Powder Coating vs Accuracy

[FredBuddy]

I'm having really good results with the old ideal 311008 115 gr plain base, powdercoated, in 30-30 and 300 savage, BUT I'm using the RCBS cowboy neck expander plug which is a little bigger, and I'm sizing to .310.

Good small game load, accurate, and about 5 pennies in powder and primer!

OP, I'm in your camp about economy, and I treat this as a whole new load work-up.

[bilco]

All the same cast boolits right? Are all the tests done on a single previous load that you originally worked up in the 'lubed' cast version?
I should think that the PC boolits need a little tinkering either up or down of the charge weight and not by too much either.

Just my first thoughts looking at the groups...they certainly came out of a good platform.

This is what I was thinking as well... If you didn't do some type of work up for the PC cartridges I don't think you can say you did them justice.

[HollowPoint]

I have a 6.5mm Lyman mold inbound that I plan to do some powder coating experiment with. One of the things I've wondered about powder coating rifle bullets is the difficulty of applying the powder evenly around the circumference of the bullet.

My concern is that if I end up with more powder on one side of the bullet than the other it will turn an other wise concentric bullet into an out of balance projectile from the get-go. I base this concern on the electro-static method of powder coat application that I'm using now. I can't seem to be able to get a perfectly even coat around my rifle bullets. It could be that I'm just being to anal about it.

The experimenting I plan to do will entail a method I came across on youtube. I'm hoping it will help me apply my powder as evenly as possible. Especially since I'll be attempting to coat some long and skinny 6.5mm cast bullets.

I have no problems with my powder coated pistol bullets but, I haven't had much luck with the thirty caliber rifle bullets I've tried; and I've tried it on everything from air rifle pellets to rifle bullets. If I can get groups like a couple of the ones shown in the OP's pic, I think I can tweak such a load to give me what I'm looking for in terms of accuracy.

I guess time will tell.

HollowPoint

[odfairfaxsub]

I do really really good on my low velocity 300 AAC w the lee 230 gr. long bullet w a long nose and bowtail. A lot to go wrong although introduce velocity and you end up showing a lot of issues you didn't see w the blackout

[popper]

PC without gas checks and 7grs of BE is cheaper Compare to a 170gr PB in 30/30 running 1400 fps. PCd & 9.5 Unique. The noted group, shot last, rest is other loads I was trying, not flyers - 11 gr doesn't work with this alloy.
Attachment 178206

[W.R.Buchanan]

First off that boolit won't shoot well without a gas check no matter what you do. You can have cheap or "works good" but in this case it won't be together. I have never had a gas Check boolit shoot well without the gas check.

What lots of people don't seem to understand is that the back end of the boolit is the steering end. If the back is gooned at all, the boolit won't fly strait. You can do just about anything you want to the front end but as soon as the back end is deformed in any way,,, it's a loser.

With an unprotected boolit shank that is undersized to the bore the boolits base will be deformed upon firing for sure, and you won't be able to predict how that will occur so there is no way to compensate for it. Accuracy will suffer..

Also a .308 should be easy to get to shoot right with a variety of Loads, Boolits and Powders etc.

A Gas Check will help a lot but if you don't want to use a Gas Check due to extra cost then the solution is to buy a Plain Based boolit mould. Pretty sure Lee has something in that size range that is PB'd. (no they don't, just looked) Other outfits do have PB .30 cal. rifle boolit moulds, or you could bore out the base of your mould to full diameter and eliminate the gas Check Shank form the boolit. I did this with a .45-70 mould that had a Gas Check Shank but dropped way undersized. Powder Coating will bump the size of that boolit up to where it needs to be to shoot right.

Then the next thing is you could speed things up a bit. Most rifle boolits in the .30 cal size range seem to exhibit best accuracy in the 1500-1700 fps range with a GC which can be achieved with the ubiquitous 16 gr of 2400 load. This will cost you @ twice as much in powder than what you are doing now. You will still get 425+ rounds per pound of powder which is not the end of the world cost wise.

PB boolits seldom shoot well past 1500fps but with Powder Coating I think you could do better than that. Also for what you are doing with this load Lee has 3 .32 cal. Pistol moulds that are in the 100 gr range and would easily size to .310-311 for your rifle. These are Pain Based designs and could be pushed at low velocities with small charges of powder, probably smaller than what you are currently using, to get a useful Mouse Fart Load. Powder Coating would benefit these as well as it would eliminate the lubing and increase the strength of the base of the boolit.

Several ways to overcome your problems.

Hope it helps.

Randy

[Don Fischer]

I've tried PC and TL in the same case's, brand, and same load. If there's any difference in accuracy, I didn't see it. I think I might just do TL though as I haven't got any PC bullet's done really nice. Always bare spots of lead where i picked them up out of the powder. And I find it more time consuming. BTW, I was in the hospital getting sewed up recently and they had a set of tweezers with little sharp pins where you pick thing's up. I'd bet these would work well for digging the bullet's out of the powder. Oh yea, I check the barrel for fouling after shooting each type and saw no difference, both left a clean barrel except for powder fouling.

[waksupi]

I get the same accuracy with powder coat. Something people seem to forget, is when you powder coat, you have changed a component. You just need to work up the load again. In my rifles, it has seemed to be around a 1/2 gr. difference, and slightly different seating depth.