Is there an advantage to doing one method or the other for boolits with muzzle velocities around 1500 fps? 1800 fps? 2200 fps? Higher?
Printable View
Is there an advantage to doing one method or the other for boolits with muzzle velocities around 1500 fps? 1800 fps? 2200 fps? Higher?
In my view, whether you PP, powder-coat, or lube; the most important to me is zero CB runout in a loaded round and the precise CB alignment in the barrel. Runout causes in-bore CB yaw and in-bore CB yaw produces inaccuracy. The softer the CB alloy and higher the velocity, the more critical the runout becomes. Match jacketed bullets are harder and very precisely made to achieve top accuracy. Since a hardened CB is softer than a match jacketed round, barrel alignment is even more critical for a CB to approach match jacketed accuracy.
Best regards,
CJR
1854.
The paper really becomes of value over 1800 fps . There is something here .....should have been a sticky ,that was a walk through of a member getting a 300 RUM to 3000 fps I think with a 180 gr boolit .
The patch is sort of over kill for slow loads depending on how big the caliber is. I've pushed to 2300 fps with a 27 130 fp in a 7x6.8 mildcat that actually weighed 140. I also use it as a "fix" for an over sized bore ,316 in a 762 39 is a little sloppy.
Pistol calibers. Powder coating of those boolits has proven to be the cats meow. Rifles calibers. Many reloader's prefer the old school technique of paper patching. The doing of. Well sir. It's been a on going practice well over a century that I know of.
I looked into PP, even tried to wrap a few for 30/30, gave it up. IMHO, it helps with softer alloy. PC works for as fast as you can go, HiTek has worked for me to ~1500. Alloy for PC or HiTek needs to be correct, as well as fit. I would rate PC, HiTek, then PP for reliability. HiTek, PC, PP for ease of application. Obviously PP is slowest method. HiTek is a winner for volume production. Personally, I HiTek for pistol and PC for rifle.
Popper you leap to bold conclusions without the expertise to back them up by your own admission. PC and paper patch are different crafts and as comparible as apples and giraffes.
Dan, you are 100% correct, they are different. PP is a PITA for me, would barely be reliable in my levergun. For me, plastic coating does everything I need, i.e. I see no viable reason to PP unless you just want to do it. Yes, it does work, no question about that. I think that is a reasonable conclusion. I wasn't arguing, just an answer to the poster's question.
Popper, it has been my observation that lots of folks want to take short cuts in life and I'm ok with that. Sometimes it works, sometimes not. I consider the powder coat concept interesting and certainly useful, being another way to skin the cat in a manner of speaking. It is, to my eye, an alternative to grease lubed bullets and there's nothing wrong with that idea at all.
One of the puzzles I run across here and at other forums is discussion about paper patching in all regards, as often as not pointed as short cuts. Why it puzzles me is fairly simple. The kinks were worked out of the concept around 150 years ago. If one is willing to take a little time to set up properly for paper patching it is a highly functional process which can provide stellar accuracy over a wide range of velocities with minimal concerns about alloy hardness. Every short cut will diminish the returns. Proper set up will allow a person to patch somewhere in the range of 60-90 bullets/hour. After that they load pretty much like any jacketed round.
True enough, they aren't for mass produced ammo, just mass mayhem at any range; short or long. Mayhem is the product of placement and bullet performance. Having seen what patched bullets can do in that context I'm of the opinion that powder coat is still a young technology not fully developed. I'll be favorably disposed if and when PC bullets start whacking targets at a mile with some or even minor consistency.
A friend of mine purchased a Marlin 1895 CB rifle back in the late '90s, chambered in .45-70. I was already moving down the paper patch path with the .44 mag in a rifle and he decided to follow suit. In virtually no time at all he was shooting sub MOA groups at 200 yards with the gun using 510 grain bullets at a MV of about 1800 fps. The bullets were swagged of a 20:1 alloy, PB/SN. He stole his wife's dress pattern paper to patch them, which may explain the facial bruising suffered about that time.
Take care,
Dan
Do you have any of his reloading info? That's extremely impressive velocity with a 500 grain bullet, especially out of a lever gun. I'd Love to find a way to load similar rounds for my 1895!Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital Dan
For me PP is a way to make worn and rust damaged bores shoot again. To be sure there is the fun factor too but for volume shooting I am looking at PC or lacquer coating. I don't know anything about Hi-Tec. Having retired and having joined a range just minutes away I am looking into alternatives to paper patching.
For the short term, I am paper patching 308 jacketeds specifically to be able to take this youngster out for some target shooting and goat hunting. Even if this works, it's too expensive for range sessions. It's just a stop gap while my casting station is inaccessible. I am hoping that it will work as a light hunting round in which case the cost is not an issue.