Stock Rifle HV "HOW"

[vzerone]

So what are the calibers and fps for those records?

I'm not a member so I don't get the Fouling Shot, but I believe it has the velocities and maybe calibers. I can't see why you can't use any caliber you want it's still a cast bullet and it's hard to get those kind of groups they are with any caliber. Maybe a CBA member here can answer those. I'll research in the mean time.

[Bjornb]

I'm not a member so I don't get the Fouling Shot, but I believe it has the velocities and maybe calibers. I can't see what you can't use any caliber you want it's still a cast bullet and it's hard to get those kind of groups they are with any caliber. Maybe a CBA member here can answer those. I'll research in the mean time.

Cousin Vinny, I'm a dues paying CBA member so I get The Fouling Shot. In the latest issue, among about 100 entrants in various matches, there were exactly 3 rifles entered in Unrestricted Rifle (above 14 lbs.), where my bench rifles would be located.

They were as follows:
Remington 700 in 300 Savage, velocity shot was 2100 fps. est.
Savage Target in 30BR, velocity est. 1950
Savage Target in 6PPC, velocity est. 2100

So as we can see, these rifles are not Mauser actions which were "specified" for the XCB project-

Furthermore, to comment on something your cousin Joseph A. has been trying to ram home for a very long time: The groups shot were always on the ragged edge. I never saw a point in just finding an accurate load and then quitting. All my range sessions continued until the groups fell apart; that was the purpose of shooting in the first place! Some of my best groups were shot with Unique, Varget and H335 at pedestrian speeds, but there was no point in highlighting such groups. XCB was supposed to be speed AND accuracy, not just one of the two.

Oh, and tell your cousin that the throat erosion of my barrel was more than likely caused by shooting large amounts of military cannon powder. Not linotype, which by the way is the preferred alloy of the CBA competition shooters.

The XCB was never meant to be a pure accuracy cartridge. It holds too much powder for that. That's what the 30BR is for; it holds about 30 grains 4198 in a full case which makes it very balanced for what it was developed for. The 30XCB gives a good balance of accuracy and speed.

[Bjornb]

provided the noise level in the peanut gallery remains as low as it has recently become.

Gear

We'll have to bring that noise back up to a dull roar........don't forget: the peanut gallery is where the shooting happens!!

[vzerone]

So what are the calibers and fps for those records?

I'm not a member so I don't get the Fouling Shot, but I believe it has the velocities and maybe calibers. I can't see what you can't use any caliber you want it's still a cast bullet and it's hard to get those kind of groups they are with any caliber. Maybe a CBA member here can answer those. I'll research in the mean time.

Bjorn sir you brought it. Here's a link to my cousins bore scoping of his AR10 7.62 NATO using strictly cannon powders, specifically 867. The bullet alloy was 50/50 water dropped no extra tin added. The number of rounds were approaching 10,000 give or take a few and some where a box or two of jacketed. Notice the gas port hole, although corroded, doesn't show the typical "tear drop" shape you normally see. The throat is in very fine shape. So that story about shooting cannon powders is a myth and we know who perpetrated that don't we. Your wear was from shooting Linotype which my cousin told you about and you still continue to use that to this day.

http://www.beyond556.com/bboard/forum/cast-bullets/general-discussion/93788-borescope-pic-my-ar10-barrel

Next up you and your companion 30XCB shooter, play that you all are really nice guys and like to see targets and data plus chronograph readings, ignored and continue to ignore my cousin's shooting of that same AR10 with the LEE 130 grain cast bullet of 50/50 alloy water dropped from a production barrel for Arma-Lite 20 inches long and with a 10 twist of over 3100 fps into 1 inch groups consistently. They were five shot groups with some of the four into nearly 1/2 inch. That sir far exceed anything that you and your 30XCB friends have done.

So may we just continue with what will help the members here into getting their standard (or non standard) rifles shooting and not have a pissing match?

[CHeatermk3]

The national records are archived on the cast bullet assn's website, http://castbulletassoc.org/

To find out what was used to set any particular record you need to go to the technical data sheets which are displayed in the match results pages which are grouped by Club and dates in a separate section of the website.
Not all matches will have group and score competitions it's pretty much up to the individual clubs to decide what will be shot at a particular match.

You can find the 2015 match results here:

http://castbulletassoc.org/match2015.shtml



(http://castbulletassoc.org/match2015.shtml)

[Blammer]

I think this whole endeavor is quite interesting.

I have not been able to get jacketed bullets to shoot at a higher velocity than "normal" with out problems, such as accuracy, excessive copper fouling, bullets coming apart, etc....

to get cast bullets to do that, that will be quite the feat.

[Blammer]

My attempt at high velocity was by accident. I couldn't get my 35 whelen to group well. I didn't know how fast I was pushing them at the time. I tried bunches of stuff. Finally I hardened my bullets a little and that did the trick. For me high velocity is 2500 fps with a 200gr bullet in my 35 whelen. :)

[vzerone]

My attempt at high velocity was by accident. I couldn't get my 35 whelen to group well. I didn't know how fast I was pushing them at the time. I tried bunches of stuff. Finally I hardened my bullets a little and that did the trick. For me high velocity is 2500 fps with a 200gr bullet in my 35 whelen. :)

I'd consider that HV. You're in a caliber where more HV is going to hurt your shoulder. What you have there is one heck of a cast hunting load, probably little bit too much. The 35 Whelen is a great round and I also like the 358 Winchester. What alloy did you end up with?

[Hannibal]

I am reminded of a song by Mr. Stevie Wonder

"When you believe in things that you don't understand, then you suffer
Superstition ain't the way . . . "

I can not post groups to support Bjornb's groups. Neither can I post groups to contradict Bjornb's groups.

I don't have to. The man posted EVERYTHING. Equipment. Conditions. Bullet. Charge. Case prep. Velocity. Date. Time. And if you follow his lead, and can shoot straight, there is NO DOUBT IN MY MIND THE RESULTS YOU SEE WILL MATCH.

He demonstrated it over, and over, and over again. With all the details for anyone to challenge. Over, and over, and over again. What did we hear in response? Chirping crickets.

If anyone can demonstrate anything CLOSE to this documentation with a factory rifle, and not just a singular event, then please point this information out, for I guess I missed it.

Another 'Peanut' will now turn away from the 'Stump".

[Blammer]

I wound up with my regular WW alloy just water dropped for a tad bit harder.

If I had to guess at the specific alloy I'd say I started with 96/2/2 then added WW's to fill up the pot. :) real scientific like, I know...

[TXGunNut]

.......You guys figure out how you want to go about it and I'll interject my own meandering experiences on the subject from time to time, provided the noise level in the peanut gallery remains as low as it has recently become.

Gear

I promise to be quiet while the grownups are talking. ;-)

[vzerone]

.......You guys figure out how you want to go about it and I'll interject my own meandering experiences on the subject from time to time, provided the noise level in the peanut gallery remains as low as it has recently become.

Gear

I promise to be quiet while the grownups are talking. ;-)


Tx, I'm fine with what ever anyone wants to shoot.

[Hannibal]

Tx, I'm fine with what ever anyone wants to shoot.

I'm still trying to deduce the criteria here. 1 MOA? 2 MOA? 50 yds? 100 Yds? 2K FPS? More? Less? Does it vary depending upon the caliber? Semi - auto? Single shot?

In short, if the criteria is not specifically defined, how is anyone to judge when it has been met?

If this thread is limited to 'Factory Rifles', and said rifles can not hold 1 MOA @100 yds with J-words, are they given a free pass with cast? :veryconfu

One can not comply with the specifications if specifications are not clearly defined.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

Hannibal,
Relax, don't get all wrapped up in all these questions that I already answered for the long gone Sgt Mike (may he surf the internet in peace). Each participant can set their own goals. As I stated in post #1, This is a conversation, a conversation to hopefully help each participant reach their goals. I am hoping you are not here to rabble rouse. Bjornb is a marksman and has posted some fine shooting, I hope he continues in our conversation.
Jon

[Hannibal]

Rabble rouse? No, Sir.

But if I may be so bold, the criteria you propose is simply to improve on one's individual prior attempt?

That's fine if that's what it is. I'm simply trying to interpret the purpose of the thread.

My interest in this thread is in reference to factory rifle accuracy and how members are evaluating accuracy.

If one does not establish a baseline, I can not comprehend how further testing can be accurately evaluated.

If you believe this amounts to thread drift, then pardon my digressions.

[Hannibal]

In short, if one owns a 3 MOA rifle, I believe he/she will have a hard road ahead trying to improve upon that with cast, unless a fundamental reloading error is discovered along the way.

YMMV.

[runfiverun]

it's a personal challenge.
get your rifle out.
establish your baseline.
and start working on it.
share what you done or don't [shrug] simple doesn't have to be hard.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

Hannibal,
I'm not sure if you are aware, but not all factory rifles are created equally. A cast boolit shooter should know his/her rifle...and they should be the one to set a baseline for that gun.

Now, over a year ago, I attempted HV in a stock Win 70 in 243win and posted the results. I started with 3 loads, a control and two HV loads. My control load shot 2" @ 100 yds, the HV loads were 5" and 12". Now I had some GC issues that discouraged me and I discontinued that project. I did learn some things from it, but I need to learn more.
Jon

[Hannibal]

A personal challenge, as I surmised. Very well, then.

My only experience to date has been with a 358 BLR which shot well over 1 MOA with jacketed bullets, and while I was able to match that level with cast, I still do not regard that endeavor as a success. I shall not bore the membership with the details of said failure. Some of my attempts to correct the BLRs issues are in the levergun forum, but again, do not expect any useful information.

I grew disgusted with the endeavor and sold the rifle, as it was clear to me a re-barreling was the next step. A step which I was not interested in.

And so far as 'rabble rousing', it would seem the individual who used the 'peanut gallery' inference is far more likely guilty of that than I.

YMMV.

[vzerone]

Let me point out a fallacy. That is if you have a rifle you're shooting jacketed out of and you only can get an inch group out if that it won't shoot cast any better, in fact that it will shoot even worse. That's not true. A real good example is a milsurp that has unusual bore/groove dimension that you can't find a jacketed bullet that will fit it correctly. In this case you can tailor cast bullets to fit the particular needs. Those are the more common ones, but I've also seen some factory rifles that shot cast better even if the bore/groove dimensions were correct for jacketed. Those are more rare but they are out there. Don't be turned off to trying cast if your particular rifle won't shoot jacketed well.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

In short, if one owns a 3 MOA rifle, I believe he/she will have a hard road ahead trying to improve upon that with cast, unless a fundamental reloading error is discovered along the way.

YMMV.
Perfect example, if I set the accuracy to 1MOA, the guy with a 3MOA rifle will be discouraged to say the least.

[Hannibal]

That has not been my experience to date. Not saying it isn't possible, just that I haven't found that to be the case with any rifle I've tested so far. I shall keep this in mind.

I CAN state unequivocally that I believe a rifle with a bore diameter .0015" greater at the muzzle end than at the chamber end will not shoot ANYTHING with any degree of reliability. Those rifles are out there as well. Ask me how I know.



Let me point out a fallacy. That is if you have a rifle you're shooting jacketed out of and you only can get an inch group out if that it won't shoot cast any better, in fact that it will shoot even worse. That's not true. A real good example is a milsurp that has unusual bore/groove dimension that you can't find a jacketed bullet that will fit it correctly. In this case you can tailor cast bullets to fit the particular needs. Those are the more common ones, but I've also seen some factory rifles that shot cast better even if the bore/groove dimensions were correct for jacketed. Those are more rare but they are out there. Don't be turned off to trying cast if your particular rifle won't shoot jacketed well.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

snip...
And so far as 'rabble rousing', it would seem the individual who used the 'peanut gallery' inference is far more likely guilty of that than I.

YMMV.
Really? You better re-read your entire post #260.
You seemed to join in this thread with an agenda.

[Hannibal]

I believe Bjornb has posted nothing but truthful information. If you disagree, then I guess that leaves us at odds.

Not a situation I prefer, but there it is.

[btroj]

Hannibal, this is not about besting bjorn or disproving anything he did. He shot some very fine groups and documented them extremely well. I have no reason to believe what he says he did is entirely factual. I haven't seen anyone in this thread vast a shadow of a doubt on his shooting.

This entire thread is about each person seeing how fast they can get cast to shoot with a reasonable, to them, degree of accuracy. Find that limit and then see what can be changed in the casting and loading realm to push that limit upwards.

My desires are to do exactly what Jon posted about in the OP. Take a factory rifle and see where my current limit is for velocity with a semblance of accuracy. Then make some changes and see if I can't eek another 100-200 fps with accuracy out of the rifle.

Making this about old grudges and drama will only cause the thread to be closed. Let's be better than that.

[Hannibal]

Agreed. Let us ALL keep that in mind.

Now, back to our story.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

Hannibal,
It has nothing to do with Bjornb and you know it.

Why did you bring up Bjornb in post 260 ?
The answer is clear by all your snide comments in 260 ...to belittle this whole thread ...just like your other posts #159 #161 #162

If you want to honestly join in this conversation, that is great. If not, why are you in this thread?
Jon

[geargnasher]

Let me point out a fallacy. That is if you have a rifle you're shooting jacketed out of and you only can get an inch group out if that it won't shoot cast any better, in fact that it will shoot even worse. That's not true. A real good example is a milsurp that has unusual bore/groove dimension that you can't find a jacketed bullet that will fit it correctly. In this case you can tailor cast bullets to fit the particular needs. Those are the more common ones, but I've also seen some factory rifles that shot cast better even if the bore/groove dimensions were correct for jacketed. Those are more rare but they are out there. Don't be turned off to trying cast if your particular rifle won't shoot jacketed well.

Well said. Too many people get the cart before the horse and build a box of expectations around them that they can never subsequently break out of.

I learned a little about how to get accuracy at HV with cast bullets because I'm stubborn and stupid. Nobody told me before I was on the internet that those lead thingies couldn't be shot past 1600 fps, I just assumed they should do better than that and didn't comprehend why the loading manuals didn't have HV cast loads listed in them. So I just started out with jacketed load data and worked backwards a bit until I started figuring out what to do. A couple people that used to be on this forum helped me a lot on the side and one old gentleman who I miss very much enabled me many years ago by casting bullets for me that did nearly the same thing jacketed ones did when loaded correctly.

Like Runfiverun said, get your rifle, go make some ammo and go shoot it. Push it until accuracy goes away and think hard about what might be happening (most of it has already been said on this thread) and see what you can to to improve it. Ask specific questions. Try to learn something in the process.

Gear

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

Vince,
Your thoughts are so correct, even Sgt Mike agrees.

Sgt Mike posted this two weeks ago.

After looking through six pages, only seen coupla folks (2-5) provide methods and results.
And no clear definition of High Velocity (yes it would be calibre or even case volume specific to a degree).
The saving grace so far is the annealing gas checks even though Btroj and Bjornb seem to provide information that sticks out as helpful to me.
Having way more than one 30-06 I have one or two that will not shoot jacketed yet I can get great accuracy from cast approaching almost what I consider HV, which is a good bit higher than what some consider HV.
Good thread even though three fourths is really unrelated in my opinion. Thank you gentlemen for your time.

[geargnasher]

....If you want to honestly join in this conversation, that is great. If not, why are you in this thread?
Jon

Because of this: http://www.derailingfordummies.com/

They're taking turns at it.

Gear

[vzerone]

Geargnasher, I was searching on the internet as to why big cannons have such small rifling grooves. I didn't find an answer, but never the less I found some very interesting things, at least to me. Do you know what the rifling twist was on those 16 inch guns on the U.S. battleships? One turn in 25 inches. I was shocked. I thought it would be slower. The muzzle velocity for the AP rounds was around 2500 fps. The nuke rounds velocity was around 2700 fps. Number of shots before the rifling liner had to be replaced was around 394 for the AP rounds, little higher for the nuke rounds, and the practice rounds was a very high count. Now watch me swing this right into line with the cast bullet forum. Think of barrel life they would have gotten with cast projectiles! What do you think Geargnasher, single or multi-cavity mold? LOL Average weight of powder charge was 600 lbs. Wow! They must have had one heck of a huge powder measure.
The Navy certainly had enough Beeswax to make their own lube if they shot cast. So would we consider that HV?

[geargnasher]

Wow, 25"? That's pretty tight, but the Greenhill formula was developed for artillery in the first place so those boys knew what they were doing.

All I know about artillery is from a fired practice shell that used to be a door stop at work. It had a lead (alloy?) obturation ring and the 105mm barrel had made shallow engraves in that ring about 1/4" wide all the way around, lands and grooves the same width. The ring was only about an inch "long" and had a groove in the middle of it that I presume was filled with some sort of lube. The huge, steel shell was about all one man would want to pick up from the floor, and it didn't even have any explosives in it. Talk about small bearing surface!!! That little 1" band of lead didn't show any signs of stripping or gas cutting whatsoever, and I studied it very closely. Micro-groove indeed.

Gear

[vzerone]

Wow, 25"? That's pretty tight, but the Greenhill formula was developed for artillery in the first place so those boys knew what they were doing.

All I know about artillery is from a fired practice shell that used to be a door stop at work. It had a lead (alloy?) obturation ring and the 105mm barrel had made shallow engraves in that ring about 1/4" wide all the way around, lands and grooves the same width. The ring was only about an inch "long" and had a groove in the middle of it that I presume was filled with some sort of lube. The huge, steel shell was about all one man would want to pick up from the floor, and it didn't even have any explosives in it. Talk about small bearing surface!!! That little 1" band of lead didn't show any signs of stripping or gas cutting whatsoever, and I studied it very closely. Micro-groove indeed.

Gear

All of them that I have seen were bore riders. Yes I was wondering about the Greenhill formula too. If I'm not mistaken I believe those 16 inch projectiles were 72 inches long for the AP. The rifling was .150 deep and there were 94 of them around the bore. Yup, that's definitely Micro-Groove. Hey now all I have to find is the BC, ES, and SD LOL

[Hickok]

I believe I am just going to sit back and try and learn anything I can from the posts.

I am going to try to better my HV loads and go hopefully, happily along with my cast shooting.

Many times after posting loads results and targets that I am very happy with (and eager to show) after a lot of work and expense, I come away feeling worse than bird droppings on a pump handle after the critique takes away from the effort.

I am happy for and enjoy those who shoot bench matches and competition and give us their advice. I also like anything anyone posts about paper punching and 10 or 20 shots groups.

Me, I just like to shoot, and my main aim is to have a load in my rifles and handguns that will deliver on deer, bear, groundhogs, etc, and is accurate by my standards for general shooting and packing in the woods.

[newton]

Yes sir, such threads exist. Example: http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?252332-Testing-the-30XCB/page41

Many pages of specific loads, shot in several different rifles, complete with target and chrono data.


Thanks. Now I have a bit of reading to do.

I was actually thinking of a thread that didn't have all the small talk, so guys didn't have to weed through it all. I know it would be near impossible to do without heavy mod cutting, but would be cool anyways.

[TXGunNut]

I'm right there with you, Hickok. Well said.

This project is purely academic for me but I feel the things I'll learn in the pursuit of HV will benefit my other pursuits, in short help me to be a better caster, loader and shooter. The cars we drive utilize advances developed on race tracks, why should our rifles be any different? Now I need to go back and wade thru all the posts again to prioritize the many good points. Guess I should have been taking notes.

[popper]

159608159609159610
150gr. jacketed @ 2000 fps, 145gr PB @ 2100 fps, 145gr. PB @ 2100 when the COAL is WRONG (short). 2nd pic was after 60 some rounds, shoulder started to wiggle a bit. Loads are past Hornady max jacket loads, just a tad, for BO. #3 show what happens when the boolit is NOT in the throat correctly.

[rockrat]

Looked down a few cannon barrels at Ft. Sill, OK and the twist of 1 in 25" didn't seem right from what I remember of the barrels of the smaller cannons there. Using the Greenhill formula for the 16" projectiles, I suspect the twist is 1 in 25 FEET , not 1 in 25 inches. Was checking online and saw the specs where the twist was 1 in 25 for the 16" guns, but curious as the tables didn't specify what the 25 was, so I figured to just plug it into the Greenhill formula. Got on the Mountain Molds website ,but their tables only went to 1 in 15 feet, but since the formula was there, I plugged in 300"(25 feet) as the twist. Came out to max. projectile length of 128", well over the 72" projectile length for the 16" AP round.

[vzerone]

Looked down a few cannon barrels at Ft. Sill, OK and the twist of 1 in 25" didn't seem right from what I remember of the barrels of the smaller cannons there. Using the Greenhill formula for the 16" projectiles, I suspect the twist is 1 in 25 FEET , not 1 in 25 inches. Was checking online and saw the specs where the twist was 1 in 25 for the 16" guns, but curious as the tables didn't specify what the 25 was, so I figured to just plug it into the Greenhill formula. Got on the Mountain Molds website ,but their tables only went to 1 in 15 feet, but since the formula was there, I plugged in 300"(25 feet) as the twist. Came out to max. projectile length of 128", well over the 72" projectile length for the 16" AP round.

Thanks for pointing that out. Took a lot of research, but finally got it. It's 1 turn in 25 calibers. So I guess it's 25x50 since the gun is listed as a 16 inch 50 Cal Mark 7. Dang, it's a flintlock rifling twist!!!

What can I say, I use to small arms and their twists are in inches. You can tell I wasn't a gunner's mate! LOL

[popper]

Appears CBA match fps is in the 1600-1800 fps range for heavy, 170-190gr GC boolits (308W). Not very high fps for caliber. Most 1:10 twist.

[vzerone]

Thanks for pointing that out. Took a lot of research, but finally got it. It's 1 turn in 25 calibers. So I guess it's 25x50 since the gun is listed as a 16 inch 50 Cal Mark 7. Dang, it's a flintlock rifling twist!!!

What can I say, I use to small arms and their twists are in inches. You can tell I wasn't a gunner's mate! LOL

Actually I was wrong again. The caliber is 16 inches so it would be 16x25 which is 400 inches. I found this too:
The rifling of this gun was right-handed, which means that the projectile will rotate clockwise when viewed from the rear. Early 16-inch guns had "gain twist rifling" that had an initial twist of 1 turn in 50 caliber that increased to 1 turn in 25 caliber at a point 2 calibers (32 inches) down the barrel. The rifling remained at 1 turn in 25 caliber twist throughout the remainder of the barrel. This special type of rifling acted to reduce the strain on the soft copper rotating band of the projectile during the maximum acceleration near the breech, but was found to be impractical due to manufacturing difficulties and the fact that this actually increased the drag on the projectile in the barrel. Later guns were produced with rifling of uniform twist.

[David2011]

I may see what I can get from the 375 H&H too. I have had it over 1800 with accuracy easily. Never gone faster with good results but have learned much since then.

I'm toying with shooting my .375 H&H in that velocity range using the 250 gr RCBS mold. Do you have any alloy recommendations? Powder recommendations? I was thinking H-4895 for the reduced power loads.

What's the recoil like at 1800 fps? I would expect mild but I've been surprised before.

David

[runfiverun]

I'd imagine more manageable than a 435gr 45-70 at the same velocity.

[btroj]

A 265 at 1800 fps is a ***** cat. I used 27-29 gr of 2400 with a Dacron fill for those loads. Sub 2 inches at 100 for 5 shots all day long. Shooting 50 from the bench in a single sitting was no big deal.
4895 wouldn't be a bad choice at all. Here is some good info. http://www.castpics.net/subsite2/ByCaliber/Cast%20in%20the%20375%20H_H.pdf

[btroj]

I'd imagine more manageable than a 435gr 45-70 at the same velocity.


ummmm, yes? A 435 at 1800 in a 45-70 isn't something I care to fire from the bench.

[vzerone]

One of my friends has that same mold for 375 for various 375 caliber rifles he has. One of them being the 375 H&H. I believe he was loading it around 2000 fps or more and it was very pleasant to shoot. The rifle was very accurate too. I think he was using WW's. He nailed a crow one day with it at the shooting range at 150 yards. The rifle had an old cloudy Weaver 4X scope on it.

[wmitty]

Crow with a .375? I love it!

[popper]

soft copper rotating band Not that soft but the 5 & 8" still use it, they are 'micro-groove' so to speak. If you call 1/2 - 1' deep V grooves 'micro'.

[cainttype]

I'm toying with shooting my .375 H&H in that velocity range using the 250 gr RCBS mold. Do you have any alloy recommendations? Powder recommendations? I was thinking H-4895 for the reduced power loads.

What's the recoil like at 1800 fps? I would expect mild but I've been surprised before.

David

A case full of WC872 surplus pushes a 275 gr LBT LFN to 2380-2390fps in my 24" Shilen barrelled Browning A-bolt. A small kicker of 4198 cleans the burn up a little (not absolutely necessary) and can boost those numbers a little. 1.5 MOA, or better, 5 shot groups at 100yds has been easy to get with nothing more than a good fit to throat and NEW casings. Alloy was lino-Pb 1-3, LBT blue lube was used... I haven't tried it with the fire-formed casings yet.
I'm certain that can be improved on, but it already delivers more than I require of it so I'm not likely too devote much effort there unless I get really bored.
This type load isn't for the recoil-sensitive.

[vzerone]

A case full of WC872 surplus pushes a 275 gr LBT LFN to 2380-2390fps in my 24" Shilen barrelled Browning A-bolt. A small kicker of 4198 cleans the burn up a little (not absolutely necessary) and can boost those numbers a little. 1.5 MOA, or better, 5 shot groups at 100yds has been easy to get with nothing more than a good fit to throat and NEW casings. Alloy was lino-Pb 1-3, LBT blue lube was used... I haven't tried it with the fire-formed casings yet.
I'm certain that can be improved on, but it already delivers more than I require of it so I'm not likely too devote much effort there unless I get really bored.
This type load isn't for the recoil-sensitive.

Yes that load is getting up there so I imagine it has a good punch. Does your rifle have the boss on it? The .375 seems like a very easy one to get shoot with cast and accurate too.

[vzerone]

Crow with a .375? I love it!

Yes we had a very good laugh when he told us. He was at the range sighting in those cast load when a crown landed on a fence post at the 150 yard line. He was actually aiming that the 100 yard target he put up and the crow appears. He said what the heck and took the shot. We asked him what's next, prairie dogs??

[runfiverun]

we do have an occasional big bore prairie dog shoot out here.
the 375 becomes a small bore at that point.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

I've been thinking about boolit slump.

Is that an instantaneous blip on the radar, loosely following the pressure curve?

What does that do to hardness ?
If the boolit were heat treated, does the slump work-soften the alloy,
so after the slump and pressure subsides, the softened boolit going down the barrel, is about the hardness of that alloy if unheated?

[shooter93]

I wouldn't THINK the bullet is exposed to enough heat long enough to essentially anneal it but that is a guess. I would also imagine slump isn't instantaneous judging by the pictures Speer sent me years ago showing jacketed bullet nose deformation as they traveled down the barrel. Of course we're dealing with milliseconds so slowly and instantaneous are pretty close to each other....lol.

[shooter93]

David...a 250-280 grain bullet at 1800 in a 375 would be no problem at all for recoil. In fact it would be quite a bit of fun. I shoot a 270 grain at 1600 fps in a 38-55 marlin lever gun. It only weighs about 6 pounds and has a steel butt plate and it's a fun gun to shoot.

[Yodogsandman]

I've been thinking about boolit slump.

Is that an instantaneous blip on the radar, loosely following the pressure curve?

What does that do to hardness ?
If the boolit were heat treated, does the slump work-soften the alloy,
so after the slump and pressure subsides, the softened boolit going down the barrel, is about the hardness of that alloy if unheated?

I'd WAG that the boolit nose would not heat up until far away from the barrel after firing it and would only effect the outer surface of the nose. Any slump while in the barrel would be from being kicked in the boolits base by quickly expanding powder gasses without being heated much from it. Even a heat treated boolit is probably less than about 30 BHN and quite pliable when hit by that much pressure almost at once.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

snip...
Any slump while in the barrel would be from being kicked in the boolits base by quickly expanding powder gasses without being heated much from it. Even a heat treated boolit is probably less than about 30 BHN and quite pliable when hit by that much pressure almost at once.
I am speaking in the barrel...actually in the chamber, during the peak of the pressure curve. I'd think if the pressure is great enough to create slump, that the alloy is being work-softened.

[vzerone]

I am speaking in the barrel...actually in the chamber, during the peak of the pressure curve. I'd think if the pressure is great enough to create slump, that the alloy is being work-softened.

Simply put Jon, no.

[Yodogsandman]

The trick would be to smack the boolit with most of that pressure curve sometime right after it's pushed past the chamber and is still supported by the bore. As long as any slump is even and the boolits body is fully supported by the bore, it shouldn't matter much. Although, any slump would also create extra pressure to the body, with some flow of lead alloy to the lube grooves and hydraulically push out and replace some of the lube.

[Forrest r]

.I'm interested in bullet slump/alloy issues also. Decided to test with 2 different bullets and 7 different powders. The powders will be 4227, h4895, 4046, varget, bl-c2, h414, 4350, reloader 19, superformance. The bullets will be a saeco 301 and a lyman 311465, both will be cast from range scrap and pc'd. Another set of bullets will be cast from range scrap (15#) and mono-type (5#) + 2% tin cast *730 and water quenched and aged at least a week. All bullets will be sized the same using the same sizer and the same gc's installed.


Not sure but I figured the fast burning powder/pressure would test the alloy and the slow burning powder would test the rpm threshold. I actually have no set/target group size. Just wanted to see if I could walk loads in and then back out and at what point did those loads/alloys fail.

So far I have managed to to do the testing with the 4227,started both bullets @ 18gr's and took the loads up to 25gr with the 301's and 27gr with the 311465's. At the low end of the load (18gr) it didn't matter with any of the bullets. Groups were the same up until the 23gr/301 & 24gr/311465. Then the range scrap/pc'd bullets gave up the ghost. The hard cast 301's really didn't like the 4227, and the groups stayed around 2 1/2" (outside hole to outside hole) the whole way thru the test up to and including the 25gr load. The hard cast 311456 tightened up at 26gr and started opening up at 27gr.

http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t242/forrestr-photo/4227311465_zpseugm2nns.jpg (http://s162.photobucket.com/user/forrestr-photo/media/4227311465_zpseugm2nns.jpg.html)

I have no idea what the velocities are, need to start bringing the chronograph to the range. The only thing I can come away with with the testing of this powder with these bullets is:
The soft pc'd bullets slumped under the higher pressure loads and their groups were 1+" bigger than their traditional lubed/hard cast counterparts.
The 301 never did anything and stayed the same 2" to 21/2" groups thru out the 18gr to 25gr ladder test with 25gr actually being the best.
The 311465 walked right in and back out again as it should so I believe I'm looking at the rpm threshold of that bullet.

The next powder will be h4895, that should answer the rpm questions and hopefully some of the alloy/pressure/slumping questions. Planned on doing ladder tests until all bullets blowout/fail and then chronograph those loads.

I may have to change bullets and go back and re-test the 4227/long nosed bore ridding bullet. The 301 is a bore riding bullet that has a long slender nose. I never tried the 301 (actually either bullet) in this bbl. The bbl is a .301/.308 instead of a .300/.308 and the 301 bullet's design is real close to having only 60% of the bullet engaging the .300 bore.

Anyway, that's all I know how to do, walk the loads up until they fail to get a baseline of the bbl/bullet/powder. And then change bullet dia/lube/gc/alloy 1 thing at a time to see if the bullet can be pushed past it's original threshold.

[vzerone]

.I'm interested in bullet slump/alloy issues also. Decided to test with 2 different bullets and 7 different powders. The powders will be 4227, h4895, 4046, varget, bl-c2, h414, 4350, reloader 19, superformance. The bullets will be a saeco 301 and a lyman 311465, both will be cast from range scrap and pc'd. Another set of bullets will be cast from range scrap (15#) and mono-type (5#) + 2% tin cast *730 and water quenched and aged at least a week. All bullets will be sized the same using the same sizer and the same gc's installed.


Not sure but I figured the fast burning powder/pressure would test the alloy and the slow burning powder would test the rpm threshold. I actually have no set/target group size. Just wanted to see if I could walk loads in and then back out and at what point did those loads/alloys fail.

So far I have managed to to do the testing with the 4227,started both bullets @ 18gr's and took the loads up to 25gr with the 301's and 27gr with the 311465's. At the low end of the load (18gr) it didn't matter with any of the bullets. Groups were the same up until the 23gr/301 & 24gr/311465. Then the range scrap/pc'd bullets gave up the ghost. The hard cast 301's really didn't like the 4227, and the groups stayed around 2 1/2" (outside hole to outside hole) the whole way thru the test up to and including the 25gr load. The hard cast 311456 tightened up at 26gr and started opening up at 27gr.

http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t242/forrestr-photo/4227311465_zpseugm2nns.jpg (http://s162.photobucket.com/user/forrestr-photo/media/4227311465_zpseugm2nns.jpg.html)

I have no idea what the velocities are, need to start bringing the chronograph to the range. The only thing I can come away with with the testing of this powder with these bullets is:
The soft pc'd bullets slumped under the higher pressure loads and their groups were 1+" bigger than their traditional lubed/hard cast counterparts.
The 301 never did anything and stayed the same 2" to 21/2" groups thru out the 18gr to 25gr ladder test with 25gr actually being the best.
The 311465 walked right in and back out again as it should so I believe I'm looking at the rpm threshold of that bullet.

The next powder will be h4895, that should answer the rpm questions and hopefully some of the alloy/pressure/slumping questions. Planned on doing ladder tests until all bullets blowout/fail and then chronograph those loads.

I may have to change bullets and go back and re-test the 4227/long nosed bore ridding bullet. The 301 is a bore riding bullet that has a long slender nose. I never tried the 301 (actually either bullet) in this bbl. The bbl is a .301/.308 instead of a .300/.308 and the 301 bullet's design is real close to having only 60% of the bullet engaging the .300 bore.

Anyway, that's all I know how to do, walk the loads up until they fail to get a baseline of the bbl/bullet/powder. And then change bullet dia/lube/gc/alloy 1 thing at a time to see if the bullet can be pushed past it's original threshold.

Forrest,

I first want to say you are doing good and have done good with this test. Okay, I want to clear up the word slump. It's not a good definition of what's happening to the bullet. What is happening to the bullet is the gas pressure is slamming the base of the bull and trying to compress it. If you move metal in one spot it moves metal to another spot. In our case here with bullets it's moving metal towards the nose. Essentially an easy way to say it, it's compressing or swagind the bullet. The more you hit it with pressure the more you "swage" towards the nose. If you could recover a bullet that's not damaged from impact and hold it horizontal you will not see the nose "slumped". One definition of slump is sit, lean, or fall heavily and limply.

Okay, next up there is no such thing as a rpm threshold. This is especially true if you have a perfect bullet. This term was phrased by a previous member's limitations on shooting cast bullets. The reason your Lyman 311465 made you think this is that Loverins are very bad about being pushed hard. The Lyman Loverins particularly have a very narrow bearing band that can't take pressure and velocity. You didn't reach no "threshold" limit, you reached the limit of the bullet design and strength. You really should select a better bullet then the Lyman Loverin. Some of the custom mold makers make a Loverin that have much thicker bearing bans then the Lyman's.

I'm watching powder coating very closely and in my opinion I think bullet lube is still better. I'd really like to see your test done with conventional lube.

Next I'd like to say you don't need to add 2% tin to the alloy you're using the Monotype in. There's plenty of tin, and antimony, in that alloy.

[Forrest r]

Well, thank you for the reply.

I just picked a couple of bullets out and wanted to give them a try.

The tests I'm doing is with traditional cast, size,lube /conventional lube bullets. I figured I'd toss some of the same bullets in the test that were powder coated.

I added tin because I'm using range lead from an outdoor range, been using the same lead from the same range since the 90's. I don't pick up 22lr's or bp round ball's, mostly home cast/commercial cast/25% to 30% jacketed. The end result is an alloy that real close to coww's. I've used/cast/shot both over the decades and I have a hard time telling the difference. That should put the range scrap alloy (#100 batches) in the 9bhn/10bhn range. I was playing with one of those alloy calculators and punched the #'s in for 75% coww and 25% mono-type. Mono-type ='s 26bhn and I added tin on the calculator until the alloy's bhn ='d 26bhn. The end result was 75% range lead/25% mono-type/6.5 oz tin or 2% tin. Basically I'm stretching my mono-type and more tin should = better bullet elasticity. The end result is an alloy with 8.2% tin and 16.3% antomony that is 26bhn. I've tried 3 different hb pencils on the bullets and none of them scratch the bullets, they only write on them. The same pencils do the same thing with bullets cast out of mono-type and water dropped. Not very exact, but at the end of the day, that's all I got so I try to work with all I got.

Thank you for the take on bullet slump. Never did any major studying on rifle bullets. Hate to say it but never did a lot of casting for the rifles. Found a load that an 03-a3 liked and that's all I cast for, simply bullets to practice off-hand and the rapid fires @ 100yds with reduced targets. But I have looked/studied the 44cal and bullet slump. Not my photo, it was sent to me a couple of years ago by a fellow member on this web-site. We were discussing bullet slump and looking at fired bullets.
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t242/forrestr-photo/compressed44bullets_zpsxceiicyb.jpg (http://s162.photobucket.com/user/forrestr-photo/media/compressed44bullets_zpsxceiicyb.jpg.html)

So anyway, hence the statement bullet slump. I had a couple of choices why those pc'd bullets failed. I have shot around #600 of cast/coated bullets now, mostly in handguns and contenders with 10" bbl's. I've shot the pistol bullets with allot more pressure (same/alloy/same coating) and the bullets performed as they should. The rifle bullets failed as the pressures went up. I can only assume it was the soft alloy in a longer bullet doing what your describing when you say bullet slump.

The bbl is nothing special, it's a 24" bbl that has a custom chamber cut in it for the 175gr smk bullet. It has an extended ball throat (.3105)cut in it (a good thing for longer bodied bullets in a 308 case) and a 1 1/2* throat that I took a 3/4* throating reamer to and recut the 1st half of the throat with. Now the bbl has a duel angle throat that increasing the cast/lead bullets support when it matters most. At the short start pressure of the load. Traditional cast bullet and a bumped bullet (made a bump die for that bbl) that were loaded/chambered/testing the throat when I was working on it.
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t242/forrestr-photo/riflingleademarks_zps5d0d19fd.jpg (http://s162.photobucket.com/user/forrestr-photo/media/riflingleademarks_zps5d0d19fd.jpg.html)

The bbl is a 308/301 which is loose and I'm sizing the bullets to .310. The twist is 1 in 11. So I'm using a different type of custom bbl, it has extended freebore, a long throat and a loose bbl. Sorta like people talking about their shot out service rifles that can't shoot jacked bullets worth a darn but eat cast bullets like potato chips.

I really don't want to get into a rpm anything other than saying I know a threshold is there. A 1 in 11 is supposed to max out at around 2150. That's what makes this testing so interesting, same bullets being used in a cast bullet friendly bbl that has a fast twist. Along with using extremely fast burning rifle powders to extremely slow burning rifle powders. After A baseline is established with a ladder test done with all the different powders. I can see at what point things failed and then try modifying the bullet (alloy/bump/different size), the gc's, seating depths, no crimp/taper crimp, collet crimp, different lubes. To see if I can extend the pressure/velocity limits of that bullet.

Pc'd bullets:
I'm using nothing more than 9bhn/10bhn range scrap and then pc'ing those cast bullets. The pc'ing (tumble lube) process that I use is annealing that alloy making it even softer. I swage my own jacketed bullets & used to cast cores (plinking pistol bullets) out of the free range lead. The cores were too hard to swage so I'd put them in an oven @ 400* for 15 minutes to anneal/soften them. I'm doing the same thing when I pc a bullet, put it in a 375/400* oven for 15 minutes. I just wanted to see how the soft pc'd bullets would do with in a rifle and it showed up real quick, not very well. After I run a full test/baseline of all the powders and find the fail point of a bullet/powder combo I was going to re-test the pc'd bullets. But this time they will be hardened by both water quenched and heat treated in an oven.

So anyway, it's a start. Not looking for hv, just looking for at what point the pressure or velocity wins and there's nothing I can do to change it.

[vzerone]

Forrest how do you explain those of us that are pushing 50/50 alloy (COWWS/LEAD) in 1-10 twist to 2400 fps? My cousin pushed a 50/50 alloy bullet out of an 7.65 Argentine to 2400 fps and it has a 9.8 twist. I'm telling you it's a pressure, velocity, alloy, bullet balance, bullet started straight in the bore thing...not an rpm thing. How do you explain 220 Swifts shooting accurately at 4100 fps? You need to diss that notion. If a cast bullet is balanced (hard to do or find) and started straight in the bore (very hard to do) and the alloy is sufficient for the pressure/velocity you will only be limited by the alloy pressure/velocity, your ability to load it correctly, and your shooting ability.

Forrest this is from the fellow that invented that theory: "The RPM threshold is that point where accuracy begins to deteriorate when the RPM is sufficient to act on imbalances in the bullet".

Notice the crucial word "imbalances". What did I explain to you about bullet balance and starting the bullet into the bore straight?

[Forrest r]

Forrest how do you explain those of us that are pushing 50/50 alloy (COWWS/LEAD) in 1-10 twist to 2400 fps? My cousin pushed a 50/50 alloy bullet out of an 7.65 Argentine to 2400 fps and it has a 9.8 twist. I'm telling you it's a pressure, velocity, alloy, bullet balance, bullet started straight in the bore thing...not an rpm thing. How do you explain 220 Swifts shooting accurately at 4100 fps? You need to diss that notion. If a cast bullet is balanced (hard to do or find) and started straight in the bore (very hard to do) and the alloy is sufficient for the pressure/velocity you will only be limited by the alloy pressure/velocity, your ability to load it correctly, and your shooting ability.

Forrest this is from the fellow that invented that theory: "The RPM threshold is that point where accuracy begins to deteriorate when the RPM is sufficient to act on imbalances in the bullet".

Notice the crucial word "imbalances". What did I explain to you about bullet balance and starting the bullet into the bore straight?

Actually I'm not trying to explain anything. Why you would even ask me to explain what someone else did/tested/used is beyond me. Perhaps the people that did these things would be better qualified to "EXPLAIN" their actions.

When the op of this thread posted this in post #3.
High as feasibly possible.
Obviously higher than the typical (1600fps to 1900fps) published loads and up to the physical limits. Honestly I'm not smart enough to set the number, which I suspect will vary with caliber and other factors. This is more of a discussion of how to get there, not a actual number or range of numbers.

I simply chose a starting point, that starting point being 2 of 11 or 12 different 30cal molds that I have laying around and a hard alloy that I want to work on/with for a future project. I now have 1 singular data point, nothing more, nothing less. I guess when I have 2 data points, I'll have something to compare the 1st one to. Do you notice all the me/myself & I's in that paragraph?? I'm simply starting a thread (key word "starting") on how I'm getting there.

I have no idea where this came from:
What did I explain to you about bullet balance and starting the bullet into the bore straight? ?????????????

Actually you explained nothing of the sort. All's I really got out of your post (#311) is you don't like the guy/other member that had idea's about a bullets rpm, you don't like the loverin bullets and you didn't like the use of tin.

Well, ok, hopefully you don't mind if I simply keep on doing what I'm doing and work my way thru all 7 powders to establish a baseline of the likes/dislikes of the different powders/pressures with the same bullets are before I start changing things. And if you do mind, you can put in a post that you don't like that either.

[vzerone]

Forrest I had no intention of riling you. You're the one that brought the rpm threshold up not me. I might add that the theory was composed of and tested by ONE person. Hardly conclusive.

Okay straight into the bore: One way is to be positive your sizing dies are concentric. Another is you can just neck size if you're sure your neck sizer die is concentric. Yet another method to prove the theory is use thicker case necks. Am I correct that one of your calibers is the 308? If so there is thicker case neck brass out there. Notice benchresters use the most minimum neck clearances. The reason for all that is to center the bullet as much as possible to the centerline of the bore. The use of inline benchrest bullet seater dies is another thing to do. One such die is the Forster Benchrest seater. If you don't believe they work load a dummy cartridge with your seater die (unless you're using such dies I just mentioned) then load one with the Forster Benchrest seater and spin the cartridge in a lathe or one of the reloading company tools for checking concentrically of your cartridge. You should see a different. Last, but not least, use a self aligning design bullet. If you aren't familiar with that the the Mihec 30 Silhouette is one.

Now if I riled your feather I apologize. I'm not arguing with you I'm trying to teach you some things. That's what this threat is all about.

[shooter93]

Not to start the threshold argument again.....don't even start it......it does have to do with imbalance and more than one person has thoroughly tested for it including Hatcher, Hornady etc. (Hornady says that less the .001 variances in jacket thickness causes an imbalance they can see of the target ) and has been around a very long time. It is a THRESHOLD. No one says it can't be surpassed. When dealing with cast bullets it just takes a lot more care in prep, casting techniques etc. to get a lead bullet as perfect as possible and then get it started right. For many casters that becomes more work than they want to do for their shooting purposes.

[vzerone]

Not to start the threshold argument again.....don't even start it......it does have to do with imbalance and more than one person has thoroughly tested for it including Hatcher, Hornady etc. (Hornady says that less the .001 variances in jacket thickness causes an imbalance they can see of the target ) and has been around a very long time. It is a THRESHOLD. No one says it can't be surpassed. When dealing with cast bullets it just takes a lot more care in prep, casting techniques etc. to get a lead bullet as perfect as possible and then get it started right. For many casters that becomes more work than they want to do for their shooting purposes.

That's exactly correct shooter93. If you don't have an imbalance, the bullet started straight, and exited very well...there is no threshold. The obstacle then becomes alloy strength while in the barrel and outside the barrel I doubt anyone, myself included, is going to melt the bullet from extreme velocity. One of the ballistic engineers said in order to get the rpm of a bullet high enough to actually disintegrate the rifle twist would be mind boggling and I might add very impracticable.

The velocity limit where accuracy starts to fail is a limit that caster/shooter put there by his choices of alloy and lube for the pressure range, how well he loaded the cartridge, his correct choice of powder, a concentric cartridge, getting the bullet started straight into the bore, and how well he shoots. The rifle has to be up to the task also.

[cainttype]

The velocity limit where accuracy starts to fail is a limit that caster/shooter put there by his choices of alloy and lube for the pressure range, how well he loaded the cartridge, his correct choice of powder, a concentric cartridge, getting the bullet started straight into the bore, and how well he shoots. The rifle has to be up to the task also.


Not wanting to misinterpret your intention here, but... Since there is no perfect anything in this cast shooting game, and not everyone is operating at the same skill level, or with the same quality tools...
Are you suggesting that all things being equal, especially the not-so-perfect ammo the majority of shooters will be using, there is NO difference between a 1-8" twist and a 1-14" twist barreled rifle of similar quality when trying to reach "high velocity" (whatever the definition is today)?
If there is a difference, if it might be a little "easier"... what would you guess that difference to be?

[vzerone]

Not wanting to misinterpret your intention here, but... Since there is no perfect anything in this cast shooting game, and not everyone is operating at the same skill level, or with the same quality tools...
Are you suggesting that all things being equal, especially the not-so-perfect ammo the majority of shooters will be using, there is NO difference between a 1-8" twist and a 1-14" twist barreled rifle of similar quality when trying to reach "high velocity" (whatever the definition is today)?
If there is a difference, if it might be a little "easier"... what would you guess that difference to be?

No I'm not saying they would be exactly the same. What I am saying is those out there saying you can't get accuracy with a fast twist at HV are wrong. 5r5 proved that when his daughter shot a very small group with an AR15 at something like 2800+ fps (I didn't go back and look so don't quote me on that). The group was witnessed too. I will say yes to it's easier to get HV with accuracy with the slower twists. You should be able to match jacketed with cast. It certainly can be matched with paper patched. I will say yes to it's very hard to do the faster twist and more so with the really fast twists.

I don't want anyone to give up while looking in their gunsafe and see their 308 rifle and wanting to shoot cast in it to HV, but the twist happens to be 1 in 10.

[onceabull]

Vzerone; Is this group of 5r5's daughter the internationally famous 1.75 " group at 100 yds that "won the Nevada State Cast bullet"championship..Must be quite the match with competitors shooting over chronographs.... Onceabull

[cainttype]

I agree completely. Any firearm worth keeping is worth taking out and shooting.
The fact that better results can be had through better components, better assembled ammo, and better quality firearms should be a given. Accepting and recognizing that rates of twist are part of that equation is also simply common sense.
Everyone on this forum is either shooting cast or interested in learning too, so acknowledging subtleties like twist rates seem as important to add to the conversation as most other points. The more we discuss these things openly, the better.
I have quite a few rifles with twist rates of 1-10" or less. I have no doubt that reaching higher velocities with a minimum of fuss is generally easier with similar quality firearms having somewhat slower twists.
Can you reach HVs with faster twists? Yes, depending on your definition, but... Chances are you will need to pay more attention to detail as those twist rates increase, including alloys, case prep, primer and powder selection, etc.

Not ever really giving a lot of thought about similarities of "possible" combinations, I always felt there was a simple connection to some areas of twist rates... As an example, dividing the rate by the caliber, then using the result to play with other calibers is a bit interesting... 10/.224= 44.64, so...
44.64 x .308 = 13.75
44.64 x .358 = 15.98
44.64 x .375 = 16.74
44.64 x .458 = 20.44
All of those numbers look like pretty good choices for cast firearms in their perspective calibers at pretty respectable velocities with the one simple equation... coincidence?
Using a 12" .224 yields pretty good HV options too... just always thought it was a simple comparison worth pondering.

[vzerone]

Vzerone; Is this group of 5r5's daughter the internationally famous 1.75 " group at 100 yds that "won the Nevada State Cast bullet"championship..Must be quite the match with competitors shooting over chronographs.... Onceabull

Sir I don't which match it was all I know is I hear him post about it from time to time. I know he posted his daughter shot it. Does that help any at all?

[Forrest r]

I choose to believe there is a rpm threshold, that's my belief, that's what I've witnessed and 1 of the things I'll pay attention to in the future as I do these tests. If anyone chooses not to say there is such a threshold, then so be it. But please don't put your beliefs and past issues with other people on me. I do understand that the threshold is bullet design/pressure related and the spin of the bullet is secondary, but I choose not to turn a blind eye to that reality either.

Thank you for the lesion on getting the bullet aligned to the bore. Right now I have:
Re-cut the throat in the bbl making it 25% longer with an angle that is designed to have 66% the new throat specifically there for bullet alignment to the bore.
That's a mechanical change at the business end where the loud button is used.
Use a forster concentricity gauge on the loaded rounds.
That's a mechanical test on the mfg end of the ammo making process.
I won't even get into the custom dies I've made not only sizing dies but bump dies that will be used at a later date.

Anyway, I simply used allot of 1 of the worst powders out there (4227) for hv with cast bullets. I did a search to see what other people recommended on this website. It seemed that 18gr to 20gr was the most recommended weight for a large # of different bullets. At least I can say/recommend 26gr of 4227 with a poorly designed bullet.:kidding:

The next test will be with H4895, huge difference the performance/pressure curve of this powder compared to the 4227.

[popper]

Thank you for the take on bullet slump Slump is an OLD term used in concrete business, it is a test method. Pour a pile and see how much it 'slumps' a measure of concrete strength/curing. Same thing happens to boolits, but caused by impulse pressure vs gravity.

[vzerone]

I choose to believe there is a rpm threshold, that's my belief, that's what I've witnessed and 1 of the things I'll pay attention to in the future as I do these tests. If anyone chooses not to say there is such a threshold, then so be it. But please don't put your beliefs and past issues with other people on me. I do understand that the threshold is bullet design/pressure related and the spin of the bullet is secondary, but I choose not to turn a blind eye to that reality either.

Thank you for the lesion on getting the bullet aligned to the bore. Right now I have:
Re-cut the throat in the bbl making it 25% longer with an angle that is designed to have 66% the new throat specifically there for bullet alignment to the bore.
That's a mechanical change at the business end where the loud button is used.
Use a forster concentricity gauge on the loaded rounds.
That's a mechanical test on the mfg end of the ammo making process.
I won't even get into the custom dies I've made not only sizing dies but bump dies that will be used at a later date.

Anyway, I simply used allot of 1 of the worst powders out there (4227) for hv with cast bullets. I did a search to see what other people recommended on this website. It seemed that 18gr to 20gr was the most recommended weight for a large # of different bullets. At least I can say/recommend 26gr of 4227 with a poorly designed bullet.:kidding:

The next test will be with H4895, huge difference the performance/pressure curve of this powder compared to the 4227.

Forrest with that Saeco 301 have you or why don't you try some 4831?

[vzerone]

Slump is an OLD term used in concrete business, it is a test method. Pour a pile and see how much it 'slumps' a measure of concrete strength/curing. Same thing happens to boolits, but caused by impulse pressure vs gravity.

What I meant, the most common meaning of slump, is for example: You take some modeling clay. Roll out a long rod of about 1 inch in diameter and 12 inches long. You hold it horizontal by one end. In a short amount of time the unheld end with slump or another word for it would be droop.

What we are seeing in bullets is the compression of the base of the bullet pushing metal forward (all of this obturating to the bore) until the force runs out of enough pressure to do so. If it nears the nose of the bullet it causes a change in it's shape. It cannot slump by the definition/example given above. I know some people think of it as the example above.

[newton]

What I meant, the most common meaning of slump, is for example: You take some modeling clay. Roll out a long rod of about 1 inch in diameter and 12 inches long. You hold it horizontal by one end. In a short amount of time the unheld end with slump or another word for it would be droop.

What we are seeing in bullets is the compression of the base of the bullet pushing metal forward (all of this obturating to the bore) until the force runs out of enough pressure to do so. If it nears the nose of the bullet it causes a change in it's shape. It cannot slump by the definition/example given above. I know some people think of it as the example above.



This is interesting to me. The very first question that comes to my mind when I hear this is how do we know the nose slumps? Seems to me the only way to verify it would be to catch a bullet by the rear end in order to leave the nose intact. But as far as I can tell, the only way bullets are recovered are after they hit something with their noses.

[vzerone]

This is interesting to me. The very first question that comes to my mind when I hear this is how do we know the nose slumps? Seems to me the only way to verify it would be to catch a bullet by the rear end in order to leave the nose intact. But as far as I can tell, the only way bullets are recovered are after they hit something with their noses.

People have recovered bullets were pretty much undamaged and you can easily observe it, that is if there was enough pressure to cause it to slump. Snow banks are one way to recover them intact.

[newton]

People have recovered bullets were pretty much undamaged and you can easily observe it, that is if there was enough pressure to cause it to slump. Snow banks are one way to recover them intact.

How do you know its not from the bullet impacting the snow? Not trying to argue it, just pointing out that logic says in order to say with absolute certainty you have to eliminate the possibilities.

[popper]

Vzerone - it's the same, think of gravity pushing up on the concrete - strength of the material, same as your clay example. It's the weight of the front of the boolit that causes it, no momentum at first in the nose, plenty in the rear. If the nose isn't strong enough, it 'slumps'.

[vzerone]

Vzerone - it's the same, think of gravity pushing up on the concrete - strength of the material, same as your clay example. It's the weight of the front of the boolit that causes it, no momentum at first in the nose, plenty in the rear. If the nose isn't strong enough, it 'slumps'.''

popper you're still not getting at what I'm saying or describing. The nose of the bullet, in most of the cases, is changing because the pressure is compressing the metal behind it forward. In my clay example there is only one force applied and that is gravity. The clay rod has no gas pressure on it (other then atmospheric pressure which is all around it) pressing or pushing on one end. For the nose to change, compress, whatever you want to call it, from acceleration alone, the velocity would have to be mind boggling. If you put that clay rod inside a metal tube and hit the one end with pressure then it will exhibit what cast bullets are doing.

Hey gravity pushing up on concrete would be anti-gravity. :kidding:

[newton]

Vzerone - it's the same, think of gravity pushing up on the concrete - strength of the material, same as your clay example. It's the weight of the front of the boolit that causes it, no momentum at first in the nose, plenty in the rear. If the nose isn't strong enough, it 'slumps'.

I get what your saying popper. But why wouldn't we see this with exposed lead tip jacketed bullets if this was the case?

[vzerone]

I get what your saying popper. But why wouldn't we see this with exposed lead tip jacketed bullets if this was the case?l

One reason is there isn't enough pressure to compress obturate such a tough bullet.

[popper]

Actualy army testing shows it does happen to FMJ, just inside the jacket so you don't see it. They actually measure the radial force on the bore due to the 'slump' and it is a LOT, even for spitzer bullets. Part of the reason for the interlock (corlok) design.

[vzerone]

Actualy army testing shows it does happen to FMJ, just inside the jacket so you don't see it. They actually measure the radial force on the bore due to the 'slump' and it is a LOT, even for spitzer bullets. Part of the reason for the interlock (corlok) design.

What is happening there is that the jacket is open at the base and the pressure is either pressing lead core forward (being in those bullets the core and jacket weren't bonded) or the pressure is just pressing on the base of the core and compressing it.

[Forrest r]

Got another round of testing in, as usual some good results & some bad. At least I have another load to take a hard look at. Planned on doing pulmonary testing with 7 different powders and the go back and fine tune/re-test the different bullet/powder combo's that showed promise. I switched bullets for the 301 to a 30h, the 30h has multiple lube grooves so the reloader can control how much/many lube grooves to use. Wanted to test the different loads starting with the fastest burning powder and work to the slowest powder. This test run was with h4895.

And of course I didn't have enough lube. I only used the bottom ring where the gc is and 1 lube groove. It wasn't enough so I'm going to re-test the same loads with lube in another/2 lube grooves. I shot the 311465 test loads 1st, no problem. The 30h loads showed to little lube right from the start. Lubing another band should help, only 1 way to find out. The 30h (left/center) and the 311465 (right).

http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t242/forrestr-photo/30h-311465lube_zpszhwwkn02.jpg (http://s162.photobucket.com/user/forrestr-photo/media/30h-311465lube_zpszhwwkn02.jpg.html)

The 311465 actually did extremely well again!!! With 38.0gr of h4895 being the highest load I could use before that bullet gave up the ghost. It's only a 5-shot group that's just under 2"'s but I watched the groups (32gr to 39gr) walk right in and open up. 2 different ladder tests with 2 different powders now with the same results. The groups shrink and then open up as the loads go up.

http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t242/forrestr-photo/311465-38grh4895_zpslxpjtjzn.jpg (http://s162.photobucket.com/user/forrestr-photo/media/311465-38grh4895_zpslxpjtjzn.jpg.html)

I took a chronograph with me this time, wanted to test some mp-300/357mag loads. The readings for those 311465 loads were fast, real fast. I believe the chronograph is working properly, the mp-300 loads with within 40fps of what other shooters are getting with the same bullet/bbl/load. What they told me to correct is dead on for what I experienced/saw, I need more crimp. I plan on re-testing that mp-300 load with more crimp and see what happens.

When I 1st changed bbl's to this custom 1 in 11 twist I shot known jacketed bullet loads for the bbl's break-in. I had a 1 in 10 twist 300/308 22" bbl on that rifle and had worked up jacketed loads for it over a chronograph. When I switched to this bbl I was getting more velocity with those same reloads (had a couple 100 laying around). I wrote it off as this bbl is not only looser (301/308 vs 300/308) but this is a 24" bbl (24" vs 22").

Well anyway, shot these cast bullets over the chronograph and it was a real eye opener. So now I'm going to go back and re-test the re-lubed 30h's along with re-testing the pm-300 loads and bring some other known loads/firearm combo's that have already be shot over a chronograph to make sure the chronograph is running correctly. Then I'll re-test the 311465/38.0gr h4895 load.

[runfiverun]

Vzerone; Is this group of 5r5's daughter the internationally famous 1.75 " group at 100 yds that "won the Nevada State Cast bullet"championship..Must be quite the match with competitors shooting over chronographs.... Onceabull

actually she didn't win, my wife beat her using her 30-06 and a 10 twist barrel.
she was not going 2800 fps merely 2300 fps.
maybe things slow down a lot in a 400 or so foot drop in elevation, and they were both just sucking that day shooting at 1800 fps.

[Harter66]

If there is no rev speed significance then how is it that my Savage 1-12 308 will consistently at higher pressures out run my Savage 1-8.5 30-06' ,more over the 10 twist 03A3 will out run the Savage 06'. My belief is that it is spin induced bullet failure.

I know there is no such thing as an 06' with a 1-8.5 twist but the drive fit patched jag and very tight 0000 wrapped bronze brushes pushed and pulled with a linial line on the rod and fixed index point on the barrel would tend to disagree with its non-existence. The results are the same with the 2 Savages up to 180 gr jacketed bullets and with cast from 125 to 172 gr .

Slump or more practically internal balistic nose shape change is supported by a shooting experiment with a full Spitzer shaped bullet and group consistency being restored at velocity steps by using slower acceleration powders in the same pressure ranges and finally a switch to a more rigid alloy .

These 2 threads detail working loads from a new unknown mould to a final for now with loads to be confirmed for non fluke 1.5 inch groups from a 3" factory load rifle.
http://68forums.com/forums/showthread.php?57557-6-8-and-quot-free-quot-bullets-or-casting-on-the-cheap

http://lee-loader.com/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=1133

[runfiverun]

there is a threshold there are several of them they usually come at 300 fps intervals.
which co-incidentally is about where the accuracy nodes are too.
the first threshold comes in about where straight parallel sided boolits start to fail.
a design change that more closely matches the contours of your throat will be the first step.
after that you have to search little things out like powder speed and alloy changes.
a change in lube flow characteristics will also help.
the whole thing about good boolits, acceleration speed/powder timing, and straight into the barrel really shows up at the second step. [@2200 fps]

[Harter66]

If that were exclusively true then the perfect fitted bullet for a 300 RUM would shoot as well at 1800 and 30 kpsi over Unique as it does at 2100 at 30 kpsi over 4895 at 2700 at 30 kpsi over 4350 or 4831 as at 3400 over I don't know 5010 maybe at 30 kpsi with no regard to whether it were launched in an 8,10,12 or 16 inch twist we know or at least I am sure this doesn't work because if it did then the 12 twist 308 would shoot just like the 8.5 twist 06' for all I know at this point the new 30-30 Savage may have the same case mouth forward shape. All 3 will manage 30 kpsi so the results should be very similar. No ?

[Hickok]

I believe there is a rpm threshold. I realize I am talking about jacketed bullets, but out of a .220 swift, I have vaporized thin jacketed Sierra Blitz 55 gr bullets. Same thing with .223 and Sierra Blitz bullets pushed hard from fast twist barrels. Looks like a grey colored tracer going down range. Accuracy goes kaput.

I can see where a fast twist and pushing hard on a cast boolit would cause problems.

I know, I know, apples and oranges, jacketed not cast,....just sayin'.... don't know what I'm talking about.

[runfiverun]

well many theorize that the 220 makes poof balls from the jacket being striped/cut as the light bullet and thin jacket is pushed forward too fast.
what does this tell us about cast?

30-k is nothing on the back of a lead boolit,, the 12grs of red-dot [ED Harris] load makes
45-k and I hear nothing about it ruining accuracy.
it's also producing what about 1600 ish fps?
so pressure doesn't tell the whole story.

[41mag]

Ok so we are now on page 9. I have read through almost every post and feel we have lube, alloy, twist, and slump covered pretty well.

That said, I have a Ruger Compact in .308 with a 1-10 twist 16.5" barrel.

I have mixed, name brand sorted, and some match cases.

I have a standard set of Hornady FL dies.

I have both a Lyman 4500 and Saeco lubesizers, with .308 thru .313" dies for each.

I have several molds made by Ranch Dog, NOE, and MP, both in GC and PB versions, and would like to use my boolits for hunting.

I don't mind buying an alloy if needed but figure I can blend it up cheaper. I have COWW, Iso Core, Lino & Mono type, pure Pb and Tin to work with. I also have the Alloy calculator downloaded and am familiar with how to work it.

I only get around 2650 tops for a 150gr jacketed in this rifle due to the short barrel so I don't figure I have to go far to get close to this with cast. I feel if I break 2100 with accuracy I'm good to go.

I have just about every type/brand LR primer made, and plenty of different powders to choose from.

I have Carnuba Red as well as some Felix Lube and plenty of 45/45/10, and I don't mind ordering anything else that Glen makes, but I do not mix my own.

How should I proceed to get to a decent 1 - 2" group at 100yds?

I'm not sure but I think this was the initial jest of the first post.

[vzerone]

The reason the 220 Swift blows light constructed bullets up is exactly what 5R5 said, but I'll add. The rifling weakens the jacket. Remember the word "jacket" signifies that it's a covering. So the rifle cuts fairly deep into it even though it's pressing it into the core. Couple this with the pressure, the heat from being fired, air friction once out of the barrel, and rotation it simply comes apart. I have a different thought then 5R5 on where he mentioned the rifling tears the bullet up. I don't believe that's happening to cast. There's no evidence, if things are done right, on recovered bullets nor any lead left in the bore. The cast bullet also does not have any sort of jacket.

When a certain member came up with the rpm theory he was at first saying that it deteriorated accuracy no matter if the bullet was imbalanced or not. Later he changed his statement to it not affecting a balanced bullet. He also tagged on dual helical spirals as also affecting accuracy. I haven't found this to be true.

Far as the 8.5 twist 06 not shooting as accurate as it's brother the slower twists there are just too many factors involved including the rifle itself. We've seen instances of two people have the identical model of rifles in the same caliber and one shoots outstanding and the other mediocre. I have and have seen 7, 7.8, 8, and 9 twist shoot just as accurate as the slower twists in the same caliber.

I have a thought to put in all your heads. Over the past week I did a test for myself. I have the chamber end of a 7.62x39 barrel. I did work on it to be able to fire a cartridge through, but I cut the chamber to a stub where 1/16th inch of the case mouth actually protruded outside of the muzzle if it. Basically I cut the stub down to just little less then the chamber. Then I stuck the stub just inside a carboard box and fired it. You've heard the old saying hang a 30-06 cartridge, or any cartridge on a wire hanging inside a cardboard box with it centered in the center of the box and a candle heating the primer. They say that neither the case or bullet will penetrate the box. I've never tried that. So back to my test. What do you all think happen? You think it just popped? You think it fired off violently? Tell me what you think.

[Hickok]

Truthfully I am glad to hear cast can be used in differing twist rates at higher speeds.

As to the round in the box, since it was in a chamber, I think the bullet would have enough velocity to penetrate the box, if the chamber stub was held stationary, and could not recoil. Equal and opposite reactions as per Newton.

Had the cartridge been a bare cartridge and set off, the brass would probably rupture and the brass and bullet would not penetrate the box. Just quessing.

[runfiverun]

the primer went wizzing away.

41 mag:
you got the gist of the OP.

how I would proceed is to do nothing more than pick a case brand.
in my case Remington.
a primer to work with.
I went with federal LR.

then you have to pick a boolit, which is kind of the harder part.
which NOE, which M/P mold do you have?
if you have the M/P 180gr silhouette boolit I have heard some good stuff about it doing well.

this is the part where your gonna learn a little something about fitment, the 308 has a similar but not quite the same throat as a 30-06 so in the 2100 fps area something that has a tapered nose profile and smooth edges should do pretty well.
not long square/parallel sides.
doing a pound slug of your throat would give you an exact picture but a saami drawing would be close enough to get started.
pick the boolit shape closest to that.
the other thing the slug will do is tell you how long your case necks can be, and how large your neck was cut in your chamber.

the last thing you need to choose is the powder. I'd go slower than varget.
start at about 30 grs and work forward alternating a tuft of Dacron and a non tufted load at each step.
so 30 grs with and without and observe the difference.
use the Dacron to predict the next powder step.

I'd use the ww alloy to get started [I water drop my rifle stuff and cut it 3to1 with some softer lead]

the key is to get started and observe each step along the way for changes.
if the results change you need to change something in the load details.

[vzerone]

I had the primer contained 5R5. The cartridge had a very loud report when it went off. It also had a very big muzzle blast. In fact I had to use a second larger box as the first one was shredded from the blast. The answer is it definitely penetrated the box and I believe you would have caused a bloody wound if it hit someone. Mind you 1/16th of the case mouth was protruding. I was quite surprised. It gave me an insight to maybe how the powder burns. The boys over on Artful forum were discussing this and in fact 5R5 is in the thread about what actually happens when the primer goes off. We all have our theories that range from the powder burn is pretty much consumed in the case to the powder is consumed in the bore and everything in between. Well from this test it appears in this instance that a good portion of the powder is burned up in the case. I really didn't see signs of unburned powder in the box. The case mouth that was exposed got flared from the pressure and I had to use a rod to tap it out of the chamber. The powder by the way was 4198.

Yes one can shoot cast from fast twist with accuracy, but the faster the twist is and the harder you push the bullet, the harder it is to achieve this. I have many friends in the competition shooting world and more and more of them are turning towards faster twists because they want more stabilization then just being barely stabilized. They are finding out that the faster twists are giving superb accuracy. Would any of you consider the 220 Swift or 22-250 with faster twist inaccurate? They aren't. So yes cast can be shot fast and accurately from fast twists, it just takes alot of work.

I'd much rather think of the limitations as the alloys, the pressure range, how balanced the cast bullet used are, how well the bullet fits, how concentric the cartridge is loaded, the correct choice of powder type, and don't forget the quality of the rifle and how well the shooter can shoot. We often query one another as to what is the most important thing to shooting cast accurately. We hear all kind of things from benchrest prepped cases, to extremely slow powders, to all kind of different alloys, etc. I feel the answer is the correct alloy for the pressure/velocity range and starting the bullet straight into the bore. This is not to neglect that the bullet be balanced as possible and a host of other things, but those two mentioned stick out the most to me.

[Harter66]

What I said was that the slower twists out ran the faster twist and that it is the same and same margin whether cast or jacketed.

I think the questions could be answered with a 1-10 and 1-16 bbl chambered in 300 RUM were used with reduced case capacities to 308,x57 ,06' 300WM and the RUM on 1 rifle . Then use 1 powder retumbo or 1000 or W857 . Cut both chambers on the same day with the same tool and take extreme steps to ensure that only the twist is different between the 2 bbl. This will remove case shape ,throat, leade , land groove ,length ,weight ,taper, stock ,shooter fit ,trigger, hammer fall, sights/optics, bedding, heat distribution, lot variations and more variables. It leaves only 5 lots of 20 well matched brass and particulars of 300 weigh lotted bullets . Of course there could be atmospheric as well . With so many more variables removed it should be possible to prove that twist does or does not make any difference and that cast can or can not be pushed to jacketed speeds. Since speed is the quest I futher suggest that no more than a 165 gr maximum loaded weight bullet be used . I should think that loads should be fired in the 1-16 bbl 1st then the same loads in the chamber matched 100 new brass be fired in the 1-10 twist bbl .

As a last confirmation use loads that work in the 1-10 twist in the 1-16 .

The down side of this is of course having a spare magnum action and bench rest stock along with a couple of grand to drop on bbls and fitting just laying around .

[vzerone]

What I said was that the slower twists out ran the faster twist and that it is the same and same margin whether cast or jacketed.

I think the questions could be answered with a 1-10 and 1-16 bbl chambered in 300 RUM were used with reduced case capacities to 308,x57 ,06' 300WM and the RUM on 1 rifle . Then use 1 powder retumbo or 1000 or W857 . Cut both chambers on the same day with the same tool and take extreme steps to ensure that only the twist is different between the 2 bbl. This will remove case shape ,throat, leade , land groove ,length ,weight ,taper, stock ,shooter fit ,trigger, hammer fall, sights/optics, bedding, heat distribution, lot variations and more variables. It leaves only 5 lots of 20 well matched brass and particulars of 300 weigh lotted bullets . Of course there could be atmospheric as well . With so many more variables removed it should be possible to prove that twist does or does not make any difference and that cast can or can not be pushed to jacketed speeds. Since speed is the quest I futher suggest that no more than a 165 gr maximum loaded weight bullet be used . I should think that loads should be fired in the 1-16 bbl 1st then the same loads in the chamber matched 100 new brass be fired in the 1-10 twist bbl .

As a last confirmation use loads that work in the 1-10 twist in the 1-16 .

The down side of this is of course having a spare magnum action and bench rest stock along with a couple of grand to drop on bbls and fitting just laying around .

I see what you mean. Have a friend that has a business building 6.8 AR's. He can run his bullets quite a few hundred fps faster then most because he's using a slower twist 3 groove barrel.

About the twist test you mentioned. There is one thing that most are missing including the originator of the three rifle three different twist test. I'll say this first: say a bunch of you and your friends have the same exact model rifles and caliber bought at the same years of production. If one finds a good jacketed load does that load shoot the best in the other rifles? Not usually. So here is what everyone that does this twist test miss. They have to tailor the load to each rifle. That would include maybe different powder, bullet, and lube...throw in primers. That twist test would be pretty hard to prove, very costly, and very expensive. My take on it is all the ballistic labs around the world all get barrels made by the same barrel maker with the same lot of steel blanks, same length, same crown, same internal dimensions, and these are fitted to a very heavy with barrel action that's on a steel table in such an arrangement that the whole assembly recoils and returns to the same exact position. Then you try all the combinations of bullets, powders, primers, lube, and don't forget all the different bullet diameters and seating depths and to include neck tension differences plus take in all the atmospheric conditions before this test could even begin to be viable. Forgot one, then have a barrel tuner on to fine the sweet spot in barrel harmonics because changing a load changes the harmonics.

Get the notion of thresholds and twists out of your minds and listen to those that know and have done it to shoot HV with accuracy out of a variety of twist rates. 5R5 is a good person for this information.

[Harter66]

Ok let's have a 60" hammer forged bbl made with a 10 and a 16 twist mandrel. Cut it and fit it to ONE action . The solution as outlined up to this point is to remove as many variables as possible. Case space is a variable that can be removed as outlined. We can back fill the 300 RUM down to 30 carbine or even 32 acp though I think maybe getting a bullet to clear a 26" bbl might be a problem especially with rifle powder. :)
If the solution is to eliminate every variable the test should be done in a lab . The quest is to shoot a cast bullet of common design in every man's rifle in any caliber or cartridge at weight/velocities equal to or faster than jacketed. My 8.5 twist 06' won't deliver on that . A 150 gr jacketed will only go 2695 fps with 1 MOA groups placed in the same place every time. At 2710 their 3" and by 2800 they are off an 8 1/2 x 11 . At 2650 3 in are touching and at 2600 they make a 60 cal hole . This is fixed whether I lay in with a heavy boot of 4895 or gently nudge it along with W857 the window doesn't make it worth the effort spent. It will how ever make a 250 gr VLD deliver ,which I guess is a twist thing. The 230 NOE is next up to see if it'll make the energy cut off.
The 308 other than a really short 178 gr patched bullet won't shoot anything in the 180 range even RN shorter than the BTSP 150 . Again I guess a product of twist . With the same 150 gr BTSP it gives an inch in the same place every time but will do so above 2800 fps . The 03A3 also gets the job done to almost 2800 but with a 10 not 12 twist.

[Harter66]

Twist for whatever reason has an impact on the top velocity attainable.
How we get to that velocity also has an impact . The generally excepted means is slowly with a smooth arc from the primer strike to the muzzle especially where the bullet is swaged down to bbl dia . Some systems need a little kick to work well . A few really need that boot to make it happen.

The alloy has to be soft enough to form to the lands and grooves and in some cases expand and rigid enough to keep its shape while it goes from zero to 1400 miles per hour in .0004 seconds and turn up to 10x dental drill speed.

There are high speed pictures of bullets that were spire points in the case but flawed to the point of being round nose. So we have to take care that ours don't do the same. We call that slump . The bullet gets shorter and the part with the least support move to fill space that isn't full. If it happens too slow/late it can be destructive to the bullet hitting the same place every time. If it happens to soon or too much the result is the same .
To fix it we choose bullet that have shapes that minimize the change in shape by by being at nearly the maximum slump shape and filling the grooves or by selecting and alloy that resists changing shape. "OGG say hard bullet go fast and straight" or something cute. If it were as easy as that we'd shoot zinc and save the gas check money.

[vzerone]

Harter66, There's not way to say this so I'm just going to say it. You really don't understand what slump is and I'm not going to discuss it. Maybe 5R5 will help you out on it I don't have the patience. Sorry You have a mix of some right things and a lot of wrong things mixed together. I and my cousin and a good number of other associated friends have calibers in faster twists then your 8.5 twist 06 that would make your eyes pop out with both jacketed and cast. I know you explained the tight jag and all that you used, but something is very wrong that a 30-06 has that twist and wonder if the barrel was really meant to be on that 06.

[Harter66]

I also have several 7mm and a 6.5 as well as a couple 1 8 twist 223 s I just haven't done as much work with those. I have run 2500-3000 rounds through the obviously fictional Savages and haven't learned a thing nor do I have any clue about mechanical function .

[vzerone]

I also have several 7mm and a 6.5 as well as a couple 1 8 twist 223 s I just haven't done as much work with those. I have run 2500-3000 rounds through the obviously fictional Savages and haven't learned a thing nor do I have any clue about mechanical function .

Harter, get me back up to speed here. That Savage you have with the 8.5 twist 06 barrel is it factory or did you buy a replacement barrel from another barrel maker? Also have you shot the heavier jacketed bullets from it? If you did how did they shoot compared to the lighter weights? They made the 06 a 10 twist because the original bullet was a 220 grain. I know you know this just rehashing. They use to have 250 grain for the 06 I wonder how those would shoot? Now we know for cast there are some heavy weights out there. I'm just wondering if you have a barrel that's not so good. Have you slugged the breach end and the muzzle end to see if perhaps the bore is larger at the muzzle end?

I'm trying to find an undamaged bullet that will show you slump.

[Harter66]

I'm guessing that with the Savage stamped bbl it is factory.
I did shoot some 225 gr Spitzer /spire point factory loads about 25 yrs ago with just mediocre success and too many scope bites. I believe those were old stock then. It may have been special ordered . The taper is correct from breach to muzzle. I am hoping I can achieve 2k with the NOE 311-230 fp but I only need 1800. In a strange ....er...twist that bullet will shoot and stabilize in a 12 twist 30-30.

[5Shot]

something that has a tapered nose profile and smooth edges should do pretty well.
not long square/parallel sides.



What are you referring to by your comment "smooth edges"?

[vzerone]

Harter, I apologize for being abrupt with you on the bullet slump. I'm going to explain and although I couldn't find a fired bullet I drew up what the bullet would look like under various stages of slump. First I will explain it. Let's imagine a flatbase spitzer point cast bullet. It would have full bearing bands, but the spitzer nose is by no means a bore rider as it kind of just sets in the center of the bore not touching the land tops. Now when the alloy is too hard for the pressure you hit it with, or put another way, if you don't hit it with enough pressure its exits the barrel looking pretty much like you loaded except for the rifling engraving and being swaged down in the bore/groove some. That is the first picture at the top that I drew. Next when you hit with more pressure that is able to try to compress the alloy, we know that you really can't compress metal so the pressure pushing very hard on that base causes the metal to move forward in the bullet because the bore/groove walls prevent it from expanding more then their diameter. The moved metal then starts to move into the ogive portion of the bullet that doesn't have contact with the bore/groove and in turn making more bearing surface because it pushes the metal outward too. In turn the sharp spitzer nose becomes less pointed. That's the second picture down. If you hit it with even more pressure all the same above happens except the pushed forward metal pushes out even more of the spitzer nose and it becomes even less pointed. That's the last bottom picture. The bullet through all the phases still retains it's point at the tip, it's just that the ogive changes much. Now the picture to the right of those other three is what many describe incorrectly as nose slump. That never ever occurs in real life. Also what doesn't occur is your description of a pointed nose becoming a roundnose. It would take an acceleration that is beyond small arms capabilities. You're talking about an exceptionally high velocity. You know as objects approach the speed of light they also become shorter according to Einstein and other scientist. I would like to see that high speed photo of the bullet you said that happen too.

http://i1318.photobucket.com/albums/t643/vincentz1/img076_zpshjvrqmz2.jpg

[runfiverun]

not 90* angles.
I don't like a front drive band that is just squared off.
a bore ride nose is also not going to get you down the road past the first hurdle.
you need support [or fit]
there are two kinds of fitment static and mechanical.
mechanical fitment is the fit in the throat but with parallel sides and the nose does most of the alignment.
this type of boolit requires a hard alloy [think lino-type] and works pretty well with the faster powder.

the second one the one that relies on static fitment allows the boolit to glide into the barrel smoothly without a lot of damage and does much better with softer alloys that are heat treated.
the softer alloy allows the boolit to move about and be pushed into the barrel, and then be accelerated.
these type of boolits do better with the slower powders.

think of them like tennis balls and golf balls and how they are treated by the stick thingy they get whacked with.

[Hickok]

Maybe I missed it if it was brought up, but if a boolit was PCed, and did not have any lube grooves, i.e., a smooth bullet like a jacketed, would it be a better high velocity boolit, due to the fact that it would be "stiffer" and resist deformation in the barrel?

[runfiverun]

it could be.
except that powder coating is not applied evenly and that affects the balance.
the boolit being balanced and spinning around it's center is what makes this whole high twist thing work.

if you can't cast well nor find the centerline of your barrel with the centerline of your boolit your gonna have to break down and buy the fabled 16 twist barrel.

trust me here if P/C could be applied in an even coating and hold tolerances even close to those that a J-4 or match jacket has I would be the first one to go out and buy the necessary equipment to make it happen at my house.

this whole thread is about what we CAN do with the rifle we got for Christmas, or use for deer hunting.
it's a lot easier to practice hunting shots with loads that shoot flatter or much closer to your jacketed hunting loads scope settings.

[vzerone]

Another thing with that smooth no lube groove PC'ed bullet is it would have too much bearing surface and much more friction. Barnes changed their copper solids from smooth to ones with grooves to decrease the fouling and friction.

[popper]

I have the 31-165 with and without L.G. both shoot well @ 2400 from 16" & 2700 from 24" upper (1:10 both) PCd (same load, different upper). Vz's pics explanation is correct for 1R, FP boolits, kinda fails for L.G. boolits, #4 COULD happen to a 7-8R boolit, but the pic exaggerated a lot. Let's not get carried away with the RPMTH, as stability becomes more aerodynamic after the boolit leaves the bore, crossover between spin & aero depends on fps, profile, damage due to firing, etc.. Conclusion from Army spark range tests show a 'perfect' boolit exit, way UNDERSPUN is rapidly aero stabilized, i.e., POI = POA by 100yds. I am also beginning to believe that the RPMTH is more an effect of material tensile strength, not imbalance. I.e., spin balance a tire and the middle 'grows' in dia.. Spin it at 140K-200K RPM and see what it does.

[vzerone]

I have the 31-165 with and without L.G. both shoot well @ 2400 from 16" & 2700 from 24" upper (1:10 both) PCd (same load, different upper). Vz's pics explanation is correct for 1R, FP boolits, kinda fails for L.G. boolits, #4 COULD happen to a 7-8R boolit, but the pic exaggerated a lot. Let's not get carried away with the RPMTH, as stability becomes more aerodynamic after the boolit leaves the bore, crossover between spin & aero depends on fps, profile, damage due to firing, etc.. Conclusion from Army spark range tests show a 'perfect' boolit exit, way UNDERSPUN is rapidly aero stabilized, i.e., POI = POA by 100yds. I am also beginning to believe that the RPMTH is more an effect of material tensile strength, not imbalance. I.e., spin balance a tire and the middle 'grows' in dia.. Spin it at 140K-200K RPM and see what it does.

Yes I exaggerated it on purpose to get the point across.

Now take that next to last statement of yours: "I am also beginning to believe that RPMTH is more an effect of material tensile strength, not imbalance". Think about it, if the alloy isn't up to snuff for the load, that is velocity/pressure the bullet then changes from all the forces on it from what was hopefully a balanced bullet to begin with to an imbalanced bullet.

You know the rpm theory wasn't carved in granite by God on Mount Sinai and carried to the castboolit members by Moses 308 Win. Get the rpm notion out of your heads. If you think that high rpm is going to ruin your accuracy you have failed before you even begun.

[vzerone]

I have the 31-165 with and without L.G. both shoot well @ 2400 from 16" & 2700 from 24" upper (1:10 both) PCd (same load, different upper). Vz's pics explanation is correct for 1R, FP boolits, kinda fails for L.G. boolits, #4 COULD happen to a 7-8R boolit, but the pic exaggerated a lot. Let's not get carried away with the RPMTH, as stability becomes more aerodynamic after the boolit leaves the bore, crossover between spin & aero depends on fps, profile, damage due to firing, etc.. Conclusion from Army spark range tests show a 'perfect' boolit exit, way UNDERSPUN is rapidly aero stabilized, i.e., POI = POA by 100yds. I am also beginning to believe that the RPMTH is more an effect of material tensile strength, not imbalance. I.e., spin balance a tire and the middle 'grows' in dia.. Spin it at 140K-200K RPM and see what it does.

popper you also said this in the post above: "as stability becomes more aerodynamic after the boolit leaves the bore". I do believe you meant to say "as the bullet becomes more stabilized it is more aerodynamic" because "stability" isn't a tangible thing. The bullet, if it's balance and exits the muzzle well, indeed does become more stabilized as the gyroscopic action of it spinning it trying to stabilize it from the yaw it receive when leaving the muzzle. I don't know about it becoming more aerodynamic, but I think you meant it's flying more point on then wobbling.

[popper]

Aero stability trumps spin. Spark test uses cardboard to introduce wobble which damps out -100 yds due to aero. Wobble is same as unbalanced boolit effect.

[vzerone]

Aero stability trumps spin. Spark test uses cardboard to introduce wobble which damps out -100 yds due to aero. Wobble is same as unbalanced boolit effect.

I'm just saying stability has no aerodynamics, a bullet does. Stability isn't a tangible, a bullet is. Basically using wrong nomenclature. Yes it's not going to fly as well if it isn't stabilized or put your way wobbling.

[Harter66]

So we should be able to load a 75 gr RN with a gas check for a 32 acp in a 7.62x54 Mosin Nagant and send it away over a full case of 4895 as accurately as over 6.0 Unique ? It would have to be HT lino I expect .

[vzerone]

So we should be able to load a 75 gr RN with a gas check for a 32 acp in a 7.62x54 Mosin Nagant and send it away over a full case of 4895 as accurately as over 6.0 Unique ? It would have to be HT lino I expect .

Harter I'll have to think on your question. I can tell you my cousin pushed a LEE 130 grain gas check bullet of water quenched 50/50 alloy to over 3100 fps win little over one inch group at 100 yard more then just once. The group had 4 cutting little over 1/2 inch. This was from an AR10 with a 10 twist barrel using a max load of H4198.

Both your loads are attractive and it seems the Unique would definitely shoot well. Problem with the 4895 is that it's slow in comparison of the bullet weight you will be shooting. It may work, but I honestly don't know because I haven't tried that one.

I did know an older gent that use to pull the 90 grain FMJ bullets from 30 Luger cartridges and load them to exceptionally high velocity in his 30-06 Springfield to hunt groundhogs. Didn't matter it was a FMJ bullet it turned a groundhog inside out. Very interesting concept. Thing was like a 30 caliber 220 Swift.

If you load the Unique make sure you hold the rifle muzzle up before each shot to insure the Unique is against the flash hole or it's vicinity.