The Rest Of Us

[Zeek]

Recently, somebody (303Guy?) indicated that the best PPCBoo approach is to patch clear over both the drive band and nose portions, such that no part of the lead touches the barrel. Actually, if it was 303Guy, he can and does do that regularly because his tapered PPCBoo cores HAVE no nose . . . the patched-up boolit assembly fits the long taper of his SMLE's leade cone. His point, which is well taken, is that this prevents leading, even a hint of which really messes with the accuracy of subsequent shots, even if their load and PPCBoo are ideal for that rifle ~~~> they just won't shoot for sour owl sweat until the lead is removed.
I think that is an admirable way to go, for most older military rifles, with their typically-gentle leade cone (the 30-06's steeper leade angle notwithstanding). BUT, you simply cannot apply that approach to the making of PPCBoos for modern short-cylinder-then-the-3-degree-inclangle-leade throating unless you can find a Loverin CBoo to do it on. The long nose of your typical rifle-type CBoo WILL NOT CHAMBER if you add a 2X wrap of paper. Most such CBoos as-cast nose diameter is close to Ideal (yes, all puns are intended), as-is, for the desired bore-riding nose fit.
I ran into that issue today, at the range with my 308W Rem-788 bolt rifle and L311335 (205 gr semi-point, with a 2X20# patch on the bands only and the nose bumped to a nice fit at 0.302" diameter). The core boolit was 12 Bh (air cooled WW+Sn alloy) sized 0.307, wrapped, then sized (after the patch dried) to 0.309". I was getting smallish groups at ~2100 fps using AA-2495 with a compressed corn meal topper/filler. Recognizing the the corn meal increased pressure a bit, I tried one grain more of AA-2495 but with no CM. It went WAAAY-WILD for five shots. It would then not shoot my prior accuracy load (from ten minutes prior) at all well until I ran two fire laps (400 grit) and around ten more PPCBoo rounds. Then, suddenly, it would shoot my nice CM load again.
I figure that the cause was leading of the land tops, with the no-CM load. I did NOT have the option of patching the nose to prevent its touching the land top. Of course, I could buy a semi-Loverin mould (the NEI 0.308-152-GC {#50}), but that won't help address the how-to-shoot-two-diameter-PPCBoos problem. Suggestions?
Regards, Zeek

[303Guy]

Thanks for the insight, Zeek. I find that to be quite revealing.

Well, I have been experimenting with patching to a bore-ride config with a patch bore-ride section. All my tests have deen done in my firing tube - no range tests. (Every week-end something happens .... :( Ahhh well .... ). I had been hoping to report back quite a while ago.

I have two throat sizes I am patching for; the one has a bore sized - umm .... well ... bore! The other one has a much larger than bore, bore section of throat i.e. the bore is tapered. I had quite a job getting the patch to 'confetti'. The alloy needs to be soft enough and the pressure rise fast enough to pressure the boolit core against the patch right up to the nose radius.

The other throat requires the casting to be sized to a two diameter such that the patched boolit nose section rides the bore. This one is intended to shoot at full house velocities with slow powder. I forget now but I thing the patch 'confettied'. I'll have to do some test tube tests for this thread. Not sure when I'll get to the range again. I know I'll be working this coming weekend - that sucks!:???: I figure if the PPCBoo doesn't work in the test tube it will not work on the range but if it does work in the test tube, it might work on the range.

[303Guy]

Here's one that did not work in the test tube.

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-597F.jpg Both wraps survived.

And one that was beginning to work.

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-605F.jpg Only the inner wrap survived.

Success. On the right is patch and rag debris.

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-620F.jpg Confetti!

[barrabruce]

Have you tried to fold a cig paper so the neck section is one layer and the base two layers???

I have had some of my best groups that way.

Sized the core to 0.302-0.303 then wrapped end up with 0.3095 base - 304 nose. or about that.
For 30-30.

I'm not getting bench rest accuracy out of them thou.

That way I can wrap a lee 170 grn to just touch the lands and seat above the neck base.

I'm still working on it thou.
When our range opens up again I'll have a nother go at patching.

I may have to start them in the throat / lands to get better than about 1 1/2 " at 100 or 4-6 inches at 300 yrds thou.
I intend to hunt something with them one day so I would like to be able to extract them as well.

I haven't had much success with half pathces thou.

Got a 150 to try out see if I can get these to shoot.

Maybe one day I'll get bug holes!! But I doubt it thou.

Mostly I can only find strips of patch. Sometimes with the folded over base and another strip attached when using lubed patches.
With dry patches I can't seem to find much at all.
Cheers

Barra

[pdawg_shooter]

My best 30cal bullet is the 311284. It drops .310 on the body and .302 on the nose. I sixe .3015 so I end up with a full length bearing surface. I patch to the ogive to keep the lead off the bore.

[longbow]

Zeek:

I have been pondering the same thing. While I don't do a lot of paper patching I may again for my .303's. I have been debating the same issue and the simplest answer I have is to make a pushout mould in two diameter so the paper patched nose is bore ride or slightly larger and the paper patched body is groove diameter.

I have been using a one diameter pushout mould that casts 0.301", knurling to 0.304" (because my .303 likes it better) then paper patching to 0.314". The boolit looks much like the old Lyman 165 gr. PP boolit. I would like to use thinner paper though partly with the intent of using 311299's or 311284's in the .303.

I have just found a new source of thin tough paper that I have patched up some 31141's with and will be shooting them shortly. I decided to try cooking parchment. It is very tough and 0.0015" thick. It wraps well too.

The noses of the 31141's will be slightly larger than the bore diameter but will fit into the throat so we will see how those perform first. Then I may try some 311299's to see how they do but if the wrapped nose is too large then I will make a pushout mould to suit the paper thickness and get a bore riding nose.

I would rather paper patch than use gas checks if I have to choose. Being lazy and cheap I would rather just use pan lubed lead boolits but sometimes a guy just has to give a little.

On a side note. I have been using a smooth two diameter boolit cast in a pushout mould to make a 220 gr. copy of the 314299 (0.307" x 0.318"). Using COW filler and light lubing on the nose I get no leading. I am shooting lower velocities though.

You might try some tumble lube on the noses of your bare boolits before venturing too far. That may solve it for you.

Longbow

[Zeek]

The reason that I provided a start on this thread is that I recall all the Harris workup for the NRA. He used mainly two-diameter CBoos and patched only the drive band section, and he used mainly modern chamberings with the throating I described above. Well it seemed to work for him. Perhaps there is some trick to it that we won't find out so long as we stick with the long-throated military rifles. Hell, in my SMLE, I can patch clear to the back of the point (on a two diameter CBoo core) and chamber it fine, even though the cartridge is loaded to normal LOA of over 3". The lubed nose idea is something I'll need to try ~~~> thanks for the idea, Longbow!
Zeek

[longbow]

I'm with you now Zeek. You want a short patch with bore ride nose but unpatched.

You know, I had a thought some time ago I was going to post but never did. So, here goes.

I pondered making a mould with a reduced body inside the case neck for a short paper patch with a full diameter drive band in front and bore ride nose like the 314299 or 311299 ~ basically replace the lube groove area with a reduced diameter suited to paper patching to slightly over the groove diameter with front band about the same (maybe 0.002" over groove).

The idea being to steal the nose bore ride design concept that works so well for 311299 and 314299 (and 311284 too) but eliminate lubing and gas check. Well, maybe not eliminate lubing ~ I would likely use a wipe, spray or dip of something relatively waxy on the nose.

Now before you laugh too hard, my logic is that the nose bore ride design works and the front driving band should center the boolit in the throat and protect the paper as it enters the rifling. The paper patch then acts as a short jacket and mainly seals gases but also provides maybe 2/3's or the bearing area. No paper exposed to be damaged or get wet, no worries about wrinkling or folding as it enters the rifling.

I would have tried it by now but I cannot do it with my pushout moulds so would have to make a split mould. I am not set up to make split moulds quickly or easily.

Okay, that's it, you can stop laughing. I think it has merits.

Longbow

[303Guy]

I have contemplated the same thing. I didn't try it although I did make a few such half-patched samples. I foresee a problem if one should attempt to push the velocity too high - well a problem with pressure induced upset. The lube would have to meet lubing requirements as well as not overlubing the patch. If I was able to drive a 225gr tapered boolit to about 1800fps with a near full charge od slow for lead powder then why not a semi-patched bore-rider! I think matching the alloy hardness or strength to the pressure profile should produce good results. Only one way to find out.

Longbow, a push through sizer would solve your pushout mold problem. Also using a harder alloy with a little more shrinkage maybe?

[longbow]

303Guy:

I am thinking something like:

- 0.305" nose
- short (maybe 0.010" long) front driving band at 0.316"
- remainder of the body about 0.308" to maybe 0.310" depending on paper thickness. Two wraps of 0.0015" paper would give about 0.315"/0.316" with 0.310" body. The whole works could be sized after I guess.

This would produce a short jacket (or long gas check?) of paper maybe 0.375" long.

Just a thought but it would take a split mould or rather severe partial sizing which I doubt would work well. Squeezing the butt end down by 0.006" isn't likely to go well.

Longbow

[pdawg_shooter]

Why would you want bare lead riding the bore? The advantage of paper patching is no lead contact with the bore and support of the bullet during acceleration to prevent the bullet from being distorted. Are we trying to re-invent the wheel here?

[6.5 mike]

longbow, while I agree with padawg about re inventing the wheel, it would be an interesting design, as it might be what is needed for some odd sized milsurp's.
Kinda like a "heeled boolit" in a .22rf. Also would help chambering if the neck was to tight pp'ed normally.

[longbow]

There are a few reasons for the short patch thought:

- bore ride designs work well in plain base and gas check designs (311299, 314299, 311284 for example)
- some throats do not accept long boolits like the 314299 if paper patched to groove diameter (my .308 is an example)
- no exposed paper means no damage to paper during handling if exposed to water. etc.
- if the bore riding nose and front driving band center the boolit then the paper is really acting as a long gas check

I am not trying to replace traditional paper patched boolit designs, just looking at an option for certain applications. Also, I am thinking smokeless powder and modern chamber designs not BP with PP friendly chambers.

Alternately, a two diameter boolit could be used with PP all the way to the ogive but bore diameter or a bit more to nose ride then groove diameter body after patching.

Just random thoughts.

Longbow

[303Guy]

That's fair comment, pdawg_shooter. From my experiments and trials I have found that there is a minimum pressure and velocity at which a paper patched bore-ride boolit will work. A semi-patched boolit might just fill the gap for some guns.

And now a question - what effect does the bore-ride section have if it is unpatched? Theoretically it does not engage the rifling so there is little stress on the surface in contact with the bore - which is appropriately lubed. I do think there is a place for this concept.

Just because a trial proves unsuccessful does not mean that the concept is a failure, only that the right 'formula' was not found or used.

[Zeek]

Why would you want bare lead riding the bore? The advantage of paper patching is no lead contact with the bore and support of the bullet during acceleration to prevent the bullet from being distorted. Are we trying to re-invent the wheel here?

The comment makes sense with long-throated old military rifles, given that one can chamber a full-length-patched PPCBoo that is seated out to normal cartridge length. However, with, say, a 308 Winch-Yer-Chester, the drive band section can stick forward of the casemouth only around 0.17". So, unless you have a bore-riding nose to extend the bullet forward of the short 3-degree inclangle leade cone, you can only shoot very light-weight bullets, an approach that would take most of the interest out of PPCBoos for most shooters.

That IS the topic of this thread, after all. So, the question remains valid: HOW to do the bore-rising-nose PPCBoo and get good accuracy at a relatively high MV? We need to recall that the original Lyman PPatcher mould cast a bullet of around 0.302" diameter the full length. So, the less bullet length you used with your PPatch, the longer the bullet's bore-riding nose. That bullet and concept worked for many folks. In like manner, most of the PPCBoo experiments that Harris did for the NRA used two-diameter CBoos with a patch applied to the drive band section. Clearly, there IS a way to make that approach work.

My point in starting this thread was that most of our discussion relates only to full-length-patched PPCBoos in the older military rifles that will accommodate them. It would be good to extend our scope to include the use of bare-bore-riding-nose two-diameter CBoos patched only on their comparatively short drive band section. 303Guy's point is very well taken: unless the nose expands, there is virtually no stress on it ~~~> it just glides along. There SHOULD be a way to make that approach work well.
Regards, Zeek

[pdawg_shooter]

This is a reprint of an earlier post:

Back in November of 98 I decided to develop a sub-MOA, 3000fps load for a 30 caliber rifle. It took awhile, but I believe I have “got er done.”
The Rifle.
In order to get the velocity I wanted with this weight bullet I chose a 300RUM in a Savage model 116. It is stainless with a laminated stock. It came from the factory with pillar bedding, and I added glass behind the recoil lug, and under the front receiver ring and tang. I topped it with a Weaver T15 for this test. This rifle will group ¾ to 7/8 with good jacketed bullet loads.
The Bullet.
The most consistently accurate 30cal bullet I cast is the Lyman 311284 so this is the one I worked with. The alloy is a mix of WW and Linotype. I added lino. until an air cooled bullet tested 16.0 BHN on my Lee tester. The bullet was then sized .3015 with a push through die. This gave me full length bearing surface. The bullet was then patched with 16# green bar printer paper and allowed to dry overnight. I then clipped the tail, lubed with White Label BAC and run through a .310 push through die. This left the bullet .311 and ready to load. The finish weight, with patch, was 202gr.
The Brass.
I used new Remington brass. I full length sized them and sorted by weight allowing no more than +/- 1%. It was then trimmed to length, outside neck turned to .012 thickness, the primer pocket reamed to a uniform depth, flash holes drilled uniform and deburred. I then loaded with a 180gr. Core Lock and H4831 to fireform. The test load was then loaded in UNSIZED brass. I tried H1000, Retumbo, and finally settled on reloader25. The starting load was 88.0 and I worked up to 93.0. This gave me 3069 with no signs of excess pressure. Oh yes, the primer was a Federal 215. The bullets were seated about ¼ inch into the case and finished seating when the bolt was closed. This gave me an OAL of 3.670.
The Test.
Testing was done over 2 days. Shots were fired over a bench rest with a windage and elevation adjustable front rest and “bunny ear” rear rest. Twenty 3 shot groups were fired allowing the barrel to cool completely. The smallest group measured .760 and the largest was 1.140. The overall average figured out to .992. Mission accomplished, but just barely. So what good is this load? Not much unless you like poking holes in paper. Next step will be to neck size, seat to correct OAL and see how they shoot. Might make a good hunting load that way.
I do load some jacketed 180, 200, and 220 grain bullets for this one. It now wears a Simmons 3.5x10 scope. Maybe some day I can go elk hunting.

[Zeek]

The Rest of the Story?

This is a reprint of an earlier post:

Back in November of 98 I . . . cast is the Lyman 311284 . . . . The alloy is a mix of WW and Linotype. I added lino. until an air cooled bullet tested 16.0 BHN on my Lee tester. The bullet was then sized .3015 with a push through die. This gave me full length bearing surface. The bullet was then patched with 16# green bar printer paper and allowed to dry overnight. I then clipped the tail, lubed with White Label BAC and run through a .310 push through die. This left the bullet .311 and ready to load. The finish weight, with patch, was 202gr . . . .

So, that gave you a uniform diameter CBoo. However, most of us have no idea what the throating design is on that big boomer; and this thread is about adapting PPCBoos to modern throat designs (short cylinder extends ahead of the casemouth, followed by a short leade cone, thereby requiring a two-diameter CBoo with bore-riding nose if the boolit is going to come up to any useful weight). So, how much of that sized-down 311284's 0.3015" diameter bearing length did your patch cover? Thanks for providing the alloy hardness. That really helps.
Regards, Zeek

[Doughty]

Zeek,

Take a look at the bullet I made. It has a shallow (.004-.005) long "groove" on the nose that allows the patch to recess to a second diameter. The tracing paper that I used sucked right down, allowing the "bore riding" part of the nose to be covered and also makes chambering easy. The little testing I've gotten to do so far indicates that this feature doesn't seem to hurt the accuracy too bad.

[303Guy]

Hoo boy! If only I had the time and energy there is so much fun potential in experimenting with the ideas and suggestions from this thread! I do have a rifle that meets the criteria of this topic. It's still a Lee Enfield but in 25-303. I have been trying to make bore-ride PPCBoos for it but haven't been able to test anything. I could certainly try plain bore-ride section semi-patch boolits in it. Heck, it would make life so much easier for me. Mmmm...... ! The problem I think I have is that my alloy is too hard for an undersized nose section core. And it's flipping 'hard' to make a small two-diameter mold accurately. See where I am coming from? Make a mold, size the casting with a push through, patch the boolit base section to throat diameter ..... could work. The question them becomes, what lube to use on the nose that won't cause the semi-patch to adhere to the casting?

[runfiverun]

peter.
your waxy lube.

[pdawg_shooter]

The Rest of the Story?


So, that gave you a uniform diameter CBoo. However, most of us have no idea what the throating design is on that big boomer; and this thread is about adapting PPCBoos to modern throat designs (short cylinder extends ahead of the casemouth, followed by a short leade cone, thereby requiring a two-diameter CBoo with bore-riding nose if the boolit is going to come up to any useful weight). So, how much of that sized-down 311284's 0.3015" diameter bearing length did your patch cover? Thanks for providing the alloy hardness. That really helps.
Regards, Zeek

I run the patch to the start of the bullet ogive. I do this on all my paper patched bullets.

[Zeek]

Zeek,

Take a look at the bullet I made. It has a shallow (.004-.005) long "groove" on the nose that allows the patch to recess to a second diameter. The tracing paper that I used sucked right down, allowing the "bore riding" part of the nose to be covered and also makes chambering easy. The little testing I've gotten to do so far indicates that this feature doesn't seem to hurt the accuracy too bad.
Doughty, that's one cool lookin' bullet. However, the nose appears to be rather short, so you might be able to get away without patching that part at all. It is only when the nose gets to be over around one caliber in length, especially if it is two or more calibers long (between the point and the front of the drive band section) when you just flat MUST have it supported across the land-tops, one way or another.

What alloy hardness and MV are you using that PPCBoo at? Likewise, in what chambering? Does the PPatched nose "engrave" between the land tops upon chambering the round? Thanks.

Here's something to consider. Folks who shoot standard two-diameter rifle-type GC/lube-groove CBoos generally find that they can get decent field accuracy with loads up to around 2100 fps, and that is with the bare bore-riding nose, and that is done without lubing the nose at all. So, I see no reason why we could not get up to at least that speed range with a base-patched-naked-nose PPCBoo.
Regards, Zeek

[longbow]

I'm with you ZEEK.

I am planning on making another mould with a 0.305" nose and 0.309" body to be paper patched with 0.0015" paper to bring it up to about 0.314". I will run the paper a very short ways up the nose. If the paper patched body is throat diameter then it should enter the rifling okay.

This is an easy mould to make.

I still like the idea of a paper patch shank behind a full diameter driving band and bore ride nose. I will get set up to make a split mould and give it a try. It may take a while but I will get it done eventually.

I can see no disadvantages over a standard gas check bore ride boolit like the 314299 and possibly several benefits. If it works, great! If not I will bore the mould out for something else. Nothing but a bit of time lost and lessons learned

Longbow

[303Guy]

Here's something to consider. Folks who shoot standard two-diameter rifle-type GC/lube-groove CBoos generally find that they can get decent field accuracy with loads up to around 2100 fps, and that is with the bare bore-riding nose, and that is done without lubing the nose at all. So, I see no reason why we could not get up to at least that speed range with a base-patched-naked-nose PPCBoo.Are these bore-ride nose not being lubed by residual lube from the previous shot? Perhaps the 'standard' wax lubing of paper patches will produce the same results. Only one way to find out - try it and see what happens.

[frankenfab]

I don't have any experience in paper-patching, and I possibly never will (never say never?). I just wanted to say that this forum has the most intelligent, courteous, and knowledgeable people of any I have ever seen.

It's intersting just to read so much of the the suff here!

It's like the Discovery Channel.

:-)

:lovebooli

[RugerFan]

.......... I just wanted to say that this forum has the most intelligent, courteous, and knowledgeable people of any I have ever seen.

It's intersting just to read so much of the the suff here!

It's like the Discovery Channel.

:lovebooli

Amen! Amazing motherlode of knowledge eh.