the results

[Gunlaker]

Today I got a chance to try out my first paper patched loads (load specifics mentioned my previous thread) in my factory chambered C Sharps 1874 in .45-110.

The good news:
I didn't get paper rings or complete tearing of the patch resulting a leaded barrel.

The bad news:
I didn't get anything I'd even call a group :-P

It was a very windy/rainy day so I was unable to find any confetti. Any that existed would have quickly blown away. I do know that at least some of the patch came off some of the time, as I saw some paper bits in the air.

The interesting part was, based on elevation settings from one of my grease groove loads, the first shot was dead centre in the bull. The others were some distance further away :-P.

I tried to keep the bore squeeky clean between shots to prevent damage to the patches. For my first few shots I wiped with 2 wet and one dry. After about the 4th or 5th shot I realized that I was still leaving a fair bit of fouling in the bore and switched to 3 or 4 wet and then 1 dry patch.

To sum it up, I learned a little bit, but not a lot. I'm going to experiment some more. I'm going to adjust the load a bit to try and reduce fouling and pay better attention to the bore condition. I might try adding a lube cookie or thicker wads with more compression.

As I progress, I'll post anything interesting I find.

Chris.

[montana_charlie]

Chamber another round with the same bullet/patch combination you were using before and then eject the case..leaving the bullet in the bore.
Shove it on through the bore and see what it looks like when it comes out.

It won't be 'bumped up', but it will show you if the paper is wrinkling (or something) when chambered.

Alternatively, you might fire a 'package' with a tiny charge of fast pistol powder.
That's how I fired my first PP's bullet. I used 1.5 grains of Red Dot.
I had to drive it the rest of the way with a rod, but it gave me a decent idea of how the patching turned out.

Just be careful when you open the breech. The compressed gases ejected my case 'with authority'.

Two 'damp' patches should be plenty unless it a hot, dry, day. I patch to a different diameter than you (so it might make a difference), but I have never had real good luck shooting through a 'dry' bore.

I run the wet patch(es) and just dry the chamber with a short rod setup. They are wet with a 'moose milk' which is an 80/20 mix of water and water-soluable oil.

I'm glad you finally posted some results. I was going nuts seeing that 'getting ready thread' just hanging there for days and days...

CM

[Gunlaker]

Chamber another round with the same bullet/patch combination you were using before and then eject the case..leaving the bullet in the bore.
Shove it on through the bore and see what it looks like when it comes out.

It won't be 'bumped up', but it will show you if the paper is wrinkling (or something) when chambered.

Alternatively, you might fire a 'package' with a tiny charge of fast pistol powder.
That's how I fired my first PP's bullet. I think I used five grains of Red Dot.
I had to drive it the rest of the way with a rod, but it gave me a decent idea of how the patching turned out.

Just be careful when you open the breech. The compressed gases ejected my case 'with authority'.

Two 'damp' patches should be plenty unless it a hot, dry, day. I patch to a different diameter than you (so it might make a difference), but I have never had real good luck shooting through a 'dry' bore.

I run the wet patch(es) and just dry the chamber with a short rod setup. They are wet with a 'moose milk' which is an 80/20 mix of water and water-soluable oil.

I'm glad you finally posted some results. I was going nuts seeing that 'getting ready thread' just hanging there for days and days...

CM

Yeah, sorry for the delay. I only get a chance to shoot on Sundays and I work a lot so I build my ammunition over the course of several days during the week. :twisted:

I've been thinking some more and I'm rethinking what's wrong. I suspect that my patches were not coming off cleanly. My reasoning is this: the only time I've seen bullets go this wrong with respect to accuracy, was once in my Ruger in .45-70 when I shot some hard cast bullets with really old lube. I got heavy leading, and no doubt deformed bullets. The results were a "spray" pattern at 200 yards. I think the same thing would happen had the patches not come off uniformly. My next set of experiments will include a handful of dry patched bullets. And I might try a different thickness of paper. I have 2 thicknesses of paper available, one is from an onion skin tracing paper pad (Hilroy), and the other is the stuff that BACO
sells. There is definitely a difference in thickness.

You've got some interesting ideas that I'll have to try. With respect to your pistol powder experiment, I imagine a magnum primer might even do the trick. Some time back, when making my first smokeless loads for my Marlin 1895, I had a missfire. The jacketed round got pushed a couple of inches into the bore by the force of the primer alone.

I'll try pushing a few through the bore by hand tonight and see what happens.

Thanks for the advice. It'll take me a little time to try this stuff out and post the results, but I will post as soon as I have learned anything interesting.

Chris.

[montana_charlie]

Since you can only shoot on Sundays, you have to take what you get, speaking wind-wise.
While I always pick a calm day when testing 'groups', I have fired into snowbanks when the wind was up a bit. I was only interested in 'recovery'...not group size.

However, I always want to look at patch particles.
That last snowbank session had the wind going about 12 to 15 mph from 11 o'clock, so I started searching on an angle back and to the right (from the muzzle) until I started seeing bits of paper in the grass.
I collected twenty or thirty pieces to look at, and they were strewn over an area about 15 feet long and four feet wide.

So, unless there is a real gale blowing, the paper is there to be seen. You just have to figure out where to start looking.
Finding just a few pieces will give you an idea of how the patch comes off.

What is the chance of digging out one (or more) of the bullets you fired...to look at?

I don't think you will have much luck pushing a bullet through the bore with only a magnum primer. Even with a primer plus 1.5 grains of Red Dot, my bullet probably did not go halfway through.
I have a feeling a primer would have barely made it lodge in the throat.
Yes...your bullet won't fit as tightly as mine, but there is still a similar amount of inertia to be overcome. Of course, it won't hurt anything to try it with just the primer...

The BACO paper (with the Esleek watermark) is .0023" thick.
If you patch wet with it, I suppose it stretches enough to get down to (maybe) .0019.
Wrapping that paper on a .444" bullet should get it slightly over .451", but you say your package is slightly below .450".

Does that mean you used the Hilory paper, and that it's thinner than the BACO...or that you are putting some heavy stretch on the BACO paper?

Uhh...you aren't using any wax (or anything) on the patches, are you?

Hmmm...in the absence of a snowbank, I don't have anything else to suggest at this time.

Charlie

[405]

Gunlaker,

I imagine most CSA chambers/throats are similar. I have a mid-heavy barreled CSA in 45-110. I shoot both grease groove and PP bullets out of mine. One thing different though is I swage my PP bullets from near pure lead. It's a flat base design. I don't cast them- so some difference there from the cast types. The two diameters I use are .446 and .4475. In the 45-110 my best weight seems to be about 520 gr. My final PP diameter ends up being .453-.455 depending on how tight I wrap. My noses are about 1.5R with gradual taper from ogive into the bullet shank. A similar design I think? to the "Money" bullet. I bought a ton of BACO's all cotton paper a few years ago and use that to patch with. I load with FFg, standard primer, (2) .030 wads all with light compression. My final OAL allows a slight engraving of about .10-.15 of the forward part of the PP into the lands- kind of a bore riding situation. I think that helps make certain the bullet starts perfectly in line with the bore upon ignition. I do swab between shots for best accuracy. This type load out of my rifle is very accurate and can't tell much difference between the .446 and the .4475 bullet nor much difference whether patched to .453 or .455 final diameter.

So, with the .444 diameter patched to just under bore diameter.... I wouldn't know what to expect. If you get erratic groups, before tryng different primers, you might try a slightly thicker paper and get the PP diameter up to at least bore diameter (+) and try the "bore rider" thing with the lands lightly engraving the paper at what ever OAL that is. When chambering those type rounds you can feel a little resistance as the paper slides into the lands. Good luck!

[montana_charlie]

One thing different though is I swage my PP bullets from near pure lead. It's a flat base design.

My final PP diameter ends up being .453-.455 depending on how tight I wrap.
With a bullet that soft, I bet your 'package' is bumped right up tight to groove diameter before it has moved a quarter inch.

You would probably get the same action if you started with a .452" bullet and patched it up to .459".
Only difference is...you would have to seat a little deeper in the case.
CM

[405]

Full groove diameter obturation. I'll bet you're right about that with the soft alloy. That's one reason for the 1.5R nose.... and I was a little worried even about that length. Any longer/thinner and there could be some risk of nose slump with the soft lead. I don't know the nose length of a 45 cal Money bullet, but given the higher BC design, it could very well be longer than 1.5 cal. There is conjecture that with a longer nose, softer alloy and a relatively shorter supported shank, the advantages of the higher BC can more easily be compromised by out-of-whack balance and/or alignment during obturation. I have no way to prove or dis-prove any of that. But, there is quite a bit of evidence to support the theory about long shank, fully supported bullets being accurate.... at least at the shorter ranges where BC is not so critical. I think the basic wadcutter design shows that in lots of applications.

[montana_charlie]

I don't know the nose length of a 45 cal Money bullet, but given the higher BC design, it could very well be longer than 1.5 cal.
If "1.5R" means the radius of the ogive arc is 1.5 times the bullet diameter, then the Money bullet is noticeably different. The ogive arc is about 4 times caliber.
The nose length of the .45 caliber is .700" on a bullet that is 1.450" overall.

I shoot a Money in 20-1 alloy, and the nose does upset a little. But, since I seem to have good alignment with the bore, it just fattens a bit...rather than slumping to one side.
CM

[405]

MC,
Yah, sorry about the mixed terminology. The front portion of the roundnose ogive of the swaged bullets I shoot are a more or less standard tangent profile based on a certain R (radius about 1.5 cal). My bullets' nose lengths are approx. .525"

My swaged bullets are somewhat difficult to measure accurately because of the nose form die push out rod leaves a small meplat on the nose and the transition from nose ogive to shank is so gradual. In any case here are the approximate numbers that may make more sense than the academic discussion of shapes.

bullet wgt______ 520 gr
bullet dia.______ .446
bullet length____ 1.350

nose length_____ .525 "unsupported" length
shank length____ .825 "supported" length

[Gunlaker]

What is the chance of digging out one (or more) of the bullets you fired...to look at?

The BACO paper (with the Esleek watermark) is .0023" thick.
If you patch wet with it, I suppose it stretches enough to get down to (maybe) .0019.
Wrapping that paper on a .444" bullet should get it slightly over .451", but you say your package is slightly below .450".

Does that mean you used the Hilory paper, and that it's thinner than the BACO...or that you are putting some heavy stretch on the BACO paper?

Uhh...you aren't using any wax (or anything) on the patches, are you?

Charlie

Hi Charlie,

Finding one of those bullets will be pretty tricky as it's a very busy range. The whole line is usually 100% occupied all day long.

I did use the Hilroy paper but that might have been a mistake, as it's patched a little under bore. The BACO paper is definitely a bit thicker. I patched wet (just water ) and stretched the paper good to make sure it stuck. Maybe too good :-). No wax or anything was used.

As a test I patched one bullet dry last night, and I can see that it's much more likely to come off if not cut by the rifling.

Tonight I will be patching a couple with the BACO paper, wet and dry, to get some measurements. I suspect that the BACO paper wet will get me a little closer to bore diameter.

I'm using 20:1 alloy and I wonder if the undersized bullet (no neck tension) just didn't get the chance to bump up enough to cut the patches.

Chris.

[Gunlaker]

Gunlaker,

I imagine most CSA chambers/throats are similar. I have a mid-heavy barreled CSA in 45-110. I shoot both grease groove and PP bullets out of mine. One thing different though is I swage my PP bullets from near pure lead. It's a flat base design. I don't cast them- so some difference there from the cast types. The two diameters I use are .446 and .4475. In the 45-110 my best weight seems to be about 520 gr. My final PP diameter ends up being .453-.455 depending on how tight I wrap. My noses are about 1.5R with gradual taper from ogive into the bullet shank. A similar design I think? to the "Money" bullet. I bought a ton of BACO's all cotton paper a few years ago and use that to patch with. I load with FFg, standard primer, (2) .030 wads all with light compression. My final OAL allows a slight engraving of about .10-.15 of the forward part of the PP into the lands- kind of a bore riding situation. I think that helps make certain the bullet starts perfectly in line with the bore upon ignition. I do swab between shots for best accuracy. This type load out of my rifle is very accurate and can't tell much difference between the .446 and the .4475 bullet nor much difference whether patched to .453 or .455 final diameter.

So, with the .444 diameter patched to just under bore diameter.... I wouldn't know what to expect. If you get erratic groups, before tryng different primers, you might try a slightly thicker paper and get the PP diameter up to at least bore diameter (+) and try the "bore rider" thing with the lands lightly engraving the paper at what ever OAL that is. When chambering those type rounds you can feel a little resistance as the paper slides into the lands. Good luck!

That's interesting information to be sure. Do you use custom brass? I get very little resistance chambering the rounds, but I guess that's due to the small diameter.

My mould is the BACO money bullet design, although I may have bought one that won't stabilize at long range (assuming I get it to shoot well at all) in the 1:18 barrel, as it's 1.51" long.

With the BACO paper I should be able to get it slightly above groove diameter, especially if I patch dry.

Mine were loaded with 100gr Fg, 2x0.30" veg king wads, WLR primers, and very mild compression. I doubt if it was more than 0.050".

I can hardly wait 'til Sunday morning.... Sounds like the weather will be good this weekend so maybe I'll learn something new.

One quick question, about how much of your bullet sits in the case?

thanks,

Chris.

[405]

Gunlaker,
There are likely many ways to get to top PP accuracy with these things. The individualism and experimentation is some, if not most of the fun and appreciation.

I use regular Starline brass. I anneal the necks fairly regularly. I use standard Remington LR primers and regular GOEX FFg. I drop tube the powder.

I lightly neck resize. I use a neck expander with a diameter just barely under final PP diameter. The seating force is just a snug fit- not tight. I can chamber a round and have the front part of the PP lightly engrave into the rifling then pull the unfired round out without the bullet pulling out of the case. I apply a thin film of something like Felix lube, rubbed on with the fingers, to the PP bullet before seating in the case.

Just checked my load log for some numbers and the .446" 520 gr PP bullet is seated .520 into the case.

After firing, I have never found any paper shreds larger than some rectangular pieces of the base overlap. I imagine that a good portion of the bullet's shank nearly fully obturates to groove diameter so the paper surrounding the bullet is completely shredded during firing. The few bullets I recovered when curious about this quite a few years ago showed full land impressions at least for the base half of the bullet. Usually the front half was distorted or flattened to the point that nothing was there to inspect. I was getting excellent accuracy so never investigated further. I know MC makes good use of the snowbank trap and recovery technique :)

[Gunlaker]

Tonight I patched a few bullets with the Baco paper both wet and dry to test them for size.

The .444 bullet dry patched with BACO paper comes out to .451". When I did as Charlie suggested and drove it through the bore, the bullet had some definite resistance and I could see it was turning as it moved down the bore (my dowel was being rotating as it pushed the bullet).

The wet patched ones haven't quite finished drying yet, but they look like they are going to come out just a shade over 0.450".

The ones patched with the Hilroy tracing paper did not grip the bore much if at all.

Just for fun, I tried some of my wife's parchment paper (about 0.0025"), but it seemed to have some sort of slippery coating so I abandoned that.

I have learned that dry patching is a bit finickier than wet. Although wetting the leading edge of the dry patch helped a bit.

I'll try out the BACO paper, and I might even try a few rounds with a very mild taper crimp. I noticed that in Mike Venturino's book he tried it and found improved accuracy.

Chris.

[Gunlaker]

I re-measured everything this morning after the patches were dry, this time using my micrometer rather than my calipers.

The bullets patched with the BACO paper come it at just about 0.452" both wet and dry patched. I must have been squishing the paper with my calipers in my previous measurements.

I'll shoot some of each this Sunday to see what happens.

Chris.

[montana_charlie]

My mould is the BACO money bullet design, although I may have bought one that won't stabilize at long range (assuming I get it to shoot well at all) in the 1:18 barrel, as it's 1.51" long.
The good thing about that is...you can always have a machinist face off the top of the mould if you start thinking it should be shorter.
Most any machinist worthy of the title should be able to do it...not just a mould maker.

CM