any interest in a group buy of these?

[castalott]

The rounded nose bullet is a Lyman 311410 at about 130 grains. I don't know what the other is but it weighs around 165 grains. Anyone interested in a group buy of either or both of these? I'd like to see the body of both at .311 and the nose of the 30-30 bullet at .300 or maybe .301. I know we've done a lot of 30 cal molds lately.... But I would like to have either or both in 6 cavity....

Dale

[45 2.1]

Dale-
You have the Lyman 311410 and the 30 is a commercial number that is a beveled plain base which Lyman doesn't offer, but is close to the gas checked 311041 in design. Lyman used to offer the 311241 which an excellent 160 gr. plain base number for the 30 calibers. If your wanting a plain base 30, the Lyman 311241 is what I would recommend.

[castalott]

Hi Bob!

I've been looking for an extra 311410 4 cavity for some time with no success. And the other is way out of spec ( The nose is .295). I am to the point that it is easier to buy what I really want than waste my time looking ( and being disappointed) for the others.

I would actually like to knock a few grains off the 30-30 bullet...145 to 150 with all the weight coming off the nose would be great.

This bullet mold thing has turned into an obsession.....lol

Dale

[Newtire]

Hey castalott,
If you're gonna get something going, count me in on that little 130 grainer 311410.
I have an undernourished .30 carbine that really likes bullets from a Lee mould that casts 130 gr. but is only a single cavity. I need that mould. Not an obsession...just that I really really gotta have that mould!

[45 2.1]

Dale, something like this: 140 gr. 0.750" long.

[castalott]

Well, that's a good start...

I really want something with a bevel base because I want a plinking/high volume reloading bullet. I can't tell exactly about the nose, but I want as much bore riding as possible...even it if makes the nose angle a little abrupt...

And I was wondering....how important is the debris catcher groove on the 311410? Have you ever read or experimented with a bullet with and without it?Inquiring minds want to know......

Thanks, Bob...
Dale

[castalott]

Hi Newtire!

It is a fine little plinking bullet...I understand you can wind it up pretty good in a carbine too! How does yours shoot? It feeds ok too?

It doesn't really look like a rush to sign up so far...so I don't know.....

Dale

[45 2.1]

I really want something with a bevel base because I want a plinking/high volume reloading bullet. I can't tell exactly about the nose, but I want as much bore riding as possible...even it if makes the nose angle a little abrupt...

The nose is a lengthened version of the 32-20 bullet we just did and does nose engrave after very little run. It has been an excellent bullet for me. Bevel base bullets introduce alot of variables, especially from a LEE mold. In several years of testing, those with a bevel versus those without (after the bevel was removed from the same mold), the beveled bullets generally did poorer than the normal plain base versions. This was from about 5 different molds. I don't use beveled bullets after doing those tests.

And I was wondering....how important is the debris catcher groove on the 311410? Have you ever read or experimented with a bullet with and without it?Inquiring minds want to know......

I have various versions of the same mold thru Lymans history of mold making. The dirt groove is a very early idea to clean out fouling and works better than intended for cast accuracy. The versions without it shoot worse than the versions with it.

[castalott]

Cool! Thanks, Bob... ( ask the right question to the right guy....)

Now if I could just find someone who has women figured out.....lol


Dale

[C1PNR]

I don't have any problem with the design. I like the looks of it as drawn.

In a .30 caliber plain base (not BB, please) I only have the 311410 @ 130 gr nominal and the 311403 @ 167 gr nominal. So a 140 to 150 gr design fits, I guess.

I'm just trying to think of where I'd use this one.

My .30 Carbine absolutely dotes on the 311359 @ 120 grains with my alloy. Flawless feeding, minute of .30 Carbine accuracy, and I just like the idea of a gas check in a gas operated rifle.

The 30-30 is the only thing that really pops up on my screen.

Maybe the '06 in a 1903? Probably too light to shoot well in the .30 Gov't., and I don't have any .308 Winchesters.

Maybe in the M39 Finn, if the Finn isn't too large in groove diameter. The other Mosin's run .312 to .314, at least in mine.

In the K31 the light loads shoot too far to the left of "full power" loads, and I don't want to mess with changing front sights all the time.

Just some of my thoughts. What do you have in mind, castalot?

[castalott]

I shoot a lot of homemade sillyette ( lever guns mostly with iron sights. Pistol size chickens at 50 meters.Everything else strung out to 100 meters.It's all offhand with no rest or sling. I want to add to the range in the spring to get 175 meters and that will be my sheep distance)..

I just want something that is a JOY to cast ,inspect, and load. That means a simple ,clean design...Offhand practice doesn't require exceptional accuracy.....
( Although I have amazed several people how well the 311410 does at 1-300 yards just playing around. ) Besides, if accuracy was THE only thing, we'd all be carrying benchrest guns and shooting matchkings.

I 'really' don't need either of these molds as i am 'mold poor' now... But why not dream??? Besides, I'm gettin' in 'the short rows' as the farmers say. That means I don't have a lot of years left and then its downhill... Better have my fun now....


Dale

[Cayoot]

I 'really' don't need either of these molds as i am 'mold poor' now... But why not dream??? Besides, I'm gettin' in 'the short rows' as the farmers say. That means I don't have a lot of years left and then its downhill... Better have my fun now....Dale

WOW! How can anyone argue with logic like that!!!!! :veryconfu

I guess I better start saving for this one too! :grin:

[Newtire]

I just want to add my 2-cents worth here. Unless the bullet is round or pointed, forget feeding in most M-1 carbines I've heard about (including mine). I think the flat base idea is the best design. The bevel base would seem to invite gas cutting although I shot some bevel base moly coated .444 bullets up to full power with no leading. I have heard the plain lead ones aren't so good. I'd buy one if it was just like that 311410. It has a pretty decent B.C. # too.

[StarMetal]

And just why would a bevel base invite gas cutting? Gas cutting is cause by a number of things, like bullet too small to fill the bore and grooves, bullet base/edge has a flaw that gas can get around, etc. There's not difference in that corner where a flat base meets the bore/groove wall then there is for the corner where bevel meets the full bullet diameter and that meets the bore/groove wall.

Joe

[Buckshot]

...........I doubt that there is spits worth of difference in accuracy between a slug with a sharp cornered flat base and one with a bevel base. That is assuming the bevel base is well done. Accuracy problems with a BB are most likely caused by a poor radial seal at the junction of the bevel and the barrel.

By that I mean boring straight out and having a true edge on a accurate plain that is perpendicular to the bullet's axis is much easier then cutting the bevel's angle in the cavity, where it meets the side of the drive band be co-plainer or parallel with the plain of the bullet's base. In other words, the datum line of the bevel and where it meets the straight side MUST be a perfect circle. That's the hard part.

I have never searched, but by casual observation over the years, it's obvious a large proportion of the commercial pistol bullets being sold are BB designs. I don't know how many of the people buying the things are interested in pure accuracy, or how many are just enjoying the noise and recoil and accept whatever accuracy that's delivered. Yet I would tend to believe that they MUST perform to a certain degree to be so common.

There was a quite extensive test done on BB and standard base slugs done in Handloader some years back and the author proved ot his satisfaction there was no difference in accuracy. Quantities of both were sent to the Speer labs for testing without their kowledge as to which was which. Their findings were also inconclusive.

My personal use of BB slugs is limited to the Lyman 147gr FNBB in a 38 Super, and 5 shot 1 and 1.5" groups at 25 yards (box stock pistol) shows me they're accurate. Ditto all my WC slugs used in my K38 which will do solid 1" and sometimes .75" groups at 25 yards. At least I can't think of any that aren't BB'd to a degree.

So far as a dirt catcher groove ahead of the front drive band goes, I don't like them. However I do have many moulds that have the feature. The main reason I don't care for them has nothing to do with accuracy. It's that the groove is a weak spot in sizing. While it is generally no wider or deeper then the lube grooves, in sizing the lube grooves are generally in the size die and supported to a degree while the nose and that scraper groove is still outside.

I have bent 311284's and RG-4's before, sizing from .311/.312 to .309". I have never attempted an accuracy comparison between those with and those without. First of all I just never thought of it :D. Secondly I guess I really only have one rifle capable of displaying any difference and that is mainly becaise of it's being scoped. Thinking about it I'd think there'd be several other variables involved besides a scraper groove or not. Since 311299's, 314299's, and all the Lee's have shot as well, I can't see where the feature would have much impact.

.............Buckshot

[castalott]

Hi All!

I hope to clear things up..not muddy the waters...so here goes

I know that bevel base ( bb from here on) bullets give me practical accuracy in the field. Many of you would scoff at a 2 or 3 moa rifle/load. That's fine. If you like shooting little groups, more power to you. You are the guys who make progress in the world. I encourage you.

3 moa in the field is entirely useful when you are using iron sights...... 3 moa at the local match will get you offers to buy drinks and replace targets....


3 moa is an inch and a 1/2 at 50..which I can't hold offhand. 1 &1/2 inches at 50 will stay on every chicken I have..if I do my part. Works that way on all of my course too.

Now when inspecting bullets, I ( and everyone else) look at the bases before opening the blocks. That works good for plain bases. You can readily see incomplete band fillout. I contend that the bb moves most of the problems up away from the last driving band. I would think it would shoot better for that reason. Plus less damage in seating and easiler seating to boot.

But I know Bob well enough to know his experiments would be well done. I have no doubt of his results. But I also know that what works for one guy often won't for another. It would probably bother Bob to shoot a group as large as moa...where twice that is useful to me... Now don't get me wrong...I like smaller groups too. But I like easy casting, inspection, sizing, and loading too.

A simple way to look at it. If I have a 10 inch wobble offhand at 100...and the load shoots 1 inch...I have an 11 inch 'cone' of bullet impact. A 10 inch wobble and a 3 inch load = a 13 inch 'cone'. Which needs the more work? Me or the load? Why me. of course! When I get to the point that I can justify the extra time for a 1 inch load, then I will surely do it...( don't hold your breath- lol)

This isn't a valid comparison but I would remind you that matchkings have a bb called a boattail. They seem to shoot ok.

I'm not trying to change your mind...The Gary Larson cartoon where the Arabs in the bar (!) choose up sides to fight on whether you liked your camels with 1 hump ..or 2 ...comes to mind. LOL

One more useless fact & I will go...

I believe it was the book, "British Snipers to the Rhine" where the author describes his rifle. It was a Lee Enfield that was "specially chosen" at the factory for it's accuracy. NO rifle that shot over 6 moa would be considered a 'sniper rifle'. 6 MOA!!!! Stop and think about that for a minute....They were very deadly with them too... ( I hope I remembered that right)

Anyway...Peace to you all

Dale

[45 2.1]

But I know Bob well enough to know his experiments would be well done. I have no doubt of his results. But I also know that what works for one guy often won't for another. It would probably bother Bob to shoot a group as large as moa...where twice that is useful to me... Now don't get me wrong...I like smaller groups too. But I like easy casting, inspection, sizing, and loading too. Dale

No Dale, it doesn't bother me to shoot a 2 M.O.A. group. Since I dearly love any rifle from when cartridges were first introduced up to about 1950, alot of those rifles are in pretty sad shape. Its really fun to shoot a 1.5" group out of a 1866 trapdoor 50-70, even when I can't see those itty bitty sights and get one thats 5", or out of an old washed bore 7mm rolling block. The "new" WW1 rifles and on usually have good bores which make it easier. Part of the challenge to get them shooting again.

[Newtire]

Well, now that I think of it, there was a bunch of those Oregon Trail bullets I had sitting around that shot fine in my Carbine & they had a slight bevel on the base. They're easier to stick into the case for sure.

[The Nyack Kid]

bevel base boolits are messier when one is using a constant pressure luber/sizer.
i have to clean the bases of my boolits any way with my saeco , but the bevel make for a bigger mess . they sure are handy though when loading for the 45 auto.

[Bass Ackward]

No "lead" bullet base design is any more accurate than another unless you consider range.

A bevel base adds weight to a bullet while contributing nothing to the drive portion or bearing area of a bullet, it clearly weakens a lead design. Thus, the top velocity potential of a bevel based bullet is lower than a flat. And because it takes weight off the back of a bullet, it makes it harder to stabilize. You see almost no longe range lead rifle designs with the famous "boat tail" bevel. All of these reasons contribute to the appearance that bevels are less accurate.

The advantage of a bevel is on small capacity cases and short actions where bullet weight / length is limited by these factors. The autos come to mind. And because you can't roll crimp, the bevel increases bullet weight enough that inertia improves ignition enough to improving grouping. The bevel doesn't encroach as much as a flat base would to powder capacity. More important to handguns is if lower powder capacity lowered velocity and changed POI from fixed sight settings. Again autos come to mind.

[castalott]

Hi Bass!

I read your reply with much interest. ( I actually had to read it 3 or 4 times before I understood it...not that I'm slow or anything...lol)

The only true boattail lead rifle bullet I've ever seen was for a 45/70....I never seen any shot.

But by definition a long range bullet would have to be a high(er) performance bullet and that means gas checks to me. And all gaschecks are flat on the bottom. If a man had a boattail lead bullet, he would need to make a boattail gas check to experiment. That would make an interesting winter project....

And the long range bullet would have a better bc with a boattail.

But I don't want a boattail...just a bevel base...


I want to relate a short story...

A friend had just made up some steel plates to shoot. They were thick and had bases so they would stand in the pasture. The weight of each was 12 pounds plus. We both had Marlin rifles with peep sights. The range was 100 yards. Some could not be knocked over by either of us. Some both of us could knock over. There was only one or 2 that he could knock over that I could not.

What's the point, you say? He was using a 44 mag with near max loads. I was using a 30-30 with the 311410 at about 1100 fps. Up close, he had a great amount of power.But at 100 yards, our power levels were a lot closer. ( no, I'm not saying the same.)The bc of his bullet was the same as your average boxcar. Mine was .2something....

Was that unscientific...yep! Does it prove anything...nope! Did I learn something that day..you bet!

Dale

[Bass Ackward]

Dale,

I was interrested in your thoughs here and explaining why some folks swear by bevel base accuracy and why others find it a failure. I listed some of the variables that seldom get considered in that argument.

My 250 Keith in my Marlin likes 17.5 grains of 2400 for 1540fps. This is a mid range load. My chronographed velocity at 100 yards is 1275 fps. I couldn't predict a 311410, but I have a 160 grain spitzer that has a BC over 3. I ran it at 1100 fps and it is down to 3 digit velocity. Just so you know.

[castalott]

Hi Bass

ya, I know....it doesn't make sense....but I was there and it happened just as I wrote.....were my impacts at the top and had more leverage to knock it over and his at the bottom? Surely there was a great disparity between the 'soft' and 'hard' to knock over targets... I really don't know...but that's how it happened...

In my view we need to consider the bullet as a whole and not just dwell on any one thing. How all the parts work together to get your desired result is the bottom line.

I could probably get wonderful groups from a single cavity Loverin design. I'd spend more time casting, inspecting, and carefully loading those slugs than I would shooting. I have nothing against paper shooting for groups...I did it a lot when I was younger and had good eyes. In fact I've done it enough that 'the thrill be gone' as they say.

Now I like good friends shooting plain simple guns at fun targets. Larry, for example, really makes the chickens 'FLY!' with his 45/70!!! It's a little hard on chickens but it's great for your soul....We gather them up once in a while to take them to the welder-doctor...

I was interested in max performance cast bullets some years back. It can be done. But we are back to that 'extra effort' thing... I even found a 311332 with a homemade check and copper bands in the driving rings I made up...But the effort reached the point that ( quick! put your hands over your kids eyes!) jack***d bullets are worth it...

[KB291]

I would definately be interested in a 6 cavity 311410 or a 150 gr version of the 31141 in 6 cavity, in the whatever its worth department.

[Newtire]

Hi KB & Dale,
I love the 2-cavity 311041 in 173 gr. that I have & have another one coming on the 6-cavity order. Boy, does that thing shootin my 30-30's! I bet a 150 gr. version of that would be a good one too with maybe a shorter nose. The Lee 1-holer 150 gr. FP is sure an accurate one for me with medium style loads in the 30-30.
As far as the M-1 carbine shooting or not...it Does shoot. Gotta have a rounded nose to feed though. The 113gr. SoupCan won't feed but the little 120 gr. Lee RoundNose feeds great. I shoot another one in that gun that really is accurate and it's a 130gr. Lee that you can still get on Lee's surplus page. Onliest thing is that it's only a 1-holer! That little carbine is just the ticket for cast bullet auto shooting if ya ask me but it eats up the bullets too fast. Maybe if I fixed it up so it would jam on me once in awhile!...