Tails of the Patch

[bobk]

Humor aside, I was discussing paper patching with someone, and they asked, "Why wrap the patch around the base of the bullet? Why extend the patch that far at all?" I had no answer. I really don't know why. Can someone help me out here?

Bob K

[pdawg_shooter]

I prefer to twist and trim a tail on my paper patch bullets for protection. Some of my loads place the base of the bullet well below the case neck. The paper serves as a full length gas check and protects the bullet from the hot gas and the bore from the lead.

[docone31]

Ditto on pdawg.
I have not recovered one yet, but I suspect it does protect the base.
All I know for sure, it works, and works well.

[Digital Dan]

Methinks each animal wears different colors and it seems related to factors I cannot fathom. Higher pressure may be a culprit. I've seen .45-70s that are quite amenable with twisted and snipped tails and others that require card wads and a slight overhang of the patch just past the bullet base that is folded over flat...bullet then seated on the wad. Maybe 1/8th inch or so. The latter describes .44 Mag loads for my rifle. Pressures are fairly high with that one, not so much with the other. Accuracy hoovers around MOA with both.,,nod to the .45-70 for top honors.

FWIW, Dan Theodore espouses preference for the short skirt folded over for top accuracy as I understand it.

[Kragman71]

I cut my tails to cover the bullet base.
I feel that this protects the bullet base.I also,sometimes,use a wax wad to further protect the base.I do this if the bullet projects below the neck,into the "boilerroom".
Fran

[eka]

I know a lot of the competitive shooters don't twist tails, but it is just easier for me and I get good results for what I'm trying to accomplish. Now, I only use smokeless powders and generally smaller boolits, mostly .30 cal. I even patch .243. I find the smaller the boolit, the more time consuming and harder it is for me to fold the paper around the base. I also only have to worry about getting the length of the patch right, as the height only has to be in the neighborhood. I also final size in a lubrisizer. So, a tightly twisted tail snipped off close, doesn't pull loose after a pass through a sizing die like a folded patch does. These are just some of my experiences and in all honesty, I'm still fumbling along learning as I go.

Keith

[montana_charlie]

"Why wrap the patch around the base of the bullet? Why extend the patch that far at all?"
Whether it's a twisted a tail or just an overlap, everybody I know of covers (at least part of) the base with the patch. You ask why...

Picture a bullet with a paper jacket that does not extend over the base. Now picture that bullet as having smooth sides...as 'traditional' paper patched bullets are constructed.

If you attempt to push the patched bullet into a case mouth, does it seem at all likely that the bullet may just slide through the patch? That is what my imagination tells me.

I think the base covering makes sure the patch is pulled into the case mouth by the bullet when the package is seated.

CM

[rhead]

Ditto Charlie. Also, the bullet could slip from the patch during firing. Good way to generate fliers. It is easier to get the paper tight. Why go to the extra trouble just to avoid covering the base, the paper is cheap. Somewhere back in time when my great grand daddy was a youngish man, they noticed that the ones that covered the bases gave better results.

[bobk]

Thanks, guys, for all the good answers. It all makes sense now, and I hope I can explain it to the dumb-as-me. Charlie, I didn't think about pushing the boolit through the patch.

Here's another question: If you patch a GG GC boolit, do you install the check, or just wrap over that portion?

Bob K

[docone31]

When I first started patching, and I am loading another 50 as we speak, I had gas check castings all ready to load. I got such crappy results with ordinary castings, I wanted to patch. I only had those gas checked castings.
I sized them down to .308, and wrapped. The only issue I had was the feathers from the copper gas checks. I now size castings made for checks, but, I leave the checks off. They wrap and target well.

[bcp477]

I have tested my loads (all smokeless) with twisted tails, flattened (folded over) tails and no paper coverage of the bullet base at all. The best results I have gotten have always been with twisted tails (snipped off and flattened). The worst accuracy, by far, has been with no coverage of the bullet base. So, though I can only surmise the reasons, it is obvious to me that coverage of the bullet base by the patch IS important - and beneficial , at least for smokeless powder loads in my 8 x 57 rifle.

[docone31]

When I snip my tails, I leave enough of the twist that when I size, the ram smears the tail flat without messing up the patch.
So far, so good.
It all works so well for me, I am not changeing it.
I did this time add a slight crimp, or more like it, a squeeze just shy of a real crimp using a Lee FCD. They are going in easier all the time. Some even fall into the powder before crimping.
When I first started loading my new Winchester brass, stretching the neck out to .314, and squeezing it, I was glad I had some resistance on the heel of the casting. I am reasonably sure the pressure of loading might have slid a patch or two. I think that slight resistance helps keep the patch on on loading. I am also fairly sure, the resistance helps keep the patch where it is while it engraves.
Just my thoughts.

[MikeP]

With other forms of bullet making, we are told that one of the most important steps to accuracy is to assure the base of the bullet is flat and perfected. The rationale is that the gasses pushing on the base of the bullet as it departs the barrel will act unevenly with an uneven base, thus pushing the bullet off of a true or repeatable course.

How is this different with twisted or folded paper on the base of a paperpatched bullet?

[docone31]

I have never found a fired tail.
I have a feeling, from what the remnants of tail do with sizing, that when the 40,000 CPU hit the tail, it conforms to the base of the casting pretty flatly! I have loaded with slight tears on the edges of the patch, longer tails, shorter tails, no tails just shards.
As long as the base of the casting is at 90* to the bore, I am reasonably sure the base also does the same.
I have had the tails off center. When sizing, and I am certain the powder pressure does the same thing as the ram on the sizer, It gets flat. I bet the tail does the same thing.

[montana_charlie]

the gasses pushing on the base of the bullet as it departs the barrel will act unevenly with an uneven base, thus pushing the bullet off of a true or repeatable course.

How is this different with twisted or folded paper on the base of a paperpatched bullet?
MikeP,
I am right with you in your rationale. That question seems so fundamentally obvious, I am surprised it isn't asked often.
I can't answer it for you, but I can tell you what I think...

First, if you have tried wrapping some bullets with wet patches, you probably found (as I did) that the paper forms a surprisingly sharp corner where it turns under the base...if the bullet is well-formed to begin with.
Leaving the patch to dry with the weight of the bullet pressing down on the base fold seems to maintain that 'sharp corner' pretty well, and make it permanent.
(of course, the bullets I am dealing with are fat enough to stand up, and heavy enough to press down on the paper...)

When an imperfect bullet base exits from a muzzle, the gasses spew out the 'short side' or 'dented side' or 'rounded side' first...and that kicks the base off line. The imperfection only needs to be a few thousandths 'different' from the rest of the base to have that effect.

I think that if a bullet is 'perfect' when the patch is laid on, the patch will be so 'uniform' that it won't (by itself) cause a bullet to exit poorly. And, assuming the paper starts to peel as soon as it hits the air, there is still a rather 'thick layer' of paper in the bore (the part which covers the base) at the moment when the base of the otherwise-naked-bullet clears the crown.

In other words, the 'base fold' has become nothing more than a 'wad' under the bullet while (if) the rest of the patch has successfully peeled away.

So, gasses spewing out from under a less-than-perfect 'folded paper wad' are not able to spew out...until the bullet (itself) has been on it's way downrange for a thimbleful of nanoseconds.

I ain't saying this is the correct answer to your question, but it's what I suspect...

CM

[docone31]

I think you described my thoughts real well.
I suspect, the sides of the casting along with the barrel makes that corner actually more of a wad. I bet it gets completely severed travelling down the barrel.
I have never recovered one after firing.
If the base of the casting is defective, or less than dead square, then that will make it behave like a dinged bullet.
My .30cals are way too light to stand on end to dry so I rest them in an empty 9mm tray, nose down. The dry patch, the paper is rather tight and conforming. I get good sharp corners on the casting.

[Spector]

I am just starting to get my feet went in paper patching, but his is what I have been doing.

I have a ceramic topped electric stove. After I wet patch and fold the paper in a spiral under my flat based lead bullets I roll the bullets across the biggest burner on my stove. That really shrinks the patch quickly. The wet patched bullet will roll with some effort across the burner. As it drys out it will roll much easier until it eventually rolls very smoothly. Any moisture left in the patch can be seen on the shiny top like breathe on a mirror. I then push the bullet straight down on the burner while twisting it, which irons out the base, making it slick, flat and hard. Then after a trip thorugh the Lee push through sizing die it really takes shape.

Air drying may be better, I don't know. I've been too impatient to wait for them to air dry. ha ha The range is less that 4 miles from my home and when I want to trying something different I quickly patch bullets and then head right to the range...........Mike

[MikeP]

Montana Charlie, thanks for that great and thoughtful explanation. Your logic is clear. It would be interesting to see stop-frame photography of a fired paperpatched bullet.

I have been casting many years but never have done a paperpatch yet, but I'm thinking, I'm thinking. That's the reason I asked the question. Getting good accuracy with the tail of the patch seems so counterintuitive to those of us who use jacketed and cast (with and without gas checks) and have been warned of the need for perfect bases (and, for essentially the same reason, perfect barrel crowns).

[bcp477]

Yes, it certainly would SEEM that a perfectly folded base on a paper patch would be critical for accuracy....and yet, it isn't....at least not in MY rifle (8 x 57, with smokeless powder). As I stated above, the BEST accuracy I've ever gotten with PP bullets is with twisted tails, snipped off and then flattened against a hard surface. In NO way are they uniform, ever. Yet, I get groups of less than 1 inch at 100 yards, when I manage to do my part. Nice, tight, folded over flat PP bases have never produced equivalent accuracy, though it SEEMS that they should be better. We can debate the esoterics all day long...but, in the end, whatever ACTUALLY works best is all that is important. So, I'll just stick with what I have, until something better is PROVEN.

[MikeP]

bcp477, that is comforting information.

One of the big fears I had was inconsistent paper patched tails.

As the saying goes, the proof is in the pudding. The fact that somewhat inconsistent paperpatched tails is not important to good accuracy is good to know. I never could envision how to get perfect tails with a paper patch. Now I know you don't have to.

Thanks.

[RMulhern]

I don't make these up...in a sloppy fashion! Patches are wet wrapped and dried on a warming plate which gives a very flat/folded over base!

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b67/Sharps110/BPCR%20SHOOTING%20RELOADING/IMG_0070.jpg

[bcp477]

Excellent results, FPM....and very nice wrapping job. You are obviously quite skilled. But, can you be SURE that the flat folded base is the actual cause of these results ? The cartridge shown is a 50/90.... is that right ? So, in other words, a BP cartridge. Perhaps SP is more forgiving as regards the configuration of the wrapping (including the base) than BP. Also, as an aside, because the paper thickness to bullet dia. ratio is very different with a 50 cal. bullet, vs. an 8 mm one, it is probably much easier to get nice flat, folded base on your patches, than it would be for me (or for any smaller calibre round). I don't know...nor do any of us, for a certainty. So, as I said, I'll just stick it out with what seems to work for me, until something better presents itself.

Hopefully, when I get my "cast cellulose sabot" project to the point of actually producing usable bullets, I'll see better results. However, I really don't think that I have much chance of getting results better than 1" or less (as I get now), with a cut down 50-plus year old Yugoslav Mauser military rifle, using a 50-plus year old Yugoslav replacement military barrel. Actually, I'm pretty satisfied with things as they stand.

[NSP64]

I twist my tails, dry, JPW, then size with a push through, and the tails flatten. Worked so far on my .270.:drinks:


Why do I fold?................................... Because everyone said to.

[zampilot]

I've folded mine, what else would you do with the patch tail? If I trimmed them they might stay in the bore!! Hope to shoot 'em this week.

[RMulhern]

Excellent results, FPM....and very nice wrapping job. You are obviously quite skilled. But, can you be SURE that the flat folded base is the actual cause of these results ? The cartridge shown is a 50/90.... is that right ? So, in other words, a BP cartridge. Perhaps SP is more forgiving as regards the configuration of the wrapping (including the base) than BP. Also, as an aside, because the paper thickness to bullet dia. ratio is very different with a 50 cal. bullet, vs. an 8 mm one, it is probably much easier to get nice flat, folded base on your patches, than it would be for me (or for any smaller calibre round). I don't know...nor do any of us, for a certainty. So, as I said, I'll just stick it out with what seems to work for me, until something better presents itself.

Hopefully, when I get my "cast cellulose sabot" project to the point of actually producing usable bullets, I'll see better results. However, I really don't think that I have much chance of getting results better than 1" or less (as I get now), with a cut down 50-plus year old Yugoslav Mauser military rifle, using a 50-plus year old Yugoslav replacement military barrel. Actually, I'm pretty satisfied with things as they stand.

bcp477

" But, can you be SURE that the flat folded base is the actual cause of these results?"

The ONLY THINGS I'm certain of is that this country is in a helluva shape economically/politically and one day....I'm gonna die!

But what I'm doing....is working![smilie=1::castmine::drinks:
bcp477

"

[windrider919]

Back when I first started shooting PP I recovered some of the bullets in the family bullet trap (which is a U shaped trough, open at both ends. We use visquene plastic n duc tape to line and close ends then fill with water from the stock tank.) at 50 yards. One of the first things I noticed on CGG bullets was that embossed on the base were imprints of gunpowder grains where the charge was slammed forward on firing. On these perfect bullets you can see how the rifling engraving 'slips' and that the base is swaged out just a thou or so. for the last tenth of an inch of bullet base or so. These were 50% WW and 50% pure lead. When using PP with twisted tails they roll tighter cause the twist keeps the patch pulled around the bullet. but when fired into the trap you could see that the twist was being forced into the base. If it was centered the base 'bump up' was even, but when the tail ended up offset the base would be distorted. When I went to folded over PP the bases are protected and less distorted on firing. Accuracy was signifigantly improved. I also found using a PE wad cut from a milk jug helps with some powders for accuracy, I have no idea why. An example is 5744 works better with a wad than without, go figure?

[montana_charlie]

but when fired into the trap you could see that the twist was being forced into the base. If it was centered the base 'bump up' was even, but when the tail ended up offset the base would be distorted. When I went to folded over PP the bases are protected and less distorted on firing.
That agrees with what I have suspected. I've always assumed the only reason for cupped bases was to make a pocket to curl the tail into...so it couldn't cause so much 'damage'.
CM