PDA

View Full Version : Paper patching sensitivities



Black Jaque Janaviac
02-12-2009, 11:29 AM
I would like to read some discussion on what you fellas learned about the sensitivites of paper patching. Such as what sorts of things really affect the accuracy of a paper patched bullet.

Personally, the one big thing I learned was to use enough powder. For some reason 100% load densities work best, in my experience.

What have you fellas learned as far as things like: seating depth, paper type, neatness of wrapping job, crimp, lube, how far down on the ogive you wrap, or anything else I may be overlooking?

docone31
02-12-2009, 11:49 AM
This will be a good thread.
First, there are two schools here. Black Powder and Smokeless patching.
I do smokeless patching. Both my .303 British, and .308 rifles do better with patched loads than jacketeds. As far as paper, they do not seem to be all that picky. I have used Meade Traceing Paper, unlined printer paper, and lined notebook paper. Mostly today, I use unlined printer paper. I have lots on hand. I also use a cigarette roller to roll my patches. I lay them on soaking wet, and they roll damp when I take them out. Real tight wraps, even if there is a wrinkle in the wrap.
Sizing, I have found that light application of a wax such as Turtle Wax for cars, or JPW, lightly works better than heavy coatings. It seems the heavier coatings drag in the die and shift the patch.
In terms of height in wrapping. It does not seem to matter to the rifles I wrap for. Low, high, they all shoot the same.
I have not yet tried wrapping bore sized castings. I use castings for the caliber intended, then size the lube lands down, then wrap.
I have loaded long tails, snipped tails, torn tails. So far, I have not noticed a difference.
Sure got a clean bore though!
No paper rings so far, confetti on firing, better shot placement than jacketed loads.
Hmmmm.
This will be a good thread. I am certain it will show the diversity of techniques producing good results. Lots of choices here.

John Boy
02-12-2009, 12:15 PM
What have you fellas learned as far as things like: seating depth, paper type, neatness of wrapping job, crimp, lube, how far down on the ogive you wrap, ...
BJJ - the variables are like a box of chocolates!
Seating depth - so the ogive is engraved about an 1/8th of an inch
Paper - 25 or 100% cotton or what ever so the double wrap is 0.001 to 0.002 over bore diameter and bore diameter for smokeless
Wrap neatness - so the top edges of the patch are even!
Crimp - I don't. Just finger seat
How far to wrap - so no lead on the ogive touches the bore - only the paper. A Must: Determine your bore and groove diameter
Also, some folks lube their paper and others don't. It's what your specific rifle likes.

rhbrink
02-12-2009, 12:39 PM
Boy o Boy this should be great, I've been watching this paper patch thing for a while and am about ready to jump in. This will probably push me over the edge! Bring on the info!

pdawg_shooter
02-12-2009, 02:22 PM
I too have found 100%, or as near as possible works best. I size the as cast bullet .001/.015 over BORE diameter. I patch with 16# paper, clip the tail, lube and size as large as will chamber freely. I hand roll on a rubber patching block and try my darnest to make all patches uniform. NEVER let the ends overlap on the final wrap. Patches should be far enough forward on the bullet to engrave the rifling when chambered. When shooting for accuracy I use unsized brass. I cut my patches 10 at a time on a paper cutter using a 60* angle on the cuts.

Black Jaque Janaviac
02-12-2009, 02:40 PM
I thought it might be a good idea for a thread, but I can see it will need a little "management & direction". What I was hoping for was anecdotes about things you've found that destroy or improved accuracy. NOT just a description of your methods.

In my particular case I learned that when I could hear powder shaking about in the case the bullets sprayed all over the place. When I reached 100 % density the groups shrank to something satisfactory.

PDAWG,


NEVER let the ends overlap on the final wrap.

Is this something you've learned makes a big difference in accuracy? Or is this just a practice you employ in making boolits?

John Boy,

Are the things you mentioned specifically things you learned will affect accuracy? What happened when you didn't seat to engrave?

Docone,

It sounds like in your experience paper patched boolits are not finicky at all.

docone31
02-12-2009, 03:25 PM
I have only noticed finicky on undersized patches.
My thoughts on that,
I am sizing my castings larger than what is considered prototypical. Pdawg, whith whom I respect his patching, sizes .001 to .0015 over bore. My castings are .001 over bore, and, the lands are .007 over that. I then size to groove.
I have not recovered a fired round, yet. I am guessing, the larger primary sizing, then wrapped is produceing a finished patched casting different than the others are.
In a patched casting, .001 over bore, the rifleing lands will be pushing the paper into the casting. With mine, once again, I believe, the rifleing swages the prime casting into shape. I am getting more lead into the rifleing grooves insulated by paper than the other techniques.
With my patches, I have under lapping, over lapping, and in general everything inbetween. I was even, at one time in this venture wrapping them upside down! I was starting the patch at the base, in open air essentially, then the patch would finish with the ending tip easily exposed. It wasn't untill I saw a photo on this forum that I saw what I was doing. Like DUH!
I have found paper patching the most forgiveing of the techniques I have tried including loading jacketeds. Accuracy is way above par.
My thoughts are, the cigarette roller makes a real tight wrap. That, and the sizing makes a good fit. The confetti I have recovered is symmetrical. No tears, it all is sharply cut. It is no longer white which shows me it is in contact with the bore. My feelings, with my sizing technique is it is more gasketing a casting, then makeing a jacket. This could be why my results have been as good for me as they have.
My .303 British for example grooves out at .312, not .311. The bore is .304, not .303. My casting drops .304 on the nose portion and .312 at the lands. I size this to .308 and then wrap two wraps of printer paper. I let dry, wax, and size to .314. To date, I have not been able to seat the casting far out enough to lightly engage the rifleing before firing. There is significant jump. I do not know that this does not loosen the patch between unfired, and fired when it reengages in the barrel itself. Might not happen, but I have wondered. My thoughts are, I do have more lead in diameter entering the barrel. Almost like sizing a lead casting, only I have paper also involved.
I hope this makes sense. I still have great adventures in my mind trying to understand why I got the results I did. I have some castings from another member that I have not tried yet. They are a good looking design that is directly sized .302 for my .30s. Since the primer supply has gone through so many changes I have only experimented in terms of accuracy, and changes I have made to triggers, sights, scope mounts etc. One day, I will try what Pdawg does. It will be interesting to have comparisons against what I am already getting.

pdawg_shooter
02-12-2009, 03:45 PM
Letting the ends overlap distorts the bullet. The groups really open up when that happens. A small gap (.010/.020) between ends doesent hurt. And yes this is experience talking. I have been patching since the 70s and I bet there isnt a mistake I havent made.

Black Jaque Janaviac
02-12-2009, 05:30 PM
Letting the ends overlap distorts the bullet. The groups really open up when that happens. A small gap (.010/.020) between ends doesent hurt. And yes this is experience talking. I have been patching since the 70s and I bet there isnt a mistake I havent made.

OK. That's what I wanted to read. That's interesting because I've read from various sources that wrinkled boolits don't affect accuracy. So I never figured that an overlapped patch end would be any worse. Although I think I noticed an accuracy improvement when I culled lightweight boolits.

docone31
02-12-2009, 06:33 PM
Well, look at it this way.
You just got new tires. You have a long trip. One of them is way off balance.
Same with paper patching.
The closer to perfection before the charge is ignited, the more able for other factors to work together.
A simple wrinkle displaces something, an overlap the same. On the same token, I routinely seat patched loads with overlap, wrinkle here or there. Bear in mind though, I am not using a casting that is full length bore sized.
The rpm, will magnify anything out of spec. Hence, tumbling, wild POI, it all must work together. The closer to perfect, the less variables to tune. That said, I also routinely load overlap patches. I am wondering if the oversize prime castings compensate for those differences. At least I have not noticed weaknesses there.

pdawg_shooter
02-13-2009, 09:11 AM
If you have 2 layers of paper on most of the bullet and 3 layers on part of the bullet it will be out of round when it exits the bore. With bare bullets an out of round bullet is sized round by the bore. Twenty some inches and 50,000psi make one heck of a sizing die!

montana_charlie
02-13-2009, 01:44 PM
NEVER let the ends overlap on the final wrap.Is this something you've learned makes a big difference in accuracy? Or is this just a practice you employ in making boolits?
It's simple logic.
First, you want the bullet to be as concentric with the bore as you can make it...with any kind of bullet.

If your paper is .002" thick and one small area has three layers, the bullet is .002" off center in the case neck, and .002" off-line with the bore before you even shoot.

Then, with the bullet inside the bore and being obtruded to fill the space, the center of mass will be off to one side by .002".

If that doesn't make a wobbly football, I can't think of a better way.

A guy who wants precision in his shooting will go to great lengths to ensure precision in his hold, his sight picture, and even the amount of powder in his cases.
Why not exert the same kind of precision when wrapping the paper on...even if you CAN'T see any difference on a target?

CM