I'd be a richer man, if'n I had a dollar for every time someone has said or written "Oh, you don't need dacron with 2400 (or 5744, or Unique, or....).
For years now, it has been my practice to fire ten-round groups when experimenting, and also to fire two such groups with identical loads EXCEPT that one ten-rounder will have no filler added, and the other ten rounds will contain dacron.
Also for years, I've been saying that in SOME loads, dacron fill will yield better results than identical loads without the fluff, even with the quick-burners.
I hasten to add that by saying "dacron fill", I mean about one-half of a grain in cases such as the .303, .30-40 and 7.62 NATO. This is a very low-density tuft, virtually a see-through item. In the last few days, someone inquired whether or not FIVE GRAINS was about right!?!?! Five grains of dacron in a conventional-size case would be a dense mass, and NOT a good idea. I make my tufts by eyeball, five at a time for consistency.
Anyway, last week I took my "new" .303 (1914 manufacture) to the range with a bunch of 2400 loads, half with dacron and half without dacron. The bullets were the GB Lee 316-220, actually weighing 232 grains in my water-dropped WW and sized at .314". The brass was all W-W, primers were Remington 2&1/2, and the loads were as close to identical as possible....except for the presence of dacron in some of them.
The rifle has a Lyman 48 aperture sight and a bead up front.
Nothing of particular note occurred during the early part of the shoot, but when I got to the 18.0 load, the no-dacron load was fired first and gave me a 50-yard 10-shot group of 3.1 inches.
The 18.0 load WITH dacron, fired immediately after the above group (so, with the same light, wind etc) came in at 1.2"......well under ONE HALF the group size of the no-dacron load, and simply because of the presence of half-a-grain (+/-) of dacron fluff.
This is why I fire ten-round groups! A 3-shot or 5-shot group could conceivably fluke a good result. Ten rounds? No siree. Also, the "feeling" of KNOWING a called-good shot will be in the group is quite different from the random un-called wide shots which so often occur with less-than-great loads....such as all the groups I fired that day until the magical 18.0/dacron load.
The question is whether or not it's worth the trouble of installing the filler. In a case such as this, where the group is VASTLY better than the result from the no-dacron load, I'd surely say it's worth the minor additional step. In fact, I loaded 150 rounds with this recipe for the Nevada CB Shoot next week. I also intend to do some more work with this bullet and powder combo, changing the charge in 1/2-grain increments to see if it has any effect.
Even if one's current results with these "don't-need-no-danged-filler" powders are satisfactory, it may well prove worthwhile to do a wee bit of experimentation...there may be a real gain waiting out there.
|
   
   
|
|
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Nrut
