Shooting gas check boolits without the checks

[DragoonDrake]

Hey all,

I did a search and could not find out if you could shoot accurately gas check designed boolits with out the checks.

Please let me know,

Thanks

Adam

[docone31]

I am paper patching my .303 British, and .30cals without gas checks, and getting some pretty daggoned good full power loads.

[mooman76]

This has been brought up before and I believe the though from most is that yes you can but you can't push them as hard as a PB bullet. You could however add some sort of filler to help protect protect the base and keep leading down.

[DragoonDrake]

Thank you both for your fast responses.

Adam

[mike in co]

the last part of a boolit seen by your bbl is the base...leaving the muzzle.

the best crown is wasted if the base of the boolit is not square.

molds seem to create pretty square bases.

gas checks on the other hand have radiused bases, and when pressed thru a sizer, in my opinion, are not so good.

my limited testing with my 44 ruger super redhawk showed improved groups WITHOUT a gas check at similar velocities......50 yards, 1430-1000 fps, 255 to 300 gr boolits.

mike in co

[DragoonDrake]

Well thanks Mike

Adam

[shotman]

I dont go with the idea of the square base BS the base dont have anything to do with it the most accurate rifle bullet is the boat tail rick

[shotman]

the gas check is to keep the base from melting on a hot load. A lot of times I have recovered boolits that the gas check was not on the boolit rick

[exile]

off topic, but does this (shape of bullet base) apply to bullets with a bevel base, as far as accuracy is concerned. I ask because the Lee tumble lube molds have a bevel base, and the commercial cast bullets I have bought do also.

exile

[MT Gianni]

I suggest that you load 10 of each and fire for group. IME a bevel based is less accurate than a square plain base. This is with a 311410. I have shot pistol bullets with gc and with the base drilled out to eliminate the gc [358156] and found no difference at 357 pistol velocities. I would not push them from a 358 Win and expect good results. I think this issue is one that is dependant on velocity and perhaps caliber. Gianni

[RU shooter]

I dont know if your refering unchecked boolits in pistol or rifle but in my shooting these in rifles if you keep the speeds in the 22LR vel. range(950-1300fps.) accuracy can be exceptional when you find the powder/ boolit combo your rifle likes.

Tim

[Jon K]

I dont go with the idea of the square base BS the base dont have anything to do with it the most accurate rifle bullet is the boat tail rick


Well, I believe we're talking Cast Boolits, not J-bullets here. Kinda like apples and oranges.

Jon

[Bret4207]

I dont go with the idea of the square base BS the base dont have anything to do with it the most accurate rifle bullet is the boat tail rick

Okay Rick, try this- take a square based boolit and file a bevel on it and tell me just how good it groups. The base it THE most important part of the booilt. A bullet OTH is a different story. We deal with BOOLITS here, not BULLETS. :castmine: Many studies, both formal and informal, have shown that a damaged or out of square base leads to inaccurate shooting.

Also, the GC does more than than protect the base from "melting". Boolit bases don't "melt", they errode, at least thats the best term I can think of to define what we think happens. In many cases it serves as a scraper for fouling, as a seal against pressure, as a tougher/stronger base, as a "more square base"... the list could probably go on.

IMO discounting the base of the boolit in accuracy is like discounting bedding or secure scope mounts. You might get the odd good group, but on the whole it's vitally important to accurate shooting.

[shotman]

MR bret the BB wad cutter is just as good as flat base if you take a flat and drive it at 1300 up without a gas ckeck you will see leading. I have shot the 413 in a 30 cal with and without a GC at around 1300fs the barrel will show leading and with a GC it dont. If i shoot hot then I GC if not I dont rick

[Bret4207]

BB WC in my experience shoot larger groups than FB WC and that's not what we're talking about. I've shot GC boolits w/o the GC up to 11-1300 fps and in some cases the do okay at short range, out to 50 yards or so. But in most cases the GC improves groups at even 25 yards. Some FB boolits can be driven over 1500 fps w/o leading, or much leading, in some guns. It's tricky finding a load and gun combo that will do that though. I'm not sure if you're trying to say the 311413 w/o a GC and with a GC proves bases "melt", but I have to disagree if thats what you're saying. If you look at the various discussions here on this subject you'll find clearer explanations of the theory that I'm able to write. It's a function of fit, alloy, lube, powder,primer, case and a myriad of other variables. A simple explanation is what I've tried to give. I agree the hotter you load the more needed the GC is.

As to the GC base w/o a GC and it's relationship to a BB or BT- this is apples and oranges as another fellow pointed out. A BB WC for instance has a small, very uniform, (hopefully, that's where the inaccuracy comes from IMO) bevel that is designed to ease loading, not for an accuracy improvement. At least I've never heard of anyone designing a BB with the intention it would improve accuracy. The old Lyman catalogs show all sorts of odd designs and I've seen some really weird designs in old books from the turn of the century. You won't find a Schuetzen design with a beveled base that I'm aware of and those boys were the last word in PB lead boolit accuracy. They even went so far as to use the false muzzle to avoid the fin breech loading might leave. A flat base was important then and it is now.

Back to that non GC base- the GC shank w/o a GC works best for me if I run it through a sizer and put some pressure on the handle as the it bottoms out. This, I think, irons the base out a bit and of course the shank is filled with lube. Thats a blessing and a curse. If the lube stays on in a uniform manner I think it helps as the boolit exits the muzzle. The problem is that in most loads it doesn't seem to stay on uniformly and of course the muzzle blast pushes it all over the place. None of this seems to help.

A BT bullet, being so much stronger, the BT being designed for a smooth air flow and maximum accuracy is a whole 'nother critter. Actually instead of apples and oranges it's more like apples and squid. I don't think you can realistically compare them in the case we're talking about here, especially once you get past 25 or 50 yards.

Can we shoot GC boolits w/o GC? Sure can. Will they be accurate and not lead? That's the tricky part.

[joeb33050]

Okay Rick, try this- take a square based boolit and file a bevel on it and tell me just how good it groups. The base it THE most important part of the booilt. A bullet OTH is a different story. We deal with BOOLITS here, not BULLETS. :castmine: Many studies, both formal and informal, have shown that a damaged or out of square base leads to inaccurate shooting.

Also, the GC does more than than protect the base from "melting". Boolit bases don't "melt", they errode, at least thats the best term I can think of to define what we think happens. In many cases it serves as a scraper for fouling, as a seal against pressure, as a tougher/stronger base, as a "more square base"... the list could probably go on.

IMO discounting the base of the boolit in accuracy is like discounting bedding or secure scope mounts. You might get the odd good group, but on the whole it's vitally important to accurate shooting.

"Cast Bullets For Beginner And Expert", Second Edition, can be found and read online at: http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/CB-BOOK/
The book is in "FILES", the Table Of Contents is in "The Beginning"
Chapter 3.5 DAMAGED BULLETS shows what happens when bullets with damaged bases are shot, along with those with perfect bases.
The difference is small, and the subject is complex.

I shoot 311299/314299 without GC in 30/30 and have done well with this in matches over the years. 14.5/IMR4227 or 12.5/AA#9

joe b.

[mike in co]

the cool part is i did not have to defend my position........bret and jon, jumped right in.

sorry never shot a boat tail out of a revolver......

the subject was cast boolits...stay on subject.

were your boolits sized properly to begin with or just commercial ?

the thing about casr boolits is that works in my gun may not work in yours, your failure maybe my best group....too many variables in this game.


dd/adam needs to tell us more about what he is planning....rifle pistol velocity...


mike in co

[Bret4207]

Your files wouldn't open on my system Joe. Are you saying that you've found damaged bases to shoot just as well as perfect bases? Please define "the difference is small".

[shotman]

that is what I like about this place most of you remind me of my father--dont change it -it works just fine--- Its like the Kroil on molds ---to you all it wont work-- here think about this does a round ball have a gas check? rick

[EDK]

that is what I like about this place most of you remind me of my father--dont change it -it works just fine--- Its like the Kroil on molds ---to you all it wont work-- here think about this does a round ball have a gas check? rick

When you "been there and done that....and got a closet full of the T shirts," chances are you've already tried a lot of the things that someone comes up with and thinks is the greatest idea since sliced bread! Some horse's behind on the job comes up with a bright idea and usually it is more work for someone else or a good way to get the other guy hurt. I got the scars to prove that.

My dad has been gone 10 years next month and I wish I could do half the stuff he did...a little carpentry, home electrician, farm, handle horses and live stock PLUS his 40 hour job in an aluminum foundry. He grew up during the depression in the 30s....and we're going to get old in the recession of '08!

:Fire::cbpour::redneck:

PS I'm beginning to sound like Grand Pa....He was a crabby old Missouri Dutchman!

[Bret4207]

Round balls don't have gas check bases last time I checked, and with a RB the patch thickeness and diameter make a huge difference. No one said it can't be done, we just said it's tricky and doesn't work in every case. I'd love to hear the specifics of what you do to get good, that is comparable to the GC being there, accuracy. Same for Joe with damaged bases.

Maybe it depends on your definition of accurate.

[Larry Gibson]

Agree with Bret and others here;

The patch is the GC to a RB.

Cast bullet bases don't melt. Leading is caused by several other things.

Too many tests have proven that FB bullets are more accurate that BB bullets, particularly with BB vs FB quality WCs in .38s. Talking cast bullets here. Size of the bevel determines degree of lessoned accuracy.

Damaged base (or base not exiting square to bore) is proven to cause inaccuracy. Degree of damage determines the amout of inaccuracy (stability of the bullet as related to twist/velocity/RPM also factor hevily).

Some GC designed cast bullets can be driven to approcimate 22LR velocities with good accuracy. Fit of bullet to bore and throat seem critical. Soft alloys also seem better. Accuracy with GC bullet is almost always better when used with GC. FB bullets of equal design are always more accurate also. This just based on my experience of trying this concept over 40 years of shooting cast bullets.

Larry Gibson

[unclebill]

it's guys like you larry that made me order a buncha gas checks and a sizer.
and you didnt even know it!
my groups without the checks stunk
and i have a ton of boolits that take them.

[Bret4207]

Okay Joe, I got it to open on a different computer. Interesting results. It reminds me of those wrinkled, nasty looking "foulers" I've saved for plinking which unexplainably shoot a group, not a series of groups but a group or 2, smaller than my allegedly "perfect" boolits. As near as I could tell you shot 40 5 shot groups +/-. I think it's odd that you got a series of smaller groups right off the bat. How can anyone explain that? Random patterns? Overall you proved just what Dr Mann, Col Harrison and everyone else proved- damaged bases lead to inaccurate, or less repeatably, accurate shooting. I am under the impression your loads are fairly mild since you got some tipping. I wonder what happens as you increase the powder charge? Common sense says the groups will open. That would be interesting to see.

What would be more interesting to me, if I had the time to do it, is to take a swaged boolit (no voids!) and try the damaged base experiment, and try it with increasing charges. I'm betting that as muzzle pressure increases the groups open.

It still comes down to what your definition of accuracy is. My first non-GC loads were in a 7x57 Mauser and I was very happy with minute of rock groups. When I tried the non-GC in a 32-20 rifle with the 311316 running about 1400fps my groups at 25 yards resembled shotgun patterns. The GC 311316 would hold under an inch at 50 yards. It would be interesting, since I'm stone cold cheap and hate buying gas checks, to play with this in a variety of guns and see if there are repeatable patterns related to caliber or velocity. Wouldn't it seem that a 22 with a nick in the base would be more affected than a 45-70 slug with a similar sized nick?

[Larry Gibson]

it's guys like you larry that made me order a buncha gas checks and a sizer.
and you didnt even know it!
my groups without the checks stunk
and i have a ton of boolits that take them.

Sorry about that unclebill...bet you're happy about the accuracy though!

Just think of it as a "stimuless package" for the economy. Keeps that cash in circulation "spreading the wealth" the capitalist way! Glad I could help.....

Larry Gibson

[unclebill]

Sorry about that unclebill...bet you're happy about the accuracy though!

Just think of it as a "stimuless package" for the economy. Keeps that cash in circulation "spreading the wealth" the capitalist way! Glad I could help.....

Larry Gibson

that stuff should be here tomorrow or monday.
i have a buncha 310gr. .45 for the .454casull and 310's for the .44mag.
ya know?
i really SHOULD take up hunting again...........

[joeb33050]

Your files wouldn't open on my system Joe. Are you saying that you've found damaged bases to shoot just as well as perfect bases? Please define "the difference is small".

The chapter is fairly long, with pictures of bullets and targets. If you can't get into the book, send me your e-mail address and I'll send you the chapter.

I think that your interpretation of the data may mirror mine.
joe b.
joeb33050@yahoo.com

[Snapping Twig]

FWIW, I tried an experiment that worked out well for pistol.

Lyman #358156 is a Thompson GC design and the boolit I used for this test.

Using the GC for magnum loads, they shoot well in both .357s I have.

Loading +P specials - 5g W231 - in a magnum case W/O the GC, they shoot quite well and are accurate out to 20 yards, which is the furthest I've been able to shoot them so far. I wouldn't hesitate to shoot them to 100 yards based on what they've shown me. Velocity is @ 900 fps.

[Bret4207]

Cool, keep upping the load and see what happens as you go faster.

[joeb33050]

This set of tests suggests that fairly big damage to bullets does NOT make them shoot wildly; that perhaps we don't need to visually inspect bullets and reject as I do-rigorously.
It is still of great interest to me that the two groups of 64 shots each, one with filed bases and the other with perfect bases, do NOT show a doughnut-shaped group with the damaged bases. My interpretation of this is a set of statements:
Damaged base bullets;
Have an increased probability of shooting further from the group center, but
Frequently shoot into the group center, and
do not shoot "wildly".
for;
if damaged bases = always shooting further from group center, then damaged base groups will be doughnut-shaped-but they aren't.
I'd like to see the results of 2 sets of 5, 5-shot 100 yard groups with plain base bullets,one set perfect bases and the other set filed=damaged bases-with a rifle that is very accurate.
I do not have a rifle/mold combo meeting these criteria. We're talking ~70 bullets/shots with foulers, and 2-3 hours at the range.
joe b.






Okay Joe, I got it to open on a different computer. Interesting results. It reminds me of those wrinkled, nasty looking "foulers" I've saved for plinking which unexplainably shoot a group, not a series of groups but a group or 2, smaller than my allegedly "perfect" boolits. As near as I could tell you shot 40 5 shot groups +/-. I think it's odd that you got a series of smaller groups right off the bat. How can anyone explain that? Random patterns? Overall you proved just what Dr Mann, Col Harrison and everyone else proved- damaged bases lead to inaccurate, or less repeatably, accurate shooting. I am under the impression your loads are fairly mild since you got some tipping. I wonder what happens as you increase the powder charge? Common sense says the groups will open. That would be interesting to see.

What would be more interesting to me, if I had the time to do it, is to take a swaged boolit (no voids!) and try the damaged base experiment, and try it with increasing charges. I'm betting that as muzzle pressure increases the groups open.

It still comes down to what your definition of accuracy is. My first non-GC loads were in a 7x57 Mauser and I was very happy with minute of rock groups. When I tried the non-GC in a 32-20 rifle with the 311316 running about 1400fps my groups at 25 yards resembled shotgun patterns. The GC 311316 would hold under an inch at 50 yards. It would be interesting, since I'm stone cold cheap and hate buying gas checks, to play with this in a variety of guns and see if there are repeatable patterns related to caliber or velocity. Wouldn't it seem that a 22 with a nick in the base would be more affected than a 45-70 slug with a similar sized nick?

[LqChrome]

yep that answers my question.Just when I have a queation it's allready been covered.What a great group!!

[Bret4207]

I think there's a lot more to do if anyone ants to try and disprove the "damaged base = poor grouping" theory. (It's a fact as far as I'm concerned.) I know for a fact that light loads w/o GC shoot better on the whole that heavier loads. So if this experiment or test id to be accurate at all, pun intended, then it's going to have to start with a know accurate GC design in a number of rifles, starting with light "cat sneeze" loads and working up. It is my belief, based on what I've seen, that while the occaisonal gun will give good groups using a GC design w/o the GC, on the whole the GC will ALWAYS give the better grouping overall. That's a little different than a PB design vs GC design, which is what we were talking abot in the first place.

On PB boolits alone you could do the same test with the damaged bases vs good, but again from light to heavy. We've all had that group of nasty "foulers" that shot better than our "perfect" boolits, but that certainly doesn't mean we shold aim to produce cull boolits. I firmly believe SOME designs and SOME gun/load combos are more forgiving of damged/no GC bases. I also believe the heavier the load the more groups will open. Adding in various things like buffer/filler and paper patching add to the mix.

I think you can get decent grouping w/o the GCor with a somewhat damaged base, but it's tricky and not everyone will get good results in every platform.