none of the previous comment about sizing apply to me, like i previously stated i only have any need to size my higher velocity rifle cast bullets when attaching gas checks - i have found no practical advantage to PC coatings at all - plus pc is definitely more time consuming + expensive -
never pick a fight with an old man - if he is too old to fight he will just kill you -
in this current crisis our government is not the solution , it is the problem ! -
ILLEGITIMI NON CARBORUNDUM
as they say in latin
Saying it multiple times won't make it more true. It's too bad you have a hard time with it. Most of us don't. Nobody is trying to change your mind. Do what works for you. But some of us feel the need to speak up so others are not put off by false (for everyone but you, apparently) information.Originally Posted by schutzen-jager
So...Now You are "Righter"??? Let it Go...Everyone has a Preference...Or Maybe Not... Appears to my Feeble Mind, that Both, or better, all 3 Methods, Work...
That's basically what I was trying to say. Pretty much everyone except a few die hard holdouts and fence sitters have universally agreed this is the way... If what they're doing works for them, so be it. But you don't hear the same horror stories about leading, bullet fit, and whatnot that you heard 10-15 years ago on this forum. People started doing it, and it just works. It has solved a lot of the common problems people were running into for almost no additional investment.
If nothing else it definitely makes cast more palatable to non-casters who reload. Being that there are a lot of PC'd bullets on the market these days I think it has helped a lot of shooters who don't cast keep their firearms fed without the worries that used to come buying bulk lead bullets with crayon lube.
The issue is that to a new caster trying to figure out which direction they should go statements like "there are no advantages to PCing" can be enough of a turnoff to keep them from considering what might be the better way to go for them. There is certainly nothing wrong with doing it the old way. I still have my 4500 and sizing dies, and it's loaded with Carnuba Red right now. I haven't used it for quite some time, but you know what, I may still find a use for it yet. People shouldn't write off a method of doing something so easily. Especially when it is so widely accepted as being the current standard to the point that even store-bought bullets often come as PC'd instead of lubed.
Now... Something I think does need more testing...PC'd Hollow Points. Anyone ever see how they perform in comparison to cast and lubed??? I only ask because I am able to shoot much softer lead using PC than I could when shooting lubed. I could see the PC interfering with the ability for the bullet to expand... Anyone seen any threads on that topic?
JDGabbard's Feedback Thread
Jdgabbard's very own boolit boxes pattern!
GOA and FPC have done more in the last decade than your NRA has done in it's entire existence... Support the ones that actually do something for you.
Yes. A few years back, a member posted some testing he did. There was no difference. He even took it a step farther and filled the hollow points with pc on one batch. The boolits did not care.Now... Something I think does need more testing...PC'd Hollow Points. Anyone ever see how they perform in comparison to cast and lubed??? I only ask because I am able to shoot much softer lead using PC than I could when shooting lubed. I could see the PC interfering with the ability for the bullet to expand... Anyone seen any threads on that topic?
Accuracy claims on a forum like this are not always trustworthy. This is not due to people making false claims on purpose. Like the Rumsfeld book..."We don't know what we don't know". Let me expound.
Most people do not shoot enough to know. Some people have platforms that cannot decern if there is a difference and some folks are not capable of shooting well enough. How often do you see comments like, "Minute of deer" or "Minute of pie plate"...with accuracy touted as "good". For many folks, good enough is good enough. Accolades are given for three shot rifle groups...another telling indicator of folks who do not shoot enough to know...(or do not want to know?)
It takes a lot of groups to know if a load (or bullet lube) that gives a five shot 1.5" group is better than another load (or bullet lube) that gives a 2.0" group.
Anyway, my take on PC is that it unlikely to be more accurate based on what I have read over the years...and what I have not read. For a while I followed what the folks who shoot cast benchrest were using. Things may have changed but the top shooters use traditional lubes. If something gives them an edge, they will use it. Think about that. These are folks who have the skill and platforms to "make the call". And they are wise enough not to be fooled by a "wallet group".
The other indicator I have is Larry Gibson. When he tried PC bullets they did not perform as well as lubed bullets. He has been wise enough not to respond to this thread. I am not nearly as wise...LOL. Mr. Gibson is no fool and a better than average trigger man, so I value his input, or lack of it.
Getting to pistol plinking rounds, PC offers the advantages of less (or no) leading caused by bullets that are either not sized properly, made with poor alloy and/or driven at too high a pressure. That surely will beat the accuracy of lubed bullet that leads!!! AFAIK, no one has shot enough groups out of a Ransom Rest at 50 yards to evaluate the differences between PC and lubed pistol bullets. But for most folks (who are even worse pistol shots than rifle shots) if may not matter much anyway. Being able to use cheaper alloy and having clean barrels trumps any minor accuracy advantage a proper lubed bullet may have.
Don Verna
jdgabbard, I found it.
Scroll down to post by KVO. In Smoke4320's post, right after KVO, he also had good results but lost his pics.
https://castboolits.gunloads.com/sho...+hollow+points
Found KVO's original thread.
https://castboolits.gunloads.com/sho...+hollow+points
There was a slight difference.
PC and HiTek are another tool in the box. No more, no less. If your mold casts small both coatings might get you up to the size you need. If your getting into casting you can save some money from having to buy a lubesizer with special dies. You can pan lube too.
I think it's already been proved that if coated correctly the coating stays stuck to the bullet in it's trip down the bore. Most folks say the coating strengthens the bullet so you can use a softer alloy. I think you could use the same softer alloy with conventional lube and have no issues if the final sized bullets are the same. Lots of folks think they need really hard for the pressure they are developing with a given alloy but it actually has a broader range of use mostly in the softer direction. Coated bullets gas cut just like conventional lubed bullets if they don't fit the bore AND the throat. Sometimes it's just a matter of how soon you apply the pressure to the base of the bullet.
Plastic coatings don't make bullets magic.
Don, once again we agree on something. It must be freezing downstairs...
There has not been a truer statement made where it concerns accuracy claims. The truth is that most people I have met, and I mean no disrespect to anyone when I say this, are not capable of accurately shooting a rifle. I'm sorry, they're just not. There are exceptions , but that is why we have ransom rests. And 5-shot groups are not going to tell you much either. I can't remember where I read this, but I read a pretty detailed and lengthy treatise on determining accuracy several years back. Basically, you have to shoot thousands of rounds at the same point of aim and look at the statistics to determine actual accuracy. While a small 5-shot group might be enough to tell you YOUR potential accuracy with a given rifle and load combo, it's hardly enough to give you good statistical information for determining the accuracy of a given load.
Thank you! I'll have to give it a read. As for filling the HP with PC, that actually sounds like it might have help open things up if anything. But what do I know....
I think the big difference is where lube becomes a fluid under pressure, effectively help slide the bullet through the bore, the PC instead bonds with the lead so firmly that it creates a barrier between the two that does not easily give up the ghost.
Back when I worked in manufacturing, I spent a lot of time working in a Powdercoating line. One day management wanted to test how well the PC would bond to aluminum. With steel, the PC could be chipped off if hit right. When we powdercoated aluminum it bonded so well that you couldn't scrape it off with a sharp chisel. You'd literally lift up aluminum before you separated the PC from the metal. My theory is it is something like this with lead. It bonds so well that you'll destroy the bullet before it comes off. Thus creating a silky smooth layer between the barrel and the lead. Just my theory based on my past experiences in manufacturing and observations while shooting. But it's what I'm going with....
JDGabbard's Feedback Thread
Jdgabbard's very own boolit boxes pattern!
GOA and FPC have done more in the last decade than your NRA has done in it's entire existence... Support the ones that actually do something for you.
I converted to PC'ing after trying Lee Liquid Alox a few times and could never get it to work correctly. 100% of the time i ended up with lead in the barrel even with .38 Special and 45 ACP. PC'ing eliminated that immediately. I actually bought a Lubesizer a few years later and use that for some loads because it is faster and supposedly more accurate but my handgun groups at 50 yards can't tell the difference.
Lubesizer cost vs PC definitely favors PC for initial cost ($100's vs $10's) and cost of supplies. $20 of lube sticks will last me a few months. $20 of PC will last a few years.
People griping about PC just want to complain because it's not what they are used to and it wasn't around when they started so it must be bad...
I may have seen the same article. Anyway...a preview of coming attractions:Don, once again we agree on something. It must be freezing downstairs...
There has not been a truer statement made where it concerns accuracy claims. The truth is that most people I have met, and I mean no disrespect to anyone when I say this, are not capable of accurately shooting a rifle. I'm sorry, they're just not. There are exceptions , but that is why we have ransom rests. And 5-shot groups are not going to tell you much either. I can't remember where I read this, but I read a pretty detailed and lengthy treatise on determining accuracy several years back. Basically, you have to shoot thousands of rounds at the same point of aim and look at the statistics to determine actual accuracy. While a small 5-shot group might be enough to tell you YOUR potential accuracy with a given rifle and load combo, it's hardly enough to give you good statistical information for determining the accuracy of a given load.
I will be doing a study shortly of 3, 5, 10, 25 and 50 shot groups. I have acquired a program that will allow me to superimpose groups from multiple targets.
A PCP rifle will be used to take out variations of powder drops, lube, case prep, primer seating, bullet runout, barrel fouling/cleaning. The gun will be "topped up" every 10 shots to reduce the effect on fill pressure as my gun is non-regulated. Pellets will be weight sorted to +/- .05 gr and inspected. The gun averages .76" for over 200 groups at 50 yards so I am confident it is a decent platform. The variables of the jerk behind the trigger (me) and wind are still in play. I am waiting for decent shooting weather (northern MI) and calm conditions as I am not great at reading wind and pellets get blown around a bit.
The first testing will be at 25 yards to minimize the effect of wind.
By superimposing groups, it will show how the average of 3 shot groups compare to the average of groups with higher shot counts. The exercise is to not only prove how worthless 3 shot groups are but also determine how 5, 10 and 25 shot groups compare to "reality" - 50 shot groups.
10 targets will be shot. Each target will consist of three shots on one bull and two on another:
That will yield data for ten 3 shot and ten 5 shot groups.
Targets #1 and #2 will be combined to determine a 10 shot group. Targets #3 and #4 will produce another 10 shot group, etc etc. This will yield five 10 shot groups.
Targets #1, #2, #3, #4 and #5 will be combined to determine a 25 shot group. Targets #6, #7, #8, #9 & #10 produce the second 25 shot group.
The last group will include all 50 shots. Reality.
How I established 50 shots as "reality" is not scientific. We used to Ransom Rest 50 shots at 50 yards with our Bullseye pistols to evaluate CF loads and different lots of .22 LR. I was in college shooting with a couple of Master Class guys and that was what they did.
If there are any suggestions to make the test more informative, let me know!
Don Verna
Ok I'll bite. How do you setup 1000 bullets to PC in 5min??? Reason I dont spray is the bullets need to be all standing then sprayed without knocking them over & theen the waste of powder, but spraying is less fincky.
EVERY GOOD SHOOTER NEEDS TO BE A HANDLOADER.
NRA Cert. Inst. Met. Reloading & Basic Pistol
I went from buying jacketed to plated to conventionally lubed cast to coated cast when I started reloading pistol rounds in volume (basically I was going for less expense and reasonable accuracy for my application). One I started casting the slugs myself I just continued with the same coating technology at home since it was available and inexpensive in terms of set up and I already was familiar with the product and performance. I never even considered conventional lubing my boolits, though that wasn’t out of dislike for the process or performance so much as a lack of familiarity with it.
It may be possible that it could prevent clogging by the t-shirt, jeans, jacket, towel, or whatever you have over your gel for testing. I've read about some HPs getting clogged and not opening up after going through clothing. Which is why that test is done. Never experienced it myself.
If I had one that I knew did that, I'd certainly want to experiment with it.
^^this^^^^
EVERY GOOD SHOOTER NEEDS TO BE A HANDLOADER.
NRA Cert. Inst. Met. Reloading & Basic Pistol
If you put enough PC on a bullet to clog the HP, you put on too much.Don, once again we agree on something. It must be freezing downstairs...
There has not been a truer statement made where it concerns accuracy claims. The truth is that most people I have met, and I mean no disrespect to anyone when I say this, are not capable of accurately shooting a rifle. I'm sorry, they're just not. There are exceptions , but that is why we have ransom rests. And 5-shot groups are not going to tell you much either. I can't remember where I read this, but I read a pretty detailed and lengthy treatise on determining accuracy several years back. Basically, you have to shoot thousands of rounds at the same point of aim and look at the statistics to determine actual accuracy. While a small 5-shot group might be enough to tell you YOUR potential accuracy with a given rifle and load combo, it's hardly enough to give you good statistical information for determining the accuracy of a given load.
Thank you! I'll have to give it a read. As for filling the HP with PC, that actually sounds like it might have help open things up if anything. But what do I know....
I think the big difference is where lube becomes a fluid under pressure, effectively help slide the bullet through the bore, the PC instead bonds with the lead so firmly that it creates a barrier between the two that does not easily give up the ghost.
Back when I worked in manufacturing, I spent a lot of time working in a Powdercoating line. One day management wanted to test how well the PC would bond to aluminum. With steel, the PC could be chipped off if hit right. When we powdercoated aluminum it bonded so well that you couldn't scrape it off with a sharp chisel. You'd literally lift up aluminum before you separated the PC from the metal. My theory is it is something like this with lead. It bonds so well that you'll destroy the bullet before it comes off. Thus creating a silky smooth layer between the barrel and the lead. Just my theory based on my past experiences in manufacturing and observations while shooting. But it's what I'm going with....
EVERY GOOD SHOOTER NEEDS TO BE A HANDLOADER.
NRA Cert. Inst. Met. Reloading & Basic Pistol
fyi - i only restated it because it was in retort to fredj338 in post 57 erroneously claiming that i only had limited experience in powder coating - everyone is entitled to personal opinions + on other threads on topic here + on other forums - many have the same opinions as i do -
never pick a fight with an old man - if he is too old to fight he will just kill you -
in this current crisis our government is not the solution , it is the problem ! -
ILLEGITIMI NON CARBORUNDUM
as they say in latin
I have 3 lubesizers on the bench next to an arbor press set up for NOE dies. I still lube some but with 30 cal and 357 lever guns you can shoot them at max 357 speeds without gas checks if you PC.
[The Montana Gianni] Front sight and squeeze
Absolutely! Everyone should have the right to have their own opinions!
But here's the catch: When smokeless powder came around I'm sure there were some guys trying to figure out how to use it while the Holy Black guys were telling them just to use BP. A few years later down the road once they figured it out and it was well established I'm sure there were still some die-hard BP guys saying that there wasn't any practical advantage over just using BP. But after a decade it was decided that it absolutely was a better alternative to BP. If it weren't we'd still be using BP for all our reloading today. That last part is where we currently are with bullet coatings.
It's not that BP, or this case traditionally lubing (with or without sizing), is not still workable. People use BP, and traditional lube, every day! It's that we now have a better alternative, placing the former in a niche. And just like how we let the Flintlock and BP Cartridge guys do their thing, nobody is going to insist that you or anyone else stop doing things the way you love doing them. But that also doesn't mean we won't point out the obvious advantages, and obvious fallacies in statements made when they could steer others down a more expensive and outdated path.
That said, I do hope you haven't taken offense to anything I've said, as none of it has been meant to minimalize your opinions. I'm sure there are plenty of others that feel the same way you do. But can we just agree that the Ribeye is the best cut of steak and be done with it???
I'm sure someone will disagree and tell me the NY Strip is better.
JDGabbard's Feedback Thread
Jdgabbard's very own boolit boxes pattern!
GOA and FPC have done more in the last decade than your NRA has done in it's entire existence... Support the ones that actually do something for you.
It really is amazing. I used to expect a fair bit of leading in 9mm when I'd get a new gun until I got things worked out. Not anymore... I too still keep the Lubesizer mounted on the bench, with lube in it, ready to go. But honestly, I haven't touched it in over two years with the exception of using it to seat some gaschecks on rifle bullets. I'm not entirely sure I even need those anymore tho...
JDGabbard's Feedback Thread
Jdgabbard's very own boolit boxes pattern!
GOA and FPC have done more in the last decade than your NRA has done in it's entire existence... Support the ones that actually do something for you.
Posting Permissions
| BP | Bronze Point | IMR | Improved Military Rifle | PTD | Pointed |
| BR | Bench Rest | M | Magnum | RN | Round Nose |
| BT | Boat Tail | PL | Power-Lokt | SP | Soft Point |
| C | Compressed Charge | PR | Primer | SPCL | Soft Point "Core-Lokt" |
| HP | Hollow Point | PSPCL | Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" | C.O.L. | Cartridge Overall Length |
| PSP | Pointed Soft Point | Spz | Spitzer Point | SBT | Spitzer Boat Tail |
| LRN | Lead Round Nose | LWC | Lead Wad Cutter | LSWC | Lead Semi Wad Cutter |
| GC | Gas Check |
Reply With Quote