-Your accuracy with PP !

[christian]

Hallo again guys.

-What kind of ACCURACY can you people achieve with PP ?!

-It's beyond me why the small differences in the papertwist-TAIL don't ruin accuracy for us..(?)

We all know the bullet-base is the final steering-end, as the bullet exits the barrel.
-Since the twisted tail-end is slightly different from bullet to bullet, this SHOULD play havoc with our accuracy, shouldn't it !?

Always learnin', Chr.

[redneckdan]

I'm assuming the tail gets mushed flat when the powder ignites. I cutting my patches so that there is about an inch handing off the end when the patch is rolled on. I twist the tail and then seat it. My theory is that the extra paper helps protect the base from the hot gases.

[docone31]

I twist my tails, and then size. When they are done, there is a paper cushion on the bottom of the casting rather than any hanging on stuff.
When the castings exit the muzzle, there is a rather pronounced fluff of confetti.
Accuracy?
Better than jacketed for the same load.

[Digital Dan]

MOA +/-1/4 in general, this over a run of about 500 rounds. Did not achieve that standard until I quit twisting tail and went to folded theory with a card wad under. Compressed smokeless load, YMMV.

[pdawg_shooter]

I have always had better luck with twisted rather than folded. I require my paper patched bullets to shoot a least as good as jacketed with the same load in the same rifle.

[bcp477]

I twist tails, then cut them off and flatten them. The patch bases are NEVER uniform, however. Doesn't seem to matter a bit, though, as I get accuracy of 1.5" or better at 100 yards, with my old Yugo M48 sporter (8 x 57 cartridge), with 4x scope. Really, the rifle and load will do better than 1.5"....but I CAN'T do better than that, with any consistency. I have gotten 1" or smaller groups, though....lots of times. I WON'T claim that I can shoot that well with any regularity, though. So, when asked, I just say that the rifle (and load) will "shoot as well as I can, or better".

[Kenny Wasserburger]

No Tails here, a slight over hang and its folded flat and wet patching. Accuracy with a scoped Sharps is Sub MOA, Have the match results to prove it, Regional, National, 5@200. When You shoot against the likes of Doc Keith Lay, Michael Rix, Dan Theodore, Dave Gullo and can beat them even if its only at 800 yards the Last day of the Winter Nats at Phoenix.


I will never fold a tail ever again.

KW
The Lunger

[405]

EXCEPT for the totally unexplained flier every so often :sad: .... maybe 1out of 50+.... PP accuracy in my Montana C Sharps 45-110 with flat bottomed, swaged bullets is .90-.95 @ 100. I shoot a globe front and tang aperture rear.

Since I've never twisted tails wouldn't know how to compare? I leave about 1/8" of bare base in the center after the overlap (wrap over of base edge). Easier to let dry/tighten sitting on the base on a paper plate/cardboard.

[1874Sharps]

For the 100 to 200 yard shooting that I do, twisting the tail and cutting off the pigtail is the way I have been loading. This technique gives good accuracy for my purposes. If I were competing, as Ken W. does, I would at least try his methods and likely switch to them.

[bcp477]

As has been discussed here a thousand times before, folding the patches over to form a flat, even base is FAR, FAR easier with BIG bullets, such as .45's. It's quite another thing with small dia. bullets like 8mm or 30's, though.

[Digital Dan]

Well then, shoot big bullets and don't look back! :)

I'll bet Mr. W. will recognize this photo. Any of the rest of you see the target?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/muddler/1mile4.jpg

Success is hard to argue.............

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/muddler/1mile3.jpg

[JeffinNZ]

How far away are those targets!? I can't even see them.

[montana_charlie]

How far away are those targets!? I can't even see them.
1.609344 kilometers...

[docone31]

Dang!
That is some shootin.

[Digital Dan]

How far away are those targets!? I can't even see them.

Look closely under the right end of the cloud shadow on the right. Just a wee smudge of white there.

I was told it was 63,360 inches.

[docone31]

Dang dude.
My .303 wouldn't even make it that far!
Must feel just GREAT.

[wmitty]

Beautiful country and remarkable shooting! Thanks for posting this!

[Digital Dan]

Got one more here that really blows me away. Tell me what you don't see on the rifle in this picture. Think it might be the same shooter that is centered in the first picture, or at least the same bench.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/muddler/1mile5.jpg

[Don McDowell]

Daslunger don't got no scope on that riflegun.....

[Digital Dan]

Say it ain't true!

[Kenny Wasserburger]

Ahh,

That would be me.

KW

The Lunger

[Digital Dan]

Well, I'd like to thank you for putting that gathering together. Inspiring on many levels. ...........and nice to meet you, even in a round about way.

Dan

[christian]

Hallo Digital Dan.

-So VERY impressive shooting at that distance!
(-Even Mike Quickley in the movie "Quickley down under" can't match that,- I think !)

1. DID you mention ballistics for us ? (-Your caliber, bullet weight, Velocity?)
2. Dan,- do you, or any other of you people, have an idea of penetration-power of the bullet at 1609 meters ?
-It'd be facinating to know!

Thanks to ALL of you for enlightening me of the accuracy potential of PP bullets !

Chr.

[303Guy]

Well, I just happen to have pic of a five shot group fired by windrider with a paper patched 22 centrefire at 100yds. Here it is.

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/100ydPP22.jpg Not too shabby!

[405]

I only shoot PP over black so have no info on smokeless. I shoot most PPs in either a 45-70 Shiloh or 45-110 C. Sharps with globe front and tang aperture rear. I swage bullets ranging in weight from about 400 grains to about 530 grains and paper is cotton. I use FFg Goex with two .030 wads and swab between shots.

Here's four 45-110 targets from the last year or so while tinkering with small changes in load specs. Targets shot at 75 yds. Upper left target is ten shots, the rest are five shots.

[303Guy]

Dang! That's fine shooting! (The whole package - right from casting the primes!) :drinks:

christian, does that 'adequately' answer your question?:roll: :mrgreen:

[christian]

Hallo 303 Guy.

Yes,- this DOES answer my question regarding PP accuracy!

Chr.

[405]

christian,
Yes they can be accurate. Everthing has to be just right. KW and the folks who shoot competition and do a lot of long range experimenting really push the limit with BP and paper patch. Not only do they have to have the best possible bench rest type, tiny group accuracy--- those bullet have to remain stable with the best possible ballistic efficiency and keep the smallest velocity standard deviations all the way out to those extreme distances. That type shooting is the most demanding of all! Think about even a 5-10 swirling breeze!

Interesing to me that I can get the smallest groups with the PP loads but when averaging all groups shot, using the same guns and set up, the average group size for all gas checked/grease groove/smokeless targets are slightly smaller than all paper patch/blackpowder targets. Loading paper patch maybe less forgiving of smaller variations in load technique?? For the shooting I do with these guns/loads I know it works out to 500 yards with the same trends for groups size. I don't know about 1000+.

[rhead]

It is one more place to make a mistake. It also allows to fix minor imperfections. If everything is done right the bullet can be improved.
With smokeless it also allows for a velocity increase, which decreases drop and wind drift at a given distance. The big thing for me is it allows for the downrange bullet performance with a higher velocity.

In short it is another tool, not a cure all.

[Digital Dan]

Hallo Digital Dan.

-So VERY impressive shooting at that distance!
(-Even Mike Quickley in the movie "Quickley down under" can't match that,- I think !)

1. DID you mention ballistics for us ? (-Your caliber, bullet weight, Velocity?)
2. Dan,- do you, or any other of you people, have an idea of penetration-power of the bullet at 1609 meters ?
-It'd be facinating to know!

Thanks to ALL of you for enlightening me of the accuracy potential of PP bullets !

Chr.

Hello Christian,


I was not there at the 1 mile shoot, just have an interest in the endeavor and copy of those photos. I do paper patch a fair bit but most of my use is for hunting. Such loads are giant killers if properly constructed. I would not judge one way or another whether or not PP gives superior accuracy to GG bullets. You can get higher velocity with softer alloys and cleaner aerodynamic form, which provides ballistic advantage.

Mr. Wasserburger was the instigator as I recall and he could probably write a book or three on the pastime if not busy shooting. I have one remaining photo that might answer one of your questions. They won't penetrate steel, but I wouldn't want to try stopping one with my torso. I'm guessing here but think the prevailing caliber at that match was .45. Beyond that I'm clueless.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/muddler/mileshoot0004.jpg

[303Guy]

A high velocity cast boolit will penetrate steel just fine! I think the softer alloy will expand a little more than a J-word, making a slightly bigger hole and will stop penetrating at velocities a little higher than a J-word would as the range increases. Above a certain velocity, the punch through becomes indistinguishable. Niether cast nor jacketed behave the same as armour piercing projectiles. It was a long time ago that I played around with steel penetration and I don't remember the details. I didn't do any kind of tests, just playing around.

[RMulhern]

I shoot steel on a regular basis! This is 3/8" mild steel and those are ten shots from 1000 yards with a 700+ gr. bullet from a .50/90! All they do is splatter and from 100 yards the same thing...no penetration with alloy of 1-16. I don't shoot on 1/4" as all that does is warp the plate....NO PENETRATION!! Maybe 1/8" it might go on through but I doubt it!!



http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b67/Sharps110/BPCR%20SHOOTING%20RELOADING/BPCR%20Groups/68999d9b.jpg

[303Guy]

A soft boolit striking a large steel plate at moderate to low velocity is going to make a lot of noise as the plate absorbs the shock elastically. I have done steel penetration tests with J-words and my hornet and a piece of steel has to be very rigidly supported to allow penetration. A small enough piece of 3/8" steel would bend as well as deform at the point of impact. The impact velocity has to be high enough for the point pressure to cause the steel to rupture before the general mass moves in the direction of impact. I have seen a small piece of 5/8" steel standing on edge being struck by a 300 Win Mag bullet and not fall over! It did wobble a little. A 22LR boolit strike would have sent it flying with zero surface damage. What happens on impact is actually quite complex!

P.S. Those 1000yd groups never fail to wow me! There are multiple high level skills involved in achieving those! I can imagine each component of each round being made and assembled and eventually aimed and fired with such care and precision and skill! Beautiful!
Those pics liven up my day! :drinks:

[charger 1]

I twist my tails, and then size. When they are done, there is a paper cushion on the bottom of the casting rather than any hanging on stuff.
When the castings exit the muzzle, there is a rather pronounced fluff of confetti.
Accuracy?
Better than jacketed for the same load.

Dont you find that if you size with a paper tuff on the end the paper pulls back off the ogive on some?

[docone31]

No, The sizing die I use is Lee Push Thru.
It flattens the remnants of the tail into a nicely compressed paper pillar on the bottom of the casting.
I have 50 that I haven't loaded for over six months, the paper hasn't unravelled, the base has not decompressed.
So far so good.

[Kenny Wasserburger]

These groups were fired last weekend at 200 yards, at the local gun Club.


I find anything less then 200 yards gives you no real clue to accuracy, 75 or 100 yard shooting is not a very good indicator of True Accuracy in my opinion. And no offense to the guys that play at the shorter ranges but if you really want to see if your PP loads are up to snuff. Try em at 200 yards. Invest in a good rest. I have a very good portable Bench Also, made by Royal Stucky, you can google him, they are not Cheap nor is anything of exceptional Quality, Royal makes his Benches over in Powell Wyoming these days.

These groups were actually shot off bench rest Cross sticks my 25 Lb Bull Barrel Shiloh, "DORA"

This sort of accuracy however does not come overnight or easy, there is no free lunch in this game. However these loads are pretty well proven, I was planing on further testing at 1000 yards this weekend but windy conditions plus my working very late Friday night nixed my plans.

This is the Wasserburger .444 Diam PP Money Mould now offered by BACO. Patched to .495-.450 or there abouts. Paper is Seth Cole Tracing paper 8#. Bullet is cast of 1-20 alloy from John Walters, a very good friend of mine.
Rifle is chambered in 45-110 aka the 45-2-7/8ths Sharps cartridge.
Brass:
Norma Case FL sized and annealed chamfered with a 11 deg Jones Chamfer tool.
Primers:
WLR old white box primers with a primer wad inside the case.
Powder:
Charge is 110 Grs of Fg Goex Express compressed about .385.
Wads (3)
A .060 Veg Fiber wad is used to compress the charge with a compression die.
next a .060 poly wad is insertred on top of the veg fiber wad after compression, lastly comes a .091 Cork wad to top off the wad stack.

Patched bullet is inserted .420 into the case.

So Far the only real good test run at 1000 yards was done with Donnie (ranch 13) spotting for me at Alliance Neb back in August.

Accuracy was :shock: to say the least. Roughly 8 shots into a 10 inch or so circle.[smilie=w:[smilie=w:

KW

The Lunger

[charger 1]

No, The sizing die I use is Lee Push Thru.
It flattens the remnants of the tail into a nicely compressed paper pillar on the bottom of the casting.
I have 50 that I haven't loaded for over six months, the paper hasn't unravelled, the base has not decompressed.
So far so good.



I do the exact same but find that as that little column compresses it pulles the paper down a tad on some. Not much, but some

[Don McDowell]

Kenny did you make it down to the ranch for the longrange testing this weekend?
I'm pretty anxiuos to see what you an ol Dora can do once you two get used to each other.

[Kenny Wasserburger]

Don,

I did not, I got home from work 7pm friday night was pretty beat. Woke up at 6 am wind blowing like hell here and checked with the folks, and in Newcastle same story. Stayed home went to the gun show and finished up a bunch of 6.5x55 ammo for myself and brother and nephew, son-inlaw and Daughter. We have quite a few of these rifles in the family now. Gona try while down for Turkey Day.

Dora continues to amaze me, it still requires a tight grip and good hold but recoil is almost nil. Great Rifle and man with proper brass and these .444 bullets sure seem to do quite well.

Fouling control is the real key though I am thinking.

Will Keep you informed.

KW
The Lunger

[leftiye]

Doesn't the wind always blow everywhere in Wyoming?

[Don McDowell]

Yesterday was the pits with the wind. Wasn't bad around noon. Got my 243 fitted with another scope after the inside lenses on the other one started floating around.
Today was nice.
Missed seeing your dad in Cheyenne this past week tell him congrats on the WP award .

Looking forward to the Dora reports..

[303Guy]

... as that little column compresses it pulles the paper down a tad on some.That might depend on how much sizing is taking place. If essencially only the paper is being sized there shouldn't be any paper slippage. Maybe your prime castings are too smooth!;)

Anyway, to find out I took 'cast boolit' that I had single wrap patched and shoved it into my prime casting sizer die. Now this die produces a core with the nose section small enough to patch up to bore diameter and the rear section patches up to over groove diameter. Now this single wrapped boolit was an unsized core ie a normal, smooth sided cast boolit so the it was large. There was a little patch slipping on one side of the nose section and the paper did seem to extrude over the base a little. But, the lead core would have been 'drawn' some by the extent of the sizing. So, I would say that for normal sizing there shouldn't be any paper slip.

I'll reform this same test sample and patch it as a normal sized core and repeat the test and see what happens.

[303Guy]

OK, so I repatched and resized the test boolit. Much to my surprize, the patched boolit would not go all the way into the die! So I ejected it, took a pic and tried a few times more with nose reforming in between. Eventually, I got it all the way into the die and took another pic of it.

Here is the whole sequence;

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-351F.jpg Sized PP boolit.
http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-352F.jpg The other side of it.
One can see how the patched moved on the one side.

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-353F.jpg The bare core.
Turns out I had knurled this one. This one shows where the patched slipped.

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-354F.jpg Mashed back into shape and sized.

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-355F.jpg Repatched (Note how the 'ends meet').

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-356F.jpg Partially sized.

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-357F.jpg Fully sized.

So, firstly, it seems that sizing and swaging lead alloy actually hardens it!

As difficult as it was to size down the repatched and reformed boolit, even though it was smaller after core sizing, the patch did not move. A curiosity here is that the reformed boolit was quite smooth and still had lube on it from the swaging and sizing process. Not visible in the pic is the lead smear removed from the die by the patch surface during sizing! There was actually a shiny spot of lead on the patch which I removed with a finger nail.

I'm not sure how one would interpret these results but I would suggest that it's possible to patch in a way that prevents the patch from slipping during sizing or seating into a sized case neck.

[303Guy]

More pics and results.

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-359F.jpg The repatched and sized boolit core.

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-358F.jpg The unravelled patch.

The curious thing is that these patches are normally quite difficult to remove from the core but after sizing like that the patch didn't take much to just unravel.

Patch thicknesses;
fresh paper 0.07mm (.0028"); inner wrap 0.06mm (.0024"); outer wrap 0.05mm (.002").

This leads me to wonder whether sizing the patched boolit actually assists with the releasing of the patch on exiting the muzzle? (If so then sizing the patch boolit can only be beneficial!)

Another curious thing - see how the original spiral impressions from the original core have imprinted on the repatch even though these are not visible on the reformed core!

[405]

Thanks for posting thoughts and pics of the process. Interesting looking bullets you're shooting there. I use bullets that start out at a diameter that once patched they have met my objective so I don't size them after patching. I know some here do to get their final bullet diameter down to the smaller, objective (better) diameter. I can see where sizing the PP bullet would release any bond that exists between bullet and patch. In the end, the real question would be, does it help accuracy?

I'll have to try it sometime but have my doubts about how much can be done without hurting accuracy... I'd think at some point, sizing would start distortng the bullet itself. Taking a PP down from say .452-3 to .450 may be OK?

[redneckdan]

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b77/redneckdan/IMGP3921.jpg

At 50yds prone with a sling.

CZ-550 in .375 H&H NEI 375-304 sized down to .369" and wrapped twice with tracing paper and lubed with JPW. Powder charge is 22.5gr of Blue Dot over a standard rifle primer.

[Kenny Wasserburger]

50 yards?:groner:

Ok Just what does that tell you? Not much in my book. I dont mean to offend but thats pretty much usless Data for anyone, shooting smokless to BP.

Group is what .630 to .70 or so give or take say 1.2 to 1.3 MOA?

The below group was shot at 200 yards, in a steady 4-5 Mph Tail wind.

Black Powder 45-110 518 gr PP bullet.

The Load has yielded a 96-4X at 800 yards in a National Match at Raton NM 2008.
Also won the 800 yard Match at Phoenix this year against all comers Day two Winter nationals 93-4X, Score is a mater of record. Had me tied in a 3way tie after 900 for First place that day, I won Expert Class and was Scope champion for the Match.

Set a world Record (now Beat) of 1.336 inches at 200 yards at Raton in 2007.

Shoot that load at 200 yards then show us how accurate it is :violin: based on what I am seeing looks to be a 3.75 to almost 4 inch group at 200 yards.

I currently do not own a rifle that shoots that bad.


And Again its no offense, I own 3 CZ rifles my 6.5x55 FS Lux runs 1/2 inch at 100 and my 22 Hornet runs around .6 inch at 100 yards at 200 both shoot every day under a 3/4 MOA Group. My 22 mag I do test at 50 yards to find the best ammo and it shoots coverleafs that run less then the 2's .2 inch with iron sights.

Please, then we have some real world Data to compare too.

Get rid of the twisted tails and I bet your accuracy will improve.

KW

The Lunger

[303Guy]

Aah, but Kenny , do remember that most of us are mere mortals who can only dream of such achievements! (But it is great to be able to 'chat' with you masters!:drinks:)
As a beginner I can only say that the chances of a decent 200yd group can only exist if one can first get them to group at 50.;-) But I take on board what you are saying. I had some 'promising' results at about 40yds that went south at 180yds! (And did they only go South!:mrgreen:) If I had time I would repeat what I did to try to discover what caused the failure. As it is, I can only speculate.

P.S. It looks like that 'steady' tail wind wasn't all that steady!

[redneckdan]

50 yards?:groner:

Seeing as how I usually don't get done with class and work til sometime after 10pm most days, I'm limited to the 25yds availible to me indoors, especially if I am doing chronograph work.

This time I got home with about 30 minutes of day light to spare so I went just down the road to the nearest mine tailings dump, that has just over 50yds availible.






Shoot that load at 200 yards then show us how accurate it is :violin: based on what I am seeing looks to be a 3.75 to almost 4 inch group at 200 yards.




The OP asked what kind of results people were getting, I posted up pictures of what I am getting.

Thats all I'm after right now. Considering your predictions, this load should be minute of elk out to 450-500yds....though 1700fps is a mite slow for such long shots.

Someday I'd like to have the luxury of enough time to screw around milking the last tenth of an inch from a cartridge/rifle combination, but I don't have that kind of time right now.

[montana_charlie]

Thats all I'm after right now. Considering your predictions, this load should be minute of elk out to 450-500yds...
Speaking of '50-yard groups' as a topic of conversation...and not directed toward redneckdan.

A smoothbore musket might be capable of dependable head shots at fifty yards.
At 75 or 100, it might be able to hit a man-sized target reliably. But, at 400-500, it would probably be doing well to hit a troop formation...three times out of five.

A small fifty yard group from a rifle can be worth bragging about.
If the shooter was lucky to keep five shots on a grocery bag when he started development...and worked his way down to a silver dollar group, he can't be blamed for patting himself on the back.

But, he still needs to find out if the load holds up at 'real rifle distances' before he assumes he might see minute of elk at 400...or even 200.

An analogy...
When a guy spends a lot of time putting a fresh edge on his favorite firewood axe, he may feel like it's ready for the woods. But, he doesn't learn much about the quality of his edge if he tests the tool on a handy chunk of balsa wood.

CM

[barrabruce]

I doubt if I could shoot that smaller groups that the Experts post here with a "laser"
At those long distances.

The wind /mirage drop and all that technical stuff.

I'm more of a hunter type shooter and try practice more shootin style than actually bench rest styles.

50 yrds can be a long way to see in the dense scrub.
Plenty if you are a good hunter/stalker


Mind you I'm just saying that to justify my inadequacy to get bug hole groups and to reasure my battered ego when I am tickled if I have a nice smuttering that coulda filled the freezer or put the real hurt on something.
Sometimes just scaring a empty coke can at 200 yrds is the highlight of my day out.

Barra
Slinking back under the cover of the snags now and peeking out.

[725]

Way to go redneckdan! I'm impressed with a realman rifle sling prone shot like yours. Keep up the good work. I'm too old and fat to wiggle down into the classic rifleman's, unsupported position anymore. Shows good skills at both shooting and loading. Sad to say, I'm just either a standing off-hand sling shooter or on a bad day, a bench supported & sand bagged rifle banger.

[Zeek]

I, too, prefer doing most of my workups at 50 yards. My rifle range gets a way-squirrelly wind beginning around 1 pm most days, and it plays hell with discerning actual load performance if your target is at 100 yards. However, at 50 yards, good loads make small groups and poor loads can seldom fool you. That's good enough for me.
Regards, Zeek

[Digital Dan]

I think Mr. Wasserburgers' point may not have been seen by some. I will, in my feeble way, try to help.

50 yard accuracy is useful at that range, but says nothing about long range potential, or even at mid range. I zero one of my rifles at 10 yards and use it regularly at that range, +/- a yard or two. It shoots bug holes there, 1/2" at fifty yards and I'm clueless beyond that distance. I don't concern myself that it is not a long distance piece or speculate about that element...ever. It has NO potential at long range...period. Doubt it would shoot a 6" group at 100 yards to tell the truth. However, it is very hard on wild hogs in the swamps and close timber. That Hoot & Holler load would do the same.

Mr. Wasserburger is mortal too, but applies proven techniques to his patch work and offers tips free of charge. Twisted tails....not for long range work, whether you like it or not. Solution is simple, regardless of your available time: Don't twist tails. Adjust your patch size accordingly and fold the short skirt over the base. It works for both smokeless and BP loads. You might be surprised how easy it is to do this once it's tried...not requiring more time than currently necessary. Wet a patch with water and let it dry on a bullet...have faith....you won't need glue. I promise. Match your bullet size to the bore dimensions and likewise your paper choice, you'll be amazed at how simple this stuff gets and how effective it becomes. Avoid sizing when you can and especially if you require LR accuracy. Especially avoid a lot of dimensional change when you have to size. Bullet distortion is fatal to long range accuracy. Above all, spend a little time thinking about what you wish to accomplish. The formula has already been worked out, 99.9% of the time.

Keep another point in mind about smokeless vs. BP paper patch. Although there are many exceptions, BP cartridges are generally straight wall designs. Most smokeless cartridge cases are bottle neck designs. Both can be loaded effectively with paper patch, but they do not cross over well with different types of powder. Not saying it can't be done, just that it's not always going to be your happiest day. Recall my comment above about Pope and his rifles? He paper patched and shot some very small groups with smokeless out around 200 yards. Can still be done today if you don't wander too far off the beaten path.

Lesson there is this: Odds against anyone coming up with an idea that has not been tried is nil. Look at what works and invest your time there, unless you like learning curves with a very shallow slope. Thinking this is a good site, I enjoy it a lot. Good people all around. It is a good source of information and I'd urge those prone to debate against proven methodology to reconsider their motivation. No harm in trying to reinvent the wheel, but one should understand the effort will likely be folly.

Dull Dan

[303Guy]

I thought that to be a well worded and wise post, Digital Dan.

I must confess I like to go off the beaten track a bit just for the view! [smilie=1:
I also like to try to find that beaten track without a map at times - remember how our kids used to say to us, "Don't show me I want to do it"?:mrgreen:


You might be surprised how easy it is to do this once it's tried...True!


Wet a patch with water and let it dry on a bullet...have faith....you won't need glue. I promiseMmm .... I struggled for a while and found I needed a dab of glue on the tail corner. I found I couldn't run the paper through the printer - it went skew, wouldn't feed, ripped and twisted in the printer and jammed it up.

Then my son used that pad for writing his notes so I got another one. Different make of paper and suddently I can print it and wet 'roll crimp' the skirt and don't need glue!

Sometimes we should actually blame the tools!:roll:
It was the paper all along![smilie=b:

[montana_charlie]

It was the paper all along![smilie=b:
You may have been rolling with the grain...instead of across it.
CM

[303Guy]

You may have been rolling with the grain...instead of across it.Quite possible. I just ran a test and the a cut lengthways on the sheet simply lost its skirt when I tried to 'fold crimp' it. This was with an A4 sheet that came from the pad that wouln't feed in the printer reliably. I next cut a patch from the paper that seemd to need glue - A5 notepad. I changed the direction of cut. This paper took longer to wet and the tail corner took more 'ironing' with the plastic ruller to stay stuck down but otherwise the skirt 'fold crimped' just fine. So it seems the A5 pad has the grain at right angles to A4 pads. I was not using the 'ironing' with a ruler trick at the time I thought glue was needed.

So, two lessons;
One - make sure of the grain direction and don't just assume it runs lengthways on the page!:oops:
Two - think ouside the circle!:killingpc

[montana_charlie]

Twisted tails....not for long range work, whether you like it or not. Solution is simple, regardless of your available time: Don't twist tails. Adjust your patch size accordingly and fold the short skirt over the base.
I read that while realizing qite a few (here) are twisting tails.
If you get the results you want...at the range you shoot...there may be no inclination to change.

But, a guy on another forum just postd pictures of his 'first attempt', and showed some of his patch particles...and some of his bullets. I grabbed the 'bullets' to stick into this conversation.

We all (most, anyway) agree that a good bullet base is necessary for good accuracy. Anything that compromises the base is going to have an aerodynamic effect. Enough distortion will show at short range, but small amounts can cause long range 'fliers'.

This shows the imprint made by folding the patch over the base. Unless you have recovered examples to look at, you just have to imagine the 'damage' done by a twisted tail mashed into a
flat-based bullet.
CM

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

[Digital Dan]

Charlie,

That my friend is a very telling photo, thanks. I do agree with your thoughts twisted tails...if they work don't fix it. If I was not clear on my views; rise first to the level required. When you strive to extend your reach these fine points that influence external ballistics will become apparent. Sometimes, stuff happens I have no answer for....leaving my wife equally speechless. Try it if you want, mebbe it'll tickle your fancy!

[Zeek]

Well, I just happen to have pic of a five shot group fired by windrider with a paper patched 22 centrefire at 100yds. Here it is.

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/100ydPP22.jpg Not too shabby!
Would you please give all the specifics for that 22 centerfire PPCBoo load, including CBoo alloy, cartridge (not caliber!), loaded LOA, CB name/#, rifle make, MV, powder & charge, etc.?
Thanks! This is the first time that I have seen evidence that such performance is possible from 22 centerfire cartridges.
Bless you,
Zeek

[Marlin Junky]

Yeah, I'm with Zeek... at least let us know whether those tails were twisted or folded! :-)

MJ

[303Guy]

That pic was posted by windrider. I shall PM him to ask.

[303Guy]

Good heavens! This thread has had 2000 visits already! Clearly it is of great interest to many folks.:drinks:

[lwknight]

This has been a delightful read.
I cannot even pretend to know anything about PP'ing or BP rifles for that matter.
I'm wondering, if in the long rangeshoots, the trajectory is affected when the boolit goes transonic ( drops out of warp) at distance. 22 shooters found that sub sonic ammo was better at 50+ yards due to the transonic effect on the cheap bullet bases.

Question/idea: If the boolit bases are all important and 50 yards does not prove out a load, could it be that the distance actually proved the boolits ability to remain stable during the subsonic transition.

I plan to load PP for my 38-55 soon and its a fairly slow load anyway. Thats why I have such an interest in this and can come up with some off the wall questions.

In theory, at supersonic speed, the compression wave leaves a void of dead space behind and around the trailing part of the boolit. So I would think that the base or anomolies of the paper would be less significant than subsonic boolits.

I already know that I'm rambling in what I don't know what I'm talking about but, I'm trying to get an idea together.

[303Guy]

lwknight

I like your thinking and enquiring! I've come to suspect that the 38-55 is a premium PP candidate.

Due to my inability to get out to the range and do some serious testing, I have spend a lot of time just reading and chatting and playing around with the actual application of the patch and I like to think I have made some progress.:roll: (I have also spent a little time making molds and patch application tools).

I have derived a lot of pleasure in the success and trials of those who can get to the range. So, .... I wish you all the best (and soonest [smilie=1:)! :mrgreen:

P.S. I feel that I have only just scratched the surface. But what fun that has been so far!

[303Guy]

How about this snippet.


At that point, their loads were at match accuracy. I note that Ed Harris, on the CBA website, stated these PPCB were equal to government match ammo and he then used them in regularly scheduled 1000yd competition.

[405]

This has been a delightful read.
I cannot even pretend to know anything about PP'ing or BP rifles for that matter.
I'm wondering, if in the long rangeshoots, the trajectory is affected when the boolit goes transonic ( drops out of warp) at distance. 22 shooters found that sub sonic ammo was better at 50+ yards due to the transonic effect on the cheap bullet bases.

Question/idea: If the boolit bases are all important and 50 yards does not prove out a load, could it be that the distance actually proved the boolits ability to remain stable during the subsonic transition.

I plan to load PP for my 38-55 soon and its a fairly slow load anyway. Thats why I have such an interest in this and can come up with some off the wall questions.

In theory, at supersonic speed, the compression wave leaves a void of dead space behind and around the trailing part of the boolit. So I would think that the base or anomolies of the paper would be less significant than subsonic boolits.

I already know that I'm rambling in what I don't know what I'm talking about but, I'm trying to get an idea together.

I've watched bullets in flight go squirrely just about the time (range), according to ballistics computers, that they drop thru the sonic/subsonic transition. Full explanation of that or even if it is a true cause-effect relationship is beyond me.

To proclaim however that for long range shooting the only group size that means anything is some arbitrary range (usually decided by the proclaimer) is folly. To say that 50 or 100 yard groups mean nothing for shooting at 300 yards seems folly. If the gun/load shoots 5" or 7" groups at 50 or 100 yards then there is no way it will shoot anyway but poorly at 300. If the gun/load shoots 15" groups at 300 there is no way it will shoot anyway but poorly at 500..... and so on. The only absolute valid test in the end, is at the range that is shot. If the Holy Grail for so and so shooter is 1000 yards (seems to be an elitist threshold for long range braggin' rights) then the VALID group is at 1000 yards- not some arbitrary range, be it 100 or 200 or 300 yards.

[1874Sharps]

There is something to the phenomenon of the subsonic transition. At subsonic speeds air acts as an incompressible fluid and at supersonic speeds it acts as a compressible fluid. The transition between the two can be somewhat violent (just ask a Naval Aviator who has flown supersonic jets). For those who shoot bullets or boolits that remain supersonic their entire flight it is not an issue. However it is a factor if the boolit goes through this transonic state. That is why a load can shoot well out to several hundred yards (say for example, a 45-70) but then have substantial accuracy degradation after the transition. I cannot even attempt to explain all of the aerodynamic and other forces at work, but it is true. I am not disagreeing with statements in other posts, but rather giving a different angle.

[Kenny Wasserburger]

405.

Brings up A good point, Recently testing loads with .446 patched to .451 and .444 patched to .4955 bullets in the same rifle, my 25 Lb Sharps, found at 200 yards a slight advantage in group size with the .446 bullet. Both loads shot sub MOA groups at that yardage.

Took said load to my 1000 yard range ( I know I am an elitist)[smilie=1: and the load shot about a 5 foot vertical grouping. Death for a Long Range comp load. I often test out loads at 200 yards as a bare minium for load work up. The best at that range get further testing at 600 to 800 yards. Or just 1000 if they show good potential. My reasons for 200 yards this also gives one good clues as to how well the load will hold up in wind and conditions. This is not cojecture on my part but years of shooting long range and testing said loads from 100 to 1000 yards. So things do not SEEM to me I know them from years of practice and testing. A good yard stick is 200 yards in conditions, however its not the acid test for final loads used. 800 is my favorite test range as one can get a good feel for accuracy for Long range Creedmoor style shooting.:???: Golly that might explain the majority of my Medals are at 800 yards8-).

However I have seen 45-70 loads that shot excellent scores at 800 yards not even hit the 1000 yard target. Again years of match shooting and actual experience are what I draw upon to make that Statement it does not seem to me that happenes I actually have seen that happen at my own Range in a Match.

I am always glad to share my own hard earned lessons. I also sign-post with my actual given name. So folks can see I don't hide behind a moniker or handle.

As one friend points out it aint braging if you actually can do it and do, do it on a regular basis.:mrgreen:

And I have a gun safe full of Big gold medals from National Championships that can back up my Elitist Claims, 1 real big one that says National Champion on it.[smilie=1:[smilie=1:[smilie=1:


Folks that share hard earned facts-information then are labeled elitists, are done so by very small minded people.

KW
The Lunger
Elitist ect ect ad nausum.:-D:-D:-D

[Don McDowell]

Bullet style/shape/design plays a huge roll. And yes put me down in the 50 yd thing is fun, but useless if you shoot further than 100.
I tested some bullets that were supposed to be the greatest thing ever invented shoot tiny groups to 1000. Well they did shoot good at 100 yds, not so hot at 200 and by the time they got to 300 they were spread about a foot, and about 1/3 of them hit the target sideways, at 450 IF you got one on target it landed sideways, or left an extremely oblong hole.
Have experienced this with a couple different bullets, so yup if you don't ever intend to shoot further than 100 yds , 50 works fine, but a person really needs to test the bullets and loads at the furthest distance you may ever want to shoot them.

[lwknight]

I always thought that boat tail J's were a hoax for supersonic rifles . It makes some sense that they might do better at long ranges by surviving the transonic zone.
Has anyone tried boat tail cast?

[Lead pot]

Yes.


http://i704.photobucket.com/albums/ww43/Kurtalt/IMG_0265.jpg

[303Guy]

Yes.And? There is a great deal of suspense this end!:mrgreen:

Lead pot, I have just been thinking along those lines for reasons of avoiding boolit base deformation on firing. Also seems like a good way to keep mold edge defects away from critical areas.

Kenny, that's not bragging, it's simply telling us about it. And very interesting it is too! Especially since you are able to confirm or dispell speculations. I can't speak for others but for me, knowing there are real live folks out there who actually do these incredible feats and are willing to talk us about it is inspiring. For starters, you make me realize it is possible so now I know that whatever I may strive for is not pie in the sky - it can be done. (Maybe not by me but that's OK - someone is doing it).

[Lead pot]

I been working with this bullet for a couple years on and off with a black powder load and I really haven't found a good enough way to protect the base from getting hammered when the charge goes off.
I been shooting it with a B-Wax base wad and a patch folded into the cup base and the bottom of the bullet base covered with graphite so the wax dont stay with the bullet.
It has very good potentials but I still get some bad dirt diggers.
Or just plain wheat flour compressed slightly when seating the bullet over a card and lube wad plus a card over the compressed powder which shoots good and the recovered bullet shows that the base is protected pretty good doing this, but the pain loading this is not worth the effort from the down range results over a regular patched bullet.
But then I haven't shot it past 200 yards to really see the full potential of a rebated boat tail bullet that don't show up at close range.


Kurt

[RMulhern]

A .45 caliber bullet fired with BP may shoot 'bug-holes' at 50 yards.....and at 300 yards it may not stay on the wall of an OUTHOUSE!!

I know! Been there....done that years ago!!

[phatman]

Hello,

I've been lurking here for about a year and this is my first post!

Leadpot,
I have read that there are problems with the boat tail boolits when using black powder. But how do you think you boolit will perform with smokeless in a 458 Win Mag?

303Guy,
I have followed your adventures in PP and have learned a great deal with the excellent pictures you have posted. Thankyou

John

[Lead pot]

John,

I have no idea what a .458 BT lead bullet would do with smokeless powder, I have never shot smokeless in my Sharps or High Wall's.
The Marlin's I use smokeless with swaged jacketed flat base bullets I make because of the Micro groove bore.
At the ranges you would shoot the .458 Win with a BT or rebated boat tail bullet wouldn't show any improvement over a flat base unless you are shooting at a very long range with it.
But even then I couldn't say for sure because I never shot one past 200 yards.
At this time since the last snow I have 20 RBT bullets in a bank to see how different base protection is working and I stopped the patch at the point where the rebate starts instead folding it under, but none were shot with smokeless powder.

Kurt

[Red River Rick]

405.

Brings up A good point, Recently testing loads with .446 patched to .451 and .444 patched to .4955 bullets in the same rifle.................

KW
The Lunger
Elitist ect ect ad nausum.:-D:-D:-D

KW:

There's something wrong with this equation....................

I'm not trying to be a stick in the mud..............but, could you clarify this?

Season's Greetings!
:drinks:

RRR

[1874Sharps]

Red River Rick,

I must think KW made a typo and meant to write .449 instead of .4955.

[Red River Rick]

1874Sharps:

No doubt, it probably is a typo. But, one never knows with these guys. Maybe this is some new way to get maximum bullet fit! Self "SWAGING"!

RRR