PDA

View Full Version : Paper Patching...my way.



montana_charlie
01-02-2009, 03:04 PM
Well, I have read so many paper patching discussions over the last four months I wonder if anything could be said about the subject that I haven't seen at least twice. If there is, I am probably too 'full' to absorb it.

Assembling 'bits and pieces' of theory, experience, and speculation from four different forums (and having done some loading bench experimenting with donated bullets) I am ready to make up some loads to try.
And...this will be a black powder project.

I even appreciate comments from those who I 'argued with', as their input provided contrast for evaluating all the rest of the information.

I have decided to use the Theodore Money-nosed PP bullet, but in .450" naked diameter (samples generously donated by Arnie Moos), and the 9 lb. onionskin I found on eBay. Arnie's bullets are very 'soft', and I imagine I will eventually switch to 16-1 alloy to prevent slumping of that narrow Money nose.

So, as I progress toward patching my first bullets, they will be patched-to-groove (almost), and, according to last night's calculations, seated in the case .465" to get leade/nose contact.
(This should mean that the leade does not have to be scrupulously cleaned by shot-to-shot wiping...as required for shallowly seated patched-to-bore bullets.)

I made up a test round with a patched diameter of .455" thumb-seated in a fireformed case, over 1.5 grains of Red Dot, and lit by a magnum primer. It threw the bullet halfway up the bore, and I pounded it back out into the chamber. Of course I messed up the nose.
But the patched area was unmodified...and showed good results in all of the factors I was looking at. Rifling was clearly evident in the paper and the lead, and the patch passed through the leade with no folding, tearing, peeling, scuffing, or other problems. As I peeled the patch from the bullet, it came away in small flakey segments (shreds) delineated by the rifling cuts.

I knew immediately that the patch/bullet sealed the bore well because...when I dropped the breech block...the empty case went past me like a scalded dog.

They say a smokeless shooter must patch to groove because his powder won't bump-up a bullet. And, those who use smokeless do claim good results with patched to groove bullets.
A shooter using black can patch to bore because his powder is able to bump the bullet...but he doesn't have to.

I'm following the 'doesn't have to' part of that rule of thumb...for starters...because groove diameter seems to be more correct for use in my chamber dimensions.

This thread may get some age on it before I ever have a chance to post some shooting results. Judging by today's weather, it may not happen until August!
But, I will resurrect it whenever I have something to add...and you guys can fill pages with information, too.
Just remember the thread IS aimed at 'black powder'...so don't feel ignored if I (or others) don't get worked up over new 'smokeless' information.

CM

Kenny Wasserburger
01-02-2009, 03:13 PM
Charlie,

For what its worth, I thnk if your chamber is on the larger side then your method makes the most sense, and if your rifle has leade ahead of that chamber. Good luck. I look forward to hearing your results.

It is going to be in the 40's here today i need to burn up some old ammo to get ready for Phoenix in March.

The lunger
Kenny Wasserburger

montana_charlie
01-02-2009, 03:23 PM
It is going to be in the 40's here today i need to burn up some old ammo to get ready for Phoenix in March.
I have some 'old ammo' I would like to burn up, too, but not to get ready for anything special. Our temperature may reach the 40's, but it will be on the 'Down Under' side of zero.

Thanks for the encouragement on the patching...
CM

JeffinNZ
01-02-2009, 05:37 PM
Charlie, I have been following the threads and I am not sure you argued as much as had a good old healthy robust discussion.

montana_charlie
01-03-2009, 03:18 PM
Maybe you're right, Jeff. Could have been my imagination saying that there were some tight jaws around.

I was patching some bullets last night to start figuring out patch dimensions. I still need to adjust that, but I stumbled on a wrapping method that seems like the bee's knees.

I have a rotary-type paper cutter for making strips, and after I had a few patches shaped I just used it as a flat surface to roll them.

Not wanting to expose the surface to water, I laid a stiff plastic bag down and anchored it with a refrigerator magnet. This is a temporary solution. I will build a bullet board, but it will also be covered with a slick, waterproof surface.

The method went this way...
I would thoroughly soak a patch in water, and lightly strip off the excess by stroking gently with my fingers.

Then I would lay the patch flat, and plaster it down tight by stroking it (more about the stroking later). The stroking would cause a certain amount of stretch, which held it's dimension because the patch was 'glued down' so tightly.

Then I could lift the pointy end onto the bullet at the ogive, and simply roll it up. As I said, the paper already had the 'stretch' in it, so I didn't have to tug against it while rolling.
Having been cut across the grain, the paper (when wet) actually 'wants' to curl around something. The very wet paper 'sucked onto' the bullet like it was a magnet...and was very 'stable' while crimping and folding the base overlap.

This shot shows how nice the patch goes on...and shows that 'test bullet' I mentioned in the opening post.
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=10374&stc=1&thumb=1&d=1231005639

Now, about that 'stretching'...
Stroking very wet (fragile) paper with a finger can easily tear it in two. A small roller would (perhaps) do the job more reliably.
I'm talking about a hard rubber roller, something like what a printer would use to ink a plate of linotype text...but not as big. Something an inch (or so) wide, and an inch in diameter...with a handle on it like a paint roller.
It needs to be hard...like the platen on a typewriter.

Anybody ever seen something on that order...?
CM

Hmmm...wallpaper seam roller...?

357maximum
01-03-2009, 05:56 PM
Charlie

I have an older set of windowscreen tools...it has a hard delrin type plastic roller like you described. About 1 inch wide and about 1.25 in in diameter if memory serves. Might give you a direction to look in.

montana_charlie
01-03-2009, 10:00 PM
Thanks, 'max'.
I have Googled a bit with your suggestion in mind, but don't see a lot of rollers that are wide and flat. Most are those narrow 'spline rollers' with the groove in the edge.
I did find one like yours...but at $35 plus s/h, I think I can build something.

Seems like I have a piece of Delrin out in the shop that's about 1.25 inches in diameter.
Who knows? There might be a caster out there for a roll-around chair...somewhere.
CM

gtim88
01-03-2009, 10:24 PM
Thick wall pvc pipe, roll by hand or make a couple bushings fabricate a handle. if it works, would be cheap enough.
Tim

Nrut
01-03-2009, 10:45 PM
Thick wall pvc pipe, roll by hand or make a couple bushings fabricate a handle. if it works, would be cheap enough.
Tim
Or buy a short rod of delrin, drill a hole length wise and make your own handle out of some small metal rod...I bought some delrin rod once from a plastics shop so it's out there...
BTW Charlie thanks for the tip on stretching the paper..

Buckshot
01-04-2009, 05:03 AM
............Various types of plastic, or synthetic's if you prefer are available and pretty inexpensive. They can be bought in many diameters if cylinders are what you're looking for. I just bought a couple feet of HDPE 1" in diameter for well less then $5. However while it was smooth it had a very shallow wide 'swale' running in a slow spiral around the rod. Possibly some artifact of it's extrusion?

I don't know if all HDPE of other diameters have this effect or not. Regardless, what I needed for the project was an OD of less then an inch and it machined to a very fine smooth finish. I'm not used to the material I machine coming off in continuous smooth, weightless but tenacious streamers :-)

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

John Boy
01-04-2009, 09:28 AM
Stroking very wet (fragile) paper with a finger can easily tear it in two. A small roller would (perhaps) do the job more reliably.
Charlie - what works for me is:
A scrap piece of Corian ... lay the paper (thin or thick) - lay the bullet on the paper and then wrap by rolling the bullet forward with the palm of your hand.

No tears - wraps tight including thin lens cleaning paper

leftiye
01-04-2009, 04:43 PM
Buckshot, Maybe, if a smaller cylinder was okay, turn it down a little. The machine marks should even be beneficial.

John boy, I like your idea of rolling with the side of your palm, it should produce nice tight roll if you can do it without causing other problems to surace. One could even come up with something flat to roll with (like one of those sanding plates with the foam rubber on them maybe).

runfiverun
01-04-2009, 08:43 PM
seems like a lube pad would make a good paper pad, and would soak up a bit of water without
letting the paper slip.

docone31
01-04-2009, 09:30 PM
I use a cigarette roller for my .30s, and .303.
My thoughts would be,
Why could it not be possible to make a scaled up version for the larger paper patching folks here. The pad and roller you describe is simplified in my cigarette roller.
With that device, I soak my patch, lay it wet on the apron, set the casting onto the patch, still wet, close the device and roll away.
The patch rolls on slightly damp, tight as all get out, smooth and any wrinkles that might have been on the roll are dead flat.
I can just barely get a .357 casting into the machine. A .45, forget about it. Even a simple roller machine could have the opening roller groove opened up without interfering with the machine.
I sure found it simple.

scrapcan
01-05-2009, 11:39 AM
what about the roller used for putting on formica or cabinet facing? They should be about 1 to 2 inches wide and about aht big around. you might look at rockler or lee valey for laminate glue roller?

just a thought.

littlejack
01-06-2009, 12:58 AM
How about buying a rubber sanding drum of your favorite size and removing the shaft. Make yourself a wooden or metal handle for it to roll on. Shape it like a roller handle or yoke type sling shot frame. Drill the hole same size in the handle as is in the rubber drum. Run a bolt through the handle and drum and wa-la.
One could buy one of the miniature paint roller handles and mount the drum on it.
Jack

Lead pot
01-06-2009, 01:49 AM
Just use your fingers like I do, it works great wet or dry.

LP

runfiverun
01-06-2009, 04:51 PM
when i roll them by hand i end up doing it left handed and never get any paper stretch.
i seem to get quite a few loose patches and no consistency in accuracy.

pdawg_shooter
01-06-2009, 05:57 PM
I cut some patches a tad short once and couldnt get enough stretch with my fingers. My patching board is hard rubber, after stretching wit my finger I use a rubber "J" roller from the lumber yard. I bought the roller for hanging FRP board in the bathroom and it works fine.

montana_charlie
01-06-2009, 09:57 PM
I cut some patches a tad short once and couldnt get enough stretch with my fingers.
I use a rubber "J" roller from the lumber yard ... and it works fine.
Thanks for that input, pdawg.
Up to this moment, it was mere speculation on my part that a roller would stretch patches. Your confirmation is much appreciated.
CM

Digital Dan
01-07-2009, 03:54 PM
Charlie, you might want to read Dan Theodore's article on the subject in the most recent edition of BPC News.

Baron von Trollwhack
01-07-2009, 06:33 PM
The old mouse pad makes a good boolit rollin' pad.

BvT

montana_charlie
01-07-2009, 10:47 PM
Charlie, you might want to read Dan Theodore's article on the subject in the most recent edition of BPC News.
I don't get the BPC News, but much of what I have read was written by Dan Theodore.

Was there some particular tidbit in the News that you think I am in need of?
CM

longbow
01-07-2009, 11:16 PM
For any that haven't found this website:

http://www.bpcr.net/site_docs-results_schedules/documents/Technical_Information.htm

Several articles by Dan Theodore and others ~ all good stuff!

Longbow

Lead pot
01-08-2009, 02:38 AM
Yep; Dan does some purdy Writing.

montana_charlie
01-15-2009, 11:25 PM
Rick Kalynuik, aka Red River Rick, a master metal manipulator, just sent an email containing this image.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/picture.php?albumid=88&pictureid=423

In 10 to 14 days, I expect it to reach my trembling fingers.

For those who demand detail, it is 1.450" long, with a .450" diameter, and should weigh about 535 grains in 16-1 alloy. It has Theodore's 'Money Bullet' nose which is .700" long and consists of a tangential ogive with a 4 x caliber radius, blending into a .250" sphere (approximately 55% of caliber).

Ballistic Coefficient is said to be about .571 based on dual chronograph readings.

Initial patching will be to .456" with two wraps of 9# Eagle-A Trojan Onionskin (25% rag content).

(It just dawned on me that I don't have handles available for this mould. But, I can 'retire' an NEI mould to free up a KAL Tool pair.)

Rick sure does pretty work, doesn't he?

CM

docone31
01-15-2009, 11:43 PM
That is one sweet lookin mold! I sure hope it targets as well as it is made.
Absolute Wowser!
Someday, a dual in .304 for me.

Digital Dan
01-16-2009, 11:27 AM
I don't get the BPC News, but much of what I have read was written by Dan Theodore.

Was there some particular tidbit in the News that you think I am in need of?
CM


There's several tidbits actually. You ought to get a subscription to BPC News. The contributors don't always agree with my thoughts (yeah, I'm smiling) but they are all very experienced in the various arts related to Lord Black.

I'm not going to detail the various and many points Dan T. made about competition quality BPCR patched loads, but they conflict somewhat with your approach so far as dimensions are concerned. They are also conflicted with the thoughts expressed in Paul Matthews' book. You certainly can patch to groove but might run into fouling issues. Based on my small experience your dims are good for smokeless, maybe not so good for BP. Good luck with that anyway, hope I'm wrong about that. Have you considered looking around for thicker brass to accommodate your chamber dimensions, thus allowing for thinner patching paper?

montana_charlie
01-16-2009, 01:33 PM
Have you considered looking around for thicker brass to accommodate your chamber dimensions, thus allowing for thinner patching paper?
Your question tells me you understand what (I think) I'm trying to accomplish.
I briefly considered the possibility of using thicker brass. The reasons I dropped that line of thinking are twofold.
1- The expense is enough that I would rather just stick to GG bullets.
2- As it stands now, a bullet held in my 'thin walled' brass slides forward into a freebore of the same diameter. The freebore is not particularly long, but it does exist. Then it progresses into a gentle leade where the groove diameter matches the freebore and the case mouth.

To me, this looks like a smooth transition from case to bore.

Thicker brass would need a smaller patched-to diameter, which would then bump up to fill the freebore...and grooves. It seems like an unnecessary dimensional change to put the bullet through.

Do you know who said this?
"Here's a truism that came to me years ago: The more a bullet has to bump-up, the more the base will be distorted."

My original target diameter was .460". I have settled on .456" (for now) because I have two full reams of suitable paper which patches to that size, and bullets so patched slip snugly into fireformed necks. I ordered the mould based on what that paper yields when wrapped.
But, I am keeping one eye open for paper a little bit thicker, in case .460" is a better idea.

I understand what you say about the (fouling) difference between smokeless and BP. Between-shot wiping is the rage right now, and can be resorted to if necessary.
But, I am hoping the slimness of the Money nose will make it possible to fire multiple shots with minimal (or no) fouling crontrol measures.
Bullet seating depth has been calculated to allow for a .125" lube cookie as a nod to BP. It should be enough to keep fouling soft...at least in the throat...and I'll soon find out how much that helps.

You know how a kid with a newly made slingshot goes looking for a stone to shoot? Once he discovers one just the right size, he is off to find a target so he can try it out.

I had a notion of what I thought I wanted to do, and read stuff until I found 'a stone that fit my slingshot'.
It happened to be a post by Dan Theodore in which he was advising a PP newby on bullet and patch selection for a chamber very similar to mine. My final dimensions are not exactly what he specified, but follow the same line of thinking he was using for that discussion. My naked bullet will actually be .004" smaller than what he was recommending...but will fill the chamber in about the same way.

Because Dan T posts under a variety of 'names', I didn't think I could find that discussion. But, because of your comments, I went looking...and found it.
http://www.bpcr.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2274&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=083b2f0b64d5291913d3f4fb3fad7ec8

The shooter may be a 'PP newby' but he's not a neophyte to BPCR. The entity shown as 'twoguns' is (in fact) Arnie Moos. I didn't learn that until well after I sold him a Kal-Max Case Stretching Jig...modified for his 'special needs'.

It has been bullets from a mould of his that I have been using to lay my plans...

CM

Digital Dan
01-16-2009, 09:34 PM
Well, hope it works out for you. You might have some luck with the money bullet due to the ogive radius. Do keep us informed of progress.

renegade
01-19-2009, 12:05 PM
Hi; I just wanted to throw this out here. I got the "2009 GUN DIGEST" from my local library and they have a couple good(I think so anyways) articles concerning blackpowder cartridges.The article is called" ACCURATE BLACKPOWDER CARTRIDGES-WHAT WORKS- THE SECRET REVEALED" by Markus F.Moll and David J Moses.The article covers,Propellant/Primer,what grain size should be used(sometimes the larger grain say 2F is better since it does'nt pack as tight as 3F therefore the primers flame ignites the charge more consistantly\\ \\Wadding,example,wool&milk carton\\Bullets, as to caliber and twist & style\\Leade/Rifling Profile\\How to wrap the patch\\Interpreting the target\\Barrel profiles,number of lands and depth of grooves from various barrel makers.Another chapter has some good info and history of "Old Reliable" The Sharpes Rifle. It's a good read, you all should check it out if you can.

Eagle
01-19-2009, 12:56 PM
I know i am knew to all of this but what is the benefet of paper patching. Do I still have to use lub if I paper patch.

montana_charlie
01-19-2009, 01:11 PM
im knew two becuz i haven dun it yet. ill let 45 2.1 hanel this wun.

CM

docone31
01-19-2009, 01:29 PM
Paper patching.
Paper allows an insulating layer between the rifleing, and the lead. This changes parasitic friction. The paper becomes an hard layer.
I only have experience with smokeless powder so black powder might be different in this regard.
However, I do not lube my patches. The only lube on them is from the wax I use for sizing them. They are not moist as castings are when lubed.
The largest benefit I have found, is, I do not have to throttle down my loads when I am casting. I can control the size of the projectile through the patch.
When wrapped, the patch becomes an hard, stable jacket.
I have used undersized paper patches to firelap with excellent success also. My Enfield had hammer marks which went away with this process.
Essentially, I get jacketed performance without the fouling from the copper jacket. I can really push my loads without losing accuracy. In fact, I gain over conventional jacketed loads.
I highly reccomend it.

Eagle
01-19-2009, 01:45 PM
Thanks docone31. I have been on this site for a while now just reading and absorbing all the info I can. I have bought two molds and hope to start next week with the casting. I think I am going to try the paper before I go to the lube. Is there a certain kind of paper I should use. Or can I just wet down some newspaper and have at it. Thanks again for the help.

docone31
01-19-2009, 02:05 PM
I use plain computer paper. The kind I get for the home printers. It works out pretty well for me. I tried Meade Traceing Paper, and I do still use it, although I can use the printer paper and size it down without issue.
I use JPW for the sizing.
I also use Turtle wax for sizing. It depends on what I grab first.

bobk
01-19-2009, 02:14 PM
Is the Turtle wax for the slower loads?:wink:

Bob K

docone31
01-19-2009, 02:19 PM
The Turtle, and JPW is for going through the sizing die.
The ones I do not size, I do not lube.

montana_charlie
01-19-2009, 07:17 PM
Is the Turtle wax for the slower loads?
Yup...probably.
And mustache (hare) wax for the fast ones...
CM

Don McDowell
01-19-2009, 10:39 PM
MC instead of soaking the paper in water directly , try placing a handful of your precut patches between a couple of soaked cloths, or I have got to using one of the blue shoptowels soaked then the patches spread out and then fold the towel in half. They get wet enough to roll nice and tight, but not so wet as to tear, or take for ever to dry out.

montana_charlie
01-20-2009, 12:42 AM
I plan to try both ways, Don, to see which is faster...easier...or maybe just more interesting.

So far I am not having problems with torn patches, even when I totally soak the paper.
I found a cheap plastic roller for wallpaper seams at the paint store. Two passes with that puts some stretch on the patch without tearing, and then the heavy wetness makes the patch suck onto the bullet like a magnet.

Yeah, the drying takes longer but it's winter time, so there's no hurry to get 'em loaded.
I'm sure you know that keeping cows happy in cold weather leaves precious little time for shooting...

CM

Don McDowell
01-20-2009, 10:52 AM
Well I'm not sure what kind of weather we got here any more.
For most of December and starting into January, we were in bone cracking windchill, no snow to speak of.
Now today the NWS has issued a redflag warning for this afternoon and evening.:roll::(
Cold or hot I don't care, I just wish the wind would knock it off. I finally decided to fire a handful of paper patch rounds I had ready for testing yesterday,:???:took 22 minutes windage just to get on the steel at 270 yds.:-?

montana_charlie
01-20-2009, 02:19 PM
took 22 minutes windage
Probably would have taken less if your wristwatch was set to Daylight Savng Time.
CM

Don McDowell
01-20-2009, 02:42 PM
well now there ya go, I didn't even have my watch on. Yupper yup bet that was it.

Lead pot
01-20-2009, 05:47 PM
CM.

If you have some good paper that takes water like a ink blotter.
Instead putting the whole patch in the water or what ever you use and pour a little on the counter top or your patching board and just drag the patch through it and just cote one side of the patch, if you have good paper that is all you need to do and the patch will stay put and wont pull apart when you tighten it..
I used to wet patch but stopped long ago.
Wet patch if you want but dry patching works just as good.

montana_charlie
02-03-2009, 09:40 PM
Well, I gave Rick's mould a quick try today.
I did not have time to make up some 16-1 alloy, so I used some old mystery metal ingots that I have had in a box for about thirty years.

I also didn't take time to properly clean the mould. A quick dousing with carburetor cleaner and a shot of graphite was all I did...and the wrinkles proved it was not sufficient.
But, I was just wanting to get a read on the as-cast diameter of the bullets it produces...and get a look at how the base comes out.

However, I did manage to surprise myself. I had cut the sprue and tipped the mould over to let it fall off. I noticed some bits of lead stuck to the bottom of the blocks, so I spent a few moments rubbing it off. While doing that, I heard a quiet 'thump'.

As it turns out, you don't need to open the mould to let paper patch bullets out. These just slide out through the top, if the sprue plate is swung out of the way.

Then, I let one slide out partway and gave it a twirl as though I was screwing it back in to the cavity. It showed no sign of being an egg-shaped bullet in an egg-shaped hole. I couldn't even feel the parting line go past.

This mould appears to be tight, smooth, and round...

CM

montana_charlie
02-22-2009, 04:54 PM
After too much time wasted...er...spent on other things, I have finally built some loads to try. May even be able to shoot them today...

These are loaded with the Dan Theodore 'Wasserberger Mile' bullet (with the Money nose) with grease grooves eliminated...and a diameter of .450".
The cartridge on the left has one of the 'samples' sent to me by Arnie Moos, and the one on the right is from the mould that Rick Kalynuik made for me.

Due to some 'illogical thinking', I managed to compress the powder too much in those with the Kalynuik bullets, but I'll shoot them anyway to see what effect that causes.

Paper is 9-pound onionskin which brings the finished diameter up to .456" with two wraps...which is a slip-fit into my fireformed 45/90 cases.
Patches are .920" wide so they lay .020" past the ogive, leaving .15" to fold under the base with no pesky tails.
(These were wrapped freehand, as I haven't made a patching board, yet.
So the base fold varies a slight amount from bullet to bullet.)

The naked bullet is out of my mould from Rick, but it is a 'cull'. That's why it isn't loaded in a case.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/picture.php?albumid=88&pictureid=554

Using two firm strokes with a plastic (wallpaper seam) roller on saturated paper causes the patch to stretch a predictable amount. so, a 2.656" patch will grow long enough to wrap twice...and leave a 1/16" gap between the ends.

Why a 2.656" patch? Because I can get exactly three from each 8.5-inch strip of paper. Of course, the width of the patch and the angle on the ends all work together to allow that to work out so exactly.

Anyway, after these are 'burnt up' I will have the proof in the pudding about whether patched-to-groove is a reasonable approach to paper patching with black powder.

CM

docone31
02-22-2009, 07:06 PM
Those look real good. Like I want mine to look like.
Lookin forward to range results.

Kenny Wasserburger
02-22-2009, 07:40 PM
Charlie,

I would offer the suggestion that you back off the width of the patch having it up over the Ogive may cause you some problems. the bullets at 20-1 only show rifling up to about .750 or so on the sides of my bullets I dont patch mine up much higher then that anymore, accuracy is well? Very good.

The lunger
Kenny Wasserburger

montana_charlie
02-22-2009, 08:34 PM
Charlie,

I would offer the suggestion that you back off the width of the patch having it up over the Ogive may cause you some problems.
Thanks for the suggestion, Kenny.
I am certain it was made for sincere reasons, and my thanks are equally sincere, but...
(You probably guessed there would be a 'but', didn't you?)

If you open your calipers to 20 thousandths and look at the gap, you will probably agree that it is such a small thing it may not be enough to matter. Plus, my bullets are a fair bit 'fatter' than yours, so the rifling should cut that leading edge even if it's a tiny bit past the ogive.

Those are the 'but's' based on 'logical thought' that I feel may apply to the question.

But (here comes another one)...
I did get out to shoot up all of those reloads. And, I managed to find quite a few paper samples to examine. Looking through them, there were some constant themes that ran through all that I could find.

- First off, there were no big pieces of paper. Everything I found would fit the definition of 'confetti'.

- Some were segments of the part that was folded under the base. This was a clean strip about .15" wide which had some soiled 'feathers' leading off at 90 degrees to the length. The clean part is from under the base, and the soiled part is what was left of the 'side' of the patch. The rifling had slit the side into 'feathers' right up to the point where the paper turned under the base.

Of course each 'feather' is very short as you couldn't expect the entire thing to remain attached.

- Also found a good number of long, thin strips that are obviously cut from the side of the patch. They are the same width as the rifling, and as long (basically) as the width of the original patch.

I haven't looked them over under magnification, yet. I will be curious to see if some strips are 'clean' from being an 'underwrap'...while others are dirty from being part of the outer wrap.

Just to keep them from disappearing, I stuffed them into empty cases sitting in the loading block. Tonight I will dump them out and try to 'analyse' how each piece came to be whatever it is now.

If they are as interesting as I think they might be, I will take some pictures...

CM

rhead
02-22-2009, 09:41 PM
If your results are less than satisfactory two things to try are with the paper further up on the oglive and lower down. It is something that you can both control and adjust. your rifle will tell you what it likes. One of the three will likely give better results than the other two.

3rptr
02-22-2009, 11:11 PM
+1 on the wall paper seam roller.
Oldie ones r wood, newer, hard rubber, newest r plastic.

montana_charlie
02-23-2009, 02:08 PM
I didn't find anything remarkable enough about my spent patches to make photos worthwhile.
It's enough to say that all of the paper was finely shredded, and (I feel certain) fell free right at the muzzle.
I was shooting into a light breeze, and all of the paper bits were behind the muzzle...with a fair percentage being on, and behind, the bench.

As to accuracy, it was not impressive.

The rounds loaded at full COAL:
The first three of these were fired at a gong, partially to check the sight setting, and mainly to see if any kind of fouling management was needed between rounds. The second round loaded without tubing or wiping, but it was tight. The third round would not get closer than a quarter inch from seating the rim until a damp patch was run through.
One patch was sufficient to chamber that round, so I stayed with that 'technique' for that whole batch of loads.
So, 12 rounds were fired while wiping between shots...but only wiping with one damp patch. I know it is common to run two damps followed by a dry, but I was interested in knowing how little fouling management is required to simply get the next round to chamber.

The patch was your standard 1 3/4-inch round flannel, dampened with moose milk, and 'speared' in the middle on a nylon brush.
After passing through, the patch was shaken, spun, jiggled, and dinked with until it fell off of the brush...then the rod was extracted from the bore.

The 100-yard group was not impressive...about six inches high and wide, and pretty evenly scattered in and around the 4.4-inch bull. Being 'donated' bullets, I don't know what alloy they were cast from.

I spent quite a bit of time just peering up through the bore...looking for paper rings, leading, and any other signs of trouble. I didn't see any, but it was obvious the bore was not getting cleaned very thoroughly.
It was also apparent that the BP fouling was very dry and crusty. This was unexpected because the load did include a .125" grease cookie under the bullet.
Maybe the cookie needs to be bigger...or greasier.

Anyway, there were no 'mechanical difficulties' with this load and bullet. More development is obviously required to produce something approaching 'accuracy', but a person could hunt with this degree of performance...if he kept shots to 100 yards.

The 'short rounds':
I had seven rounds loaded with bullets from the Kalynuik-made mould. These drop a little large in diameter, so I assumed they would need to seat a bit deeper in the case than the others.
I built one trial round with some hard felt substituting for the grease cookie, and set about adjusting seating depth so it would chamber. (I'll say a word about that felt substitute at the end of this post.)
Eventually, I got the op wad so far down in the case I refused to go any deeper...and recompressed all of them to that depth. They were about 2 tenths deeper than the other batch of loads...which made for a lot of compression on the powder charge.

While chamber checking the finished loads, I realized cases were 'swelled' too much to chamber. To cure that I ran them all through a backed off full length sizer with the decapper removed. I ran them in just deep enough to allow easy chambering.

Two things happened during that 'resizing'.
- The case necks got squeezed down so the bullets were no longer a 'slip fit'.
- And, I realized that it may not have been 'bullet depth' that I was fighting when I compressed the powder so far. The failure to chamber may have been caused by 'fat' cases...not 'long bullets'.

When fired, I did not wipe between shots.
I figured the bullet was so far back from contact with the leade that fouling would not prevent chambering...and it was true.
So, I fired them all as though I was shooting jacketed bullets with smokeless powder.

Again, the 100-yard group was not impressive...but not as bad as I envisioned. About four inches high and five wide, it stayed on the 8.5 x 11 paper even though it was a bit low.

Rick has offered to correct the size of this mould, but it's bullets seem to shoot 'fairly well', all things considered...and it makes pretty ones. The one thing that bothers me is that some of the strips of patch seem to have been 'crumpled' somewhat when fired. The narrow strips have an accordian look that makes me think the fatter combination doesn't pass through the leade quite as nicely as it should.

I would call this a 'mechanical difficulty' which load development probably can't overcome.

(A guy with a .450 sizing die (or smaller) might be happy with this mould but Lee doesn't make one...and I am not of the school that likes to modify bullets after they are cast. I only mention this because it seems like a shame (to me) that Rick will just toss it in the trash when I return it to him.)

About those felt wads as substitutes for a grease cookie...
Although I carefully figured all of my numbers for the building of a load, the first round needed a bit of 'adjustment' as it was a bit too long to chamber. My mistake was I didn't consider the thickness of the patch folded under the bullet base when calculating everything else.

So, I plopped the case under the powder compression die to push the 'stack' down 4 thousandths further.

That made the grease cookie bulge outward (hydraulically) to create a convex ring around the case that was over chamber diameter. That ain't cool, Bubba.

So, for later 'adjustments' of stack height I used 1/8-inch felt to simulate a grease cookie and maintain proper stack dimensions...and didn't put a cookie in until the rest of the stack was at final compression.

That bulge was ugly...but it won't happen again.

CM

docone31
02-23-2009, 02:39 PM
Charlie, I would like to say, I appreciate all the information you diligently present.
I am wrapping smokeless loads, though, the .303 British also can be used with black powder.
I look forward to your developments.
Great work.

Don McDowell
02-23-2009, 02:52 PM
Charlie a simple phone call to Lee will get you a .450 size die, provided you make arrangements to pay them the 25$ or so they'll want for it.

Bobby Ironsights
02-23-2009, 04:59 PM
Now, about that 'stretching'...
Stroking very wet (fragile) paper with a finger can easily tear it in two. A small roller would (perhaps) do the job more reliably.
I'm talking about a hard rubber roller, something like what a printer would use to ink a plate of linotype text...but not as big. Something an inch (or so) wide, and an inch in diameter...with a handle on it like a paint roller.
It needs to be hard...like the platen on a typewriter.

Anybody ever seen something on that order...?
CM

Hmmm...wallpaper seam roller...?

The roller printers use is a brayer. It's a very heavy, hard and dense type of chemically resistant, non porous rubber, and in good condition should be perfectly flat and parallel. They can be quite expensive new.

http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h314/BobbyIronsights/800px-Intaglio-rollers.jpg

Don McDowell
02-23-2009, 09:00 PM
Couple more things for you to think about.
That 1/16 inch gap between the paper ends is going to grow the minute that bullet gets bumped up. If you would recover a bullet you'll see what looks like another land groove on the bullet only it will be going the same direction as the angle of your paper cut. That doesn't help your accuracy any. Lengthing the patch to make up for the expansion will tighten groups.
You'll likely have to rework and rethink your powder compression. If you think the powder you are using likes x amount of compression you'll need to add enough grains to make up for the bullet being seated further out of the case, either that or use filler wads to get to the seating depth you wantand compress the same amount as you would with a grease groove.

montana_charlie
02-23-2009, 11:54 PM
Lengthing the patch to make up for the expansion will tighten groups.
I understand what you are saying, Don. The most the bullet can bump is 4 thousandths, but I'll adjust the patch with another pass with the roller, anyway.


You'll likely have to rework and rethink your powder compression.
Yep, I have already started. The compression I ended up with on the first two batches (after 'adjustments') was way more than I wanted...
CM

Don McDowell
02-24-2009, 12:14 AM
Charlie that 1/16th inch wide .004(actualy .004+ 1 thickness of paper) rib on just one side of your bullet isn't going to do you any great favors as far as accuracy goes.
http://http://s51.photobucket.com/albums/f358/Ranch137/?action=view&current=paperrecovered.jpg

Don McDowell
02-24-2009, 01:14 AM
Ok one last try
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f358/Ranch137/paperrecovered.jpg

This bullet was recovered from the clay bank behind my 200 yd paper range. You can see the "gap" running from bottom right to upper left

docone31
02-24-2009, 11:11 AM
Wow, great recovery.
It shows the seperation line pretty clearly.
I haven't been able to recover any of mine. I over lap a tad on mine.
The rifle I have is not something that is known for MOA, but with patching it sure comes close!
There are some patchers here that sure give me something to aspire to.

Don McDowell
02-24-2009, 12:27 PM
Docone as near as I can tell if a person pays particular heed to the wisdom/experience shared by Mr's Wasserburger, Danielson, and Mulhern (fpm111) you can get a quick handle on how to make this paper patching thing work and work very well.

twoguns
02-24-2009, 12:45 PM
The shooter may be a 'PP newby' but he's not a neophyte to BPCR. The entity shown as 'twoguns' is (in fact) Arnie Moos. I didn't learn that until well after I sold him a Kal-Max Case Stretching Jig...modified for his 'special needs'
CM


Hey Charlie,

I'm twoguns, and i stretched my cases with your rig, but I'm not Arnie Moos. :-D:-D:-D:-D:mrgreen:

I was reading this post on your journey into paperpatching and I just had to chuckel a wee bit. We have gone down very similar paths in the past few months and bumped into some of the same problems, re: bulging cases from too much compression, cartridge OAL woes and such.

While waiting for spring, I have loaded up a progression of different powders (GOEX cartridge, and Swiss1.5 ) with increasing amounts of compression. The paper I chose was a little thicker than suggested by Dan T because his 8# paper with the .454 Money bullet was REALLY loose in my fireformed brass. So I'm using 9# fidelity. We will see.

Speaking of brass, I finally found the EXACT cartridge length to fit my Winchester Creedmore chamber. After lots of playing around it is 2.435max depending on the cartridge rim thickness (.065-.068). Any longer and the mouth of the case starts to pinch down when it is chambered.

I also bought several expanders from BACO to see how much I could expand the case mouth and not have chambering issues. I found that an as-bought .461 no-step expander polished a wee bit in a drill press does the job on the annealed Starline cases. My .454 PPBs wet wrapped with 9# paper are a tight thump press fit in the cases. That may be a problem (neck tension) but won't know till I fire them. It may not be a problem because I'm loading the COAL to kiss the leade anyway.

Your post on the use of rubber roller got me thinking and I believe I will try that too. Several years ago, I bought a 2 inch wide hard rubber roller for matting my photos and while I can't remember where i got mine, I did find this picture of, and link to some rollers that may satisfy you.

http://cdn.dickblick.com/items/401/01/40101-group3ww-l.jpg

http://www.dickblick.com/products/blick-hard-rubber-roller/#photos

montana_charlie
02-24-2009, 12:47 PM
Don, your picture nicely reinforces your advice to eliminate the gap. As I said, I will try to do that using a third pass with the roller...to stretch the paper a bit more.

And...Mister twoguns...greetings, Ken!
Yessir, I got the two of you mixed up.

Your were the 'guinea pig' for the 'adjustable punch' because you needed two very different lengths of stretch from your various cases. Your need made me (finally) finish designing that tool.
But, both you and Arnie Moos bought stretchers during the same month, so I suppose that is how I got the two of you confused.
(The two of you confused...? Obviously it is I who is the confused one...)

Looking back through my notes, it appears that Arnie Moos (strangely) just calls himself 'arnie', and it was Arnie who sent me a batch of sample bullets to try.

Anyway, it's good to hear of another BP shooter who is working on patched-to-groove loads...though mine are a few thousandths under yours.
If our results are not parallel, perhaps we decide who has the better approach...

CM

twoguns
02-24-2009, 01:12 PM
And...Mister twoguns...greetings, Ken!
Yessir, I got the two of you mixed up.

No problem, Charlie!




Anyway, it's good to hear of another BP shooter who is working on patched-to-groove loads...though mine are a few thousandths under yours.
If our results are not parallel, perhaps we decide who has the better approach...



Can't wait to find out. BTW, what rifle are you shooting?

Don McDowell
02-24-2009, 01:27 PM
Charlie I am working also at this time with a patched to groove 40 cal bullet. So far I can tell you it seems to work much better with smokeless powder in the 405 than it has with black in the 40-65.
I'm getting pretty well under the notion that with bp , the bore + -.002 is surely the better way, while smokeless can probably go either way but groove diameter is better.
More shooting needs done, but the evidence I've gathered so far.......

montana_charlie
02-24-2009, 04:03 PM
BTW, what rifle are you shooting?
It's a 45/90...if that's what you're asking.
If you really mean "what rifle", it's a Pedersoli Billy Dixon that was rechambered by Lee Shaver to .45/90. I tell you all of that because it means the rifle does not have the same chamber dimensions (in the throat) as one straight from the factory.

I think the Shiloh throat (what there is of it) probably works best with patched-to-bore, and Pedersoli throats (probably) would do better with patched-to-groove.
Since mine is midway between them, I spent a long time thinking about which way to go.
In the end, I settled on a compromise that is like a little of each.
I guess that's why I used 'my way' in the thread title.

I chose this size because Arnie has had good luck with it...and I don't even know what brand rifle he shoots it in. I didn't ask because it doesn't matter.
He has what he has, and I have what I have. It will work for me, or it won't.
If it doesn't, I can always switch to a .446" bullet and follow the herd...

CM

Don McDowell
02-24-2009, 04:11 PM
Charlie I think its more of a rediscovering what every 10 year old kid already knew 130 years ago, than it's a following the herd today.

twoguns
02-24-2009, 07:26 PM
If you really mean "what rifle"....

CM

Yes, I was trying to figure how the dimensions of YOUR chamber, freebore, leade, bore and groove compared to mine. IOW, did we have the same or different, because at the end of the day that will be important to know when we both get some results.

I read and reread Dan's advice :coffee: to me and any other topic where he gave pertinent info and I think-believe-feel like I'm heading down the road to PPB nirvana. 'Course, I could be hosed. We will see.

There are a couple of things that I'm not totally comfortable with in my setup.

1. I wish my brass was a wee bit thicker at the mouth so that I would not have ANY change in diameter from the case mouth into the .250" long freebore on my rifle which is the same as groove dia. at .461". I've already spent enough $$ on this brass so I'm choosing not to deal with that issue until I absolutely have no other options. Thicker brass matching my chamber to freebore step thickness would allow thinner paper to be used and no bullet/paper deformation as the shot goes off. Its only about .002" of a step right now. I don't know if that is enough to worry about, but it IS there.

2. My compression die is set to have the bullet resting .500" deep into the case mouth which limits the amount of powder I can load. My COAL is set so that the paper wrap is just engraved by the rifling. I have to push the case with my thumb just a wee bit (like a 1/16" before closing the action. I have been using bore pigs, but am thinking about the wiping routine.

At least one important thing has been taken care of and that is no more lead in the chamber nor paper rings, thanks to your help with my brass length.:drinks:

montana_charlie
02-25-2009, 12:03 AM
Yes, I was trying to figure how the dimensions of YOUR chamber, freebore, leade, bore and groove compared to mine.
Freebore - 0.100" long, .460" dia.
Leade - 1.5 degrees
Bore - .450"
Groove - .460" at the chamber and tapering down to .4575" at the muzzle.
(I showed you mine. Are you gonna show me yours?)

I read and reread Dan's advice to me...
Your use of the .454" bullet makes me think I read that post, too, but I didn't remember that it was you he was speaking to.
The advice he gave you(?) was the thing that first started me thinking about patching to groove with a BP load.


There are a couple of things that I'm not totally comfortable with in my setup.

1. I wish my brass was a wee bit thicker at the mouth so that I would not have ANY change in diameter from the case mouth into the .250" long freebore...
Its only about .002" of a step right now. I don't know if that is enough to worry about, but it IS there.

2. My compression die is set to have the bullet resting .500" deep into the case...
paper wrap is just engraved by the rifling.
As for your discomfort...

#1:
Could you not size the neck down 2 thousandths to match up with the freebore ID?
It might require one of those bushing-type neck sizing dies, but I think you could do it with a regular f/l die..backed out of the press an appropriate amount to just 'kiss' the neck lightly.

#2:
That is what it is, Ken.
Your fatter bullet just won't go as far into the leade as leaner ones. I don't remember which specific bullet design Dan told you to use.
Are you pushing a 'blunt' nose into an 'high angle' leade?


At least one important thing has been taken care of and that is no more lead in the chamber nor paper rings, thanks to your help with my brass length.
A number of Kal-Max buyers have written up nice 'testimonials' about how well the tool worked for them, and how easy it is to use. But your comment is the first (public) one which says stretching the case actually eliminated the problem it was built to cure. Thanks for that...

CM

EDIT...
I couldn't contain my curiosity, so I Googled until I found your conversation with Dan.
http://www.bpcr.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2274&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=3615ccca111248c2919e26ab1d9695e1
I see that you are using a .454" Money bullet from a Paul Jones mould, and I seem to remember you are shooting a .45/90.

So, going back to your #2...
You should be able to get at least 80 grains compressed under that bullet. That should be enough to make the bullet go too fast to see...

twoguns
02-25-2009, 11:31 AM
:cool:
Freebore - 0.100" long, .460" dia.
Leade - 1.5 degrees
Bore - .450"
Groove - .460" at the chamber and tapering down to .4575" at the muzzle.
(I showed you mine. Are you gonna show me yours?)
Freebore - 0.250" long, .461" dia.
Leade - 1.5 degrees
Bore - .451"
Groove - .461"




#1:
Could you not size the neck down 2 thousandths to match up with the freebore ID?


Well......yes..... (now, I might show some ignorance)...but, I thought that as soon as the light goes on inside the case and the bullet gets thumped in the ****, that the annealed case wall has little choice but to expand out to the chamber dimension. I don't think sizing the brass at the mouth would do anything to save the bullet from making that 0.002" step transition.

Now, considering how deep I have the bullet seated in the case, it seems reasonable to me that the bump up begins when the light goes on (and ends 10 or so inches up-barrel as Mann proved and the lead pushes the case mouth against the chamber mouth.


Thanks for that... Your welcome!



You should be able to get at least 80 grains compressed under that bullet. That should be enough to make the bullet go too fast to see...

Yep, I can get at least 80. :coffee:
But I want more, more, more so I can achieve that magical amount of powder and compression that finds me the Holy Grail - a clean burn.:cool:

docone31
02-25-2009, 11:41 AM
A question from the Peanut Gallery.
To get that clean burn, I have read about duplex loads. A little smokeless under the black powder.
Is that a reality, or just fiction?

BrentD
02-25-2009, 12:24 PM
It can be a reality, but I think of it as a crutch. If you want to avoid fouling by using smokeless in a duplex, why not just use all smokeless? But yes, it can be done and I'll move on down the firing line a few extra benches if you are going to do it.

The NRA now requires 100% bp in cartridge rifle competitions. I believe this is new this year for Creedmoor/midrange shooters. Been that way, always, for silhouette.

Brent

Don McDowell
02-25-2009, 12:48 PM
Docone the Lyman manuals as late as the 1950's contained duplex data for some of the bp cartridges they still listed data for.
Having tried it tho. I concur with Brent either do it with smokeless or do it with black. Whats the point in trying to elimate fouling with a small charge of smokeless when you could leave the black out and not have any bp fouling to mess with? Becaus even with the smokeless at the bottom of the case you still have the bp residue to clean from your cases and gun.
I'm also not convinced the pressure generated by the duplex are all that safe in the bp cartridges.

montana_charlie
02-25-2009, 01:37 PM
:cool:
Freebore - 0.250" long, .461" dia.
Leade - 1.5 degrees
Bore - .451"
Groove - .461"
That is almost a Pedersoli chamber...

Well......yes..... (now, I might show some ignorance)...but, I thought that as soon as the light goes on inside the case and the bullet gets thumped in the ****, that the annealed case wall has little choice but to expand out to the chamber dimension. I don't think sizing the brass at the mouth would do anything to save the bullet from making that 0.002" step transition.
You may be entirely correct. I can't claim to know exactly how things happen in there. But, I have yet to read a 'sequence of events' from a credible writer (one who claims to actually know) which describes the progression in detail.
So, I like to believe there is room for a little fudging...if fudging would help in some way.

Yep, I can get at least 80.
But I want more, more, more so I can achieve that magical amount of powder and compression that finds me the Holy Grail - a clean burn.
Well, you could work if from this end...
'They' say (and quite a few 'they's' agree) that Goex likes a compression of .385".
I have to believe that number depends somewhat on the total height of a stack, and that it would be different for a 45/70 than it would be for a 45/110. But, the one time I proposed that, 'they' told me I was wrong.

Anyway, choosing .350" as a desirable amount of compression (and you may substitute .385" if you wish) you subtract that number from the .500" seating depth and you get the distance below the case mouth a charge would have to reach.

So, you droptube powder into the case to fill it to .15" below the mouth (with op wad in place). Then, packing the top of the wad down to .500" will result in .350" of powder compression.

If .350" can be trusted to cause a 'clean burn', the amount of powder required to get it is figured for you when you see how much fills the case to .15" from the mouth.

I wouldn't be surprised if that powder charge exceeds 85 grains, and that amount of compression shouldn't bulge a case.

Helpful...? Anything there you had not already considered...?



Is that a reality, or just fiction?
CAUTION, Hassgropper!
Reality and fiction are but two faces of a three-sided coin. The third is only visible to those fortunate ones who are not 'trapped in their own ignorance'.

FPMIII (and I) recently received a warning about allowing a hint of 'BP predjudice' to invade a smokless PP discussion. Take care that the arbiter does not cast one upon thee as well, for doing just the opposite.

As for the meat of your question...I cannot answer you for I am trapped in ignorance (on that subject) which is virtually boundless. And, to 'say what I think' about duplexing might earn me another warning...!

CM

twoguns
02-25-2009, 03:33 PM
That is almost a Pedersoli chamber...

Its a Winchester SS 45-90 with a Badger barrell.




'They' say (and quite a few 'they's' agree) that Goex likes a compression of .385".
I have to believe that number depends somewhat on the total height of a stack, and that it would be different for a 45/70 than it would be for a 45/110. But, the one time I proposed that, 'they' told me I was wrong.

I remember that thread. I have had the occasion to pull bullets and compressed powder loads. What I SAW surprised me. The powder under the wad was very tightly compact and lesser so as I dug through the powder stack with a dental pick. The powder near the primer was loose. Your proposition was right on. Some day when I get bored I might try a two or three stage compression.




Helpful...? Anything there you had not already considered...?

Yuppers, got that covered. I have a 5 step progression of "GOEX -Cartridge" loads on both sides of that seemingly KW magical number. IJust don't know if GOEX-Cartridge will fit the bill. Time will tell.

Don McDowell
02-25-2009, 03:43 PM
I've got some pretty good groups going with my Old West pp bullet ( 550 grs patched to bore size) using 80 grs of Cartridge in 2.3 inch cases. .030 fiber wad, and 1/8th inch lubed wool felt between the bullet and powder.
I don't think Cartridge needs alot of compression to work well.

docone31
02-25-2009, 04:47 PM
You know, Charlie,
If it weren't for the BPers, we would not have the expertise we now have.
There is a lot of finite fact that just plain works. The fundamentals of those processes give us a foundation to experiment and survive to tell about it.
A lot of priceless information from the BP school.
I have no clue why, but, there is no rifle more beautiful than a cared for BPCR. The lines, the style, the sound, the performance. Nothing compares to it.
Even though I patch smokeless, I still have a georgeous photo of a 50/90 Sharps on my desktop.
Someday.....

montana_charlie
02-25-2009, 06:25 PM
I've got some pretty good groups going with my Old West pp bullet ( 550 grs patched to bore size) using 80 grs of Cartridge in 2.3 inch cases. .030 fiber wad, and 1/8th inch lubed wool felt between the bullet and powder.
Well, you've done it now, Don.
You finally mentioned something that fit's right in my plan, but which I have been trying to ignore.

In the first trial loads, I had a 1/8th-inch grease cookie. I wasn't set up very well to produce discs of lube in that thickness, so it was a real hassle getting the loads built. Plus (just to use up some of it), I made the cookies from some homemade lube which I modified to be as soft as I felt a cookie should be.

I do have a roll of 1/8th-inch felt, though. All it needs is to be saturated with lube (of some kind) and run through the wad punch.
I found myself thinking that since the thickness was already there, I wished I had planned on felt wads...instead of mashing lube to get it thin enough.
But, I was determined to get those loads finished, so I kept mashing and cookie-cutting.

Judging by what I could see in the bore, those cookies had little, if any, effect.

Do you produce your own lubed wads, or do you use Ox Yoke (or something like them)?
If you make your own...tell me about lube.

TIA, FWIW, OMG, LOL (etc.)

CM

Don McDowell
02-25-2009, 06:33 PM
Charlie I'm to lazy to go to all the trouble of making my own wads. So for the most part I purchase them from Harlan and Wendy Sage www.sageoutfitters.com
I ordered some stuff from BACO here a while back and part of that order was some 40 cal lubed felt wads for the .400 pp project. They work well also.

When working with this paper patch stuff I always keep coming back to the instructions found in some of the ancient Ideal/Lyman manuals regarding bp charges." The powder should not be compressed, but the bullet and powder charge should be in firm contact"

montana_charlie
02-25-2009, 07:16 PM
Charlie I'm to lazy to go to all the trouble of making my own wads.
Ok, so describe the lube that is in them...as much as you are able.

If you squeeze a wad, does the lube come out like an oil or grease...or something waxy like (say) SPG?

If it IS like an oil, does the felt seem to be heavily saturated...or just wet through?

And (final question) do any of your six senses (including 'gut feeling') give you a hint about what the lube is made of?

CM

Don McDowell
02-25-2009, 07:32 PM
It's just slick sort of powdery stuff.
Don't have a clue what's in it, but I'm pretty sure its the same thing as their muzzleloader patch lube.

Give it a try. Neither the lube nor the lubed wads are so terrible expensive its going to break anybody.

montana_charlie
02-26-2009, 11:52 AM
Give it a try. Neither the lube nor the lubed wads are so terrible expensive its going to break anybody.
It isn't the cost of store-bought wads that sets me back. It's that when my wife gave me a nice press-mounted wad punch (a couple of years ago) I went out buying a variety of materials to run through it.

So, I have this nice big piece of felt...and would like to come up with a suitable use for it.

CM

montana_charlie
02-26-2009, 11:57 AM
A lot of priceless information from the BP school.
Shucks, Hassgropper, you're gonna get me all misty-eyed...instead of just mystified.
CM

Don McDowell
02-26-2009, 12:21 PM
Charlie just rub some muzzleloader patch lube, like bore butter, or some of Sagebrush's lube into those felt wads you punch then. Should work like just fine as long as you get the felt saturated , but not to the point where it starts to come apart.

twoguns
02-26-2009, 01:18 PM
Charlie just rub some muzzleloader patch lube, like bore butter, or some of Sagebrush's lube into those felt wads ...

Yeh, When I use TC Bore Butter I warm it up in the Micro first...:-D

montana_charlie
02-26-2009, 02:10 PM
Charlie just rub some muzzleloader patch lube, like bore butter,

Yeh, When I use TC Bore Butter I warm it up in the Micro first...:-D
Okay, boys...
Looking through my old bag of muzzleloading stuff, I have a big fat tube of Blue and Grey Minnie Ball Grease that I bought (in '73) to use on Maxi-Balls.
Never used much because I had a 'blue ribbon' patched ball load that kept me in the running at our matches in Germany.

I'll try mashing some of that into little felt discs and see what happens. It has a 'thinner consistency' than the cookies I made, so it may not even require heat.

Surprising what you can find when you start digging in the back of the closet...
CM

leftiye
02-26-2009, 03:58 PM
CM, I used to make wads for my muscleloaders from feltan Bluestreaks (shotgun wads), and melt natural Lube 1000 into them FWIW.

twoguns
02-26-2009, 11:38 PM
Okay, boys...
... big fat tube of Blue and Grey Minnie Ball Grease... '73...
... 'blue ribbon' patched ball load that kept me in the running at our matches in Germany.
CM

I thought I was cool because last year I got to stand on the refueling floor of the Unit 3 reactor at Chernobyl while on an IAEA inspection and peer review visit. Shooting in Germany is much more cooler MC!...

I wanna go to Germany:lol:

Ken

montana_charlie
02-27-2009, 11:44 AM
much more cooler
I dunno. Chernobyl is probably quite cool, too...by now!
Those matches were many moons ago, and the laurels are too dry and crumbly to rest on.
CM

twoguns
02-27-2009, 11:07 PM
...and the laurels are too dry and crumbly to rest on.
CM

Hmmmmmmnnn, I think that was a fly-by over my head. Anyway I want to go to Germany some day.

montana_charlie
03-01-2009, 10:53 PM
Aw, don't worry about it, Ken. It was a poorly constructed bit of nostalgic humor.

But, I did manage to make some lubed felt wads...though not the way we discussed.
I (long ago) made up a cup (or so) of an SPG look-a-like lube, but never tried it. Then, when I needed some grease cookies, I melted that stuff and modified it a bit to make it 'greasy-er'.

I read a post a yesterday from Dale53 where he mentioned a 'cup warmer' he planned to try for melting lube. That reminded of one that my wife offered me about two years ago.
Turns out the offer was still good...so I melted my cookie 'grease' and tossed some punched felt wads in. They sucked it up like Obama floating in a vat of taxpayer's money.

It was an easy job by any standard, and those cup warmers are a great idea for a small batch. I left the lube on it for over an hour, after it melted, and it never got close to 'smoke temperature'.

CM

montana_charlie
08-05-2009, 09:27 PM
This thread may get some age on it before I ever have a chance to post some shooting results. Judging by today's weather, it may not happen until August!
But, I will resurrect it whenever I have something to add...
Well, it's August.
Went out to shoot today, for the first time since there was snow on the ground.
Back then, all I did was fire four bullets into a late season snow bank to see what they looked like...and it wasn't pretty.

Those loads had eighth-inch lube cookies under the bullets, and I fired them with no fouling control measures. Just load and shoot, like while hunting.
The cookies didn't appear to do anything good, at all. The first bullet looked fine, with clear rifling marks, and obvious lines showing where the paper edge was.
The following three got sequentially more scruffy, with the last one looking awful.
In the ogive area, the lead was heavily 'scuffed' all the way around the nose, and the rifling marks looked 'gouged' into the lead.

The educational benefit was in the first bullet. It showed that my patches were too narrow. As the nose bumped up some, the rifling was able to engrave about a tenth of an inch ahead of the front edge of the patch.

So, I changed the patch size to make it (both) wider and longer. Wider to cover more of the nose, and longer so that no stretch is needed to make the ends meet.
I pulled five bullets from the remaining loaded rounds, wrapped them with the larger patch. I did it without wetting the paper, which resulted in no thinning of the patch due to being stretched.
This got a tighter fit in my fireformed case necks without having to look for a thicker paper.

Surprisingly, dry patching is just as easy as wet patching...maybe even easier.
Only difference is, you twirl the bullet into a waiting case as soon as it is wrapped. And, there is no 'drying' step in the loading sequence.

I really wanted to capture these bullets undamaged, but refused to wait till the next snowstorm. So I fired them at a paper target today to check the terminal performance.

It was a hundred-yard group, and it measured 1.25". Bore was wiped between shots with two wet, and one dry patch.
Yeah, everybody has told me that shooting patched-to-groove over black powder will require wiping, but I was determined to try without it. Now, I have to agree it's necessary.

The group is only so-so as far as it's size, but the load stack in the cartridges got modified as changes in patch kept them from chambering. That involved pulling out the lubed felt wad so the charge could be compressed some more to get the stack shorter. This happened twice before a usable COAL was found...and resulted in much more powder compression than seems reasonable.
Added to everything else, the bullets were not visually 'perfect' examples nor were they ever weighed.

Considering the mid-course modifications, and all of the variables which were not being controlled, performance was good enough to convince me this can be made to work reasonably well.

I'll do a few more sessions to look at groups...after I refigure the proper height for the load stack. Come winter, I'll recover some bullets to evaluate when there is some snow to shoot at.

Patched-to-groove over black seems to be doable...

CM

montana_charlie
08-09-2009, 02:58 PM
Patched-to-groove over black seems to be doable...
RATS! I may have spoken too soon.

Fired twelve of the re-figured loads into a 100-yard target, and got a crappy group. Actually, it looked like three nice connected-hole groups, separated by intervening flyers. The whole 'pattern' was three inches wide and four inches high.
Barely good enough for close shots at deer, and way too poor for target work...

I had added more powder to make up for removal of an eighth-inch lubed felt wad, and adjusted the charge to obtain .350" of compression on a settled charge of Goex Cartridge.
That came out to 88 grains in my 45/90 cases, for a COAL of 3.290". Thing is, I get good accuracy (with other types of bullets) with considerably smaller charges.

Wiping with two wet and one dry, the bore stayed in nice condition for each shot.

I collected a handful of patch shreds afterward, and found some undesirable 'big pieces' that seem to be made up from 'most of' the inner wrap.
They appeared to come off right at the muzzle, but it's not the uniform 'confetti' you would hope to see.
It would be nice to examine fired bullets to see how the paper impressions looked...just not possible without snowbanks...but, the inner wrap didn't seem to get cut all the way to the leading edge of the patch.
Either the nose isn't bumping as much as expected, or the patch is too far out on the ogive.

Looks like it's back to the drawing board on patch width and charge size...

CM

montana_charlie
10-17-2009, 04:36 PM
I guess I'll use this old thread to act as a history of my PP-ing, in case my computer bites the dust, someday. If the information also helps someone working along the same line as me, that's great...or if he finds a different 'secret magic' he might post it here.

Keep in mind this is about patching to groove, with soft alloy smooth-sided bullets, fired with black powder. Comparisons resulting from using smokeless might be informative, perhaps even helpful, but probably won't apply directly to the stated goal.

After a couple of do-overs, I found a patch width that seems to cover enough of the ogive to account for some nose bump, without going so far beyond the ogive as to make chambering difficult....or prevent the paper from being cut all the way to the leading edge. Turns out, a 1-inch width does it very nicely when .150" of the patch is turned under the base.

The thing that kept nagging at me was the realization that these 85 to 90-grain charges I have been trying are all larger than the ones which have always produced best results with other bullets...all other bullets I have used.

I suspect that the increased amount of compression required is messing with my previously achieved 'consistency'.

So, I made up a load stack that looks like this.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/picture.php?albumid=88&pictureid=1428

It gets me back down in the 75 to 80-grain range where my best 100-yard accuracy has always occurred, and provides an opportunity to start using some of the felt I bought a couple of years ago. The felt wad is primarily to take up some space in the case, as a means of getting an appropriate amount of compression on the 80-grain charge under the veggie wad, while maintaining a suitable COAL.

This one produced 1.25" groups at 100 with between-shot-wiping using two damp patches...then drying the chamber with paper towel on a 'chamber rod/nylon brush' combination.

This sequence left the bore slightly damp when the next round was fired...a bit like blow tubing does...but the bore was quite clean of fouling.

Wind was 12+ mph from 4 o'clock, so finding patch remnants in a cow pasture was a painstaking process. But I recovered enough pieces to convince me (for now) that it was working as desired. When we get some snowbanks, I will try for some representative bullets to examine.

The ultimate goal is to get accuracy of (at least) this level while 'shooting dirty', but I will continue to wipe if that is the only option. If this level of powder charge continues to work well, I'll probably play at saturating the felt with some form of lubricant which is 'softer' than the last stuff I tried. I do have room in the stack for a waxed paper wad between the bullet and the felt if that seems necessary.

But, I'll shoot this load, unchanged, for a couple more sessions to see if it has the 'consistency' to keep after it...and try it at some longer ranges, too.

CM

montana_charlie
12-18-2009, 09:05 PM
Continuing the odyssey of trying to successfully mix black powder with patched to groove bullets...

Having waited all summer, I fired some bullets into a snowbank back on the fifteenth...and went to dig them out, today.
By the time I got the two 'shallow ones', the snow was tracked up so badly I couldn't tell where the others went in. So, I left them for later.

The two I recovered are .452" Money bullets, patched to .457", fired in a modern (stepped) chamber, into a .450" bore with a .460" groove diameter.
If you care, the lead/tin alloy is 7.8 BHN, and they penetrated about four feet when fired at 1200 fps from 75 yards.

The first bullet fired came out looking terrible. The patch had been scrubbed off of one side, and there was lots of lead to steel contact. The last cleaning patch run through the bore was soaked in turpentine...back when I was getting some lead flakes out. Residue from that cleaning, or simply an extremely bare bore may have caused destruction of the patch.

I wiped between shots with moose milk-dampened patches.
To save time (because it was cold on the 15th) , I used a jag to shove two stacked patches through the bore in a single pass, then dried the chamber with paper towel on a nylon bore brush.
The stacked patches make for a pretty tight 'package' which requires a strong arm and a stiff rod to get it moving. Once in motion, it goes through with reasonable ease...and picks up a heavy load of grunge.

That wiping method must work, because the second bullet came out looking like this.
http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/MoneyPatchedToGroove.jpg

There is absolutely no injury to the shank caused by the sharp chamber step...or anything else.
More specifically, there is no 'wiggly wrinkle' showing where the patch got rumpled at the case mouth...no 'wasp waist' showing where a lead ring got 'stolen' by the chamber step...and no cupping of the base showing where lead extruded into the chamber step gap and got redeposited, leaving a rim around the base.

If one bullet can get through in such pristine condition, I would imagine all of them can. Effective wiping seems to be the trick.

Now to find out if this is repeatable...then on to trying to get reasonable performance while 'shooting dirty'.

CM

montana_charlie
05-16-2010, 11:05 PM
Having figured out how to get a nice-looking bullet out of the muzzle, I acquired a mould which casts at .454". This is the diameter which mates up perfectly with the paper if have on hand. It is a discontinued 9 lb. onionskin, but the two reams I found on eBay will provide 26,000 patches...enough for the rest of my life.

After toying with the components sufficiently to get the best fit, I have made up an image which shows the loaded configuration...lying in a chamber with a 45 degree step, .100" freebore, and a 1.5 degree leade angle.

The patched to groove bullet is seated on a .030 veggie wad .670" down from the case mouth.
In my Bell 45/90 cases, 86 grains of drop tubed Goex Cartridge packed down to .670" makes a compression of .380" while 85 grains would yield a compression of .325".
86 grains works well in my rifle, and I haven't yet tried 85 grains.

The patch extends .040" forward of the start of the ogive, and this combines with the seating depth to place it's leading edge halfway into the leade. This seems to adequately 'shoehorn' the .460" package into the rifled bore with no damage...to either the patch or the bullet.

In summary, results have satisfied me that patching to groove diameter is a viable option, and may be preferable to bore diameter (in some ways) when shooting from an unmodified modern SAMMI chamber.

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/MyPPLoad.jpg

Thanks to all who participated...
CM

Don McDowell
05-16-2010, 11:25 PM
Well you going to post some targets of your efforts, or do we wait till they publish the scores from the Quigley?

montana_charlie
05-16-2010, 11:51 PM
I only shot one target so far this spring, and it was back when there was still a snowbank to retrieve bullets from. I knew I posted it in a thread somewhere, but I had to go searching to find it for you.

This was shot with the .452" Money bullet, and I have yet to fire the new .454" ones that I just got loaded up.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showpost.php?p=857623&postcount=26

CM

45 2.1
05-17-2010, 08:39 AM
In summary, results have satisfied me that patching to groove diameter is a viable option, and may be preferable to bore diameter (in some ways) when shooting from an unmodified modern SAMMI chamber.

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/MyPPLoad.jpg

Thanks to all who participated...
CM

Charlie, you are very close to patching the smokeless way. I've used 0.454" base diameter slugs with 9 Lb. onionskin and BP before with excellent results. Since your wiping and have a clean bore, go up to 0.0005" under throat diameter and seat to touch/engrave lightly with your loads. I never had as good of groups with a lot of wads under the patched boolit either. Good Luck........

montana_charlie
05-17-2010, 01:46 PM
Charlie, you are very close to patching the smokeless way.
Yes, I know. I weighed the information I read about smokeless patching against BP patching before I started this thread (last year). What I read led me to decide that groove diameter may be required for smokeless, but when shooting BP you could take your choice.

In an 'original' chamber, which leaves the case at the right size to accept a bore diameter bullet, patching to bore would only make sense...as was done in the old guns.
But I felt you could get the same 'smooth flow' of the bullet from the brass to the steel if groove diameter is used...when the chamber is going to leave the expanded brass at that size, anyway.

The only difference in the two configurations is that the bullet 'expands' to fill the grooves when patched to bore...but is 'engraved' by the rifling when patched to groove. Both cause minimal 'change' in the original bullet.

Patching to bore in a 'big' (read GG) chamber has several troublesome elements which guys have found ways to work around. But those 'adjustments' still require something extra to make them work, and the bullet must go through more 'change' between the time it's chambered and the moment it leaves the muzzle.

Patching to groove works if you are willing to wipe between shots. That was a tough requirement for me to accept. I am going to stop experimenting with the patching method...and get serious with finding my best load.
But, once that is accomplished, I will re-explore grease cookies and lubed wads...looking for something which allows 'shooting dirty'. That will occur when there is once again some snowbanks to deposit bullets into...

CM

Lead pot
05-17-2010, 04:24 PM
Charlie you can shoot a patched bullet at groove diameter if you want.
Just seat that bullet off the lands like you would a grooved bullet. you just wont get that long range accuracy but it will work just fine for busting rocks and you will loose a little case capacity for powder.

Kurt

Don McDowell
05-17-2010, 04:32 PM
You won't be able to "shoot dirty" with groove dia. patched. You can do it with bore- bullets tho.

45 2.1
05-18-2010, 08:05 AM
What I read led me to decide that groove diameter may be required for smokeless, but when shooting BP you could take your choice. Not entirely true.

In an 'original' chamber I believe my trapdoor chambers are contemporary with the Sharps (and I have measured several original chambers in several Sharps, Ballard, Trapdoors etc.). All would except a 0.463" patched boolit in WW brass with little of the patch showing. , which leaves the case at the right size to accept a bore diameter bullet, patching to bore would only make sense...as was done in the old guns. Patching to bore was done to get more powder room, get the patched boolit into the rifling and allow for the fouled barrel condition. All items concerned with the BP fouling which had to be lived with.

The only difference in the two configurations is that the bullet 'expands' to fill the grooves when patched to bore...but is 'engraved' by the rifling when patched to groove. Both cause minimal 'change' in the original bullet. That change is sometimes a bad thing, especially if the boolit doesn't bump evenly. But, when it is patched right (see RMulherns pictures as he did a good job on it) the boolit shouldn't bump out of line (much at least).

Patching to bore in a 'big' (read GG) chamber has several troublesome elements which guys have found ways to work around. But those 'adjustments' still require something extra to make them work, and the bullet must go through more 'change' between the time it's chambered and the moment it leaves the muzzle. Accuracy depends a lot on the boolit being in line with the bore as well as a few other things.

Patching to groove works if you are willing to wipe between shots. That was a tough requirement for me to accept. I am going to stop experimenting with the patching method...and get serious with finding my best load. Whatever you decide, you should realize that your best load with either method my be equal or one may be superior to the other. This depends on the condition of the bore from shot to shot. A clean bore is the same while a fouled/dirty bore can vary with heat and humidity (as noted very well in the results from Raton) dependent on the time of year.
But, once that is accomplished, I will re-explore grease cookies and lubed wads...looking for something which allows 'shooting dirty'. Once a "lube" is found that allows you to do that, your troubles should stop. That lube is not now here though. You can use many of the others available, but you have to use quite a lot with a lot bigger grooves to hold it. And I believe that is not what you would think ideal. That will occur when there is once again some snowbanks to deposit bullets into...

Don McDowell
05-18-2010, 09:48 AM
45 2.1, it's no great feat to "shoot dirty" but bore or under patched size is required to be able to chamber the patched rounds without rumpling the leading edge of the patch when chambering.
Bore sized patch bullets seated very shallow into the case stand alot better chance of being aligned with the bore than groove diameter patched do.
Either way works well, but it takes some time to get everything down pat, from the powder charge and wad column to the paper and the bullet alloy.
Of course there's a big difference in whether one is punching rocks,snow banks, etc for fun or whether one is shooting for score in competition someplace on what the final load combo ends up being.

RMulhern
05-18-2010, 11:18 AM
FWIW......Kenny Wasserberger...from his 5@200 photos shows his PP bullets seated fairly deep into the case; moreso than what I seat my loads to however Kenny will tell you quickly that his bullets are patched to bore diameter. My bullets are seated no more than about .140" into the case. My thinking is that since I'm operating with a standard chamber that it behooves my accuracy to have as much of the bullet into the bore as possible thereby giving possibly the least amount of distortion to the bullets base due to the base being expanded outward at ignition and hopefully shaving off as little lead and patch as possible! I also use an 'under primer wad' in the primer pocket thinking that just maybe this inclusion will somewhat retard full ignition such that the bullets base is thereby moved fully into the bore prior to full ignition. Whether or not this is happening I have no way of knowing since I don't have snowbanks. Maybe I'll try my son's swimming pool! All of my PP loads have used bullets with an alloy of 1-16 however I am going to test some loads with an alloy of 1-10. My thinking is that with a harder alloy that this would be maybe a better way to reduce or prevent base distortion. I have looked at photos that Kurt aka Leadpot has posted using I think an alloy of 1-11 and even though the engraving marks of the lands were more shallow than the softer alloy bullets, I don't recall that Kurt stated that the accuracy was worse than the softer bullets. What I am thinking is that even though the engraving would be more shallow....this does not mean that this would cause 'skipping or skidding' of the bullet across the lands at initial ignition! In conclusion, reference using groove diameter or bore diameter PP....there are so many variables in this game that one has to use WHAT WORKS in a particular rifle and NOT what someone else is using!

Lead pot
05-18-2010, 11:47 AM
....there are so many variables in this game that one has to use WHAT WORKS in a particular rifle and NOT what someone else is using!

You got that right.

Kurt

RMulhern
05-18-2010, 12:26 PM
You got that right.

Kurt

Kurt

As to the title above....I cannot remove it from my mind that bore diameter has to be better than groove diameter for one main reason and that is because those shooting standard modern chambered rifles must deal with base distortion of the projectile! With groove diameter the bullet is seated deeply into the case and regardless of who the 'caster' is....and how well the bullet is patched or fitted into the case.....the more bullet into the case means that there is more chance of base distortion!! This I think mainly applies to the individuals shooting BLACKPOWDER! Depending upon the alloy used and whether or not one is shooting SP....this may not be the case but for BLACKPOWDER....I think it makes a whole helluva lot of sense!! Again.....all rifles are akin to people aka ALL DIFFERENT so it just takes a whole lot of work as to what works in whatever rifle!!

As for me and my testing and results....I'll stay with BORE DIAMETER!:D;-)

montana_charlie
05-18-2010, 01:42 PM
My bullets are seated no more than about .140" into the case. My thinking is that since I'm operating with a standard chamber that it behooves my accuracy to have as much of the bullet into the bore as possible thereby giving possibly the least amount of distortion to the bullets base due to the base being expanded outward at ignition and hopefully shaving off as little lead and patch as possible!
That is one of the 'workarounds' for bore diameter patching in GG chambers that I was referring to earlier.

I cannot remove it from my mind that bore diameter has to be better than groove diameter for one main reason and that is because those shooting standard modern chambered rifles must deal with base distortion of the projectile! With groove diameter the bullet is seated deeply into the case and regardless of who the 'caster' is....and how well the bullet is patched or fitted into the case.....the more bullet into the case means that there is more chance of base distortion!!
If the inside of the case is at groove diameter...and the bullet is patched to groove diameter...there is no empty space within the case for the bullet base to distort into.
Look again at this image from the bottom of Page 5.

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/MyPPLoad.jpg

You will see that the entire bullet is closely supported by either brass or steel as it sits in the chamber/throat. Any 'distortion' which can occur will have happened before the bullet starts to move...and (as you can see) there is no empty space for that distortion to fill.

Do these look distorted to you, Rick?
http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/CCWII.jpg

CM

RMulhern
05-18-2010, 01:54 PM
Charlie

That 'ain't' the true view! Go back and take a look at the 45 degree area on some of the views Kurt posted of chambers! THAT'S WHERE....the **** end of the bullet gets blown into!

montana_charlie
05-18-2010, 02:03 PM
Charlie

That 'ain't' the true view! Go back and take a look at the 45 degree area on some of the views Kurt posted of chambers! THAT'S WHERE....the **** end of the bullet gets blown into!
Examine the image of the loaded cartridge and you'll see that my chamber has that 45 degree step.
The image is an exact depiction of my rifle and my reload, accurate to a thousandth of an inch.
Still, the bullets come out undamaged, as that photo shows.

Here are some more...these were were patched wet.
I think the 'scruffiness' is caused by minerals in tap water.
The bullet on the right was sent to me...already patched to groove...by Joe C. from the Shiloh forum. I pulled one of my bullets and inserted his, and got two almost identical results.
His shows a little bit of lead to land contact at the leading edge of the patch.

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/MVC-697F.jpg
CM

Lead pot
05-18-2010, 02:06 PM
Rick.

I patch to 1/2 of the depth of the groove or .440 with my .438 bore .446 groove or I can patch to .446 and seat the bullet accordingly or patch to .001 under bore.
the best results I get is .003-4 over bore but I don't have the chamber like most are. It does not matter if I use the prolate bullet or the elliptical I patch it to .003-4 over bore.
The postell type PP bullet I patch the same but I seat it a little deeper, I have to even with the 5 degree tapered lead.
The drawing CM made that bullet is all well and good and it might chamber in a clean chamber but with the BT it wont chamber on the second shot the way he has it drawn up.
The bullet could be seated 5-10 thousands off the land and he will get by with it.
If I'm wrong Charlie tell me.

By the way that is some mighty fine illustration your doing. What are you using doing this??

Kurt

montana_charlie
05-18-2010, 02:30 PM
By the way that is some mighty fine illustration your doing. What are you using doing this??
I am using software called 'Screen Calipers' to get all of the dimensions right, but the main image came from Tom Myers.
I took an image posted by him which shows a patched Money bullet in a Pedersoli chamber...and manipulated those elements to create 'my configuration'.

I used MS Paint for the manipulation, but Tom deserves credit for the image.


The drawing CM made that bullet is all well and good and it might chamber in a clean chamber but with the BT it wont chamber on the second shot the way he has it drawn up.
The bullet could be seated 5-10 thousands off the land and he will get by with it.
If I'm wrong Charlie tell me.
You are probably correct, Kurt. I have been wiping all along to keep everything standardized for the testing.

I will try other methods after I complete load development (which has never been done, yet) to see what charge gives best accuracy.

But, I won't be trying the cookies and/or blow tube until there is some snow...

CM

303Guy
05-18-2010, 03:22 PM
montana_charlie, there's a marking on the R/H boolit that seems to coincide with the case mouth. Is this from too long a case so's it starts to crimp in the throat lead in chamfer?

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/CCWII.jpg

I get this effect with my 303 Brit with smokeless but mine are an expansion band that gets preserved by the patch compression.

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-689F.jpg

My cases don't 'grow' so I can't minimize the gap between case mouth and throat start. On this particular boolit I would expect an accuracy issue as the band only goes halfway round the circumference. (There's no visible rifling because it's a two-groove and the rifling impressions are on the edges).

montana_charlie
05-18-2010, 03:49 PM
montana_charlie, there's a marking on the R/H boolit that seems to coincide with the case mouth. Is this from too long a case so's it starts to crimp in the throat lead in chamfer?
I looked for that particular case (back then), and I may not have indentified it.
But I found three which had a slight wire edge turned into the case mouth.
Perhaps they didn't get chamfered properly...or maybe the edge got turned when tumbling in ceramic media. But, none of them were trimmed too long.

Anyway, the mark never showed up in later firings of that particular 'set' of cases.
CM

Don McDowell
05-18-2010, 04:07 PM
Looking at those bullets the case mouth is biting to hard into them,either from crimp or cases being just a touch long, and the grain of the paper being left into the bullet , would seem to indicate it's patched to tight.

montana_charlie
05-18-2010, 10:09 PM
The 'ring' on that one bullet (out of many) has already been hashed out.

About the 'paper grain' imprint...
This post of Kurt's shows a bunch of his recovered bullets. The lighting is bright enough to wash out some detail, but I think there is some paper grain showing here and there.
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showpost.php?p=715483&postcount=12

Would you care to amplify on what you mean by a patch being 'too tight'?

CM

Don McDowell
05-18-2010, 10:24 PM
Yes by the bullet being to large the patch is keeping it from fully expanding to the bore, that's why the grain is imprinted in the bullet. By it being patched that tight , it's liable to be doing all sorts of contortions when it comes out the muzzle.
Probably a good move going down in bullet size like you did, but I don't think you went far enough yet, but I suppose time well tell. I'm sure looking forward to seeing the results of your shooting with those.

montana_charlie
05-18-2010, 11:25 PM
I have no words...

RMulhern
05-19-2010, 12:23 AM
Yes by the bullet being to large the patch is keeping it from fully expanding to the bore, that's why the grain is imprinted in the bullet. By it being patched that tight , it's liable to be doing all sorts of contortions when it comes out the muzzle.
Probably a good move going down in bullet size like you did, but I don't think you went far enough yet, but I suppose time well tell. I'm sure looking forward to seeing the results of your shooting with those.

Don

Maybe I'm just stupid but I'm not quite following this posting! Can you maybe put it in plainer context so my feeble mind can understand?

Thanks![smilie=w:

Don McDowell
05-19-2010, 12:38 AM
We've known for over a hundred years now, if you run a lead bullet to large it does what? It fins and cups the base. Paper patch may hold the fins in but it won't stop the base cupping . Looking at that fuzzy picture of those two bullets it's plenty obvious that the bullets are to large and expanding to hard into the sides of the barrels. The bases look to be rounded, and unless its a terrible optical illusion the groove engraving looks to be narrower at the leading edge of the bullet than at the base? How'ld that happen? As the bullet exited the bore the natural elasticity of the lead trying to do its thing making the "engraving" of the grooves larger as the bullet exited the barrel and distorted.
We also know from history's lessons the only time the folks that made the accuracy legends are made of ,used extra large patched bullets is when they were muzzleloaded and breech seated. The loading of the bullet thru the muzzle allowed the bullet to be engraved and sized to the barrel. (just as we do when we slug a barrel for measurement) Then when the powder kicked it in the butt the bullet was already engraved and sized so distortion was'nt a problem.
We also know that the "match" grade patched bullets were cast or swaged largely of what we consider very hard lead. Usually 14-1 or more , not unusual to find reference to 10-1 alloy for target bullets. Why? The tin keeps the elasticiy of the lead from deforming the bullet. Some folks are prone to call it nose slump these days.

Lead pot
05-19-2010, 01:38 AM
Don.

I have never recovered a PP bullet that showed signs of fining that where patched over bore diameter short of some I cut a wad on purpose with a small crescent cut out to see what effect it had to the base of a bullet and in particular the bullet on the bottom row of that photo CM posted. That particular bullet I used a wax paper wad over the powder and a lube wad I cut a crescent out of and that let the lead flow into that damaged lube wad even as soft as the lube cookie is was enough for the lead to flow into it.
what I found patching a hard bullet .002 under bore diameter with a card over the powder and a lube wad with a card under the bullet base with a bullet cast at 1/11 tin/lead was a bullet with very lite land engraving on the bullet shank and several bullets that had very bad gas cuts. This I have never found on patched bullets patched over bore diameter.
I patch my bullets tight to bore and over bore when the bullet profile allows for me to do this because I get the best accuracy and the least nose setback.
I'm unable to post photo's and records because I lost most do to a hard drive crash. I had photo's of bullet bases and what alloys I used of hundreds of bullets that I recovered from the snow banks over 10 plus years. Bullet fining is very common with GG bullets.
A 3 gallon bucket full of recovered bullets is a lot of studying to see what is going on with alloys and bullet designs :bigsmyl2:

Kurt

303Guy
05-19-2010, 03:38 AM
I am having a cupping/finning problem with paper patched boolits. At least, I think it's a problem.:confused:

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/Two-GroovePP28grAR220910grBran2.jpg (Not too bad for expansion!)

This one was fired in a two-groove Lee Enfield (No.4 303 Brit). The bore is .304 and being a two-groove, that's what the boolit has to swage down to. It starts out at .318 at the base, patched. I had speculated that it was being caused by 'dragging' as the boolit gets swaged to bore diameter.

The paper grain imprinting onto the lead core is what I thought to be normal and a good sign as there is not patch slip and it shows that the patch is doing its job of keeping the lead core off the bore surface under lateral expansion due to a pressure being applied the the boolit base. If there was no paper grain imprint I would be concerned. I'm open to correction here - and anywhere else too, for that matter!

Don McDowell
05-19-2010, 09:31 AM
Kurt the amount of study you've put into this bullet thing is an invaluable resource and it was a sad day when all that data was lost.
I guess alot of what a person does depends on the end result desired. If a person is happy shooting minute of 5 gallon bucket at 100 yds, then that's a differrent ball game than shooting for string measure at 40 rods, or high scores at the 1k line.
As most of us have found out the hard way, a load that makes bragging size groups at 100 yds, won't hit a schoolbus sized gong at 700.
But I still think the amount of expansion a lead bullet will give when hit in the butt with a given amount of pressure will determine what sort of deformation the bullet goes thru at the muzzle. If you have a bullet that's trying to swell to much into the lands and grooves is not going to shoot as accurately as one that's not trying to swell that much.
Anybody that's been on the firing line has heard "whirlybirds" going down range some of us have even sent those "whirlybirds"merrily on their way. Those things weren't the result of a perfectly fit bullet.

45 2.1
05-19-2010, 10:26 AM
We've known for over a hundred years now, if you run a lead bullet to large it does what? It fins and cups the base. Paper patch may hold the fins in but it won't stop the base cupping.
As a point of interest, I found that wads stopped any cupping with large throat sized boolits with smokeless loads. They also reduced accuracy. The wad reduced expansion of bore diameter boolits also unless the load was up there somewhat. With BP this didn't happen as the BP bumped up boolits, either GG or patched, faster and more positively. Wad thickness and stiffness has an influence on this. A fat boolit that is pushed, rather then shoved seems to shoot a lot better. The old Scheutzen guys understood this well I believe.


Kurt the amount of study you've put into this bullet thing is an invaluable resource and it was a sad day when all that data was lost.
I guess alot of what a person does depends on the end result desired. If a person is happy shooting minute of 5 gallon bucket at 100 yds, then that's a differrent ball game than shooting for string measure at 40 rods, or high scores at the 1k line.
As most of us have found out the hard way, a load that makes bragging size groups at 100 yds, won't hit a schoolbus sized gong at 700.
But I still think the amount of expansion a lead bullet will give when hit in the butt with a given amount of pressure will determine what sort of deformation the bullet goes thru at the muzzle. If you have a bullet that's trying to swell to much into the lands and grooves is not going to shoot as accurately as one that's not trying to swell that much. Excellent statement........

Anybody that's been on the firing line has heard "whirlybirds" going down range some of us have even sent those "whirlybirds" merrily on their way. Those things weren't the result of a perfectly fit bullet. Has anyone determined what is causing that. Is it part of a patch still attached or what. I haven't experienced this with GG smokeless at all.

Don McDowell
05-19-2010, 10:39 AM
Whirlybirds are an affliction to both types of powder and poorly cast or deformed bullets. A patch blowout will sound pretty as it goes down range, lube warping can be a problem with grooved bullets and I'm beginning to wonder if the same principle might not come into play with patched bullets and wiping the bore with a bit much slickum between shots.?

Lead pot
05-19-2010, 01:59 PM
Here I dug out some pictures I have on file on the desk top computer.
Wads have a big effect on the bullet base and also bullet upset.
Here is a .45 bullet that was patched to .454 with 1/30 alloy. It fully upset in the bore groove enough that you can see the end of the patch on the nose and the short wrapped patch with no base damage.


Here are some .44 bullets shot with different wad combinations and 1/20 alloy.
The left bullet#7 just had a wax paper wad and all bullets were patched .002 under bore diameter.
Second bullet from the left #3 had a .023 card.
Third from the left #1 had a .060 fiber wad.
And the one on the far right #41 had a .030 fiber and a .128 cork wad.
All 4 show no signs of fining.


These two are my hunting bullets, 685 grain hollow point bullets 1/20 alloy shot into a bag of mason sand. They show slight fining on these bullets. Sorry I don't have a photo showing the base.

If any of my PP bullets would develop fining it would be this one.
This is one of my rebated boat tail deep cup based bullet that I been working on for several years now and just developed a way to protect the fragile base.
This is a tight patched bullet and notice the ring on the bullet nose-- this shows that it pulled the case neck forward up into the lead. I'm surprised it did not separate the case..
These are just a few examples of bullets what alloy and wads will do to the integrity of the lead bullets.

Kurt

Don McDowell
05-19-2010, 02:31 PM
Here's a .435 dual diameter bullet from the Old West Mould. It's base measures .435 and then the nose drops to about .430. It's hollow based. It left the 2.3 shoved by 80 grs of cartridge, a .030 fiber wad and a 1/8 inch felt. Paper was 20 lb southworth all cotton, base diameter as patched is .450. As you can see if you squint close enough the rifle engraves, altho lightly clear up on the nose. I cast these from some dead soft lead. This one was recovered from an elk , impact distance was at 204 yds.
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f358/Ranch137/paperrecovered.jpg

Lead pot
05-19-2010, 04:32 PM
I cant get your photo to come up Don.

Don McDowell
05-19-2010, 06:25 PM
Kurt it shows up fine for me. I think I emailed you one of a dirt bank recovered one sometime ago. It's the same bullet as I gave you that batch of to try thru the 44's.

montana_charlie
05-19-2010, 06:29 PM
But I still think the amount of expansion a lead bullet will give when hit in the butt with a given amount of pressure will determine what sort of deformation the bullet goes thru at the muzzle. If you have a bullet that's trying to swell to much into the lands and grooves is not going to shoot as accurately as one that's not trying to swell that much.
Your grasp of bullet deformation physics and bullet swelling physics is certainly unique, Mr. McDowell.

Deformation at the muzzle?
Trying to swell too much?
I can't even pretend to understand what you just said.

CM

Don McDowell
05-19-2010, 06:34 PM
Somehow Maxwell that doesn't really surprise me.

montana_charlie
05-20-2010, 12:18 PM
Well, when you were giving those explanations, they were in reply to something you and Kurt were talking about.
So, I'll just wait for Kurt to explain it...if he can.
CM

Don McDowell
05-20-2010, 12:33 PM
Okydoky simple synopsis.
If you want to shoot "groove" diameter patched,and do so with repeatable accuracy, you need to stay with a .450 bullet. That combo most likely won't shoot dirty. Unless you go with a tapered bullet, or dual diameter with a short .450 base.
To shoot dirty you'll need to go with a .440-.444 bullet patched no larger than .450, and probably use a lubed wad or grease cooky.

montana_charlie
05-20-2010, 01:12 PM
So far, 'shooting dirty' is a side-issue in this thread...spoken of, but not explored.
But, even if it was a subject worth spending time on, I don't know what 'shooting dirty' has to do with the concept of a patch being too tight.

That 'too tight' and 'hampered expansion' thing is the subject that I and Rick Mulhern are failing to understand your theories on.

Yes by the bullet being to large the patch is keeping it from fully expanding to the bore, that's why the grain is imprinted in the bullet. By it being patched that tight , it's liable to be doing all sorts of contortions when it comes out the muzzle.
Don

Maybe I'm just stupid but I'm not quite following this posting! Can you maybe put it in plainer context so my feeble mind can understand?

Thanks![smilie=w:

You explained to Rick that 'we have known for a hundred years...too big bullets get cups and fins on the base'.

Kurt said 'not in my experience'.

You replied (to Kurt) with 'the amount of expansion will determine the deformation at the muzzle'...(and with) 'a bullet that's trying to swell too much will be less accurate'.

If you can explain any of that for (the three of) us it will be something worth keeping.
If you can connect any of it with 'shooting dirty', that should prove interesting, too.

However, if you're saying that excessively undersized bullets don't shoot well because they need to swell too much, everybody would agree with you.
But, that would be exactly opposite to the practice of patching to groove...which uses the biggest bullet possible and, like all patched bullets, does best with 'tight patches'.


There is one aspect of patching to bore diameter which may be the kernel of what you have been getting at.
But, I'll wait for your reply to see if that's what you mean...before I agree with you.

CM

Don McDowell
05-20-2010, 02:43 PM
Oh golly gee whiz Mr. Maxwell , shucks tell us all.......

RMulhern
05-20-2010, 02:54 PM
Concerning the shooting of all-lead cast PP bullets.....here's something that I THINK I know! When the powder ignites...all hell breaks loose inside the barrel, the **** end of the bullet gets hit in a nanosecond with tons of pressure...and the nose is the first thing that moves....REARWARD! At the same time the nose is moving slightly rearward the exterior of the bullet is being blown outward against the interior of the barrel and the nose of the projectile has several tons of torque applied to it attempting to twist it out of it's structural integrity. Shortly after being 'pressure cooked'....the projectile is again exposed to being hammered when it gets to within about 6" of exiting the muzzle because it's being squeezed down by the choke within those last 6" prior to exiting the muzzle!

When you stop to think about it.....it's a damn good thing lead does have elasticity to a degree because without it we wouldn't be able to hit a frickin barn! And all the more reason for being able to select an alloy that best withstands all the labors that a cast bullet is subjected to and all the more reason for being able to cast good bullets!

Don McDowell
05-20-2010, 03:08 PM
Yup and when you're shooting a patched bullet that the slug is already over bore diameter, you got more distortion going on.

montana_charlie
05-20-2010, 11:14 PM
There is one aspect of patching to bore diameter which may be the kernel of what you have been getting at.
But, I'll wait for your reply to see if that's what you mean...before I agree with you.
Yup and when you're shooting a patched bullet that the slug is already over bore diameter, you got more distortion going on.
Nope. Sorry...that wasn't it.


Don,
We all have our favorite 'experts' that we rely on when something outside our own experience needs to be figured out.

You and I both put a lot of faith in the experience of Rick Mulhern and Kenny W., but I also like to know what Brent Danielson and Dan Theodore think.

Back when I was just starting to consider paper patching, I read this advice from Dan to Ken Einig, a guy who was trying to get his Hiwall working with PP.

"Using too small of an as cast PP bullet diameter has been shown, by various marksmen, to not deliver the accuracy that a larger diameter bullet can. Here's a truism that came to me years ago: The more a bullet has to bump-up, the more the base will be distorted.

So, to conclude, if I were you and interested in PP'ing I'd trim 45-100 Starline brass to as long as possible and still chamber it, fire-form it, trim-to-length at what ever you chamber length is and shoot at least a 0.4500" diameter bullet patched to near barrel-groove diameter. I've got a Paul Jones PP mold that casts a 0.4540" diameter bullet. It has shot very well in standard, non-pp, chambers."

So, you see Don, because mine IS a "non-PP chamber", I latched onto that diameter number and used it as a reference point for deciding what I would start with.
Silly me...I didn't take his advice as given. I over-figured the requirements I would encounter.
So, I started out looking to patch a .450" bullet. I soon worked up to .452" and got the good results I have been bragging about.
Now, after all of the unnecessary fooling around, I am finally up to the .454" bullet that Dan originally recommended.

You 'complimented me' a few posts back on finally getting down to a smaller bullet.
I don't know what you have been reading, but I said just the opposite. I am now up to the biggest one I've tried.

After reading your take on what happens to a bullet inside the barrel, it's obvious you would not put any cedibility in Dan's information. But I have a feeling his data has undergone at least as much testing as yours.

Thanks for the information on lubed felt wads, way back in the early part of this thread.
When I get around to trying to 'shoot dirty', I will give them a try.

CM

Don McDowell
05-20-2010, 11:20 PM
Just keep on winnin them national championships CM.

45 2.1
05-21-2010, 08:30 AM
Just keep on winnin them national championships CM.

I'm a little curious about this..........just which one of you on this thread qualifies for that (winning of them national championships, in the plural form used here)? To paraphrase another western fella, "when your good you get close, then sometimes your lucky". It seems to me that a fella needs some luck besides being an excellent shot, with an equally excellent or better spotter and some decent weather to do that. What say you?

Don McDowell
05-21-2010, 10:08 AM
I say luck seldom if ever plays any part in a match win, of any level.
I also say you can't buy, parrot, or plagerize you're way into the winners circle.
You need good equipment, quality loads, and a lot of familiarity with it, a goodly amount of honest trigger time and a lot of determination. There's been a plethora of threads around lately "what sight setting" and there's been an abundance of internet experts giving all sorts of well copied and pasted advice, most of which according to the range books I've kept over the years are worth almost nothing. You can use computer programs and drawings and speculations to get a basic start, but the real world will soon show you what's what. Until you've actually experience a 30 pt drop in sight settings from one day to the next with nothing changing other than the calender , or even between practice rounds fired in the morning and afternoon , you and your computer program just won't believe it. Never mind a target jumping 5 minutes just during the course of a relay....
You have to hit every shoot you can get to, and you have to practice at home on a regimented basis.
A person can have all the 1/2 moa loads at 300 yds on your home range you want, but those will mean little to nothing when you hit the firing line at a range somewhere past walking distance from your back porch.
A person needs to be able to handle the noise and confusion at a shoot he/she may or may not be used to at home. Even practicing at a public range while helpful does absolutely nothing to prepare you for whats about to hit when the match begins.
Lots of things go into being able to even finish in the top 50%. Sometimes such as at the Quigley last year, I finished up only 10 pts behind the first place winner, and that was good enough to get me 126th.....
Just two weeks ago I got a 3rd place ironsight and seventh place over all in the 22 match, had I of had my head pulled out of my ass on the one target I muffed, would of taken the whole enchilada....
Lots of things go on that only first hand experience will know or understand.....

Don McDowell
05-21-2010, 10:12 AM
I've experienced something else and I know of another here that has had the same thing. A load that up to 3-4-500 yds just shoots absolutely scarily accurat, yet when you go to the next distance won't even stay on target , and some rounds won't even thro dirt in the field of view of the spotting scope.
That's why my previuos statement a while back about a person has to render the loads for what he/she wants out of em. If the best you'll ever do is bust a disc blade at 300 from a bench, that's fine, but don't even expect that load to hit the target frame at 600 until you try it there.

45 2.1
05-21-2010, 11:27 AM
I've experienced something else and I know of another here that has had the same thing. A load that up to 3-4-500 yds just shoots absolutely scarily accurat, yet when you go to the next distance won't even stay on target , and some rounds won't even thro dirt in the field of view of the spotting scope.
That's why my previuos statement a while back about a person has to render the loads for what he/she wants out of em. If the best you'll ever do is bust a disc blade at 300 from a bench, that's fine, but don't even expect that load to hit the target frame at 600 until you try it there.

I can appreciate what you just said, but wind and light play a big factor in what you hit, that is you or your spotter being able to discern just what you should do next..... thats where luck comes in as sometimes you have no idea what happened. Not getting an answer to the previous question, I would assume that none of you in this thread is one of them national championship winners. And I do understand about competition, some things are common to all types.

Don McDowell
05-21-2010, 11:43 AM
45 2.1 there is absolutely NO luck involved. If you or your spotter miss a wind call it's usually a miss and thats that. It do or die.
I'm going to assume you've not shot any competition?
At Alliance 2 weeks ago during the buffalo match Sunday the wind changed fack and forth from needing 5+ minutes right to 3 plus minute left, and sometimes that happened before you could pull the trigger. One of the perrenial top finisher said it best when he said he was going home and rigging a cordless screw driver to his windage adjusment knobs.
During the long range match it took more windage than some folks had on their sights (me included) just to get on target at the 7 and 800 yd targets, at the 1000 yd line I finally found a tire off to the side I could hold on and get on target, by the time we hit the 900 target the sun was out the target had jumped and the wind was fishtailing from straightbehind to 90 degrees right.
LUCK? not a friggin bit, it took skill and experience.
NO Sir there's absolutely no luck involved you either do it or don't.

45 2.1
05-21-2010, 12:18 PM
LUCK? not a friggin bit, it took skill and experience.
NO Sir there's absolutely no luck involved you either do it or don't.

Well.... I have been in a lot of different types of competition, some of which was long range rifle.... but none of it in BPCR. The others had the same problems with all the weather/light related problems and i've had the pleasure of shooting with national record holders in those sports. These men related some very interesting ideas and methods..........but when asked, none of them said there was no luck invovled. Perhaps your in need of some.

Don McDowell
05-21-2010, 12:39 PM
Oh I coul use some luck alright, but not for my shooting.
So what competitions and where did you shoot?
Leadpot is not far from you he's got a stack of trophies from various smokeless venues, and has no small share of awards from various bpcr events.While we've joked about "luck" we all know luck really didn't play a part.
R Mulhern holds some records in Highpower and Palma, and in the many conversations we've had luck hasn't come into the shooting thing.
A very good friend of mine from Mattison shoots a good bit of highpower, and in all the conversations we've had luck seldom comes into shooting competition talk. Been working on him to jump into the bpcr game , after all I did buy his spare M1 match garand from him.... Lobbing a bullet into a braggin size buck deer now, that's different deal...
Kenney W besides the titles he's managed in bpcr represented our state quite well in highpower, and I'm pretty sure he'll not mention anything about luck, at least not with any seriousness in his voice....
So hows about it you going to proffer any proof to your words , or just keep the post count rolling?

SharpsShooter
05-21-2010, 12:51 PM
This is a great thread. Bore vs groove. In my rolling block, the groove diameter is .455' while the bore is .450 My PP mould, a Tom Ballard adjustable gives me a perfectly round .450 bullet. I only shoot black powder, so patching to bore won't happen. I patched to .453 which is not groove diameter either, thereby breaking both rules. I compressed the powder to a seating depth of .500" and seated the diapered lead on top. I straightened the bell an d took them shooting. Cleaning with 1 wet, 1 dry with no magic elixirs or incantations produced this

http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r255/SharpsShooter_photos/PP485grTomBallardMould2.jpg


Point it, the rules.......don't always apply


SS

45 2.1
05-21-2010, 01:08 PM
Oh I coul use some luck alright, but not for my shooting.

This was a great thread till you got confrontational...............
So you don't need luck..... OK, thats fine, now answer me this "Why haven't you won a national". You made the crack and avoided the question. A fella that doesn't need luck especially for his shooting should have no excuse then. You put both legs into your pants at once too.
A lot of home grown boys did local things because they weren't rolling in money or had obligations that prevented them from doing so. Not every one that is good gets to try to prove it at some high end event. To say anything else denotes snobbery.

Don McDowell
05-21-2010, 01:09 PM
SS a friend of mine shoots that same bullet in his lonestar roller, He meets limited success at 1000 yds with it.
I have a 400 baco mould that the bullet won't shoot worth a flip (yet) thru the 40-65, but even at the .408 patched diameter it shoots real well at 300 yds in the 405 with its .4115 groove using smokeless. Even managed to scratch a couple hits on the 800 yd buff at Alliance NE just practicing with it, but blew a patch and leaded the bore something fierce and have not returned to those since I got the barrel back to strictly molysteel content....

RMulhern
05-21-2010, 01:17 PM
As for 'luck'....just let me add this little tidbit of info! I love watching Keith (Doc) Lay shoot long range because Doc is one HARD HOLDER for certain, he's meticulous to the inth degree, takes notes, and once he gets home enroute from here...I'm quite certain he's going over in his mind how the day went for ascertaining zeros, paying attention to his sight settings as how they possibly coincided with the days wind/mirage, temp, etc. Doc shot 800 yards all day long here from about 1030 hrs. up until around 1830 hrs. when we got run off by a huge thunder cell so he went through a good bit of ammo. During one of his strings I was watching....he had a less than 10 ring (20") size group working and about 3/4 the way through that string, up jumped the 'booger bear' with a hit completely off the 44" aiming bull, the hit occurring up at the 2 o/c position about 8" off the bull!! I asked him how that one broke and Doc replied "Right down the middle...it was a good break"! My comment was "Doc...this is what drives me bonkers about shooting BPCR! You can have everything going exactly right and with no visible wind/mirage change....you'll have a totally unexplained shot that goes off the map!" Doc just grinned...and kept shooting! The next round was back into the 10 ring! Now...was that an 'unlucky shot'? That I can't say but knowing Doc and his marksmanship ability what I will appraise it as is 'a naturally occurring phenomenon' that goes along with shooting all-lead cast bullets! Personally I believe I can cast bullets as good as anyone but in the final analysis...even though one may take the time to weigh each bullet fired in a match and have all say within.....2/10 gr. of each other...the fact still remains that we don't have an X-Ray tool that will allow us to go in an examine the inner core of the bullet! So if any individual thereby expects to plop every round exactly where you want all to go....well...I think that is a false hope! You do the best that you can and hope for the best! From watching scores from those whom win matches over the previous years I would make this analogy: "Of all BPCR matches fired across the USA each year, gong or Creedmoor less than 5% of all shooters will win 90% of all the matches"!! This DOES NOT OCCUR from chance; rather it comes about because of a regular regimentation of training, by paying attention to a hard-core set of iron-clad rules pertaining to marksmanship that are unyielding in nature! It does not come about through luck or chance!

Don McDowell
05-21-2010, 01:19 PM
Confrontational??? no not hardly. If simply asking you for some inkling of your stated abilities and wins is confrontational.....
I stated clearly the reasons for My not winning. Lack of trigger time the last few years has really kept me from any real respectable finishes.
Don't even pretend the poor boy **** with me, I'm living well below the poverty level , and all the shooting I've done in the past two years has come from supplies laid in in the good years, and the number of shoots I've attended have been way more limited than I would like. I am a rancher and alot of the shoots I would love to attend don't coincide worth a damn with things that need done around here.
Matter of fact I've missed Kenny's creedmoor the last two years, and son it's not a long distance call to his house on the ranch...
I've not been shy about posting the results of shoots I participate in, no matter what my final finish score. Matter of fact I plainly and clearly state prior to any shoot I attend , " someone is going to have to work really hard at shooting sxxty to kick me out of last place.
No 45 2.1 there's no confrontation here, just merely a trust but verify. Anybody can make great claims on the keyboard as to they're shooting ability, putting it up for the world to see and judge is another matter...

Lead pot
05-21-2010, 01:24 PM
45 2.1

Where do you shoot, what range??

Kurt

45 2.1
05-21-2010, 01:28 PM
45 2.1

Where do you shoot, what range??

Kurt

I shoot at home........... Southern Illinois

SharpsShooter
05-21-2010, 01:41 PM
SS a friend of mine shoots that same bullet in his lonestar roller, He meets limited success at 1000 yds with it.
..

No chance to shoot beyond 550 yards short of a 2-3 hour drive. I want to see if it will hold up out to 500 and I can be happy. To use it for white tails around here...250 yards is longish shot and I suspect it will be fine. I don't have the inclination to shoot competitively, but bang & clang buff shoots would be lots of fun. All my point was that the rules can be bent and still have a good shooter.


SS

Don McDowell
05-21-2010, 01:56 PM
SS yessir that bullet should make a grand hunting bullet.
Most all of the shoots I do are the "gong" shoots. and I'll be the first to tell ya , don't try it don't even get close to one, they are as addictive as anything you'll ever get into...
Paper shoots are alright, if you're busy shooting, watching one has the attraction of watching paint dry on a wet cold concrete wall....
And yes I'm in full agreement, the rules can be broken in this bullet game. That's exactly what goes with my patched rounds in the 405. .004 final size under groove and smokeless shoots great, now all the expertise gathered will tell you that won't even work.....

montana_charlie
05-21-2010, 03:39 PM
Anybody can make great claims on the keyboard as to they're shooting ability, putting it up for the world to see and judge is another matter...
For Don,
A couple of pages back you asked to see one of my targets. I posted a link. You did not respond.
I presume it didn't impress you enough to spend time talking about it, and that's fine. It wasn't terribly impressive, anyway.

Since then, you have voiced a desire several times to see more of my shooting results, but your 'wish' is comingled with those little disparaging asides like 'busting rocks'...'minute of five gallon bucket'...and 'snowbanks'.
It's fairly obvious you will stubbornly remain unimpressed until you see a MOA group fired at 700 yards or more.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I am not ready to try the long ranges, yet.

For everyone else,
There is a tenant of long range shooting that most BPCR types admit to. It is that a good group fired at a hundred yards may fall apart when the distance increases to 'whatever' yards.
Some even go so far as to say that a 'small group' at 100 actually doesn't prove anything.

Well, it proves the bullets are all going the same direction, and they are stable at that range...if the holes are round.

When the range increases, little things start to matter.
A low velocity may have been good enough at 100, but might be totally inadequate for 'whatever'.
An imperfection in the bullet may cause it to go haywire after it's been airborne long enough for the fins, or wasp waist, or slumped nose, or bad base, to have it's effect.
Then, there's the possibility that the bullet design is simply wrong for longer ranges.

The purpose of this thread is to explore the mechanics of patching bullets to groove diameter...and to find out if those mechanics will produce a flying bullet which is free from imperfections caused inside the chamber/throat/bore.
The method works, and photos prove it.

That does not say that other methods don't work, nor that they are not as good.
What it does say is that, if you are having problems with 'damaged' bullets while patching to bore, there is another option to consider.
If you don't know whether your bullets are damaged or not, then you must depend solely on performance on the target to satisfy yourself that they aren't.
If the performance is not there...you would find a snowbank to be informative.

The bullet I am using is known to be a 1000-yard capable design.
It is my belief that, if it can do well at 100 yards, it can be made to do well at any range...if it gets out undamaged, and with sufficient velocity.

I plan to 'develop' my load to achieve long range accuracy, for my own enjoyment, but there is nothing I need to prove to anybody in that regard.

Shooters who have exhibited their 1000-yard expertise have already proven this bullet will do the job. I have only proven that it's possible to use a different patching method to drive it out of the bore...undamaged...from a chamber that is not very well designed for paper patching.

That is why I started the thread...


And, Don,
As soon as this is posted, I will be leaving for Shonkin, Montana to help with a branding. It is an annual obligation that I have been satisfying for thirty-three years. I help them and they help me.
Because I am committed to being there, I cannot attend the BPCR shoot in Great Falls tomorrow...which I was hoping to make this year.

CM

Don McDowell
05-21-2010, 04:08 PM
Well Maxwell as I see you are still on line as I post this.
No I have not seen a target from you that would indicate any thing but some generalized blasting.Would be interesting to see something a person could digest rather than random shots here and there....
As to my so called "disparraging" remarks. I'm sure you've seen my mention of the 500 yd bathtub, 800 yd kerosene tank, and the 1000 yd fuel barrel. I may not have ever mentioned the 200 yd kitchen stove I regularly shoot at. Also this granite and marble found in this country is pretty tough stuff. Have a clump of yucca that catches what for on occasion when I'm tring to get wind adjusments before I fire on paper......
As to the bit about a bullet shooting well at 100 and no good further out. Yup pretty sure someone has already covered that. Also that same someone mentioned that tailoring the load to what you have in mind of shooting to......

Have fun branding. Always good to help friends and family.
Maybe someday you'll grace us with your presence at a shoot, be good to put a face to the name once anyways.

Red River Rick
05-25-2010, 10:19 PM
MC:

Did you get a chance to cast any boolits from that new mould and try them? Just wondering!

RRR

montana_charlie
05-26-2010, 01:44 PM
MC:

Did you get a chance to cast any boolits from that new mould and try them? Just wondering!
I have a batch loaded up, and I hope to shoot them today.
CM

montana_charlie
05-26-2010, 08:26 PM
After I got the bench and target in position, the wind started to blow. If I was not already set up, it would have made sense to wait for a calmer day.
When sighting for the first shot I realized I had left the spirit level at home, so this target was fired without it.

It's 20 rounds into the wind from 100 yards...on a single target...with no sight adjustments.
Hope it doesn't seem too 'random' to some viewers...

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/ItsPersonal.jpg

If you need something to use for 'scale', the black bull is 4.4 inches wide.

CM

SharpsShooter
05-26-2010, 08:38 PM
That shows some promise MC. So what next?


SS

powderburnerr
05-26-2010, 08:58 PM
you figure out the fliers? ..........Dean

montana_charlie
05-26-2010, 09:56 PM
That shows some promise MC. So what next?
That would be load development.
None has been performed with this bullet, yet...just been working to get the groove diameter part ironed out.

This was loaded with 86 grains of Cartridge, which I need to put through the Chrony.
It takes more compression than is probably necessary, so I will try some lighter charges to see if the group tightens any.

There is no lead in the barrel, so the patches stayed together alright...and my snowbank recoveries make me willing to assume the bullets arrived at the target with undamaged shanks.

This load impacted in the same location as the last time I shot, so it seems to be repeatable, at least.

you figure out the fliers? ..........Dean
Not really, Dean.
One of them may have been the shot where the wind blew the saddle blanket covering the bench up over the muzzle...just as I pulled the trigger. But I think that shot hit a rock below the target, because I seem to remember a looooong ricochet about then.

With cleaning rods and wet patches blowing off the bench, and the blanket flapping in the wind, I gave up on trying to fire a group worth bragging about.

At least I got the whole batch fired before the rain started...

CM

powderburnerr
05-27-2010, 10:10 PM
. I usted to get a fewtargets like that and never did really figure out what caused the out shots... they quit when I started to wrap .. you wipe I know but the conditions do not sound real stable ,,, let us know next time out, if they are still there , if you get to shoot in nice conditions..the core group shows promise.... dean

Don McDowell
05-27-2010, 10:25 PM
Looks pretty good. Shows some real promise.
Sometimes the wiping routine is more of a problem than the load. Might try just a damp patch between shots....

Red River Rick
05-27-2010, 11:57 PM
Charlie:

Looks pretty good to me! Things are starting to fall into place. A bit more tweaking, and you'll have it beat.

Glad I was able to help!

RRR

montana_charlie
05-28-2010, 12:44 PM
[Glad I was able to help!
Oh, yeah...for those who have not followed this thread from the start, it's time to give credit where due.

The bullet I started with was a .452" smooth-sided Money bullet from a Kalynuik mould, courtesy of Red River Rick.
That mould was ordered as a .450", but I soon learned that even .452" was too small for me.
It shot very well with my paper, but was a loose fit in the necks of fireformed cases.

This bullet has a .454" diameter...and patches up to .459 - .460". It is small enough to thumb seat, but only barely. Once seated on the wad, it is very snug in the case neck.
It is the same Money PP design, and from the same talented maker, Rick Kalynuik of KAL Tool and Die.

CM

montana_charlie
06-06-2010, 05:41 PM
Well, I've decided to frame that target I put up a few posts back...because it might be a while before I see another as good as it.

Since 'load development' is next on the agenda, I built a batch with one grain less powder. That is 85 instead of 86 grains of Cartridge while keeping everything else exactly the same.
I didn't really expect to see much change, but the amount of compression required for the shorter powder column seemed more reasonable than the .380" with the heavier charge.

Well...15 shots stayed within the 4.4" black bull (at 100), but that's about the only good thing there is to say about it.

I'm not sure why, but the wet patches encountered noticeably more resistance during the wiping...especially the first of the two. Hunidity is about normal (at 30%) for this area, so I don't think it's a 'climate' thing.
The first five looked pretty cr@ppy, so I changed the wiping method for the next five. They looked no better, so I tried a third technique...also with no change.

Patch particles looked about normal, but I haven't had a chance to 'snowbank' this new bullet. Might be able to learn something useful this winter.

Guess I'll drop to 80 grains for the next session and see if there is any drastic change - one way or the other. This rifle often makes it's best GG groups with charges on the light side.
Might prove true with PP, too...

CM

Don McDowell
06-06-2010, 06:19 PM
Same powder lower charge heavier fouling = not enough pressure. Up the charge and see if the fouling won't go down and maybe creep back up the accuracy scale a bit.

Yellowhouse
06-06-2010, 10:35 PM
Charlie, I've searched for a printable version of the target you used. Got a link you can share?

I've been to this site but if they have a 1000 yd scaled to 100 I missed it.

http://www.reloadbench.com/pdf.html

montana_charlie
06-07-2010, 02:24 PM
Charlie, I've searched for a printable version of the target you used. Got a link you can share?
Look here http://www.longrangebpcr.com/ReducedTargets.htm

CM

6.5 mike
06-13-2010, 07:42 PM
Thanks, charlie I had wondered where you found those. Site looks very interesting too.

montana_charlie
06-28-2010, 07:59 PM
I have been busy with 'stuff' so haven't done any further testing of loads, although I have a batch loaded up with 80 grains of powder to see if a lighter charge works any better.

But, the last few sessions at the bench I have been noticing I can't seem to get happy about 'trigger control'. I tried a few different 'styles' of gripping the stock, but have decided my straight gripped military butt is the root cause.

So, after wanting one for a few years, I got out some files and made a 'traditional add-on pistol grip' from a piece of walnut cut out of a damaged Sharps buttstock.
I'm no wood carver, but I think this will do. It certainly takes away the strain of pulling the butt into my shoulder while still trying to relax the shooting hand so the fingers don't 'lock up'.

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/SharpsGrip.jpg

Here's a closeup...

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/PistolGrip-1.jpg


CM

Red River Rick
07-02-2010, 05:39 PM
Look's pretty good MC.

Have you had a chance to try the rifle, with the modifications? Just wondering if it worked as you predicted.

Again, well done!

Rick

montana_charlie
07-03-2010, 03:23 PM
Have you had a chance to try the rifle, with the modifications? Just wondering if it worked as you predicted.
If you are referring to the pistol grip...No. I haven't shot with it, yet.
But, I can tell by the way it feels that I am going to like it a lot better.

If you are talking about some other 'modification', you may have me confused with Rick Mulhern...and his throat reamer.

CM

montana_charlie
07-05-2010, 12:19 PM
Okay, I tried it...the pistol grip, that is.
Shooting the Money PP with 80 grains of Cartridge, I did manage a respectable grouping at 100 yards. Much better than the scatter-pattern from the last session, and somewhat prettier (in some respects) than the target posted earlier.

At least there is only one flyer, and I was able to know (when it left the barrel) that it probably wouldn't fall into the group. That knowledge is attributable to the increased trigger control provided by the pistol grip.

Another advantage...
Being able to pull the butt into the shoulder without tensing up the entire shooting hand allows a more relaxed shooting style, overall. That makes it more enjoyable, less prone to getting tired, and recoil seems less of a problem.

Anyway, here's the picture...15 rounds at 100 yds.
To provide some scale, the width of the black bull is 4.4 inches.
It's actually two groups, as I fired five, cleaned the barrel, took a break, then fired the remaining ten.
But, the interruption didn't seem to introduce any glaring inconsistency.

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/7-4-2010.jpg

CM

montana_charlie
09-02-2010, 07:07 PM
Continuing (as time premits) with load development for the .454" Money bullet patched to groove diameter, today I fired a batch of 15 charged with 83 grains of Cartridge.

This is the first time I've tried this charge with any bullet...including GG bullets.
It's also my first time shooting off of cross stix instead of a sandbagged pedestal.
I'm not sure if I like it, but I figured I should learn to do it.

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/9-2-2010a.jpg

The two shots connected by the yellow line were 'borrowed bullets'. I shoot a few of them from time to time to try and use them up. For some reason that I will probably never learn, they always group to the right, and string vertically.

The remaining 13 rounds had most of them going into a square-ish group which is a bit less than an inch wide, and about 1.2 inches high.
The three flyers outside the red box were simply (I believe) badly fired.

I can say for certain that the last five rounds fired 'felt better' by a large margin than the first ten did.

I guess I'll need to try 82 and 84 grains...just to see if the gun likes one of them better.

CM

SharpsShooter
09-03-2010, 01:07 PM
MC discounting the borrowed and the badly fired, that is dandy. Was that prone or sitting off the sticks? I can't shoot prone due to some back issues, but sitting is not too bad.

SS

montana_charlie
09-03-2010, 04:09 PM
Was that prone or sitting off the sticks?
That was sitting on a little hard plastic stool/tool carrier that I keep for 'mobile mechanic jobs'.
It is hard on the butt, and only about ten inches off the ground, but it gets my knees high enough to support the elbows.

My stix are home made and I haven't added any spikes to the bottom, yet.
So, wiping between shots is a bit of a juggling act as the whole contraption leans into my lap. That works...but adds time to the overall process.
My tail end was numb after fifteen rounds.

CM

montana_charlie
12-08-2011, 07:36 PM
Well, since that last posted target (last year) I had a summer of time to play with load development. I tired powder charges from 75 to 86 grains (of Goex Cartridge) and kept returning to the 83 grain charge.
It seems to be reliable in that it gives about the same performance every time out, and it has also given me my best 100 yard group.

I didn't play much with other 'variables', but I did switch back and forth between patching dry and wrapping wet. I couldn't get a clear picture if one is better than the other, but wrapping wet is easier for me to do quickly.
So, all of my final test sessions were done with wet wrapped bullets.

In the end, the particulars of my loaded cartridges goes like this ...

.454" Money-nosed bullet, wrapped with 'unobtainable' 25% rag onionskin paper to a diameter of .459" (groove diameter).
Bullets seated .700" deep on a single .030 veggie wad, in Bell 45/90 cases stretched and trimmed to perfectly fit the chamber depth. Cartridge OAL is 3.155".

Bullets exit the bore in pristine condition, with no cupped bases or wasp waists, and leave no paper rings behind.

I have been wiping between shots with two wet (damp) patches, then drying the chamber.
I would like to know if a lube cookie would allow shooting dirty, but I have not done any of that, so far.

Anyway, patching to groove is viable, and (to my mind) more appropriate for modern chambers intended for shooting groove diameter bullets.

It works well enough to produce this five-shot group back in September, when we still had some warm, windless days.
It's about a half inch high and three quarters wide.


http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/Sept212011.jpg

CM

Don McDowell
12-08-2011, 08:13 PM
Charlie I would bet you'ld have a better chance of shooting your bullets with a grease cookie and just a blow tube using kik powder. Other wise unless you were really deep seated I think the patch might hangup on the fouling when trying to chamber.
The few rounds I shot in the 44 this morning that were loaded with the KIK the barrel looked like it'ld been shooting 5744.

MT Trapper
12-16-2011, 12:06 PM
I found this 100% cotton 9# onionskin paper on ebay today if anybody is interested. It is kind of pricey.
Here is the link:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/BPCR-100-COTTON-9-POUND-ONION-SKIN-PAPER-PATCH-PAPER-RARE-LAST-IT-/180774408827?pt=Vintage_Hunting&hash=item2a16fe927b#ht_626wt_950

Trapper

Don McDowell
12-16-2011, 12:15 PM
That not quite double what paper mill was getting for it, but close....

Lead pot
12-16-2011, 12:52 PM
I been using felt wads for just loading and shoot with out using a BT for PP and GG and they do the job like Don has been saying.
It's hard to find a good quality felt most you find is some synthetic junk or you might find some wool, but the good hard rabbit 10x or 20X is tough to come by and if you order it it comes at a high price.
My last stop at a Hat shop I asked if he had any trimmings I could have and we walked to his scrap box and said take what you want [smilie=w:
I soak my cut wads in a mix of Babe oil and lanolin for a few days and squeeze it out in a potato ricer.
I haven't found anything that works better for load and shoot.

LP.

Lead pot
12-16-2011, 01:10 PM
Maybe I should sell some of my 100% 8.5# rag paper I paid $11.95 for at that price LOL.
There is 75% and 100% onion for under $20.00 for 500 sheets. I dont remember paying over $15. a box for any of my paper. Most of the old down town office supply stores might still have some old Southworth collecting dust in the storage room they cant sell now because nobody makes carbon copies using typewriters anymore.
A few weeks ago I found box of 700 cpl 1000 sheets in that box for $6.00+ tax.

montana_charlie
12-16-2011, 02:24 PM
Lead pot,
Have you looked here for felt?
http://www.durofelt.com./image_26.html

CM

MT Trapper
12-16-2011, 04:03 PM
MC,
Can you cut that felt with the same type of punch used for veggie wads?

Trapper

montana_charlie
12-16-2011, 04:33 PM
MC,
Can you cut that felt with the same type of punch used for veggie wads?

Trapper
I use the press-mounted punch sold by BACO.
It cuts the felt with almost no resistance at all, but the 1/8 inch thickness is the thickest the punch will accept.

CM

Lead pot
12-16-2011, 09:08 PM
TNX. CM.
I will save that link.

montana_charlie
03-27-2012, 08:30 PM
This winter was a strange one for Montana, almost devoid of snow. Had to wait for a 'spring storm' to find enough of a drift to catch a couple of bullets. Actually lost one that punched clear through, and ended up out in the pasture, someplace.

Anyway, shooting results with this .454 Money bullet have been pretty good, and pretty dependable. So, I just needed to look at a recovered one to verify that my patch extends as far forward as it needs to ... and no further.

Finally, I have confirmation of that, with this ...

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/picture.php?albumid=88&pictureid=5199

CM

Lead pot
03-27-2012, 10:02 PM
CM that is a fine example of a finished product.
The right alloy patched just right no fins, no case mouth ring and hardly any nose setback that I can see.
That is the way a PP bullet should look. Fine deep engraving with no chance of the bullet not getting full rotation.
Good job!

What was the alloy?

montana_charlie
03-27-2012, 11:22 PM
What was the alloy?
Actually, it's the lead foil from dental x-ray films.

But, it tests at 7.8 BHN ... exactly the same value that Dan T. says 20-1 should return after it stabilizes ... so, I just call it 20-1.
In the very near future I will have to switch to true 20-1 because my source for x-ray film just went digital ... danged technology, anyway.

Thanks for the comment, Kurt.

CM

Lead pot
03-28-2012, 12:44 AM
CM

7.8 BHN is to soft for 1/20. 1/20 is close to 9.8 or 10 BHN.
If that 7.8 BHN alloy you used with a bullet patched to slightly under bore you would have found considerable nose setback about .065".
But with it being patched to groove diameter helps to hold the setback to a minimum.
1/18 alloy I find is more then enough to hold the set back of the long elliptical bullets.
The alloy I use for the long nosed elliptical bullets is 22 lbs lead with one roll of 95/5 solder-95% tin 5% antimony.

montana_charlie
03-28-2012, 01:43 PM
CM

7.8 BHN is to soft for 1/20. 1/20 is close to 9.8 or 10 BHN.
Scroll down to the eighth post on this page (a question from you) and read the answer ... including the last sentence.
http://www.shilohrifle.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=124317


But with it being patched to groove diameter helps to hold the setback to a minimum.
Then, I guess you could say that's another type of bullet 'damage' (added to the list of wasp waists, finned bases, and gas cutting) that does not occur when patching to groove.

CM

Lead pot
03-28-2012, 07:59 PM
I remember that post.
Shortly after that post I ordered a Lee tester because I did not think my Saeco gave a reliable reading.
Shortly after getting it I cut some lead wire and filled several bottle caps with this pure lead and I made a batch of 19 lbs virgin lead and 1 lb virgin tin. This mix should have been very close to 1/20 T/L. According to Walters and Rotometal 1/20 is 10 BHN and the corbin bottle cap test http://www.corbins.com/lead.htm#wire showed my mix to be a little over 9 bhn, cant remember the exact number, the Lee tester was several lower.
The lee tester is more consistent then my Saeco and I rely on the Lee for checking my alloy consistency in hardness and not what the actual hardness really is.
Till the day I can afford to get a $6000. Mitutoyo Rockwell tester from MSC. I will just use the Lee for a consistent unknown hardness alloy.

montana_charlie
03-30-2012, 08:35 PM
I remember that post.
Shortly after that post I ordered a Lee tester because I did not think my Saeco gave a reliable reading.
Shortly after getting it I cut some lead wire and filled several bottle caps with this pure lead and I made a batch of 19 lbs virgin lead and 1 lb virgin tin. This mix should have been very close to 1/20 T/L. According to Walters and Rotometal 1/20 is 10 BHN and the corbin bottle cap test http://www.corbins.com/lead.htm#wire showed my mix to be a little over 9 bhn, cant remember the exact number, the Lee tester was several lower.
Uh-huh.
Your Lee would probably get real close to what I said about 20-1, and this dental alloy.

CM

montana_charlie
04-09-2012, 09:10 PM
So, assurred that my bullets and patches were finally right, I was wanted to try a range longer than 100 yards.

I printed an eight-inch bull and took it out with fifteen fresh rounds.
First, the light was poor due to an incoming rainstorm. Then, the large bull on a single sheet of paper left insufficient 'white' to see in the globe sight aperture.

I fired seven rounds before the rain drove me inside, but the target was nothing to brag about. It had a 'hand sized' group shoved over to the right.

A week later we got a spring snow storm, so I fired three rounds into a snowbank. One recovered bullet is a few posts above this one.

Having five loads left, I waited for a calm day to try them on a new tareget I had printed.
It is the same eight-inch bull, but it is split between two pages of paper. By piecing them together, you can see there is a good border of white.

Yesterday the light was fair and the wind was mild so I went out to shoot.
I put one in the gong just to verify I was still on a 200 yard setting, and the way the gong moved said it hit roughly in the center.

One shot at the target, and I had to walk most of two hundred yards to verify that I hit the paper.

Dropped the sight two 'points' to move the hits into the white (so I could see them) and fired the remaining three rounds to get this group.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/picture.php?albumid=88&pictureid=5225

Still a 1 MOA load at 200 ...

CM

montana_charlie
11-26-2012, 03:29 PM
I may as well post this one, since I have it.

Same .454" Money bullet patched to .460" fired at three hundred yards.

http://i684.photobucket.com/albums/vv203/montana_charlie/10-21-12300yd.jpg

Hardcast416taylor
11-27-2012, 12:10 PM
Charlie I believe you`re on to something now.Robert

bigted
12-06-2012, 08:00 PM
charlie...being fairly lazy and crunched for time...this is from which rifle again? also r u still wiping every shot? that is very incouraging groups and being in winter i will glean from those that dont have feet of snow to blaze thru for yardage....thanks for posting this!!!

montana_charlie
12-06-2012, 09:37 PM
charlie...being fairly lazy and crunched for time...this is from which rifle again?
That would be my Pedersoli Sharps, Ted
It has a standard grease groove chamber, so the bullets are patched to groove and thumb seated in unsized cases.

also r u still wiping every shot?
Yes, after each shot with two 'wets' that won't quite drip if you squeeze 'em. Then I dry the chamber with a patch on a short rod.

I have read of your success with grease cookies, but I have not duplicated that, yet.

CM

bigted
12-07-2012, 02:46 AM
i got hold of an old marlin '93' lever 38-55 with kinda a rough bore and that has been keepin me outta trouble for the last bit. i need to install a scope on the 120 for wringing out those cookie loads but dont have the mounts yet. i also patch to groove and find it interesting that sucess has happened with them in your case. thanks again for the posts and photo's. im hoping that my sucess will mirror yours with the cookie loads.