Milk Jug 300 Yard 6.5 Swede

[swheeler]

OK but I'm talking purely SAFETY factor in cartridges other than 6.5x55.. Puflon has been around for years now and I have heard of no one blowing themselves up with it? Buckshot used a whole lot of grex with surplus powders, mostly double based powders if I remember correctly. You know we talked before about me trying psb in the 6.5 carcano, results were not what I wanted for accuracy but were completely safe, but I stayed with real slow powders and about 80- 90% powder and remainder compressed psb with heavy cast. Seems years ago I tried reduced loads of H110 and dacron in 223 with cast, about 4-5 shots scared me enough I pulled the rest down, spreads of 2-300fps IIRC, but never saw anything like that with the psb in the carcano. Just looking for a little more guidence like so many others here.

[geargnasher]

I wish I had a way of recovering those bullets from yesterday, even with Sierra Gamekings at just over 2600 fps they didn't do much. I'm not sold on the heart shot either, but that's the best choice I had under the circumstances. You may be right about cast not making the Swede a better killer, but I want to see what the wet phone books tell me. First gotta be able to hit one at more than 50 feet. I know it won't work very well at 1500 fps, either.

So you pretty much answered my question by answering SWheeler's, there is always extensive reworking of powder/primer/lube/alloy/temper/boolit fit/boolit style/neck tension etc. when changing cartridge styles/calibers, but much of the methodology for developing such high-velocity, accurate cast boolit loads could remain the same, even thought the "best" loads for even very similar cartridges may be wildly different. I would like to think that a slightly compressed load of IMR 4831 would be more ideal than, say, 80% density of AA 4350 with a stack of filler on top, but I know what works in one place often won't work in another.

Gear

[PAT303]

I've tried 4831 in the swede and it did a good job,36grns 2/3rds filled the cases and shot into 1.5'' at 100 yards every time.It will be the first powder I'll try with Puff-Lon,all I want is a good 200 meter load for field rifle comp. Pat

[geargnasher]

That's a fairly light charge of IMR 4831, Pat, do you know the velocity? I'm assuming you're shooting j-words?

Gear

[StarMetal]

OK but I'm talking purely SAFETY factor in cartridges other than 6.5x55.. Puflon has been around for years now and I have heard of no one blowing themselves up with it? Buckshot used a whole lot of grex with surplus powders, mostly double based powders if I remember correctly. You know we talked before about me trying psb in the 6.5 carcano, results were not what I wanted for accuracy but were completely safe, but I stayed with real slow powders and about 80- 90% powder and remainder compressed psb with heavy cast. Seems years ago I tried reduced loads of H110 and dacron in 223 with cast, about 4-5 shots scared me enough I pulled the rest down, spreads of 2-300fps IIRC, but never saw anything like that with the psb in the carcano. Just looking for a little more guidence like so many others here.

Look at how many years myself and others have been shooting Dacron and Kapok. Look at how many poster here post about using Dacron and tamping it down tight over the powder like a wad and leaving an air space between it and the bullet. Then look at how many times they have gotten away with it. Things have to be exactly right for a disaster. The powder tech at Hodgdon doesn't believe the old 148 grain hollow base wad cutter blow up with a minute 2. some grains of Bullseyes. He said if we could go back in a time machine we would find the real culprit and being a double or triple charge of it. But yet it happens.

Against 45 2.1's better advice I messed around with the filler in my 6.5x54MS. Thank God it's on a strong action. I didn't load it right with like 30 grains of 4895 and ended up having to pound my bolt open on my Savage.

Well you use a filler think of your cartridge becoming the 9mm Parabellum and we all know how touchy that cartridge can be because most often the powder fills the entire case capacity up the bullet base and think of the seated bullet as the filler. Seat the bullet little too deep and the pressure sky rockets.

There are major performance differences between the poly type filler!

Joe

[StarMetal]

I wish I had a way of recovering those bullets from yesterday, even with Sierra Gamekings at just over 2600 fps they didn't do much. I'm not sold on the heart shot either, but that's the best choice I had under the circumstances. You may be right about cast not making the Swede a better killer, but I want to see what the wet phone books tell me. First gotta be able to hit one at more than 50 feet. I know it won't work very well at 1500 fps, either.

So you pretty much answered my question by answering SWheeler's, there is always extensive reworking of powder/primer/lube/alloy/temper/boolit fit/boolit style/neck tension etc. when changing cartridge styles/calibers, but much of the methodology for developing such high-velocity, accurate cast boolit loads could remain the same, even thought the "best" loads for even very similar cartridges may be wildly different. I would like to think that a slightly compressed load of IMR 4831 would be more ideal than, say, 80% density of AA 4350 with a stack of filler on top, but I know what works in one place often won't work in another.

Gear

I'm sure the 4831 load would work. But there is something that I, 45 2.1, and others that use this technique are accomplishing. That is HV and extremel accuracy. So you can't really get enough 4831 in that case to give you the HV and I doubt you're going to put the bullets all in one hole. With the filler you make that slow powder produce more pressure at the same time enhancing accuracy pushing the bullet more straight into the bore.

Joe

[StarMetal]

I've tried 4831 in the swede and it did a good job,36grns 2/3rds filled the cases and shot into 1.5'' at 100 yards every time.It will be the first powder I'll try with Puff-Lon,all I want is a good 200 meter load for field rifle comp. Pat

You're getting on track Pat. 4831 is one of the powders I want to try and haven't been able too because my supplier, Wideners, is just about out of every powder.

I can tell you Puff Lon isn't anything like the filler I use.

Joe

[StarMetal]

I was the Puff Lon website. I read what they said about using it in gas operated rifles. Well been using my filler right along in my AR's and MAS 49/56. So we have a group that thinks "Wow, cast in an AR?, won't that plug up the gas tube, etc.?" NO, it doesn't nor does the lead. For one if you're loading cast right you shouldn't be getting any leading, right? So how's it going to plug up anything? Of all the fillers I've tried in my AR's, that is Dacron, Kapok, the filler spoke of in this thread.....I find nothing in my AR's gas system. In fact I find my carrier cylinder much easier to clean the powder carbon from it. The bullet lube makes it softer and and not like the hard caked on carbon shooting HV jacketed loads.

Joe

[geargnasher]

You're getting on track Pat. 4831 is one of the powders I want to try and haven't been able too because my supplier, Wideners, is just about out of every powder.

I can tell you Puff Lon isn't anything like the filler I use.

Joe

I take it you use something with less "lubricity" than Pufflon that creates more restriction at the case neck and thus higher chamber pressures?

Gear

[Eutectic]

Starmetal

Bullets do lengthen when sized down, that is not an issue. The cast bullet when accelerating is under terrific G forces, the faster the acceleration the greater the force. That G force is much greater than the simple force caused during sizing in which the lead flows in the direction of least resistance. The G force may well be much greater than the force of the bullet being sized down in the bore.

let us consider a WQ'd cast bullet with and air cooled cast bullet. When the cast bullet comes out of the mould it is still very hot. However it isn't the same temperature in or on all areas of the bullet. When WQ'd the various degrees of temperature cause various degrees of hardness in different locations on/in the bullet. An AC'd cast bullet cools down over a period of time and the hardness is pretty much the same all over in and out.

Now when we accelerate the AC'd cast bullet the tremendous G force will cause the bullet to evenly set back into the lube grooves as the lube is squeezed out onto the surface of the bore. This squeezing out and depletion of the lube leaves a small amount of space for the collapse of the bullet. The actual amount of collapse is going to be dependant on many things all inter-related. Lets look at a WQ'd bullet on the other hand. Say one side of the bullet is a little harder than the other side. The harder side may be hard enough to with stand the G force. The other side may not be so it collapses. It only takes a small amount of collapse to cause the balance of the bullet to become skewed; the center of form, center of spin and center of gravity do not coincide. Now comes the part you don't want to believe but it is what is happening whether you believe it or not. The high RPM (we're talking now about 200,000+ RPM) then has an adverse affect on that bullet while in flight. The farther the bullet flies the greater the adverse effect (groups get larger in a non-linear manner) on accuracy. The effect may be small or it may be large depending on the amount of imbalance and the RPM.

Now if you look at a cast bullet with a bore riding nose the nose itself has lots of room to collapse rearward and to the sides into the grooves or on one side of the nose into the grooves. This results in a very unbalance bullet and is why it is much more difficult to shoot such cast bullets with bore riding noses at higher velocity. This is why Lovern style bullets such as the one of BaBore's that you are using work much better at HV; there isn't a long nose. Yes I know of your claimes with bore riding nose designs. But remember you also claim a very tight fit with those noses. That helps to negate uneven set back.

Larry Gibson

To all,

I don't know why Larry's few paragraphs above haven't gotten more response... A wealth of info is in these few paragraphs. We should 'bookmark' this page; even hard copy it for future reference.

Good job Larry!

As I listen to the "sizer" comments though, I also wonder if the "G" force in Larry's post is understood?

Please let me add some comments on the force our boolit sees. In the sizer, most of the force applied to change our bullet diameter is a circumferential or 'squeezing in' type force. Only enough longitudinal force 'or squeezing shorter' is applied to push our boolit through our sizing apparatus. The boolit will probably lengthen some in the process.

What does our boolit see upon firing? There is enough circumferential force applied for rifling engraving, then circumferential force increases as a result of longitudinal force.... but it is contained by the configuration of our barrel. This goes on concurrently which is why throat/chamber configuration becomes even more important for cast vs. the "J" word applications!

Things happen in microseconds upon ignition of our primer. Pressure behind our boolit climbs rapidly to several thousand pounds per square inch. We need to overcome inertia to get our boolit moving... "G" forces are tremendous, especially at launch. This isn't a slow motion space shuttle launch either! It is probably better to think our boolit is 'hammered out' at launch! "G" forces tremendous enough that longitudinal force on our boolit is also tremendous. IF these forces become higher than the structural integrity of our boolit, then our boolit will shorten/change shape in the process. I've already pointed out how 40,000 psi of a high energy powder (2400) and a buttery soft Keith HP changed shape to almost a lead cylinder! This re-shape phenomena may or may not be bad in a less extreme case. As Larry points out.... if collapse (shortening) occurs EVENLY for a balanced projectile all is good, maybe even better!

90% if not more, of the downrange accuracy capability of our boolit occurs in the first few fractions of an inch travel in just microseconds of time during launch. This has been my experience for over a half century now. Many mechanical things can be 'worked' on both in boolit and gun to achieve the best result; that's the fun of it for this ol' boy!

Maybe the oldtimers had something by "breech seating" their cast boolits over a hundred years' ago, huh?

Eutectic

[StarMetal]

To all,

I don't know why Larry's few paragraphs above haven't gotten more response... A wealth of info is in these few paragraphs. We should 'bookmark' this page; even hard copy it for future reference.

Good job Larry!

As I listen to the "sizer" comments though, I also wonder if the "G" force in Larry's post is understood?

Please let me add some comments on the force our boolit sees. In the sizer, most of the force applied to change our bullet diameter is a circumferential or 'squeezing in' type force. Only enough longitudinal force 'or squeezing shorter' is applied to push our boolit through our sizing apparatus. The boolit will probably lengthen some in the process.

What does our boolit see upon firing? There is enough circumferential force applied for rifling engraving, then circumferential force increases as a result of longitudinal force.... but it is contained by the configuration of our barrel. This goes on concurrently which is why throat/chamber configuration becomes even more important for cast vs. the "J" word applications!

Things happen in microseconds upon ignition of our primer. Pressure behind our boolit climbs rapidly to several thousand pounds per square inch. We need to overcome inertia to get our boolit moving... "G" forces are tremendous, especially at launch. This isn't a slow motion space shuttle launch either! It is probably better to think our boolit is 'hammered out' at launch! "G" forces tremendous enough that longitudinal force on our boolit is also tremendous. IF these forces become higher than the structural integrity of our boolit, then our boolit will shorten/change shape in the process. I've already pointed out how 40,000 psi of a high energy powder (2400) and a buttery soft Keith HP changed shape to almost a lead cylinder! This re-shape phenomena may or may not be bad in a less extreme case. As Larry points out.... if collapse (shortening) occurs EVENLY for a balanced projectile all is good, maybe even better!

90% if not more, of the downrange accuracy capability of our boolit occurs in the first few fractions of an inch travel in just microseconds of time during launch. This has been my experience for over a half century now. Many mechanical things can be 'worked' on both in boolit and gun to achieve the best result; that's the fun of it for this ol' boy!

Maybe the oldtimers had something by "breech seating" their cast boolits over a hundred years' ago, huh?

Eutectic

Probably less response to Larry's theory because of the bug holes I've shot with my 6.5 Grendel at HV with WQ'ed bullets. In other words I'm not totally buying the theory. The bug holes I shot with the Finn 39 were with WQ'ed bullets. I've shot both kinds of bullets in my other three 6.5's with same results. It's not proven and from the shooting I've done, along with 45 2.1, and other's ..it's kind of unproven too.

As for the breach loading of the bullet back in the old days I believe they knew about starting the bullet straight and engraveing the rifling. If you don't believe that maybe this will convince you ...the false loading muzzles on muzzle loaders for starting the bullet straight into the bore and also protecting the crown.

How about jacketed bullets? They have more G's upon them like in the super HV rounds clipping over 4000 fps. Don't tell me the copper jacket is that much protection.

Joe

[StarMetal]

I take it you use something with less "lubricity" than Pufflon that creates more restriction at the case neck and thus higher chamber pressures?

Gear

I haven't nailed it down exactly yet but I did start out with the wrong filler and got mighty discouraged fast. There's no doubt the bottle neck configuration of the cartridge plays a big role in this technique.

I thought 45 2.1 told you to pm him? Did you get anything out of that?

Joe

[geargnasher]

Quote "Maybe the oldtimers had something by "breech seating" their cast boolits over a hundred years' ago, huh?

Eutectic"

....And that's also why the ASSRA and other Schuetzen fans still do. It eliminates a ton of variables.

Gear

[geargnasher]

I haven't nailed it down exactly yet but I did start out with the wrong filler and got mighty discouraged fast. There's no doubt the bottle neck configuration of the cartridge plays a big role in this technique.

I thought 45 2.1 told you to pm him? Did you get anything out of that?

Joe

I did. I await his reply.

You beat me to it on the breech seating comment above, I gotta learn to type faster!

BTW I'm beginning to realize why you took the direction you did with lube development recently.

Gear

[StarMetal]

I did. I await his reply.

You beat me to it on the breech seating comment above, I gotta learn to type faster!

BTW I'm beginning to realize why you took the direction you did with lube development recently.

Gear

Because they took our shop away when I was in high school due to merging with our rival school and not having enough space...I took a few years of typing class. Best thing I have done. Who would have known back in my prehistoric days they would invent the pc and keyboard in the future...which by the way has virtually destroyed the typewriter. By the way straight A's and up to 120 wpm (that's not wevolutions either) by graduation.

Joe

[Larry Gibson]

Eutectic

"Probably less response to Larry's theory because of the bug holes I've shot with my 6.5 Grendel at HV with WQ'ed bullets. In other words I'm not totally buying the theory. The bug holes I shot with the Finn 39 were with WQ'ed bullets. I've shot both kinds of bullets in my other three 6.5's with same results. It's not proven and from the shooting I've done, along with 45 2.1, and other's ..it's kind of unproven too."

There in lies the problem with some here. They talk of all the variables and how things don'e happen all the time. Joe even mentioned in a recent post that many have gotten away with things and something about it taking the right circumstances. Yet I did not state that WQ'd bullet always collapse or that they always collapsed unevenly. I also did not say it always happens. What I gave is the scenario for uneven collapse which happens often enough and is proveable. There are variables to most of what we do. The hard part is to control the variables in a positive way.

What is "good" to some perhaps is not so good to others. I'll give a simple example, both involving cast bullets at HV. I'm not looking for an argument here because the examples are "good" in their context. However, I did not consider them "good" in my context. The first is Joes targets he posted on the MAS semi auto. He and others though them "good". On the other hand they were not what I get or expect to get with that same bullet out of my rack M1A. With that rifle I expect 311314 to shoot into less than 3 moa on a regular basis at 2000+ fps without any magical or "dangerous" loading technique. I also shoot much better groups with 311466 at 2200+ fps simply because it has a 12" twist which helps control the RPM. It does not need any "technique" and they are proven loads loaded by most here all the time. The other example was BaBore's groups posted of his 22 Hornet loads at 2500+ fps (as I recall). They were basically 2 moa groups. BaBore considers that "good" and so did others. Perhaps it was if you are shooting PDs out to 150 yards or wood chucks. However, 2 moa is not "good" to me as I shoot picket pins (Columbia graound squirrels) with my 22 Hornet. When lying down they give a 1" tall target and when standing up that target isn't much more than 1" wide eighter. Thus a 1 moa load is pretty much maxed out at 100 yards and may give 70-80% hits out to 150 yards. A 2 moa group gets you maxed out at 75 yards. Thus "good" is relative, what is "good" to some is not "good" to others.

I also shoot 311466 into 10 shot 2 moa groups at 2600+ fps out of a 14" twist barrel with normal loads because the RPMs are controlled and below the RPM threshold. The first 5 shots almost always go into 1 moa. That is at 100 and 200 yards. To me that is "good". To Joe and a couple others it isn't worth mentioning. See what I meen about "good" being relative?

But back to the main point; Joe has his doubts and that is fine. After all, he is one who says there are no rules and yet doubts my "theory" because it doesn't happen all the time, i.e. a rule. It is not a rule nor is it theory, it is merely an explanation as to how set back or collapse happens when it happens. It is proven, you proved it with the .44 bullet. Glad you understand even if Joe doesn't.

Larry Gibson

Joe; this is all I'm saying on the subject here so say your piece and let's just let it go, you have your theories, I have mine...fair enough

[swheeler]

Probably less response to Larry's theory because of the bug holes I've shot with my 6.5 Grendel at HV with WQ'ed bullets. In other words I'm not totally buying the theory. The bug holes I shot with the Finn 39 were with WQ'ed bullets. I've shot both kinds of bullets in my other three 6.5's with same results. It's not proven and from the shooting I've done, along with 45 2.1, and other's ..it's kind of unproven too.

As for the breach loading of the bullet back in the old days I believe they knew about starting the bullet straight and engraveing the rifling. If you don't believe that maybe this will convince you ...the false loading muzzles on muzzle loaders for starting the bullet straight into the bore and also protecting the crown.

How about jacketed bullets? They have more G's upon them like in the super HV rounds clipping over 4000 fps. Don't tell me the copper jacket is that much protection.

Joe

That's the problem with theories, you can shoot them full of holes.

[StarMetal]

Eutectic

"Probably less response to Larry's theory because of the bug holes I've shot with my 6.5 Grendel at HV with WQ'ed bullets. In other words I'm not totally buying the theory. The bug holes I shot with the Finn 39 were with WQ'ed bullets. I've shot both kinds of bullets in my other three 6.5's with same results. It's not proven and from the shooting I've done, along with 45 2.1, and other's ..it's kind of unproven too."

There in lies the problem with some here. They talk of all the variables and how things don'e happen all the time. Joe even mentioned in a recent post that many have gotten away with things and something about it taking the right circumstances. Yet I did not state that WQ'd bullet always collapse or that they always collapsed unevenly. I also did not say it always happens. What I gave is the scenario for uneven collapse which happens often enough and is proveable. There are variables to most of what we do. The hard part is to control the variables in a positive way.

What is "good" to some perhaps is not so good to others. I'll give a simple example, both involving cast bullets at HV. I'm not looking for an argument here because the examples are "good" in their context. However, I did not consider them "good" in my context. The first is Joes targets he posted on the MAS semi auto. He and others though them "good". On the other hand they were not what I get or expect to get with that same bullet out of my rack M1A. With that rifle I expect 311314 to shoot into less than 3 moa on a regular basis at 2000+ fps without any magical or "dangerous" loading technique. I also shoot much better groups with 311466 at 2200+ fps simply because it has a 12" twist which helps control the RPM. It does not need any "technique" and they are proven loads loaded by most here all the time. The other example was BaBore's groups posted of his 22 Hornet loads at 2500+ fps (as I recall). They were basically 2 moa groups. BaBore considers that "good" and so did others. Perhaps it was if you are shooting PDs out to 150 yards or wood chucks. However, 2 moa is not "good" to me as I shoot picket pins (Columbia graound squirrels) with my 22 Hornet. When lying down they give a 1" tall target and when standing up that target isn't much more than 1" wide eighter. Thus a 1 moa load is pretty much maxed out at 100 yards and may give 70-80% hits out to 150 yards. A 2 moa group gets you maxed out at 75 yards. Thus "good" is relative, what is "good" to some is not "good" to others.

I also shoot 311466 into 10 shot 2 moa groups at 2600+ fps out of a 14" twist barrel with normal loads because the RPMs are controlled and below the RPM threshold. The first 5 shots almost always go into 1 moa. That is at 100 and 200 yards. To me that is "good". To Joe and a couple others it isn't worth mentioning. See what I meen about "good" being relative?

But back to the main point; Joe has his doubts and that is fine. After all, he is one who says there are no rules and yet doubts my "theory" because it doesn't happen all the time, i.e. a rule. It is not a rule nor is it theory, it is merely an explanation as to how set back or collapse happens when it happens. It is proven, you proved it with the .44 bullet. Glad you understand even if Joe doesn't.

Larry Gibson

Joe; this is all I'm saying on the subject here so say your piece and let's just let it go, you have your theories, I have mine...fair enough

Larry,

Let me say this first. We're not going to argue anymore. Have you realized we're been giving a lot of bored and hungry members a free show? Yup..we have Larry. No more shows boys!! For the record I don't hate Larry either.

Okay...Larry I'm fine with you having your theories and me mine. There's probably truth in both of them. Gun nuts like us are set in our ways and also very determined. Perhaps that instilled thing is what has made the figthing men of our country feared and respected. We beat the best in the past. Yes we couldn't beat the politicians in D.C. over Nam.

Now I did think the group with the MAS was good for what it was. I think the 312284i s a bit much bullet for the 308 especially one with a 19 inch barrel. I didn't have the powders I wanted to use in it so just started off with the 4895 wanting to see really what the new scope mount and scope would do on this rifle. Actually I've shot almost the same groups with the peep sights on it and the Lee 312 155. As you know the MAS has a four groove left hand twist of 1 in 11. I reckon the French seen that as a compromise between what an 06 and 308 run. Am I satisfied with that group? No way no how. I want a hole or close too it. I also don't think I'm going to get that big heavy 311284 up to any blistering velocity...do you? Thus another reason for a lighter bullet. I'm fascinated with the rifle and I'll do somemore work on it. One thing about the technique...I use in where ever I can for one of many reason. One main one is it sure keep your bore as clean as possible. I wasn't expecting to make that particular rifle shoot a bug hole with the 311284, although that bullet does out of my 06 and Krag.

So you can keep on posting Larry to what I post. No hassle from me anymore.

Regards
Joe

[Eutectic]

As for the breach loading of the bullet back in the old days I believe they knew about starting the bullet straight and engraveing the rifling. If you don't believe that maybe this will convince you ...the false loading muzzles on muzzle loaders for starting the bullet straight into the bore and also protecting the crown.

How about jacketed bullets? They have more G's upon them like in the super HV rounds clipping over 4000 fps. Don't tell me the copper jacket is that much protection. ??

Joe

I thought I brought up breech seating as a good idea? Glad it pleased you and others Joe! Have you tried it by the way? It does work rather well if your breech seating tooling is sized correctly and CONCENTRIC. I suppose if I still shot in any shoots I would still do it... But it is SO inconvenient in the field where most of my load development goes these days.. I have another method almost as good. I have a .375 Winchester single shot. The groove diameter is .3755" I size 375449 boolits to .377". I usually cast out of wheel weights with tin upped to 2%. I cut a long throat in this barrel that mikes .3777" The boolit touches the lands with only 1/8" seated into the case! YES they are fragile and a pain in the field with all lube basically exposed as well but it is doable with care. I load them hot... probably about 40,000psi and they shoot! Do they experience longitudinal shortening as we have discussed?? I am rather certain they do! But they are held concentric by design! Your load may have the boolit shortening up too Joe. I think I've said more than once a load can shoot most excellently with this taking place!

I've attached Speer's take on this of what we speak. With jacketed no less! The jacket is the ONLY thing that kept deformation from going "wild" in the photo! The core material is 2 or 3% Sb I would imagine... 3150fps is faster than we shoot boolits.... well... at least most of us!

If your load is shooting great I'm happy for you Joe but it in no way proves shortening isn't taking place. Consider yourself blessed it is happening concentric and balanced if in fact it is happening.

Eutectic

[45 2.1]

I did. I await his reply.

You said: I'll give you the details of what I've done later but bedtime calls.

Still waiting on the details................