Pb to J-words and back

[0802]

I'm sure this will spark much debate etc.

I bought a new Ruger M77 Mk 2 in 30-06 to be my "main" hunting rifle (its never been in a stand yet!). As I worked up a load for it with j-words, I got into bullet casting and it was a natural experiment. I've dusted off that project and now have a decent cast shooter (at least in my mind). However, I've drifted away from the original purpose of buying that rifle -- hunting at ranges beyond what my 30-30 or similar can handle.

Now my question -- what would I need to do to transition between cast and j-words in this rifle? Would I hurt anything if I just did a routine cleaning after shooting cast and went to j-words and vice versa? I'm not seeing any leading or the like with my Pb loads.

I'd simply like to be ale to have my 175 gr Pb loads to plink with most of the year and then be able to transition to 150 or 165 gr SPs with a minimal cleaning and a rezeroing.

I'm sure many will suggest to simply hunt with the Pb load -- I'm considering that too. Just exploring options.

[NVcurmudgeon]

I'm sure this will spark much debate etc.

I bought a new Ruger M77 Mk 2 in 30-06 to be my "main" hunting rifle (its never been in a stand yet!). As I worked up a load for it with j-words, I got into bullet casting and it was a natural experiment. I've dusted off that project and now have a decent cast shooter (at least in my mind). However, I've drifted away from the original purpose of buying that rifle -- hunting at ranges beyond what my 30-30 or similar can handle.

Now my question -- what would I need to do to transition between cast and j-words in this rifle? Would I hurt anything if I just did a routine cleaning after shooting cast and went to j-words and vice versa? I'm not seeing any leading or the like with my Pb loads.

I'd simply like to be ale to have my 175 gr Pb loads to plink with most of the year and then be able to transition to 150 or 165 gr SPs with a minimal cleaning and a rezeroing.

I'm sure many will suggest to simply hunt with the Pb load -- I'm considering that too. Just exploring options.


I go back and forth all the time. After shooting cast boolits I clean thoroughly with Hoppe's No. 9, and after shooting jacketed bullets I clean thoroughly with Butch's Bore Shine. I never have any falling off of accuracy either way. This routine is necessary because I hunt deer and larger with jacketed and get in a lot of cheap, light recoiling practice with the cast.

[cabezaverde]

I have often thought about doing the same - have considered having 2 scopes with Weaver mounts. One would be for my hunting J-load, one for my cast practice load.

Haven't done it yet.

[DLCTEX]

cabezaverde: Why not just buy one quality scope that can be dependably reset between the two types of bullets? Record the settings and change them according to which bullet is used. DALE

[44man]

I would say to try and remove all the copper before going to cast. Going the other way just needs a normal cleaning.
I have never determined for myself whether the copper will cause leading if left in the bore because I have always cleaned it out first. The story is that it will so I never took the chance.
Now the big question! We returned a popular revolver because the barrel was oversize and out of round. The company accused us of making it that way by firing jacketed over leading in the bore. They said running over the lead bent the bore!
However, no cast boolits were shot from the gun so they came back and said we must have left lead in the bore when we slugged it. The bore was oiled first and cleaned after so that is also out of the question.
Has anyone here ever bent a barrel by shooting jacketed after lead?

[mroliver77]

44man,
That is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard.They are sure trying to sidestep on this one. I wonder if they are actually that stupid or just corrupt. I had a new Rem 700 in 22-250 a few years back. When I cleaned it before shooting I found that the first 2" of barrel looked as though there were threads cut in the bore. It was deep enough to go through the lands and into the valleys. I called Rem and the only person I could talk to was obviously an inner city woman that spoke a diferent form of English than I do. After explaining my situation she asked how the accuracy was. I told her I had not been fired. She did not understand the complaint if I had not even tried firing it. She advised my to fire it and see how it shot! I took it to my gunsmith whos opinion was that it might blow up if fired. After many calls on my dime( they would not give me a toll free # I sent it back. I had to pay my shipping. I got it back a few weeks later with another barreled action in my stock with no charge. This "lady" would prolly think that lead will damage your bore.
J

[Blammer]

well, before I "knew" any better I proceeded to send lead bullets down range, after shooting jacketed ones in my 357. No detriment to accuracy or added leading. I then shot jacketed bullets after it. No problems.

now that I know better; I clean before swapping. Why? cause now I know better, not because of anything I experienced. :) so, I really don't know.

did the same thing in my 35 rem contender. Good accuracy either way, no leading.

now I try to only shoot lead or jacketed and before switching, clean good.

(I wonder if I'm being to particular about this?)

[Bass Ackward]

Would I hurt anything if I just did a routine cleaning after shooting cast and went to j-words and vice versa?

In my mind, it takes a team effort.

Copper removes dimensional issues in a bore that lead can never do to make it more uniform dimensionally. This is because once sized down, copper is more likely to remain sized down and not to react to pressure once it drops below about 45,000 psi. Copper will also surface harden the rifling that lead will not do.

Lead will polish like copper never can. But .... this polishing cation can be good or it can be bad. Lead reacts to pressure easier than copper. Plus, it also has a certain amount of spring back based upon it's chemical composition. So lead will get into the low spots to remove tool marks that copper wouldn't reach until metal farther back in the pipe was corrected.

So the best thing for a barrel in my mind is to start with jacketed and then to alternate back and forth. This way you correct and you maintain uniform dimensions, and you surface harden back the steel that is polished away by the lead which retards further polishing. Bottom line, you end up with a more accurate barrel with a longer accurate life.

[44man]

Sounds good to me and I am glad you didn't say my hat is on backwards! [smilie=1:

[Lloyd Smale]

Ive gone back and forth in handguns for years without any cleaning. Ill even use jacketed to clean out lead and also shoot a couple hundred jacketed bullets through a new gun to polish up the bore and go right to shooting cast. Its never hurt a thing for me. Id say if your getting copper or lead fouling bad enough to cause troubles with either its time to address the problem with the gun.

[yeahbub]

I never had any trouble following one with the other, but I got best accuracy with cast when I cleaned the barrel after jacketed. Some rifles are more particular than others.

Posted by 44man: ". . . Now the big question! We returned a popular revolver because the barrel was oversize and out of round. The company accused us of making it that way by firing jacketed over leading in the bore. They said running over the lead bent the bore!
However, no cast boolits were shot from the gun so they came back and said we must have left lead in the bore when we slugged it. The bore was oiled first and cleaned after so that is also out of the question. . ."

44man, I don't know what sort of brill-y-unt en-guy-near or tick-nishy-un was inflicted upon you, but if a little leading followed by a J-bullet could stretch a barrel beyond it's elastic limit, how would they explain barrels staying the same size when they deliberately left six or so obstructions in them called LANDS? It would be interesting to hear this fellow explain that one. I have read of military FMJ's being modified by cutting off the tips that wind up leaving the jacket in the bore while the core is sent downrange and the next round causes an annular indentation in the bore in the shape of the jacket that got "run over" but the dead give-away is the bore indentation in situations like that. I believe mroliver77 is correct. You met up with an artless (witless) sidestepper.

[runfiverun]

sooo is s& whoever going to fix you up with a properly made barell
or are they just going to bend it straight
and charge ya shipping ?

[44man]

Bub, the fellow that wrote that is the owner of a company that I am not allowed to mention the name of here anymore.
I still have the actual correspondence but can't figure out how to post it. Of course I would have to black out names.

[357maximum]

Bub, the fellow that wrote that is the owner of a company that I am not allowed to mention the name of here anymore.
.

I remember...can I say their name? :evil:

[Bass Ackward]

Well, just like everything else in this sport, there are no 100% guarantees. Just like the phenomenon of chamber ringing, bulges can occur from something as fluffy as milk weed. At least that was the only thing the owner could think might have caused it. And I would think that lead could be a little tougher than that. So get the right conditions and it could be possible. Replaced enough barrels cause of them (bulges) anyway.

[44man]

No bulge Bass, out of round full length and oversize in the extreme. How does .360 groove to groove in a .357 sound?
Please, no names! [smilie=1:

[Bass Ackward]

No bulge Bass, out of round full length and oversize in the extreme. How does .360 groove to groove in a .357 sound?
Please, no names! [smilie=1:


If you go to that unmentionable WEB site now and look up the specs page, no dimensions are mentioned anymore, for any caliber. All it will say is that it is made for .357 bullets.

I have wanted one for years and just not been able to justify the expense for a handgun. As luck would have it, I ran into a guy that wanted to sell the one I eventually bought. I had everything in my pocket. He consented to let me measure and I was happy as all get out. So I bought it. Repeated the same test again later pushing a slug all the way through and I was surprised that it did have a .0005 or so constriction at the threads. I took that out of it. But he hadn't put a box of shells through it. He said that the price made it just too valuable to take out and use.

It is for me too, but that thing is going in my coffin. :grin: Maybe I can't take it with me, but I'll know where it is if I ever figure out how later. :grin:

Boy howdy will it shoot just with open sights. But this gun was made in 98 too which is basically why I was interested.

[yeahbub]

I wonder if their barrels are hammer forged on a madrel and the cycle wasn't properly brought to completion, maybe a power failure or something. If the machine operator slid the blank off the mandrel as a reject, which then got included with the good ones, it could explain how a sub-standard part got mounted on a gun and shipped out. That would account for the out-of-round condition and the oversize groove dia. as well.

If you really like the piece, it might be worthwhile to put out feelers and acquire an OEM take-off barrel from GPC or someone and have it mounted.

[44man]

Took 3 barrels to get it right but it now measures perfect.