike Hughes]

Mihec 62 gr NATO with alum gc, hf red dry tumble 1 coat, coww water drop from mold and wd after cooking. This load works good with my dpms ar. Since I started wd after cooking and age harden, my bhn is up to 20, which has helped accuracy. I have only been loading rifle for a couple of years and have achieved 2 moa with 223, 30-06, and 300 blk. A good experienced reloader and shooter would do better.

966699667096671

[runfiverun]

bedwell.
I'm not seeing nice round groups.
you have some potential there, just the load isn't quite right.
anyway it's my observation of the target.

[MUSTANG]

It appears Mike Hughes has achieved a good level of success. Using "On Target" software, I computed a 0.782 MOA for his testing. Not shabby at all. Renews my interest in HF Coatings.

96692

Once the weather warms up some so I can cast some .224's in the same and similar weights and coat with HF Red, I'll see if I can replicate some of his results in my Axis. If that works, I'll move over the the Colt AR-15 & Remington 40X to see how they do.

[runfiverun]

not really a critique just not seeing the roundness.
maybe a shorter oal would help, but I'd guess at a powder change first.
I really think the groups can be improved.

[Faret]

@Mike Hughes what twist on the AR?

[MUSTANG]

A thought on the left to right "Stringing" of the group for Mike Hughes.

If his scope reticule cross hairs are large, then he may be walking the view to the left and right as his eye attempts to discriminate where the cross hairs are in relation to the heavy black line on the target. May not be seeing it in the vertical impacts because of the Sand Bagging of the fire arm. Had this occur a few years ago with an inexpensive AR-15 style Chicom Scope I picked up at J&G Sales in Arizona. It's been pulled off and replaced a few years ago.

[xacex]

Great job mike! Anything else about the load you would like to share?

[runfiverun]

I was talking about bedwells.
vertical stringing is generally velocity variations. [horizontal is quite often an ignition inconsistency or bedding]
his could be clothing, or un-comfortableness at the bench.

[220]

Finally got out to test some loads today, weather wasn't great constant rain but apart from a bit of trouble keeping targets standing I don't think it effected things to much.
Mainly testing some HiTeked loads in my marlin 357 but managed to crohno and shoot a couple of groups with my 222.
Rifle is a S&W 1500, howa manufactured so pretty much the same as a weatherby vangard, has some light pitting in the barrel, with J-word loads it likes, its a 1-1.25moa rifle.
For years I've been using 22magnum projectiles and a light charge of AR2205 to duplicate 22mag performance accuracy with these is around 3moa but they are perfect for shooting bunnys under 100y without destroying them.
Load tested today was
Winchester case
CCI small rifle primer
AR 2205 powder
Lyman 225438 44gr GC boolit, cast COWW + 2%, visually sorted for obvious defects, 2 coats HiTek red copper baked for 10min 200c, gas checked prior to coating and sized to .225 after the second coat.
Oal 2.025"
Cases were FL sizes and I don't own a 22 M die so projectiles seated as I would J-words.
10gr AR2205 averaged 1898fps
10.5gr AR2205 averaged 2019fps

Targets were shot at 50m so by my calculations 2.34moa & 2.90moa, doesn't make the grade I know but equal to or slightly better than the 22mag projectiles at the same velocities in this rifle. I'm more than happy with the results, with a little work I think 2moa is achievable.
Both targets had 4 under 2moa but one opened them up.
Only 4 shots on the 10gr target 5th was just off the bottom measured before pulling the target and the widest measurement was across the 4 visible in the pic.
http://madmick3006.com/ahngallery/upload/files/2014-02/0d97d54f.jpg

[leadman]

I found when shooting my Encore and Contender pistols that horizonal string was mostly caused by a tilting of the firearm. I installed a Vortex bubble level and this did away with it when I watched it. Also shooting off the bi-pod is more likely to cause this. The lower the scope is to the bore line the better I think.

[MUSTANG]

Popper:

Groups are looking good. I am currently not able to get to the range because of the 4-6" of solid ice on the dirt road up the Mountain to the range. Hopefully we either get a good dump of snow soon to cover it and provide better conditions, or enough melt to get rid of the ice. Want to try and see if I can replicate some of your success, in .308. Not sure what experience you have with Bi-Pod use, but the following is for those who may not know how to properly shoot with a Bi-Pod:

Shooting with a Bi-Pod does not necessarily equate to a "Stable" Platform. Often times, shooters will have more open groups when using a Bi-Pod compared to holding the rifle on a rest/rear Bag by hand, or with a properly used sling. Suggestions for using the Bi-Pod:

(1) Load the Bi-Pod. Loading the Bi-Pod involves either a "Push" or a "Pull" loading.

For Push Loading of Bi-Pod, with the rifle resting on the Bi-Pod, pull the Rifle firmly into your shoulder with the Trigger hand and the off Hand while pushing forward with the shoulder. All of the play (back and forth/left to right) movement should be taken out of the Bi-pod Support by pushing forward with the shoulder, then BRASS (Breathe Relax Aim Sight-Picture Squeeze).

For Pull Loading of BiPod, with the rifle resting on the bipod, pull the Rifle firmly into your shoulder with the Trigger hand and the off Hand while pulling back slightly with the shoulder to take up any slack. All of the play (back and forth/left to right) movement should be taken out of the Bi-pod Support by pulling into the shoulder, then BRASS (Breathe Relax Aim Sight-Picture Squeeze).

(2) Select a Bi-Pod that mounts to the rifle stock, not one that mounts to the Barrel. Barrel Mounted Bi-Pods are often found on the lesser priced AR platform Bi-Pods. A Bi-Pod mounted to the Barrel messes with the Harmonics of the rifle.

[TheDoctor]

Do you mean ASC in Houston? Man, if you are in Murphy, THAT will be a drive!

[sd61]

Rifle: K31 scoped (scout); Range: 50 yards, bench rest
Boolit: Lee 155 gr., blue PC, Hornady GC, sized to .310" after coating
Alloy: close to lyman #2 @ 14 BHN (WW with some SuperHard and Tin added)
Charge: 20 grains of AA5744; COL 2.745"
Average velocity 1800 fps, best 5 shot group gave me 1.5 MOA, see below

97399

[doctorggg]

Rifle: K31 scoped (scout); Range: 50 yards, bench rest
Boolit: Lee 155 gr., blue PC, Hornady GC, sized to .310" after coating
Alloy: close to lyman #2 @ 14 BHN (WW with some SuperHard and Tin added)
Charge: 20 grains of AA5744; COL 2.745"
Average velocity 1800 fps, best 5 shot group gave me 1.5 MOA, see below



97399



Unless I am terribly mistaken a 1.5 " group at 50 yards equals 3 MOA at 100 yards.

[Faret]

Looks like a .75 moa group at 50 yards acording to the target scoring box. Or less.

[doctorggg]

Thanks for the correction I thought the blocks were 1 inch.

[Hang Fire]

That is terrific and thanks for posting. PC boolit aside, that is dang good shooting with any projectile, assuming it was 7.5x55 in a K31 rifle.

[MUSTANG]

Cheetah:

I did some research on hardness of Powder Coat paint; and what I came up with is that Powder Coat may be ~ 26 to 28 BHN. I derive that from the table on Lead Hardness using "Pencil Test" as derived from this site, plus the Sherwin Williams Data Sheet on their Powder Coatings (Not able to locate Data sheets of other PC providers listing their Pencil Test Hardness).

Sherwin Williams lists their PC at a Pencil Hardness of 2H. The 2H pencil hardness in the table indicates a BHN of 26 to 28.

The full Sherwin Williams Data Sheet on their Powder Coat paints is attached as a PDF.

98566 98567


I believe that those who experience poor accuracy with Powder Coated soft lead, do so because the underlayment of lead is weaker than the Powder Coat, and it gives way in the rifling despite the harder Powder coat, but the hardness of the Powder Coat stops any potential leading in the barrel. Think of the Earths crust rotating over a molten core.

[Echd]

Cheetah:

I did some research on hardness of Powder Coat paint; and what I came up with is that Powder Coat may be ~ 26 to 28 BHN. I derive that from the table on Lead Hardness using "Pencil Test" as derived from this site, plus the Sherwin Williams Data Sheet on their Powder Coatings (Not able to locate Data sheets of other PC providers listing their Pencil Test Hardness).

Sherwin Williams lists their PC at a Pencil Hardness of 2H. The 2H pencil hardness in the table indicates a BHN of 26 to 28.

The full Sherwin Williams Data Sheet on their Powder Coat paints is attached as a PDF.

98566 98567


I believe that those who experience poor accuracy with Powder Coated soft lead, do so because the underlayment of lead is weaker than the Powder Coat, and it gives way in the rifling despite the harder Powder coat, but the hardness of the Powder Coat stops any potential leading in the barrel. Think of the Earths crust rotating over a molten core.

Very interesting theory. If true it would indicate that quenched/harder alloys will generally perform better in general with PC.

I would love to see a PC boolit be fired with one of those jillion frame per second cameras.

[MBTcustom]

I wonder why that would be the case with PC, and not with PP?
Hard to figure.

[runfiverun]

Tim you still do have to match the velocity with a P/P boolit.
lead will try to set-back if it ain't supported properly.
think on that for a second,,,, it will lead you back to the whole mechanical fit thing.

[doctorggg]

If I am reading these last 4 posts correctly. I am to deduce that for any boolit to succeed particularly a rifle boolit the lead hardness has to be close to the hardness of powder coat paint??? To prevent the pp from wearing through or collapsing?? I would appreciate you gentlemen's knowledge. I know this is totally new territory and all I have been able to shoot (due to weather) so far is 45 acp which works great.

[220]

Son shot a 1.67moa group on the weekend with my 45/70 only 1500fps so I won't worry about pictures but a few interesting points.
Same load with conventional lube has shot 2-3moa for me consistently, HiTek load was a nice round group, may have been a bit of luck but it obviously doesn't harm accuracy at these velocity/pressures.
Just for interest I sized some .458 instead of my normal .459 results were on par with conventional lube sized similar, 4.25moa group that was all over the place.
Regardless of lube/coating looks like boolit fit is still the key to success.

[supersniper]

FINALLY!

Got lucky today while testing a new mold - RCBS 130 SP Hornady GC - weighs about 140gr using air cooled WW - PC with PBTP Super Durable Wet Black - 400 deg. for 20 min - sized to .309

16.0 IMR-4227 - Velocity is 1825fps - managed a 5-shot 3/4" group @ 50yds after 5 previous shots with lighter load

First time this rifle has really shot a supersonic load decently - this rifle has not seen a J-word bullet yet

Snow is finally melting here so looking forward to testing at 100yd soon.

Next test will be comparing with and without GC

300 Blackout - 16" CMMG pistol gas barrel - groups 5" higher than Lee 230 Subsonic zero @ 50yd

[Mike Hughes]

308 Win, 1:10 twist, All powder paints mirror blue dry tumble. COWW water dropped from mold and wd again after coating. Sized to .311 x .306, only fired one round across the chrono= 1876 fps.

101037101036101041101038101039

[KYShooter73]

No pics, but got a 1.4 inch 10 shot group at 100 this weekend. WD'd COWW + 2% Sn, HF Red, baked 17 mins, and WD'd again. Lee 312-155 aluminum gas checked and sized .311, fired from 14.5 inch pistol gas barrel. 15.7gn Winchester 296. 2.100 OAL. Didn't chrony because this seems to be the sweet spot, but it should easily beat 1800fps.

[doctorggg]

Kyshooter73,
I am presuming a 300 blackout?

[KYShooter73]

Yup. First time I have been able to PC since December, and I have been working on a powder/load/length my barrel likes all winter using 2 coats of nasty alox. The PC shoots just as good in this load as the alox without the stinky sticky smokie boolits.

[Beau Cassidy]

ESPC on the bullets or another method of application of the powder coat? It would be interesting to see the differences in coated gascheck bases versus non-coated.

[KYShooter73]

ESPC, tapping a washer on the gas check shank so I don't get PC on it and my checks will still fit. If my alloying skills didn't suck, I would love to put heat behind my .308.

[Mike Hughes]

In the 308, I loaded 5 each with 24, 24.2, 24.4, 24.6, 24.8, and 25gr. of 5744 with the NOE 311365

here are the best two

101442101443101444101445101446
101453


My next outing will be 25-26gr

[MUSTANG]

Mike Hughes:

Good looking groups. All of your posted groups seem to be staying relatively at the same size as you increase powder/velocity. It will be interesting to see if your groups remain tight as you increase past the 2000FPS region. I have the 311365 and am following your testing, please keep us posted.

[waco]

In the 308, I loaded 5 each with 24, 24.2, 24.4, 24.6, 24.8, and 25gr. of 5744 with the NOE 311365

here are the best two


101442101443101444101445101446
101453
I realize these do not compare to jacketed, I am just having fun and sharing my results.

My next outing will be 25-26gr




What is your COL? In my Rem.700 I can only seat them out to 2.830" before hitting the rifling. This puts the GC well below the case neck.

[Mike Hughes]

101757101757
Mike Hughes:

Good looking groups. All of your posted groups seem to be staying relatively at the same size as you increase powder/velocity. It will be interesting to see if your groups remain tight as you increase past the 2000FPS region. I have the 311365 and am following your testing, please keep us posted.
At 25.4 groups started to open up. At 26 grains, it looks like it may be trying tighten back up. Lyman shows 27 gr as max potential load for the 311299 which is about the same weight boolit. I will see what happens in the 26-27 range.
101754101755101756101758101759
The sun was at a bad angle and the chronograph missed some readings

I also loaded some Rx7, varget, and Imr4227
The Rx7 looks like it has potential at 28 gr. Varget grouped decent with 34 gr @2175fps. The 4227 really caught my attention with 22, 24, and 26gr all shooting good. The lone hole on the 22gr target was a cold barrel shot. Most of my pc loads have not been affected by barrel temp. Also, the 4227 was extremely quiet fired through the suppressor.
101761101762101763101764



What is your COL? In my Rem.700 I can only seat them out to 2.830" before hitting the rifling. This puts the GC well below the case neck.
My COAL is 2.80, longest that ar mag will hold. At 2.80, I was into the rifling (I am sizing the nose to .306 allowing to seat longer. I no longer worry about gas check below the neck, I am installing gas check before coating. This sets the check in place almost as if it were welded on. these pics are after attempting to pry off with a screwdriver.

[Mike Hughes]

My pics went haywire. here is the gc pic
101766

[bosco555]

Hi all,
I have been reading and casting on and off for quite some time now. I am also interested in PC boolits, mainly for my .458WinMag. This is a Ruger M11MKII. Nice rifle, but peculiar...It does not like cast boolits, no matter what I throw at it, weight, powder, gas checks combinations.

It just tumbles the bullets as if I was throwing them by hand. About 2yrs ago, I came across Lead Cast and coated bullets here in Australia, namely Westcasting. These have a golden coating which is very tough and the company markets them as being able to sustain >2000fps velocities.

However in order to achieve stable flight I had to gas-check them. Now the ones I am using have a weight of 405gr, plus GC +- 420gr. I have managed to get decent groupings using 66gr or Reloader 10x at 2100-2200fps chronographed. This is the most accurate load-out for this type of bullet in my rifle.

These boolits however do not have a recess for a gas check, but I place a drop of superglue in the GC cup and then size them through a Lee Sizer. No lube is needed as the coating is smooth enough. I will also post pics of bullet and target.

Apologies for the long post, but what I found is that these westcasting bullets have only 2 grooves. Boolits cast from a conventional mold have several and that. I think is causing the tumbling action. These however, together with a GC and sized to .458 (that's all I have) fly straight and give me excellent accuracy.

Coming to the point, I seriously thing that if we are to PC boolits, then we don't need more than 2 grooves. Possibly only one to crimp the boolit in the shell....Now who's gonna make me a mold with only the crimping groove???

Any of you guys thoughts??
Thanks, bosco

[Smoke4320]

In the 308, I loaded 5 each with 24, 24.2, 24.4, 24.6, 24.8, and 25gr. of 5744 with the NOE 311365

here are the best two

101442101443101444101445101446
101453
I realize these do not compare to jacketed, I am just having fun and sharing my results.

My next outing will be 25-26gr

that's some fine looking groups there
hope to post some soon myself .. have many at 50yds .. but will wait till new backstop is built for 100 and get some submitted here

[bosco555]

I will be shooting this coming sunday and will bring back some targets. Some people also mentioned trying Reloader 7...Trying to find the right combination is a long and winding road to be sure...
THanks Popper..I wouldn't hold my breath about Oz. You get cr@p service here. Will give accurate a call/email and see what they can do...Interesting to see...

[bosco555]

Sorry guys, went shooting on the weekend, but it was darn hot here, and the results were horrible, it looked like I actually threw the boolits at the target by hand, so I ain't gonna post no targets here. Will have to wait for the weather to cool down a bit and I'll try again..However the few that ended on the paper grouped OK considering I was shooting off-hand, no rest or bag..

[Just Call Me...G]

Howdy Gents,

Today I spent some quality time reading this thread as well as a few others regarding PC of boolits.

I have also been following and have read most of the Hi-Tek thread which I check in on from time to time...no disrespect meant, but I refer to that thread as the "Hi-Tek Love-In". It just seems a bit much for me and it's the same posters, over-and-over again shouting from the rooftops about how phenomenal it is...ugh! /rant-off.

I just wanted to stop in and say THANK YOU! to Don Verna for getting this thread up and going and for really trying to get some information that is relevant.

As a .308AR shooter and a suppressor owner, I am especially grateful to Mike Hughes for posting all of that great and usable info.
I will be following this thread closely as I am and have been interested in these alternatives to lubing for rifle accuracy.

I look forward to seeing more posts and once I get set up with my own process I will be posting results as well.


Keep the High Ground,


G

[supersniper]

looks like it has some good potential Popper

[Rushthezeppelin]

Going to need more testing to confirm but I started getting some really good looking accuracy with my 300BLK as well just the other day. Loading Lee 312-155s over 14.5gr Lil Gun (not chronoed yet but should be around 1900-2000 fps) I got a less than half inch group at 25 so it should translate to 2 MOA or better once I roll up more of this load. Only one group so far like this but I think that's because my barrel just started showing signs of breaking in my last time out (was watching each group shrink more and more once I passed about 90 rnds). Will update once I can get at least 40 (8 five shot groups should be enough to show a trend I figure) of these loads on paper with pics ofc.

[dverna]

In the shooting world, things aren't that linear. Ya'll really should be testing at 100 yds. 25, 50, 75 yd groups mean absolutely nothing.

Ain't that the truth!!!

And one five shot group is not enough. I will not even comment on three shot groups - likely to get me banned.

Don Verna

[Rushthezeppelin]

Never said it was anything but anecdotal at this point. Just thought I would post some preliminary possibly good results. Need to get around to loading up my latest batch of bullets (which I tried pressure casting with this time) so I can get them downrange. Will definitely be testing at 100 yds next time around, if I had more of that load I would have done some 100 yd testing. I might even man up and try doing 7 or even 10 shot groups :veryconfu next time. And I count flyers for the record, I'm not a sugarcoater.

[Rushthezeppelin]

Fliers are part of the group unless you called it. I have no problem with 50 shots, just the learning curve. Real accuracy, 100 or 200 if you got it.

When using an inherently accurate load I can usually call 90% of my fliers but I'll still count then towards (or rather against) my precision. If I'm simply seeing what the gun is capable of I'll discount called fliers.

[DR Owl Creek]

Deleted

[Rushthezeppelin]

Thought I posted this the other day but I thought I'd give an update. Ended up getting to shoot about 50 of my Lee 312-155s (out of 300 blackout over 14.5gr Lil Gun) the other day at 100yds. Accuracy wasn't were I wanted it to be, was getting about 5"-6" groups. Turns out when I got home and looked at the barrel it was streaked like a sewer pipe, lead from leade to muzzle. I'm pretty sure what happened is I had some of my APP Pink in the mix that had some problems with PC scraping off the driving bands while sizing/seating check. I had recoated some and sorted some that I thought were good (could still see the lead through the driving bands but obvious sheen from PC being there) but I was obviously wrong (had put about 50 of the PBTP Green through the barrel previously and had a pristine barrel so I know they are fine). Need some more testing with this mold (and application of APP Pink).

Also will have a new mold to test soon that just got in today: NOE 309 129gr PT, two cavities are PB and two are GC.

[dverna]

Rush

There is no point posting about 5-6" groups on a thread intended to highlight sub 2 MOA performance. Put these kinds of posts in the 100+ page coating threads that have become filled with similar useless information. Those threads are stickies (for some unfathomable reason) - but easy to find - right at the top of the sub-forum.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Don Verna

[waksupi]

Thought I posted this the other day but I thought I'd give an update. Ended up getting to shoot about 50 of my Lee 312-155s (out of 300 blackout over 14.5gr Lil Gun) the other day at 100yds. Accuracy wasn't were I wanted it to be, was getting about 5"-6" groups. Turns out when I got home and looked at the barrel it was streaked like a sewer pipe, lead from leade to muzzle. I'm pretty sure what happened is I had some of my APP Pink in the mix that had some problems with PC scraping off the driving bands while sizing/seating check. I had recoated some and sorted some that I thought were good (could still see the lead through the driving bands but obvious sheen from PC being there) but I was obviously wrong (had put about 50 of the PBTP Green through the barrel previously and had a pristine barrel so I know they are fine). Need some more testing with this mold (and application of APP Pink).

Also will have a new mold to test soon that just got in today: NOE 309 129gr PT, two cavities are PB and two are GC.

I would call that a very poor boolit design, and doubt you have much luck with it. Stay as close as you can towards the Loverin design for target and hunting, and be in a happy place. You need to reverse your thinking for cast, think heavy, not light.
I don't own a cartridge rifle that will not shoot under 1.5" at 100 yards, at at least 2100 fps. If they won't do it, down the road they go.

[Rushthezeppelin]

I would call that a very poor boolit design, and doubt you have much luck with it. Stay as close as you can towards the Loverin design for target and hunting, and be in a happy place. You need to reverse your thinking for cast, think heavy, not light.
I don't own a cartridge rifle that will not shoot under 1.5" at 100 yards, at at least 2100 fps. If they won't do it, down the road they go.

Hmmm well I can't go much heavier otherwise I drop down below the 1800+ fps (with regards to the 312-155) the OP is looking for. Also not sure if a Loverin design would even feed well in a 300BO AR, especially if I want to try and seat it close to the lands.

Also what exactly is your reasoning for this likely being poor in the accuracy department (I'm assuming you are talking about my new mold)? It is about the same profile as the Barnes black tips made specially for the blackout and those things are tack drivers for alot of people.

[waksupi]

Hmmm well I can't go much heavier otherwise I drop down below the 1800+ fps (with regards to the 312-155) the OP is looking for. Also not sure if a Loverin design would even feed well in a 300BO AR, especially if I want to try and seat it close to the lands.

Also what exactly is your reasoning for this likely being poor in the accuracy department (I'm assuming you are talking about my new mold)? It is about the same profile as the Barnes black tips made specially for the blackout and those things are tack drivers for alot of people.

Cast bullets are a different animal. I don't think you have enough bearing surface.

[Rushthezeppelin]

Cast bullets are a different animal. I don't think you have enough bearing surface.

If you were trying to suggest the bullet wouldn't be stable with the amount of bearing surface it has, a few people have gotten to shoot bullets from this mold in the last 2 days and all have reported very stable bullets and some people are starting to see around 3 MOA so far.

[Rushthezeppelin]

1.5" at 50 yards does not equal 3moa. Patterns are not linear with distance.

Sorry Don. Trying to stay out of this thread till I have something to report. I think it is about time to clean this thread up.

Thought I saw one report of 3" at 100 on 300blktalk, perhaps I was mistaken since I was trolling those threads half asleep last night, my bad. Regardless I think he was trying to imply that the bullet wouldn't be stable (as you were initially thinking as well), which so far seems to not be the case. Not trying to rub it in anyones face, I can understand why this might be a questionable design just looking at it just reporting on prelim results people are seeing.

[brstevns]

Must one use a gas check on a gas check type bullet if the base is being covered with coating? Only trying for 1800-1900 in 30 cal rifle

[brstevns]

If your boolit bearing surface is large enough. I've gone to 1750 (308) with the 31-165C, DT in HF red. The B version doesn't make it. Haven't gotten around to trying for higher, but accuracy @ 100 was about the same as B GC'd @ 2450. Alloy will make some difference. About 100 fps less in the 300BO, present proj. I'll get back to the AR & MG 30/30 later this year.

Using a Lyman 311291 and air cooled WW. Want to use it in a 308 win and a 30-30

[dverna]

1.5" at 50 yards does not equal 3moa. Patterns are not linear with distance.

Sorry Don. Trying to stay out of this thread till I have something to report. I think it is about time to clean this thread up.

xacex,

Thanks. I tried getting permission to edit some of the useless stuff out but could not get a lot of support for the idea. I hope it does not get as bad as some of the 100+ page coating threads but we shall see. With good weather here there will be a lot more results coming. If it gets too cumbersome, one option is to start a new thread with a higher performance threshold and let this one die of natural causes. 2" at 1800 is nothing special with traditional lubes; so, at this point, it looks like coatings will not be an "easy" solution for accurate high velocity cast bullets. Still hopeful the magic bullet (or should I say coating) will be found!

Don Verna

[Love Life]

Don, I will go through and delete as many as my posts off as possible. Hopefully others will do the same (including all those posting groups shot at less than 100 yds).

Done.

[waco]

Hmmm
I couldn't open the attachment.

[bbqncigars]

A recent outing at 100yds with a 535gr Postell boolit in a repro Sharps 1874 Creedmoor tested the same boolit lubed vs. Hi-Tek. The only difference in loads was how the boolit was lubed. Greaser groups averaged 2" with an average speed of 1780fps. Coated groups averaged 4" & 1860fps. The load of 37gr Varget is one this gun likes with greasers. I will experiment to see if the coated boolits shoot better with a different charge.

[supersniper]

Started working with PC'd boolits in the .260.

Using some old IMR-4320 (34gr) at around 2400fps gave me a 1.3" 5-shot group at 100yds using the RCBS 140 SIL GC cast from WW and WD - sized to .266

The "naked" boolits were absolutely horrible as the allow was way too soft - lucky if it hit the paper at 100 - same load as above.

[cs86]

The "naked" boolits were absolutely horrible as the allow was way too soft - lucky if it hit the paper at 100 - same load as above.

When you say "naked" are you meaning that it was traditionally lubed without PC or powder coated without a GC or something else?

[supersniper]

CS86,

Naked boolits were traditionally lubed and sized with a GC.

The PC'd boolits (also GC'd) withstood the higher velocity just fine although I did have to sand the nose down from .258 to .256 in order to get them to chamber.

I will have to get a custom sizing die made for the nose that will get me back to a .256 diameter for chambering and bore riding.

[StromBusa]

Range test with the 1:7 twist BO today was miserable. Shotgun pattern @ 100, leaded terrible. 150 gr WD PCd PB 16 & 17 gr 4227 (guessing ~ 1800-1850 fps, 850#-ft). I'll download it a lot & make one last try. If bad then I'll find a 223 bbl and give it to the GSs. No use to me. As I don't plan on mortaring SS heavies or plinking with 100 gr boolits, the numbers make no sense. It will shoot 168gr Amax 1600 fps ok but that's about all. Why bother. 130ish jacketed bullet @ 2200+ is the only thing that would make sense for a 100 yd hunting rifle. Don't buy a yugo!


good luck, I hope you figure it out, I will be getting my BO out of lockup soon...I hope...

[fastfire]

Gun DPMS AR-10with a 20” Criterion SS barrel 1/12 TW.
Scope, Bushnell 4200 6x24
Boolit; Lee312-155R
HF ESPC red
Alloy; 75%COWW25% Linotype spacers =14 BHN
Sized to .311
Light roll crimp.
COL 2.630
LC 13 brass flash hole deburred,primer pocket uniformed.
Hornady gascheck seated with a seater made by Buckshot, this tightened my groups!
Thanks, Buckshot.
Boolits sortedinto 1/10th gr. Groups
I have shot very few jword in this barrel(didn’t workup a load).
These two groups10 shots ea. @100yds
The first groupw/cold bore) measured c/c 1.53 my bestso far.
Second groupmeasured 2.50 including the 2 flyers, without flyers 1.41
Powder 36.6gr Varget
2253 fps sd16
I have been shooting 40-60 rds a day working this load up, the groups keep getting better.
PS. I read couple of days ago that if the boolits age 3-4 weeks the groups will be better, I couldn’t wait, these boolits are 3 days old.
107986

[fastfire]

Good shooting. Try annealing the GCs & add some shot to the alloy, drop right from the oven. How do they shoot single loaded?

Gas checks are annealed.
Shooting single I lost the shoulder weld each shot and had to reacquire it each time.
From what I have read here I should get better groups when the boolits age a bit.

[fastfire]

I get this with all attachments ;Invalid Attachment specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/sendmessage.php)

[StromBusa]

nice work fastfire!
Gun DPMS AR-10with a 20” Criterion SS barrel 1/12 TW.
Scope, Bushnell 4200 6x24
Boolit; Lee312-155R
HF ESPC red
Alloy; 75%COWW25% Linotype spacers =14 BHN
Sized to .311
Light roll crimp.
COL 2.630
LC 13 brass flash hole deburred,primer pocket uniformed.
Hornady gascheck seated with a seater made by Buckshot, this tightened my groups!
Thanks, Buckshot.
Boolits sortedinto 1/10th gr. Groups
I have shot very few jword in this barrel(didn’t workup a load).
These two groups10 shots ea. @100yds
The first groupw/cold bore) measured c/c 1.53 my bestso far.
Second groupmeasured 2.50 including the 2 flyers, without flyers 1.41
Powder 36.6gr Varget
2253 fps sd16
I have been shooting 40-60 rds a day working this load up, the groups keep getting better.
PS. I read couple of days ago that if the boolits age 3-4 weeks the groups will be better, I couldn’t wait, these boolits are 3 days old.
107986

[leadman]

Went to the range yesterday with my 1960s' era Savage 110 CL 30-06 and some heat treated linotype boolits coated with the Gold 1035 (3 coats), and Hornady gas checks. The boolit was Lee's 30 caliber 200gr RN sized .309". Powder was H1000 and a Winchester large rifle primer. Overall length was 3.19" . Range was 100 yards. 5 shots

Here are the results:
Charge Avg. Velocity Group Size
55 grs 2,354 fps 1.435"
56grs 2,396 fps 1.715"
57grs 2,427 fps 1.646"

Bore was very clean and shiny after shooting. This is the first time I have used this powder and it was amazing how clean the bore was.

[doctorggg]

Went to the range yesterday with my 1960s' era Savage 110 CL 30-06 and some heat treated linotype boolits coated with the Gold 1035 (3 coats), and Hornady gas checks. The boolit was Lee's 30 caliber 200gr RN sized .309". Powder was H1000 and a Winchester large rifle primer. Overall length was 3.19" . Range was 100 yards. 5 shots

Here are the results:
Charge Avg. Velocity Group Size
55 grs 2,354 fps 1.435"
56grs 2,396 fps 1.715"
57grs 2,427 fps 1.646"

Bore was very clean and shiny after shooting. This is the first time I have used this powder and it was amazing how clean the bore was.


Would love to see some pictures of the targets. Very nice shooting.

[leadman]

I'll go pull the targets out of the recycle and see if I can get them posted.

As a side note this morning I was using stripper to remove the finish on a stock. Had some Hi-Tek coated boolits close by so I thought I would see if the stripper affected the coating. Did not faze the coating one bit!

[Yodogsandman]

Any more results? I fully expected this one to become a sticky.

[David R]

SO FAR my best is with 30 cal 115 grain bullets purchased from Bayou bullets. These are powder coated gold.
12.o Promo AV 1825 SD 11. Group size 1 1/8 @ 50 yards, 3.5" @ 100 yards. Repeatable.
Savage 110 in 308.

Last night I took out 10 rams @ 100 yards in 10 shots with this gun.

I have 105 lbs of cast 30 cal bullets to powder coat. The stuff could be here today.

[Yodogsandman]

David R, 105 pounds...Wow! I'd suggest only coating what you need. You might decide you want to change things up as you develop your load. You don't want to end up with 105 pounds of boolits you can't or don't want to use. Don't ask me how I know....

[leadman]

Guess I forgot to post the pictures to go with my previous post #153 so here they are. I Hope.

Went to the range yesterday with my 1960s' era Savage 110 CL 30-06 and some heat treated linotype boolits coated with the Gold 1035 (3 coats), and Hornady gas checks. The boolit was Lee's 30 caliber 200gr RN sized .309". Powder was H1000 and a Winchester large rifle primer. Overall length was 3.19" . Range was 100 yards. 5 shots

Here are the results:
Charge Avg. Velocity Group Size
55 grs 2,354 fps 1.435"
56grs 2,396 fps 1.715"
57grs 2,427 fps 1.646"

Bore was very clean and shiny after shooting. This is the first time I have used this powder and it was amazing how clean the bore was.

Pictures loaded out of order again. First picture 55grs, second picture is 57grs, third picture is 56grs. Last picture is a duplicate of 55grs.

[HollowPoint]

Some of the groups on this thread show an awful lot of promise. The points of impact on some of the targets here seem to indicate that the testers may be stopping short of the full potential of their abilities as Powder Coaters and reloaders.

When I work up loads, even with store-bought jacketed bullets I'll get the kind of accuracy reflected by some of the targets shared in some of the responses here.

I mention this because as I increase my charge weights, generally speaking, I'll begin to get tighter clusters. When I get to the point that my clusters/groups are repeatable; at that point, I work on seating depths. I know I'm most likely mistaken but, it seems like the 1800 FPS listed in the OP's initial post may be subconsciously limiting some of you guys; even though he stated "1800 FPS or Higher."

How many of you are stopping when you get to the 1800 FPS levels and how many have deliberately tried to load to full power in an attempt to see if your groups would tighten up? I've read all the replies on this particular thread and it would seem the that answers to these two questions should be apparent to me but, they're not.

I haven't read all the other threads dealing with Powder Coating yet. I'm sure some of you guys have already tried what I'm eluding to. When I get up to speed on my own attempts at powder coating, I believe I'll start with minimum listed load data and work my way up rather than limiting myself to a certain max velocity; although ultimately the limiting factor in the best velocity I arrive at will be determined by accuracy. Out of a given caliber, that may very well be only 1800 FPS but, I'll never know if I could have done better if I'd just kept testing up to the max listed velocity.

I believe you guys are really onto something with this Powder Coating thing. I hope it pans out even further. It would really give all of us a leg up on the store bought bullet manufactures. To my way of thinking, the "Holy-Grail" of bullet casting is to be able to get our cast lead bullets to met or exceed the performance of the store bought jacketed bullets; I mean ballistically speaking. Powder Coating may just be the catalyst to achieving this goal.

HollowPoint

[xacex]

Hollowpoint,

As you can see from my groups they are round and not stringed indicates to me you are correct that once worked with OAl ect. that something should give. Unfortunately, as may of the posters on this thread I do not do this full time. It will take time, but your analysis is I believe correct. Not only that, but I think we can get accuracy beyond 1800 FPS equal to "bulk" jacketed bullets. I do not believe we will see accuracy of "match" bullets with this method. Sub MOA with PC on a regular basis from my observation is unobtainable.

Edit: As we have seen sub MOA is possible but I would like to see 3 groups on the same target that are under MOA for 5 shots. I don't care if there are 5-6 groups, and only 3 are sub MOA. That is a testament right there. I know I cannot do it so I propose the challenge to those who can. 1800FPS is the limit if you break it it is fine, but I would like to see 2200FPS or better. Let us up the ante to 2200 FPS, and 3 groups on the same target under that threshold.

[Beagle333]

I believe the application is the limiting issue. With hobbyist ESPC equipment, I know that I increase a boolit's diameter by .002±" with PC. But in my coatings, if I am really trying to get a good coat on the base bands of the boolits in the middle rows of my tray, the noses of the boolits on the outside will get quite a bit more powder. With the coating on the nose varying from .0005-" to .002+" in thickness on any side, and usually never by the same amount on both sides, it is going to be really hard to get the small boolits to travel that far, that fast, without deviating considerably. That is not a problem with a 260gr .45 slug at 900 fps, but until we can come up with a more uniform and consistent way to coat, the rifle groups are going to be tough to tighten up. And I believe that tumbling has even farther to go in the quest for reaching a perfectly symmetrical coat.
I have tried (the wasteful technique of) spraying a single widely-spaced row of rifle boolits to see if I could get a more uniform coating, but I am unable to repeat spray patterns, angles of application and duration of spraying needed to get that perfectly balanced thickness on all sides using my eyes as a gauge. Adding more to the complexity is the problem of a varying-thickness coating making a uniform crimp nearly impossible. The polyester is more springy than lead and and a variance of 4X (from .0005 to .002) in thickness on any one side will influence the final sized diameter when using the same die. And even if you don't crimp your rifle boolits, the neck tension will differ due to the diameter variance.

Despite the very slight variance of diameter on the sized boolits , I believe that the fellows who are shielding the noses when coating will be the first to achieve the accuracy goals. If they can completely eliminate the flashing in the transition from bare nose to coated driving bands, they will have an unaltered nose for the truest flight, the least added additional material that must be applied consistently to every boolit, and a slippery set of driving bands to do what we want PC to do, which is to slide down the barrel and leave nothing behind.

[Wardo1974]

The quest for accuracy is admirable, and of course a consistent product will get you closer. Until you can apply the PC consistently every time, it's going to be a weakness.

However, there is no chance these boolits are ever going to be as good as factory ones for the simple reason they are cast, not swaged (unless some of you guys are swaging their boolits, I didn't see that anywhere though)

The consistency of a swaged bullet is matchless and cannot be approached by a homebrew cast boolit. Even with a perfect PC I would expect the factory bullets to come out on top. Maybe though, not enough for us to care about. Me, I'm a hunter, not a target shooter, so as long as I get "minute of deer" with mine, I'm a happy guy.

[HollowPoint]

I haven't even dipped my foot into he PC craze yet. I've just been reading everything I can about it, trying to wrap my head around it before diving in.

In reading what I can about it, I've come to the conclusion that Beagle333 is most likely correct in his assumption that accuracy comes down to the even application of the powder coating. As with most things having to do with the attainment of bullet accuracy, concentricity is a major key.

I think that rigging up a mechanical jig/plate that rotates the individual bullets one full turn while simultaneously rotating the jig/ plate that the bullets are set on, one full turn would go a long way toward getting an even application of powder onto out bullets.

I've watched videos of guys applying the powder with their ES-guns and although they do a good job -think about it- they spray one side, then they turn the plate that holds the bullets around and spray the other side. This creates an over-lap on the sides that didn't get a direct spray of powder. Unless the bullets being sprayed are rotating in an even manner, it's difficult to get an even coat.

I hope to be getting a large format 3D printer in the near future. I think I'll work on designing such a jig plate. Even the most beautifully made PC bullets pictured in any of the post here in the PC section of this forum are sure to have uneven spots in their Powder Coated layers. When we combine this to even the slightest imperfections in our cast lead bullets and our re-loading technique, it stands to reason that we're bound to be getting less than desirable performance from an otherwise good idea.

It's akin to having a conventional copper jackets bullet with a copper jacket that's thicker on one side than the other.

The fact that some are getting good groups/accuracy indicates that there's alot of potential once all the bugs are worked out. I'd love to be able to quit using bullet lube and gas checks and still be able to shoot MOA or better groups.

Keep up the good work gentlemen.

HollowPoint

[leadman]

Remember, not all the boolits shot here are powder coated. I use the Hi-Tek coating. I do not worry about point of impact when testing loads as the poi will move around the target with different loads.
I have obtained equal group sizes and velocities to run of the mill jacketed bullets with a few of my loads, especially with the heavier boolits.
I am going to continue trying to shrink the groups of the 22 Bator boolit that I obtained the average velocity of 3,619 fps with but will have to discontinue shooting the 30 cal. boolits as my neck can not take the recoil.

One of the gun magazines ran some tests with jacketed bullets by altering the noses with a file and found that this caused very little change in the accuracy. When the altered the base there were large changes in the accuracy. Not sure how this would affect boolits.

[Yodogsandman]

I think the lighter the coating, the less thickness variations. No way to visually tell if the coating is thin on one side with a thick coating.

How about a PC'd boolit that gets swaged after a thin coating? Less surface thickness variation and perfect sizing of the whole boolit.

[ipijohn]

I think the lighter the coating, the less thickness variations. No way to visually tell if the coating is thin on one side with a thick coating.

How about a PC'd boolit that gets swaged after a thin coating? Less surface thickness variation and perfect sizing of the whole boolit.

Compressive strength of the PC is more than lead so all you will accomplish is making what ever geometry is there rounder and smaller.

[David R]

Todays fun was 5 shots 2 3/4" @ 100 yards with bayou bullets PC. 30 cal 115 gr bullet.

Pictures later.

[David R]

DavidR I think that is HiTek coated carbine boolit, unless you are PCing them. He has a couple coatings that will take that fps but you may need to heat treat to get much faster with accuracy. You shooting carbine or 308W?
Its a carbine bullet. What does it matter if its 30 cal and works. I buy these instead of cast my own.

Its like pistol bullets for the time it takes to load them and the cost.

[StromBusa]

we had some old "gang drill" mill heads by Zagar that would rotate numerous drills, I can picture the bullets rotating on them.....but then they would need transferred to the "cookie sheet" for baking...guess I'll have to invest in a painting robot.....

another option might be to coat the boolits complete, then turn the nose on a little cnc lathe....
:veryconfu

[leadman]

Bayou Bullets are Hi-Tek coated. The 115gr carbine boolit is a plain base and this will limit the velocity. After I finish lunch I'll go test one as I do have some of his boolits. I think Donnie said he shoots the carbine boolit up to around 1,900 fps or so.

I do use light boolits sometimes, but if I want the finest accuracy I shoot boolits around 200grs in the 30 caliber and velocity of around 1,600 to 2,000 fps. depending on the cartridge.

I tested one of Bayou's boolits and it is 18BHN. Hard enough for "normal" cast boolit velocities.
If they work use them.

[David R]

Here is the promised photo.http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/08/26/4cadffa4f6e3fa4ba2b43fcd41743dff.jpg

5 shots 100 yards. 2 3/4" c to c.

Tonight my girlfriend will be shooting this rifle in the final silly wet match. My son may be shooting it also. I only brought 100 rounds.

Its a plain Jane Stevens250, identical to a Savage110 with a Wally world 3-9 AO scope.

[Bullshop]

What was the velocity of the rounds fired for the target?

[softpoint]

Second time out with .358 Winchester, with pc coated boolits. 50 yard group, 9 shots, .542 center to center, 100 meter group, 5 shots into 1.422. 245gr. Saeco boolit, 40.2gr. 4320. I am going to start a thread about this rifle and load over on the favorite cartridge forum and post pics. I cant recall what the velocity was with this same load and boolit greased, but I think it was over 2000 fps. Will chrono tomorrow, hopefully.

[snuffy]

I finally got a day free from "bothers", cool enough, no wind, no body else at the range.

I had planned to do most of the testing @ the 25 yard range, so I set up there first. Two main goals, testing PC boolits in 4 guns, 2 pistols, a revolver and one lever gun rifle. The GP-100 and the Rossi are both .357 magnums. The goal is to have one load that not only functions, but is also accurate. That goal was realized, but is off topic from this thread. Load for the 357's was the Lyman 168 SWC, 2400 powder, 12.7 , 13.4. Velocity was AV 1468 (12.7), from the Ruger Average 1468 for the 13.4. Rossi was Av 1687 for 12.7 and 1742 for the 13.4. Groups were acceptable for my old eyes and those awful buckhorn sights on the Rossi.

The CZ-75B in 9mm was checking a new lee 120 TC, NOT a TL design. I also have the same boolit in the TL configuration. All coated with HF-red.

The forth is my Bushy AR in .223.The Lyman boolit I tested is the one in the pic I posted. Problem is I simply ran out of daylight. It would have taken another ½ hour to break down, move, and set up at the 100 yard range, our ranges are all separate. So I elected to test the .223 @ 25 yards, mostly to see the velocity, did they lead, and if they stabilized.

Results? Groups @ 25 yds, terrible! That rifle with jaxeted will put one on top of another @ 25y. Velocity was as expected for the powder charges and all boolits hit point first, nice round holes. Groups were round shaped, best was 1".

H-335 23.0 grains, Lyman 224462 coated, then gas checked with Hornady GC's, sized to .224.
AV 2896.5
ES 25.0

24.0 H-335
AV 2920
ES 65

25.0
AV 3092
ES 28.3

Bore was obviously in fired condition looked normally fouled. Clean-up was simple, dry patch showed no lead, patch soaked in eliminator bore solvent, (bore-tech inc.), came out black. One more saturated patch followed by a .223 bronze brush, then a bare patch showed more black carbon fouling, so I repeated the soaked patch followed by a dry patch. Bore sparkles, no lead to be found!

[HollowPoint]

I finally got a day free from "bothers", cool enough, no wind, no body else at the range.

I had planned to do most of the testing @ the 25 yard range, so I set up there first. Two main goals, testing PC boolits in 4 guns, 2 pistols, a revolver and one lever gun rifle. The GP-100 and the Rossi are both .357 magnums. The goal is to have one load that not only functions, but is also accurate. That goal was realized, but is off topic from this thread. Load for the 357's was the Lyman 168 SWC, 2400 powder, 12.7 , 13.4. Velocity was AV 1468 (12.7), from the Ruger Average 1468 for the 13.4. Rossi was Av 1687 for 12.7 and 1742 for the 13.4. Groups were acceptable for my old eyes and those awful buckhorn sights on the Rossi.

The CZ-75B in 9mm was checking a new lee 120 TC, NOT a TL design. I also have the same boolit in the TL configuration. All coated with HF-red.

The forth is my Bushy AR in .223.The Lyman boolit I tested is the one in the pic I posted. Problem is I simply ran out of daylight. It would have taken another ½ hour to break down, move, and set up at the 100 yard range, our ranges are all separate. So I elected to test the .223 @ 25 yards, mostly to see the velocity, did they lead, and if they stabilized.

Results? Groups @ 25 yds, terrible! That rifle with jaxeted will put one on top of another @ 25y. Velocity was as expected for the powder charges and all boolits hit point first, nice round holes. Groups were round shaped, best was 1".

H-335 23.0 grains, Lyman 224462 coated, then gas checked with Hornady GC's, sized to .224.
AV 2896.5
ES 25.0

24.0 H-335
AV 2920
ES 65

25.0
AV 3092
ES 28.3

Bore was obviously in fired condition looked normally fouled. Clean-up was simple, dry patch showed no lead, patch soaked in eliminator bore solvent, (bore-tech inc.), came out black. One more saturated patch followed by a .223 bronze brush, then a bare patch showed more black carbon fouling, so I repeated the soaked patch followed by a dry patch. Bore sparkles, no lead to be found!


Something that puzzles the heck out of me is the, "WHY?' Why is it so hard to get cast lead bullets that are Powder Coated," to group at least equal to bullets of similar size, shape and weight as Paper-Patched bullets? :veryconfu(I'm talking about rifle bullets)

It's no easy task to get full power Paper-Patched bullets to give repeatable accuracy but according so some of the guys over in the Paper-Patching section, they're able to achieve this using basically the same type of cast bullets and the same alloys that some here are using. (So they say; I can't recall seeing any picture or video proof) I doubt that the cast bullets that the Paper-Patch guys are using are of any higher quality than the cast bullets that the Powder-Coat guys using.

For naked and lubed cast bullets, there's that rifling twist vs. RPM phenomenon that keeps us from being able to shoot those type of cast bullets at full power with repeatable accuracy. (I really can't wrap my head around this phenomenon)

The only difference with the Paper-Patched bullets is that they shed the Paper-Patch at the muzzle, allowing them to fly naked through the air; and this at full power and high RPMs.

Powder-Coated rifle bullets can be shot at full power and high RPMs with no leading but, with the exception of a couple of posts I've come across, very few guys (if any) are getting MOA or better accuracy at 100 yards or more. Why is that?????

I can only think of one reason why, but that reason is nothing that hasn't already been discussed; an unevenly applied layer or layers of Powder-Coat??? If the Powder-Coat is unevenly applied to the body of a rifle bullet, it would seem that it would get ironed flat when it squeezed through the bore.

On a plain or flat based rifle bullet, I can see how accuracy might be affected if the Powder-Coat was uneven on one side of the bullet's trailing edge as apposed to the opposite edge. The Lands in the rifling might be smearing rearward just enough of that excess PC to create a slight elongation on one side of the bullet's tail.

About the only way to try to get around this is to design a rifle bullet that will not be as prone to being affected by the Powder-Coat being applied unevenly. I picture in my mind, a " Smooth-Walled Rebated-Boat-Tail" design of some sort. I've seen computer generated slow motion video of what happens at the transition point of a bullet as it goes from internal-ballistics to external-ballistics. On a flat based bullet, the slightest imperfection at the outer edges of the base of the bullet causes an immediate yaw effect as it leaves the barrel.

I'm thinking that with a Rebated-Boat-Tail, it might be possible to mitigate some of that yaw effect as the bullet leaves the barrel.

I guess the only way to find out is to try it. I have a bunch of metal scraps in my scrap box. I'll see what I can come up with.

HollowPoint

[Russel Nash]

As far as the even coating issue goes...

In theory, you could take 20 or 30 of your cast boolits, weigh them on your scale preferably the more digits to the right of the decimal point. Record the weight of each boolit. Calculate an average weight and standard deviation.

Then powder coat them and do whatever it is that is your normal routine before you would
Normally load them.

Weigh each one again. Calculate a standard deviation.

In theory if the second standard deviation is larger then the first, then the "variability" of your boolits just went up.

As far as the coating being UNevenly applied, I don't know how you could measure the boolit's spinning out of balance condition.

[sparky45]

Russel; if the boolit is spinning out of balance, wouldn't that manifest itself in a keyhole entry pattern?

[HollowPoint]

As far as the even coating issue goes...

In theory, you could take 20 or 30 of your cast boolits, weigh them on your scale preferably the more digits to the right of the decimal point. Record the weight of each boolit. Calculate an average weight and standard deviation.

Then powder coat them and do whatever it is that is your normal routine before you would
Normally load them.

Weigh each one again. Calculate a standard deviation.

In theory if the second standard deviation is larger then the first, then the "variability" of your boolits just went up.

As far as the coating being UNevenly applied, I don't know how you could measure the boolit's spinning out of balance condition.


Other than with ultra-high-speed video recording, I don't know either. I don't know anyone with that kind of video equipment who'd be willing to help out. My point was to try a different bullet design with Powder-Coating in mind in order to eliminate the "Uneven Powder-Coat" theory as a the culprit or at least a variable that influences accuracy; or the lack thereof.

I've come up with a excruciatingly slow way of applying my Powder-Coat as evenly as possible. It involves mechanically rotating an individual cast rifle bullet slowly enough to get an even Coat of Powder 360 degrees around the bullet. I wouldn't want to do this with all of my PC'd bullets but in the interest of eliminating variables, I can't see any other way around it.

HollowPoint

[Russel Nash]

Russel; if the boolit is spinning out of balance, wouldn't that manifest itself in a keyhole entry pattern?

It depends on how out of balance it is.

I think what I am referring to is called "gryroscopic precession". I learned about the concept back when I was learning to fly little Cessnas.

According to this link, it is also called "coning motion". I guess that would be pronounced "cone-ing motion":

http://www.exteriorballistics.com/ebexplained/4th/46.cfm

Here is a pic:

http://www.tuffsteel.com/Ballistics/bullfly/fig29.gif

The thrown football on its wobbly path is a good analogy.

It is also known as "nutation" and here are a few related pics:

http://images.google.com/search?q=Nutation+bullet&tbm=isch&ei=7FgBVPeuJcaxggSL2YHwDw&start=0&sa=N#

[Russel Nash]

This guy in his 13 minute video calls it "bullet yaw":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKbbuZDPw80&feature=youtube_gdata_player

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKbbuZDPw80&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[snuffy]

This guy in his 13 minute video calls it "bullet yaw":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKbbuZDPw80&feature=youtube_gdata_player

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKbbuZDPw80&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Darn, that made my head hurt!:veryconfu It just about pegged my BS meter as well. I never thought of a bullet flying nose up?:-?

HP, don't draw any conclusions from my limited test. Only QC I did was to visually inspect the .224 boolits, then powder coat them. I did NOT weigh them while loading. I have some left, I will take the rifle with me next time, fire it at 100yds. Getting cast .223 boolits to shoot is problematic anytime, so adding another variable is hardly helpful. BESIDES handling those little pills is frustrating, to say nothing of casting them.

I just finished sizing and GC the .308 boolits. Those I WILL weigh , they were visually inspected after casting.

On the other hand, the .357 boolits worked real well in both the GP-100 and the Rossi. Those long 168's had to be seated with the case over the front driving band in order to work though the action of the M-92 Rossi copy. Those were powder coated by the same tumble powder coating as the others.

[Russel Nash]

The bullet has to be angled at least slightly upward.

Once it exits the barrel, gravity is pulling down on it and causing it to drop.

Here is a pic from Hornady's website:

http://www.hornady.com/assets/images/ballistics_resource/external_br/trajectory_figureA.gif

So the bullet is angled slightly upward with respect to the relative wind...kind of like angle of attack when it comes to a wing flying through the air.

[snuffy]

The bullet has to be angled at least slightly upward.

Once it exits the barrel, gravity is pulling down on it and causing it to drop.

Here is a pic from Hornady's website:

http://www.hornady.com/assets/images/ballistics_resource/external_br/trajectory_figureA.gif

So the bullet is angled slightly upward with respect to the relative wind...kind of like angle of attack when it comes to a wing flying through the air.

I'm well aware of trajectory, how it's represented as a curve. But I don't buy into the theory that a bullet flies with it's nose in the air. If it did/does, it would hit a target making a slot or keyhole, instead we see nice round holes. I confess to be real dumb where it comes to higher math. I failed even basic algebra, they let me pass anyway. If those boys have cooked up some fancy equation to say that, I'd say check your math and try again. Those scribblings make no sense to me.

Powder coating is still in it's infancy. The trick will be in perfecting the application technique to result in a more even application of the coating. I agree that one of the problems is the uneven coating, thicker on one side that the other. An out-of-balance boolit just isn't going to fly straight.

I'm going to try sizing and gas checking before coating, then sizing again after. At least with rifle boolits. The gas checks go on real hard with the coating on the GC shank. It's very difficult to get them on straight. I also considered leaving them off. I don't have a seater, so it's a **** shoot to get them on square. I might be giving buckshot a call---,,,.

[HollowPoint]

IMHO you guys are over thinking the uneven PC thing. As R.N. says, weigh one, PC it & weigh it again. Use a really accurate scale. A 0.002" coating with 1/1000 the S.G. of alloy won't unbalance anything even though the formula is S.G. * radii^2.


I can see the reasoning here but I can't see how picking bullets of equal weight will help if the Powder-Coat is unevenly applied. Non-concentric bullets that all weigh the same are still non-concentric bullets. Although, in an odd way, it still makes sense to do this just in the interest of removing another potential variable.

HollowPoint

[sparky45]

Couldn't a cast bullet of same weight as every other cast bullet (size and shape equal) still be "a out of balance" bullet with small (micro) pockets of imperfections such a trapped air, making them less than aerodynamically stable, at least on a minimal basis? Or would something such as that be statistically insignificant as well as those being unbalanced by uneven PC?

[snuffy]

IMHO you guys are over thinking the uneven PC thing. As R.N. says, weigh one, PC it & weigh it again. Use a really accurate scale. A 0.002" coating with 1/1000 the S.G. of alloy won't unbalance anything even though the formula is S.G. * radii^2.

As soon as someone figures out how to keep track of specific boolits through the process of coating and baking, I will do that. Any marking will be covered up. If you're talking about just one boolit, forget it! Not on my bucket list!!:violin:

I don't think that with pistol boolits it makes all that much difference. I've never heard of anybody checking pistol ammo,(like 9mm or even 45's), for how concentric they are. As in run-out.

I'm going to cast some more .308 boolits, this time from my hard-ER mix about 18 BHN. Even before I test the ones I made from range lead. Reason? It's not my mold, it has to be returned soon. Maybe cast some more of the present rang lead first. If something works, I may buy my own mold. I have several Lee molds that are similar, might try some of those.

[HollowPoint]

What's frustrating to me is the fact that no one has been able to pin point the reason or reasons why we have such a hard time getting cast lead bullets to shoot accurately at full-power velocities.

If we have the following scenario; A Paper-Patcher, a Powder-Coater and an As-Cast Bullet-Shooter, all shooting rifle bullets of the same alloy, dropped from the same mold and weight-sorted and shot out of the same gun; all attempting to get their bullets to shoot MOA or better at hundred yards and at velocities equivalent to jacketed full power rounds, (2200 FPS and above) here's basically what we get.

Paper-Patchers claim to be able to do it; with some work of course. Once the Paper-Patch is shed at the muzzle, their bullets are flying naked through the air so that the "Rifling-Twist vs. RPM" hypothesis seems to no longer apply. (and no leading)

Powder-Coaters can achieve the higher velocities with no leading but, also with no repeatable accuracy. And this is accomplished by retaining the synthetic Powder-Coat-Jacket from the muzzle to the target. And somehow, the "Rifling-Twist vs. RPM" hypothesis now does seem to apply for no other reason than we can't seem to come up an other explanation.

As-Cast Bullet-Shooters, unless they use the hardest alloys, are generally relegated to shooting at velocities of less than 2200 FPS in order to get good repeatable accuracy; and when the "Rifling-Twist vs. RPM" threshold is reached, it essentially becomes an exercise in futility.

On the face of it, it would seem that Powder-Coating should offer the higher probability of getting those cast bullets to shoot faster and with more accuracy. The fact that, thus far it has not, tells me that it's most likely caused by a domino effect of one probable-cause effecting another.

Of course, these are all over-simplified generalities.

As long as bullet casting has been practiced, you'd think that the solutions to this dilemma would have been discovered by now. And since Powder-Coating, "Is In It's Infancy," as some have stated, this adds another "Domino" to the "Domino Effect" I eluded to.

I've gotten my K31 to shoot repeatable 1 1/2" groups at two hundred yards shooting As-Cast and lubed bullets. I've posted pictures of my groups before in order to prove this to be true. The down side to this was that my bullets were only flying at the 1500-1600 FPS range. I dream of shooting my cast rifle bullets at full power and full velocity; and with the same or better accuracy as I shoot my jacketed reloads.

The fact that I can get 1 1/2" groups at 200 yards tells me that this same rifle should be able to shoot PCd bullets just as good if not better. The thing that eludes me is, why I cannot.

HollowPoint

[David R]

What was the velocity of the rounds fired for the target?
1825 fps. SD11. 12.5 grains Promo or unique

[Russel Nash]

Just my own experience with a .30-06 bolt action with different types of factory ammo was that some of the heavier bullets grouped better MOA-wise at 200 yards than they did at 100 yards.

I guess the bullets needed time to settle down.

As far as benchmarks go...1 MOA at 100 yards...one inch basically... is a pretty good hurdle for any rifle utilizing factory or jacketed bullets.

Me? Personally? I still have not opened my Harbor Freight ES PC gun.

And I still need to buy some hollow point moulds and a Lee push through sizer (since I sold off my Star earlier in the year).

Sighhh...

Not enough time in the day.

[Russel Nash]

HollowPoint wrote:

What's frustrating to me is the fact that no one has been able to pin point the reason or reasons why we have such a hard time getting cast lead bullets to shoot accurately at full-power velocities.

I remember way back when I started a thread here that was titled something like "Do you believe bullets obturate?"

Well...I got my behind handed to me in that thread.

Somebody posted a pic of a boolit they had fired into a snow bank or snow drift and they later recovered the boolit. He placed it next to a sized but still not loaded boolit. It was pretty evidedent that the fired boolit had shrunk down or squished down in length.

Sooo...okay... If it is reasonable to ASSume boolits squish down upon firing, then could it be reasonable that boolits expand up in diameter while in flight?

That video I posted above says that bullets spin at up to 200,000 RPM's. Could that much centrifigual force make a boolit distort in diameter?

Under the stresses of supersonic flight, could a lead boolit actually bend?

We have all seen or heard about cheap jacketed .223 bullets that tear themselves apart about 50 yards from the muzzle...because they are spinning too fast.
Also...

At what point does a boolit leaving the muzzle at 1,800 fps transition back down through the sound barrier?

[Russel Nash]

IMHO you guys are over thinking the uneven PC thing. As R.N. says, weigh one, PC it & weigh it again. Use a really accurate scale. A 0.002" coating with 1/1000 the S.G. of alloy won't unbalance anything even though the formula is S.G. * radii^2.

Yeah, I think you're right...we are over thinking this.

The thing to do...most likely is to cast a bunch of boolits consistently . Size them, powder coat them, put on gas checks, maybe size them again.

And....THEN weigh them. Figure out an average and then set an upper and lower limit.

If you are looking at a 165 grain average, then stay within + or - 0.2 grains. Anything that is 165.3 and above OR 164.7 and less gets tossed back into the melting pot.

You load up the keepers.

EDIT: in short, how anal retentive do you want to be with your casting and reloading?

I've heard of benchrest and/or F class guys weighing their brass, same process like I mentioned above with selecting a "happy medium" and rejecting the other pieces of brass that don't fit in that "window" of how many plus or minus tenth or hundreth of a grain from that happy medium.

Me? Personally? if I ever do get to that point of casting and powder coating rifle bullets, if it groups better than an AK47 with say Wolf steel cased ammo at 100 yards, then I would be happy with that.

Otherwise, what's the point?

In my opinion...

[Artful]

Just my own experience with a .30-06 bolt action with different types of factory ammo was that some of the heavier bullets grouped better MOA-wise at 200 yards than they did at 100 yards.

I guess the bullets needed time to settle down.

As far as benchmarks go...1 MOA at 100 yards...one inch basically... is a pretty good hurdle for any rifle utilizing factory or jacketed bullets.

Me? Personally? I still have not opened my Harbor Freight ES PC gun.

And I still need to buy some hollow point moulds and a Lee push through sizer (since I sold off my Star earlier in the year).

Sighhh...

Not enough time in the day.

Back in the day we used to call that issue having the bullet "going to sleep" - I had a friend with a 300 win mag bench gun (metallic pink no less)
and his groups at 100 yards were worse than the same loads at 200 yards. 2 moa at 100 and 1 moa at 200 essentially.

[zomby woof]

This guy in his 13 minute video calls it "bullet yaw":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKbbuZDPw80&feature=youtube_gdata_player

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKbbuZDPw80&feature=youtube_gdata_player

and to think all this time I was carefully assembling components without this knowledge. It made my head hurt. I think I'll just go back to what I was doing. It seemed to work.

[HollowPoint]

Back in the day we used to call that issue having the bullet "going to sleep" - I had a friend with a 300 win mag bench gun (metallic pink no less)
and his groups at 100 yards were worse than the same loads at 200 yards. 2 moa at 100 and 1 moa at 200 essentially.


This is exactly the phenomenon I experienced shooting the loads I eluded to with my K31. The bullets I was shooting were cast with the NOE 198 grain spitzer gas-checked bullet mold. I was using a 16.8 grain charge of 2400 on top of magnum large rifle primers.

I did try modifying one of the cavities so that it cast Boat-Tailed Gas-Checked bullets that weighed in several grains heavier but was unable to get the same accuracy as the plain base spitzer configuration at either 100 or 200 yards.

My initial groups shooting bullets cast as they were intended gave me MOA accuracy at a hundred yards so, I was thrilled when I shot at two hundred yards and got 1.5".. Go figure...

HollowPoint

[leadman]

Using the Hi-Tek coating on the 22 caliber boolits lead me to using only linotype and if I wanted over about 3,000 fps I had to heat treat the lino. After the heat treat, then coating and water quenching I ended up with about 32 BHN. I weighed boolits after coating to plus or minus .25grs.
I fired these in my Contender 23" bull barrel at 3,619 fps average and there was no leading and accuracy met the 2 moa. I think there is some velocity left to be had with this alloy but I ran out of case capacity as I was heavily compressing the H4895 in the 223 Rem.

Maybe snuffy can try this with pc and see what happens.

[Mr Humble]

I guess it's fun to try and change the parameters which cast bullets have operated under for 100+ years, but other than fun why bother ? I always thought shooting cast was designed to be inexpensive, accurate fun not building a reactor. With all this dropping in water (dangerous) baking in ovens (lead fumes in food is no good) and coating with substances, the effect of which is unknown, it seems to this old dummy that the prize is not worth the quest. If I want to shoot a 180 gr .308 bullet at 2900 fps, I load up any of my 4 300 H&Hs with TSXs and RL25. It's accurate and kills very well. If a dueling tree or a 300 yard gong is out there, a plain old Lyman #2 .311 gas checked wheel weight bullet at 1500 fps is cheap, easy and effective from a 308 to 300RUM.

All reminds me if the Man of LaMancha......

[snuffy]

I guess it's fun to try and change the parameters which cast bullets have operated under for 100+ years, but other than fun why bother ? I always thought shooting cast was designed to be inexpensive, accurate fun not building a reactor. With all this dropping in water (dangerous) baking in ovens (lead fumes in food is no good) and coating with substances, the effect of which is unknown, it seems to this old dummy that the prize is not worth the quest. If I want to shoot a 180 gr .308 bullet at 2900 fps, I load up any of my 4 300 H&Hs with TSXs and RL25. It's accurate and kills very well. If a dueling tree or a 300 yard gong is out there, a plain old Lyman #2 .311 gas checked wheel weight bullet at 1500 fps is cheap, easy and effective from a 308 to 300RUM.

All reminds me if the Man of LaMancha......

You can be an old-stick-in-the-mud if you want to. If I were to follow that reasoning, I'd still be in the snail mail, corded telephone world of the 50's. I'm glad I got my first computer in '98, and got my first calculator in '75. Not wanting to try something new has held man back for years.

I resisted the coating process because I don't have the space for a spray booth. I would have had to buy a compressor, and do it outside if at all. Along came the tumble process, that I can and have done.

A lot of experiments yet to do to finally nail down just what works and what don't with the coating process. To me, that is what keeps me active, looking for results with a new process. There's even many variations of the coating process, hi-tek, epoxy, and the plain old powder coating. Then divide powder coating into 2, A, sprayed with electrostatic charge or B, tumble in a bowl or tumbler. Then the many types/makers and colors of the powder coatings.

You STILL have to size, often only after the coating process is done. I suspect,(but have yet to prove), that we can drive softer alloys faster with powder coatings, than with slippery lubes. What remains to be seen is if that also results in accurate boolits, small groups. I think Lee's alloy strength limits may well apply here, if the alloy will not stand up to the pressure, it won't matter what the coating does. IOW, if the alloy gives/slumps under pressure resulting in an out of balance boolit, it doesn't matter if it does that while NOT leading the bore.

I can understand not wanting to change if you're having great success with traditionally lubed boolits that are great shooters and do what you want. I also look at about 1k worth of lubrisizers and dies that I already have that may never get used again. I CAN use the Lyman sizers to size the coated boolits using the perfessors nose first die to hold them, already have!

[RP]

Coating lead with something will go away its just a crazy ideal people are doing next thing you hear about is plating boolits and even putting copper and brass wraps on them. You crazy kids kill me lol. Do not even get me started on this smokeless power ideal like who really thinks gunpowder will not smoke.

[Faret]

Do not even get me started on this smokeless power ideal like who really thinks gunpowder will not smoke.

It does smoke just less.:mrgreen:

[runfiverun]

Mr. Humble.
I believe you need a little more education on this cast boolit shooting thing.

lead into water= not dangerous
water into lead = dangerous.

fumes from an oven at 400-f not gonna happen.
fumes from lead at 1 bajillion degrees where it's boiling is possible.
but your boolits are pretty useless at that point and your house is probably on fire too, so a little bit of "fumes" are at the bottom of your worry list right about then.

if you are gonna go through all the trouble of making good boolits and adding in the cost of gas checks then 1500 fps is a waste of time and effort.
you might as well lower the velocity a little more and use plain ol flat based boolits, or put in slightly more effort then go ahead and shoot them to their full potential.

[MostlyOnThePaper]

I guess it's fun to try and change the parameters which cast bullets have operated under for 100+ years, but other than fun why bother ? I always thought shooting cast was designed to be inexpensive, accurate fun not building a reactor. With all this dropping in water (dangerous) baking in ovens (lead fumes in food is no good) and coating with substances, the effect of which is unknown, it seems to this old dummy that the prize is not worth the quest. If I want to shoot a 180 gr .308 bullet at 2900 fps, I load up any of my 4 300 H&Hs with TSXs and RL25. It's accurate and kills very well. If a dueling tree or a 300 yard gong is out there, a plain old Lyman #2 .311 gas checked wheel weight bullet at 1500 fps is cheap, easy and effective from a 308 to 300RUM.

All reminds me if the Man of LaMancha......
Thought occurs that if this topic is of no interest to you that there are literally thousands of others here that might be, rather than trolling this one. Just because some of the techniques are outside your comfort zone doesn't mean they aren't valid. Just saying.

Pretty much every thread regarding baking for example has more than one post reminding us all that your food oven should NOT be used and baking them in the kitchen/indoors is discouraged.

[GhostHawk]

Mr Humble, it seems to me that you should be very happy shooting Jacketed Bullets. Go forth and enjoy!

Cast is not for everyone.

[dverna]

Mr. Humble.
I believe you need a little more education on this cast boolit shooting thing.

lead into water= not dangerous
water into lead = dangerous.

fumes from an oven at 400-f not gonna happen.
fumes from lead at 1 bajillion degrees where it's boiling is possible.
but your boolits are pretty useless at that point and your house is probably on fire too, so a little bit of "fumes" are at the bottom of your worry list right about then.

if you are gonna go through all the trouble of making good boolits and adding in the cost of gas checks then 1500 fps is a waste of time and effort.
you might as well lower the velocity a little more and use plain ol flat based boolits, or put in slightly more effort then go ahead and shoot them to their full potential.


A perfect response....... But back to the issue at hand.

I had really hoped for more success stories. A few people have done well with coated bullets at rifle velocities but it appears to be difficult to achieve good accuracy with coated bullets. Far more difficult than say paper patched bullets. In general, it appears that coated bullets are no better than traditionally lubed/GC'ed bullets in terms of accuracy. Nothing wrong with that!!!! There are some nice advantages like cleaner shooting and it possible they will suffer less from first shot out of the group issues - but not enough testing to confirm this.

Life issues have gotten in the way of my hopes to do testing this year, but I now feel even more convinced that for my needs I will stay with traditional lubes for rifle shooting. One significant advantage of coated bullets is that there is no lube bleed during hot storage conditions. That is important to me for pistol ammo and I am weighing using either BBDT or Hi-Tek. I like the proven performance (20 years) of Hi-Tek but BBDT has the advantage of long shelf life of the powder.

Yet, in a way, I do agree with some of what Mr. Humble says. If I want to push rifle bullets fast and get good accuracy with good terminal performance, it is so much easier to do so with the modern jacketed bullet. It may be "fun" to do that with lead bullets - but it surely is not cost effective for the handful of hunting bullets most of us use.

Before anyone piles on. I have over 40,000 cast bullets (and yes some are rifle bullets) in my inventory. Nothing wrong with cast bullets - but there is nothing wrong with J's either.

Don Verna

[DR Owl Creek]

A perfect response....... But back to the issue at hand.

I had really hoped for more success stories. A few people have done well with coated bullets at rifle velocities but it appears to be difficult to achieve good accuracy with coated bullets. Far more difficult than say paper patched bullets. In general, it appears that coated bullets are no better than traditionally lubed/GC'ed bullets in terms of accuracy. Nothing wrong with that!!!! There are some nice advantages like cleaner shooting and it possible they will suffer less from first shot out of the group issues - but not enough testing to confirm this.

Life issues have gotten in the way of my hopes to do testing this year, but I now feel even more convinced that for my needs I will stay with traditional lubes for rifle shooting. One significant advantage of coated bullets is that there is no lube bleed during hot storage conditions. That is important to me for pistol ammo and I am weighing using either BBDT or Hi-Tek. I like the proven performance (20 years) of Hi-Tek but BBDT has the advantage of long shelf life of the powder.

Yet, in a way, I do agree with some of what Mr. Humble says. If I want to push rifle bullets fast and get good accuracy with good terminal performance, it is so much easier to do so with the modern jacketed bullet. It may be "fun" to do that with lead bullets - but it surely is not cost effective for the handful of hunting bullets most of us use.

Before anyone piles on. I have over 40,000 cast bullets (and yes some are rifle bullets) in my inventory. Nothing wrong with cast bullets - but there is nothing wrong with J's either.

Don Verna


Don,

I just wanted to give you a BIG THANK YOU for all the grief you put up with on this thread from very the beginning. It has all the information I need to know about coatings.

Dave

[David R]

I have posted this before, by better results this time. A clean barrel and 5 fouling shots, I then put TEN rounds in 2 1/8" at 100 yards. This is all I expect.

Stevens model 250 (savage 110) 308.
Bayou 115 gr 30 carbine bullet.
12 grains Promo. Lp primer. AV1825 fps. Sd 11

I will not have to clean it again for a long time.

I shot some jacketed, then more of the Bayou coated and it took about 10 shots to settle in again.

[MT Gianni]

As a fence sitter on coating it appears that if I get 2" moa with FWFL @ 2400 fps, coating will not give me another 300 fps.

[xacex]

As a fence sitter on coating it appears that if I get 2" moa with FWFL @ 2400 fps, coating will not give me another 300 fps.
No, it wont but you wont have the smoke, and you can pre-coat thousands of boolits and not worry about changes of hardness because you can re-heat treat. No worry about how hot it is outside, and if your lube will migrate into the powder too. Something to think about anyway.

[leadman]

I have been shooting the Hi-Tek for quite a while now and recently loaded some previously made lubed boolits to shoot them up. I had forgotten the amount of smoke they produced and how sticky they were to load.
I did some testing and came to the conclusion that the pressure limits in the Lee manual can be exceeded slightly by using HT coating.
The strength of the alloy has to be hard enough to take the pressure. This is why I used heat treated linotype for my 22 cal. boolits I shot up to 3,619 fps.
I can't get quite the accuracy with the HT coating as I can with the wax based lubed boolits at velocities above 1,800 fps or so. I can get adequate accuracy at hunting load velocities though. I am able to get my 30-06 rifles to group into 1/2 moa to 1 moa with HT at the lower velocities I normally shoot of around 1,600 fps.

I do not use any oven for baking my coatings that is also used for food. This is basic common sense. I have looked at the Australian MSDS for the HT coating and found nothing for concern as long as you have good ventilation (outdoors) and stay out of any smoke that leaves the ovens.

[SkyKid]

I've been reading this thread for a while and would like to try pcing some cast
But with working all the time I don't even have a chance to reload let alone cast
I was thinking about how some feel that the lead cannot be cast hard enough to not fail and that maybe part of the reason why it is tough to get 2 moa
Has anyone tried casting zinc
Not sure if it is doable
But if you used a heavier mold say a 200gr to get 180gr?
Just wondering don't know what the weight difference would be
I would think the zinc would be a lot harder than lead
Maybe get better results or not
Just this dumb frogs 2 cents worth
Heck it might be a way to use up all those zinc wheel weights

[GhostHawk]

Well I've been watching this thread with a lot of interest.

What I really have not seen is a lot of guys saying "Ok, you guys are right, PC is the answer"

I suspect it is going to come down to personal taste and style.
And until you can shoot true MOA (That means more than just 50 or 100 yards) in front of Witness's who can varify load, range, etc.
I suspect you won't see a ton of new converts. I think lots of people are on the fence on this one, and would prefer someone else do the ground work.

[Ronnie Dale]

My take on this thread is this.

Very very few people who are the most dedicated cast bullst aficionados are doing with the OP requests with ANY cast projectile. Lubed or PC

[RP]

My take on this thread is this.

Very very few people who are the most dedicated cast bullst aficionados are doing with the OP requests with ANY cast projectile. Lubed or PC

I was posting a long drawn out rant so to speak saying the same thing but after looking at it sometimes short and simple is a lot better. Lead or alloys have limits coating them I feel will not change that. The goal for coating for me is no leading and great colored bullets that shoot good.

[HollowPoint]

I finally got a chance to get out and fire a few of my fist batch of PC'd pistol bullets. I fired some 45 cal. and some .380's. The little 380s shot about the same as plain cast or the expensive store bought self-defense rounds I use for carry. That's a good thing.

I was unimpressed with the 45s performance. They tended to shoot real low at 25 yards with widely dispersed groups.

Cycling with both semi autos was flawless it's just that with my Kimber 45, I'm so used to that gun shooting accurately with every other bullet I've shot out of it that it just sticks in my craw that it didn't shoot well this time out. I'll have to teak the loads to see it that will help.

I just love the fact that I got no leading and that cleaning was a breeze compared to before. I'm not ready to give up just yet.

On a side note; I finally finished my second set of swaging dies for the Smooth-Sided 30 caliber rifle bullets I've been working on. Now I just have to finish up my adjustable 30 caliber bullet mold and I'll be ready to rock and roll with them too.

HollowPoint

[Luigi Lavazza]

Not sure if this qualifies but I'm super happy with it. Done at 50 yds since I was working up a load. Scrap Pb water quenched and weighed in at 139.5 each. Total group size was 1.5" with the 4 at .5". Running between 2700-2800 fps
http://i57.tinypic.com/2dtopd0.jpg

[leadman]

Luigi, if the flyer is included this is 3" at 100 yards so it does not meet the 2 moa.
Was the flyer a called shot out ?
Looks like you have the basis for a good load but just need to refine the load?

[Luigi Lavazza]

yea it was just me yesterday and hadn't shot this rifle in almost a year. I didn't recall flinching so not sure what the flier was. I'll definitely load up 50 or so more and see if I get the same results. May see how they fly in the m1A too. Too bad they won't chamber in the stinkin Savage 10.

[HollowPoint]

Not sure if this qualifies but I'm super happy with it. Done at 50 yds since I was working up a load. Scrap Pb water quenched and weighed in at 139.5 each. Total group size was 1.5" with the 4 at .5". Running between 2700-2800 fps
http://i57.tinypic.com/2dtopd0.jpg


This is the best I've seen so far; even if it is just fifty yards. I agree with Leadman. It looks like you're onto something good. With a little more tweaking you might exceed the OP's original request.

Do you mind if I ask what caliber, Powder, Cast Bullet and load you were using? Scratch that. I found this info in one of your other posts.

I just picked up another toy in 9mm caliber that has side-tracked me from finishing my Smooth-Sided dedicated 30 caliber bullet mold and swaging die set up. I should have it done by the middle of next month and I'm hoping for results similar to yours.

HollowPoint

[Luigi Lavazza]

HollowPoint:
these were launched from my open sight Argentine FAL with a 21" chrome lined 1:11 twist 308 barrel. This load was 45.5 grains of RL15 and the bullets were sized down to 308.

disclaimer: do not start with this load as it may be unsafe in your firearm. Please work up slowly.

I'm planning on moving a 1.5-5 Leupold over to this one and see how it does at 100yds this weekend. Not crazy about the idea of hunting with an 11lb rifle but it might work.

[MostlyOnThePaper]

While the OP was actually with regard to handgun accuracy and I would think rifle accuracy slightly off topic, I find anything related to the FAL interesting. Do you have a thread going in the milsurp area? That thing seems to be really showing promise.

[doctorggg]

Actually the OP is looking for rifle data with coated bullets at 1800 fps.

[MostlyOnThePaper]

Oops
My apologies gentlemen, I'm watching another thread with a similar title. Head in behind makes it hard to read.

[Luigi Lavazza]

HollowPoint,
i apologize. You also asked about the mold. They came from my new RCBS 7.62mm 130gr mold.

[OHPrepper7]

How about a PC'd boolit that gets swaged after a thin coating? Less surface thickness variation and perfect sizing of the whole boolit.

Compressive strength of the PC is more than lead so all you will accomplish is making what ever geometry is there rounder and smaller.

Wouldn't that still largely accomplish the intended goal? As PC displaces lead you would alter the bullets center of gravity, but I'm guessing it would be to an exponentially small degree - insignificant.

My leading theory for mass-produced, highly accurate PC boolits: Re-Swage AFTER powder coat.
This would probably mean swage-coat-swage, as I doubt powder coating the raw core would survive the initial swaging. But a secondary swage would uniform the exterior of the bullet, and (I suspect) give you nearly identical results to a copper jacket swagged bullet.

Is anyone out there equipped/willing to try this?

[Luigi Lavazza]

I swage once and only after coating. Swaging the linotype was definitely more difficult then the pure lead. I was having to spray them with my case lube first.

[Luigi Lavazza]

I was able to make it out yesterday with the newly scoped FAL and the remainder of the 100 that I coated and loaded up with the same recipe. Not good. I zeroed in the scope first with about 7-8 rounds of my known good FMJ load then ran about 40 of the PC cast. Most groups were about 6" spread at 100yds. I went back to my 165 game kings and went back to my 1.5-2" group for this rifle.

when I initially shot them, i cast them on Wednesday, powdercoated on Thursday loaded and shot on Saturday.

i read somewhere here that water quenched lead will soften over time. What is that length of time? Will it go soft in a week?

[Echd]

Water quenched lead alloys (or any lead alloy, really) will harden over time. The degree to which they harden is mostly in accordance with the antimony and to a lesser extent the tin in the mix (but it's the antimony that hardens it over time, the tin is helpful to allow the antimony to alloy with the lead to a significant amount in addition to its other useful functions in fillout). Arsenic also plays a factor to a smaller extent.

Pure lead does not harden or soften over time.

When shooting for a specific hardness it is best to use a lead alloy that is proven to cast around the hardness you desire, as opposed to dropping it in water and hoping for the best. I'll admit I water drop anything made of "mystery metal" because generally that's for pistols or blasting ammo.

I think many of the poor accuracy problems we see may be because people are really trying to hotrod PC'd bullets with entirely too soft alloys. Stay 1800-2100 FPS and you'll have your best results (IN MY EXPERIENCE). I've seen my best results with .30-30, 7.62x39, heavy .308s loaded relatively lightly, .45-70... stuff that doesn't really need a superhard bullet to perform. Even then I'm finding my best results with the lowest pressure recipes I can get.

With a harder alloy you can definitely get by with a little more oomph. You can drive a PC'd bullet as hard as you want, but it may not give you great results.

I recently purchased a NOE .30 XCB mold. I'm not a fan of the .30 XCB idea (seems like a rimless .30-40 Krag would have accomplished what they want, more or less...) but the bullet it drops should be a real shooter in tight bored .30s. I've got a handful cast up and PC'd, GC'd, as well as lubed and GC'd. I am also going to give paper patching a try, but I'll have to get a real narrow sizer die for that first. I'm giving them a couple weeks to harden and I'm also going to try and pick up some monotype to try very hard boolits as well. I'm not shooting for super high velocity, but looking for the best and most repeatable PC accuracy. If i am unable to equal lubed bullet accuracy with PC I might just relegate it to pistol status, where it has achieved extremely excellent results for me. I will be shooting it from my Savage FCP-K which is definitely a 3/4 MOA shooter with 168 SMKs, so if it won't shoot, it's on the bullets.

I have a week off in another two weeks, and I have to get my range mowed too... been really busy with work lately and haven't been able to shoot like I've wanted, but I've been acquiring lots of toys to play with over the fall and winter.

[leadman]

HollowPoint, see my posts #59 and #159.

I am not giving up on Hi-Tek and rifle loads but will continue to develop loads for the 30 cals. that my neck can stand and try to get the best accuracy with.
I tried adding moly to the HT liquid one time but seem to have lost the data amongst the rest so will rerun this testing. I may also try some spray on moly that I tested for Lee Precision several years back. My thinking is that there is alot of friction and heat at higher velocities from the powder and the boolit slammed tightly in the bore.
Lubing in a luber/sizer is faster and in most cases results in better accuracy in the rifles but it sure is messy compared to HT or PC.

[Russel Nash]

I was able to make it out yesterday with the newly scoped FAL and the remainder of the 100 that I coated and loaded up with the same recipe. Not good. I zeroed in the scope first with about 7-8 rounds of my known good FMJ load then ran about 40 of the PC cast. Most groups were about 6" spread at 100yds. I went back to my 165 game kings and went back to my 1.5-2" group for this rifle.

when I initially shot them, i cast them on Wednesday, powdercoated on Thursday loaded and shot on Saturday.

i read somewhere here that water quenched lead will soften over time. What is that length of time? Will it go soft in a week?

Were you using gas checks with your cast lead and powder coated boolits?

[Luigi Lavazza]

Yes I was using gas checks. I have tried with and without and have more success with them on.

[xacex]

Bump to see if anyone else has been working on this. I had to dedicate some time to another project, so I should be getting back on track to revisit my work, and see if I can get some improvements.

[MBTcustom]

Unfortunately, even 1/2" groups at 50 yards do not equal sub 3MOA at 100. Linear expansion can never be assumed with cast bullets.

[Russel Nash]

My take on this thread is this.

Very very few people who are the most dedicated cast bullst aficionados are doing with the OP requests with ANY cast projectile. Lubed or PC

BINGO!

I think I might have posted pics in this thread already of my AR chambered in 7.62X39, along with a 100 yard group.

With American Eagle brass cased ammo with jacketed bullets, it is at best a 1.5 inch grouping gun at 100 yards.

I missed out on a chance for Walmart clearanced AR in .308 for $600 plus a couple of weeks ago.

That would have been my choice of gun/caliber to use for experimenting with this to meet the high bar the OP has set for this thread

[Russel Nash]

Let me posit a theory...maybe I mentioned this already???

this coming from my "do you believe boolits obturate?" Thread from a year or two ago.

One of the posters in that thread had posted pics of his boolits he had fired into a snow bank and recovered.

Let's say his as cast but yet to be fired boolit was 2 inches long. The boolit recovered from the snow bank was visibly shorter say maybe 1.75 inches long. (I am just using those numbers because they are nice and round).

So obviously there is some "plasticity" with lead or lead alloys. That boolit look like it squished down like a marshmallow.

What if this same plasticity in lead causes the boolit to flex in flight...basically, to whip.

You can see this in slow motion video of arrows in flight.

So for you guys who are trying to go with a dead soft lead boolit covered by powder coating, I suppose you are actually working backwards, against your desired result as the OP initially set out for this thread.

Probably even moreso with longer and skinnier boolit designs as I would think they would flex more.

Anyway...just a theory. I don't come here to cast boolits as often as I used to, and with my foggy memory, I might have already suggested this.

[fredj338]

I guess it's fun to try and change the parameters which cast bullets have operated under for 100+ years, but other than fun why bother ? I always thought shooting cast was designed to be inexpensive, accurate fun not building a reactor. With all this dropping in water (dangerous) baking in ovens (lead fumes in food is no good) and coating with substances, the effect of which is unknown, it seems to this old dummy that the prize is not worth the quest. If I want to shoot a 180 gr .308 bullet at 2900 fps, I load up any of my 4 300 H&Hs with TSXs and RL25. It's accurate and kills very well. If a dueling tree or a 300 yard gong is out there, a plain old Lyman #2 .311 gas checked wheel weight bullet at 1500 fps is cheap, easy and effective from a 308 to 300RUM.

All reminds me if the Man of LaMancha......
Even at 59, my mind remains open to new things. Research coated bullets, then you won't make statements that make you look foolish.
No lead fumes from heating bullets to 400deg, but I use a separate conv oven anyway.
water dropping bullets offers zero danger, it's a solid going into a liquid.
the point for me is finding a bullet I can shoot for a penny in my gas guns. So no gc, just adds cost. If PC works, 2" or better at 100, then I am there. So far hi-trek at rifle vel a failure.

[MBTcustom]

Exactly! I went out today even considering the wind gusts to take some measurements that are a good example of this. Shooting my 300 Blackout (which is not a cartridge known for sub moa accuracy to begin with) with jacketed 125 grain speer TNT bullets with exact same load as the cast boolits, Mihec 311410 cast with the same data I have posted in this tread before, and the same load at 200 yards. It takes a while for you to hear the "whack" at these speeds, and distance. I think with this boolit/load combo 200 yards is its limit for small to small/medium game such as a white tail or black-tail deer. Definitely not bench rest quality groups lol, but good for its intended purpose. I still need to try copper gas checks and do some more work on the load, but I just pulled out 20 from the lot of 500 I made several months ago to get out of the house, and see if my other results were a fluke. Nope, not a fluke. Worse conditions today, but shot a little better than last time. Had to re sight the gun for some reason. Temperature changes, and getting beat around in a safe guess.

148002148003148004 These are in order of jacketed with same load, brass ect, cast at 100 yards, then 200 yards cast. BTW, this is the first, and only 5 shots I have ever taken with this gun at 200 yards.Please be gentle on me :bigsmyl2:


You did very well to go and shoot at longer ranges instead of assuming the loads would provide the same MOA as they did at close range.
What you have demonstrated is a classic example of non-linear group expansion and it plagues cast bullet shooters.
Don't be embarrassed about it! Kudos for actually posting your targets!
So what you do now is set up shop at the 200 yard line and start figuring out what the gun needs to pull it together, then move to 300 and so forth. The further you get from the muzzle of the rifle, the more predictable the next 100 yard increment will be.

Sub MOA at 50 and 100 may not mean sub MOA at 200, but sub MOA at 200 almost certainly means the same or better at 50 and 100. Personally, I don't trust my bullets accuracy any further than I have tested them and personally witnessed consistent results. I apply this philosophy to jacketed loads as well.

[MostlyOnThePaper]

My take on this thread is this.

Very very few people who are the most dedicated cast bullst aficionados are doing with the OP requests with ANY cast projectile. Lubed or PC
A large number of do-ers who HAVE done it have given up posting results or much of anything else over here due to not wanting to hear why their results are invalid for X reason. This used to be a great place to learn, now not as much.

[Jupiter7]

A large number of do-ers who HAVE done it have given up posting results or much of anything else over here due to not wanting to hear why their results are invalid for X reason. This used to be a great place to learn, now not as much.

Once I proved it to myself, it's up to others to decide their level of involvement. I occasionally post results, not all successes either. My current results trump any I ever had with lube&lead. I still load jacketed for match loads and longer range in rifles. For the naysayers, I challenge you to do the work and prove us wrong.

[xacex]

Once I proved it to myself, it's up to others to decide their level of involvement. I occasionally post results, not all successes either. My current results trump any I ever had with lube&lead. I still load jacketed for match loads and longer range in rifles. For the naysayers, I challenge you to do the work and prove us wrong.
Unfortunately, we have not got to the accuracy level of bench-rest shooters using lube. The problem lies in the fact those shooters have not picked it up where we have met this challenge, and improved upon the success that as been shown. This method is only as good as the people using it. It is not "magic." You have hacks like myself who go okay this is as good as what we have accomplished with standard lube, and stop there. Until you or I's skill level improves, or some of the competitive shooters pick it up I am afraid that this is the end of the road for accuracy with powder coat. We have seen sub MOA groups in this thread, but frankly there are not many sub MOA cast shooters in this pool. Maybe if there was money involved things would be different, but it is only the hobbyist who have picked this up.

[crackers]

The first sentence of the OP tells me 'goodbye' - I'm wasting my time. I just go shoot.

[Russel Nash]

The first sentence of the OP tells me 'goodbye' - I'm wasting my time. I just go shoot.

Yep, pretty much.

Reloading just in general especially for rifle is one of those things that I look at and ask:


"How anal retentive does one want to be?"



Do I want to flashole deburr every case?

Do I want to clean and uniform primer pockets?

Do I want to weigh my cases, set an average and only use cases that are plus or minus X grains?

Do I want to do the same exact thing with my boolits?

Do I want to buy this contraption:

http://accurateshooter.net/Blog/ctkconcen05.jpg

To check for bullet concentricity?

Do I want to turn case necks?

Do I want to anneal cases?

In my opinion, I would rather shoot and have just so-so accuracy. All those things mentioned above sound like chores to me.

And like that old saying by Stalin goes, "quantity is a quality in itself".

I'd rather have fun blasting/plinking ammo in bulk.

Also, in my mind, all the steps mentioned above seem to result in the law of diminishing returns. The more time and effort you sink into brass/boolit/loaded tound prep, yields even less and less measurable results.

[MBTcustom]

Not everyone is concerned with accuracy. That's cool! I've certainly done my fair share of blasting in my time, and I love it dearly. However, plinking isn't much fun if you can't hit what your shooting at. Careful load development followed by an absolutely glorious expenditure of precise ammo is one of the supreme pleasures of life in my opinion. But on the other hand, haphazardly spraying the berm and missing your mark 75% of the time because the rifle is less accurate than I am is what makes me want to wrap a gun around a tree.
For me, the time spent learning to make ammo that shoots better than I do is absolutely necessary in order to make sure that I continue to shoot better than I did last year.

[Motor]

Russel Nash. I tried to quote your last post but it's tuff to navigate on fone. I totally agree with the post though. I thought of taking up the challenge and working up a sub 2MOA load which actually I believe I already have, but why? Why bother going through the trouble of range visits and photos and all the rest just so I could post it. I'm sorry it's just not worth the hassle.

Motor

[xacex]

Not everyone is concerned with accuracy. That's cool! I've certainly done my fair share of blasting in my time, and I love it dearly. However, plinking isn't much fun if you can't hit what your shooting at. Careful load development followed by an absolutely glorious expenditure of precise ammo is one of the supreme pleasures of life in my opinion. But on the other hand, haphazardly spraying the berm and missing your mark 75% of the time because the rifle is less accurate than I am is what makes me want to wrap a gun around a tree.
For me, the time spent learning to make ammo that shoots better than I do is absolutely necessary in order to make sure that I continue to shoot better than I did last year.
My skill improves every year, as does my loading practices, but there are some in here that are well beyond what my level is, and I would like to see some of them work with this. I need to bug Starmetal into trying it with the 6.5. Just assuming there will be no consistency is no longer a valid excuse. Like you if I am not hitting the broadside of a barn I move on, but out of the gate this showed promise with rifle loads, and has been proven successful with pistol loads. Just like the argument about using cast boolits vs jacketed only those who put in the effort will ever achieve exceptional results. If that means using fancy do-dads to make that happen so be it. Maybe I will be that anal retentive in the future, but right now I am enjoying making the small improvements and seeing results. I have a 6.5 Grendel, and a boolit for it I would like to try. It is a real accurate rifle, and cartridge. Still need a sizer to make it happen. That one has produced groups in the teens for 5 shots in the past for me. When I am working on that combo you bet I will be anal retentive. I expect it will produce MOA performance to 200 yards without to much fuss.

[P Flados]

Accuracy does mean a lot to me. However, realism for me is probably not 2 MOA.

I shoot Contenders mostly.

My Dan Wesson 357 max silhouette special is the other gun I shoot regularly.

In recent years, I have only a couple of J word loads able to consistently get close to 3 MOA.

It is frustrating given the Contender reputation and given that not long after I started shooting (nearly 40 years ago) I shot less than 2 MOA with a couple of rifles without much work.

However, some of my ASBB PC boolits shoot as good as the best boolit loads I have been able to work up. I really want 2 MOA, but given my guns, I will probably happy to be reliably less than 4 MOA. If I get below 2 MOA it will be a real achievement.

[dverna]

Imagine my surprise when this old thread I started almost 2 years ago popped back up!!!!

Like most reloaders, I want less expensive ammunition that performs at least as well as factory ammunition even for "blasting". For serious shooting, where very little ammo is used, it should be better - or why bother?

Casting, for most of us, is not a "calling". It is a way to produce less expensive bullets --- but they still need to perform! For a smaller subset, it is part of being self sufficient, and there is an even smaller group that are anal about it. BTW, it is these anal types who do most of the work and who we learn the most from.

It has been almost two years since this thread was started. It appears that coated bullets have generally been unsuccessful at meeting the criteria. I find it hard to believe that our "anal" brothers have not tried coated bullets. I wonder if any of the cast benchrest shooters read this forum and converted to coated bullets to gain a competitive advantage. If not, that is telling.....

Although there are good reasons to use coated bullets for cast pistol bullets, it would appear that if a newbie were to start into cast rifle bullets, and was looking for velocity with accuracy, he/she would have an easier time with one of the good traditional lubes.

Goodsteel makes an excellent point. Our 2 moa goal at 100 yards does not mean we have a 2 moa load at all ranges. This seems more true with cast bullets than with jacketed bullets. At 250 yards, it could well be a pattern instead of a group!

I disagree with some who have basically said, "It is not worth the effort" to produce accurate ammunition. The real issue is, even with all the effort, can a coated bullet meet the velocity and accuracy goals proposed? Is it repeatable, and is it possible for others to replicate?

One last thing. If you are satisfied with a 4 moa load that is OK. It meets your needs. It does not mean it will meet the needs of others. The others are not wrong or "anal" because their needs are different. Developing a load to shoot varmints at 200 yards is different than hunting in the bush at less than 75 yards.


Don Verna

[xacex]

In content with letting letting this thread get buried. The OP has offered nothing but negative remarks to those who have actually worked on this and been successful at meeting his goals. Good-by...

[220]

Shot a few loads yesterday that I think will do it.
Rifle: Zastava M70 375H&H
Boolit: NOE 278-275-FN-GC cast from 2-2-96 as a HP and coated with HiTek Bronze liquid.
Last 2 loads tested averaged 1802FPS and 1837FPS.
Only 3 shot groups but the 1802fps load went 0.96"and 0.98" at 50y 1.52" at 100y
1837fps load went 0.85" at 50y and 0.82" at 100y
Only 3 shot groups as I said but every one under 2moa and over 1800fps I would expect 5 shot groups to open a little but should average very close to being under 2moa
The rifle average 1.25moa with Federal blue box ammo for 3 shots.

Tried 9 different loads in 45/70 with NOE 460-405-RF cast from the same alloy again as a HP with HiTek liquid bronze.
Once again 7 of the 9 were under 2moa for 3 shot groups but velocity only peaked at 1546FPS. The 1546FPS group was actually the best of the day at 0.8moa and the last load tested without any cleaning since prior to the first shots of the day.

[220]

Had a look at my load records and I had tested one of the H&H loads previously, no velocity recorded but did have a group size.
5 x 3 shot groups at over 1800fps with every one under 2moa for a combined average of 1.58moa I would say Ive done it.
5 x 3 is probably a better representation of the true accuracy than a single 5 shot group. Interesting that both loads actually shot better at 100y than 50y, only a small sample I will admit but at this stage it doesn't look like increasing the range from 50 to 100y has resulted in groups opening any more than you would expect for the increased range.
What we are really happy about is these are a fairly soft boolit designed for hunting, cast from 2-2-96 so around 12BHN, maybe to soft as a HP at 1800+fps but a bit of field testing will soon confirm this.
Need to do a bit more testing at longer range but it looks like we have a combination that should be effective on deer close to 200y which was our goal all along. No more than + or - 2" from muzzle to 150y and still hitting with around 1500ft/lbs energy.
crappy pic I know but left hand group is the last H&H load at 100y, target is a ISSF air pistol target, white patch is covering the 10 ring but for a reference the 9 ring is 1.1"
http://madmick3006.com/ahngallery/upload/files/2015-12/53d4097c.jpg

[pmer]

What are cast boolit bench shooters getting for group size anyways?

[pmer]

Yep, pretty much.

Reloading just in general especially for rifle is one of those things that I look at and ask:


"How anal retentive does one want to be?"



Do I want to flashole deburr every case?

Do I want to clean and uniform primer pockets?

Do I want to weigh my cases, set an average and only use cases that are plus or minus X grains?

Do I want to do the same exact thing with my boolits?

Do I want to buy this contraption:

http://accurateshooter.net/Blog/ctkconcen05.jpg

To check for bullet concentricity?

Do I want to turn case necks?

Do I want to anneal cases?

In my opinion, I would rather shoot and have just so-so accuracy. All those things mentioned above sound like chores to me.

And like that old saying by Stalin goes, "quantity is a quality in itself".

I'd rather have fun blasting/plinking ammo in bulk.

Also, in my mind, all the steps mentioned above seem to result in the law of diminishing returns. The more time and effort you sink into brass/boolit/loaded tound prep, yields even less and less measurable results.

When I had the High Power and Long Range bug I would do all of this for 600 yards and beyond. But it's a points game. When I used my 6.5-284 as a deer rifle minute of deer was no trouble! One way around some of those steps is to buy the top shelf brass.

[dverna]

220,

Very well done!!!

Thanks for posting

Don

[209jones]

As to accuracy with the benchresters and cast boolits, take a look at the CBA matches and the ASSRA matches, 10 shots @ 100 @ 1moa is very doable, with peep sights, also doable @ 200. 2moa is out of the running with them. Haven't seen anything on this site that gets anywhere near that, or anywhere else that talks about PC bullet accuracy. If those guys could get that accuracy with some extra speed to combat wind, they'd take it in a heartbeat. 2moa at 100 is not what I would expect or accept from my stuff except with a bigbore. These days, with normal iron hunting sites, I would accept that, but not with a peep or a scope.
Haven't seen anything yet, to convince me, that investing in a special mould for it, is worth the money or the effort to work it up on a rifle.

[Idaho Sharpshooter]

I believe that any thing worth doing, is worth doing right.
Why waste gas and tire wear and my time going to the range with a load I know isn't sub-moa out to 200yds?

just me...

Rich

[P Flados]

I am not there yet, but a lot closer than I was.

Considering I am only using a Contender and considering my rest sits on a wobbly plastic tray at an indoor range, I am starting to get close to the 2 MOA.

Velocity is probably short of 1800 fps, but I am betting it is pretty respectable for a 30 cal 173 gr boolit from a 14" Contender. Primers actually still look like I could go a little faster with the current powder, I 4227, and I do have some small quantities of slower stuff. Again I may not reach the "goal" of this thread, but I expect to be knocking at the door so to speak.

Check out my thread on checkless Naked Nose PC boolits

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?303334-Bare-Nosed-checkless-PC-coated-C309-170-F

[jcren]

On the base question, has anyone tried using NOE'S base leveling tool? Designed to deburr/slightly bevel bases to make gas checks go on easier, I have wondered about using it to uniform base edges on pc'd bullets. Slight bevel shouldn't effect leading.

[OS OK]

I expect this will be a very short thread but here goes.

I have been following all the coated threads and frankly they have become onerous. So the purpose of this thread is very specific. The only posts should be of coated bullets that have given groups no larger than 2 moa for 5 shots or more.

This is being done to provide a "Cliff notes" for coated bullet performance (this comes from a well known poster who made that comment).

Posts of "purty" rifle bullets without group data are discouraged - people looking for performance do not care how "purty" they look. Pictures of ugly bullets that meet the 2 moa threshold are OK. Pictures of "purty" bullets that shoot are OK too.

Many people do not want to post load data due to liability concerns. If you feel this way, it is suggested that you post the powder used and velocity data. If you do not have a chronograph, post "estimated" velocity; as we can work back to get the likely charge weight. Good data will be:

1. number of fouling shots if any
2. coating used, how applied; time and temperature of cure
3. Bullet used, alloy, and sized dia. - any culling criteria used (eg bullets weighed to +/- .2 gr)
4. powder used and estimated or measured velocity
5. Rifle used and caliber
6. How accuracy compares to jacketed and/or traditionally lubed in the gun
7. GC data
8. number of shots in the group
9. Number of groups before accuracy deteriorates.

By limiting the thread this way we can provide a repository of "what works". People new to coatings are going to ask "stupid" questions and most will not wade through two or three 80+ page threads. So let's have a thread that is succinct and to the point.

Although my opinion is that PC will prevail, should HT users find a coating that works, this will be a great boost to their marketing efforts. Again, no "fluff"; and keep useless banter down. Just the facts.

I originally thought that 2200 fps should be the demarcation point but dialed it down to 1800 so some of the "thumpers" can participate.

What works!!!

Don Verna

Absolutely unbelievable…"I thought finally! Were going to get some hard evidence here one way or the other. Stats that are useful. Short, sweet and to the point!"

I'm convinced now more than before…"People click in at the last post and join in the thread with meaningless 'dribble'! Just to make a comment, mine is bigger, well…mine is longer, mine is purple and smooth, mine is new and etceteras until I had to give up somewhere around the 40's on posts!"
What has happened to this forum…or what's wrong with people? I don't know the question to ask.

"What a frustrating end to a post with all the right intentions to begin with! I hope you don't quit trying to compare."

Rant is over…'who cares anyway'? …OS OK

[Idaho Sharpshooter]

Boolit Master,

time and materials are always the question. I have one of those concentricity gauges, and a 1/10,000ths readout dial indicator.

Cast or jacketed, it pretty much removes all doubt about your casting and loading ability.

[Idaho Sharpshooter]

Popper,

if your accuracy standards differ from mine, that would be your issue. As long as you are content to spend hours casting/sizing/powder coating/loading ammunition and shooting; and happy with your results that is all that matters.

[dverna]

There have been a handful of people who have achieved accuracy results with coated rifle bullets. Some, I believe, have stopped posting due to frustration with the anti coating crowd. In fact, I have been accused of being an anti.....but such is life on this forum at times.

If some can do it, it follows that coatings can be made to work.

On another site, an ex member (who has his act together) gave coated bullets a try and seems to have abandoned them. He was not able to match the accuracy he could achieve with lube. Maybe he did not try hard enough, but I know his standards are much higher than 2 moa at 1800. Or for his situation, there are no advantages to coatings so it was not worth going further.

The purpose of this thread was to establish a repository of information for those interested in accurate powder coated rifle loads. Although I requested authorization a long time ago to delete posts that do not contribute to that goal, the moderators believed it would offend some posters. So, as in so many other threads, there is a lot of junk to wade through to find a few salient facts.

One would think that that a topic like this would make a sticky. But either the paucity of results or lack of interest have shown otherwise. Another thread started by Jon B has also died.

I hope as more people work with coatings the art of achieving accuracy with coatings can be understood. It is with understanding what works, and why, that progress will be made.

[P Flados]

For those that want an easy way to Idaho's post:

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?305144-initial-findings

After review, I will add that Idaho seems to be going at it it with "top of the line" technique for assembling rounds.

Hopefully he will reach his target and will share more about actual coating application.

[Wreck-n-Crew]

I'm still hoping to see some good success come from this thread. I have just successfully shot a good group using a jacketed bullet through my 270 win. That makes me want to grab a mold and give it a shot.

However i know that the bullet is what will matter in the end. No doubt in my mind that a good bullet that is cast with precision and equal in weight is half the battle. Not sure i can even get there without having a mold made and weighing my mixtures to insure uniformity.

Then there is insuring PC doesn't mess it all up by not coating evenly enough.

My pistol pc bullets are just fine. But i am wondering if its worth it to invest in a special mold, if i even half to, and can i coat them and size them to be rifle accurate?

Any updates?.......just hoping...



Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

[dverna]

Wreck,

If you have just recently shot a good group using jacketed bullets, you are a long way from trying to get good groups with cast bullets. The other challenge you face is that the smaller calibers tend to be more affected by small variations in bullet consistency.

Others familiar with the .270 can suggest a good mold to start with. Do a search, or start a thread. My opinion is that traditional lubes offer an easier path for accurate cast bullets. White Label 2500 or Carnube Red would be good choices at the higher velocities.

Many will send you a handful of cast bullets to experiment with before you invest in a mold.

Good luck

Don