40-65 Paper Patch Loads

[Distant Thunder]

This why I describe it as "accuracy over time". I have too many times put together a new load or loaded a new bullet and shot it with very good results, but when I tried to repeat those result with everything the same it just didn't hold up.

It seems to me if a given bullet and load are truly accurate (stable) they will be that way every time in all conditions short of a hurricane. The really hard part is separating short comings of the shooter from those of the bullet and load, this is where accuracy over time may help. We all have bad days when we couldn't hit a barn from the inside with the door closed! Well maybe not that bad but I'm trying to make a point.

As an example of accuracy over time and what’s was involved in improving it I’ll use my long range pp billet, though I went thru the same process with my .40-65 pp load.

I first shot a long range match with my .45 caliber modified elliptical paper bullet in a match in about 2009, only back then it was loaded in my Shiloh .45-90 (standard chamber, 18-twist) over 100 grains of Swiss 1 1/2. It shot extremely well winning 2 Creedmoor matches (2010 & 2011) for me by good margins. It was casting at .444" diameter and 1.460" at that time. It did not show any signs instability even at 1000 yards.

In 2013 I switched from my Shiloh to my newly built Hepburn chambered in .45-70 with Brent Danielson's tight paper patch chamber and an 18-twist Badger barrel. Changing to a new rifle can require a period of adjustment, but I just didn't feel the bullet was working for me from the results I was seeing. I was loading this same bullet patched with the same paper I had used in my .45-90, but now it was loaded over 83.0 grains of the same Swiss 1 1/2.

The bullet felt looser when I chambered it in my Hepburn and I began to think that maybe the 1.460" was a bit too long for the velocity of the .45-70. I opened up the mold to cast at .446" diameter and that helped with the accuracy at 300 yards or less, but it didn't perform as well as I wanted at long range. Also I would have occasional problems chambering some cartridges. With slight variations in paper thickness and perhaps higher humidity swelling the paper I was having some really difficulties at matches.

O I made a push through sizing die and fine tuned that to a diameter that was a perfect slip fit into the bore of my Badger barrel and then every bullet had the same feel chambering.

Next I shortened the bullet to 1.440" and things really started to look better on target at matches. I also went back to my bore pigs for wiping which improved my fouling control and allowed me more time for paying attention to conditions. I had been wiping with multiple patches which was taking a lot of time and needed to match the temperature and humidity of the day which can be difficult to judge.

About 3 or 4 years ago I realized I finally had the "perfect bullet" for MY rifle and I quit tweaking it and my match results got even better. There were a lot of other minor things I tweaked including the seating depth of my bullet and my approach to match shooting and my thought process as I shoot a match. My rifle, my bullet, my load and my mental preparedness have all evolved over the past 6 years to help me get to where I am today with my shooting and for me, it’s a good place.

The changes over time and the improvements keep getting smaller and smaller and require more time to prove out. The hardest part and slowest to improve on have been with the shooter and I believe that is the only place that still needs improvement. This is just what I have found over the past 10 or so years shooting pp and those came after 20 years of shooting grease groove and just dabbling in paper patch. A lot of shooting, a lot of analyzing the results and less and less fiddling around with what is working, fixing what ain't broke.

Now others have done things completely different with equal or better results, everybody’s journey is different and YMMV.

The point is to do a lot of match shooting, keep good notes, analyze the heck out of the results and make small adjustments that are based in reality with good, solid research behind them. Then watch the results over time to see what is working for you, keep that stuff and toss the things that are not working.

This process has taken me about 3 to 4 years with 3 different rifles to get where I want to be with each, but I don’t have access to more than 220 yards on a regular basis. A shooter with such access could easily shorten that time frame I’m sure.

[Kenny Wasserburger]

Steve,
My friend that’s what I was looking for. Though I had understood SSS’s post this seems a wee bit simpler.

Thanks so much.

I am wondering if a tiny bit of Antimony wouldn’t hurt in my PP rounds, if it’s working well for DT it definitely is worth looking at.

Kenny

[Kurt]

With the high load of antimony that Linotype and wheel weights has Arnie uses with his .40 caliber rifle and can put 9 rounds some in the X ring and the rest in the ten ring with one wandering out a fingers width into the 9 ring and shoot a 99 at 800 yards I wouldn't worry about the little 5% in a 1 pound roll of solder

[Distant Thunder]

With any alloy it is important to consider the nose profile and length of your bullet as well as what cartridge it will be used in and at what velocity it will be shot at.

One small advantage of a slightly heavier and tougher alloy like Kurt has stated and I am using is at bit heavier bullet. It's a small gain in weight but the heavier the alloy the better the gyroscopic stability the same rate of twist will impart. I think I gained about 5 to 6 grains with Kurt's alloy. Does that matter? Well it does at least a little and is a step in the right direction so at least it doesn't hurt.

[Distant Thunder]

That gain was over the lino/lead alloy I had been using before switching to Kurt's alloy. That alloy wasn't as much lino as Arnie uses but was still a bunch. I'd have to look up what it was 'cause I'm older and I don't remember things like I once did, which never very good.

[Kurt]

Jim,

I changed my alloy now to 1/17 mostly because in the .40-65 the bullet measures more setback than a .44 or .45.
The setback is greater in the .40's than the .44 or .45 for some reason even using a lighter powder load over the larger calibers. But I will check this out more this winter if we get the snow. Didn't have enough last year to recheck this out.
I changed the mix last winter stifling it up using 1 roll with 17 lbs lead and the .44's and .45's as well as the .50 look very good.

[bruce m]

good post jim.
bruce.

[bpcr shooter]

well all of this certainly has me intrigued, Im going to go get some solder (thanks kurt for the info on the sale) and try some heat treating with the 18# of lead mix. I would like to run a few months worth of cure time to this as well, so it will make a good winter project, as to keep my mind busy as I await for my shiloh letter.

[VectorMan]

Thanks guys. Just what I was looking for in my 45-100. I have been using 20/1 elliptical for my silhouette game but was thinking about 16/1 elliptical or money bullet for testing the Meacham long range gun.

KA.

[bruce m]

be wary of leading if you start heat treating bullets.
personally i would never go harder than equivalent to 11:1 lead/tin.
bruce.

[bpcr shooter]

be wary of leading if you start heat treating bullets.
personally i would never go harder than equivalent to 11:1 lead/tin.
bruce.

I only use PP bullets so it shouldn't be to much a a problem. I have gone as hard as 22, but that was with pistols

[Kurt]

be wary of leading if you start heat treating bullets.
personally i would never go harder than equivalent to 11:1 lead/tin.
bruce.

Bruce,

The photo is not too good but 1/11 does not look much better as far as obturation.
If you would use it you better patch them over bore diameter for reliable rotation.

IMG_3180.JPG

[bruce m]

hi kurt,
i use between 12:1 nd 14:1 depending.
i have no problem with bumpup.
caveat is that all my bullets are quite long for calibre which might help there.
12:1 has noticeably less setback of the nose than 16:1, and this does show in wind deflection and slightly different trajectory.
i could be wrong there as i have not used a chronograph for some time in this work.
i started my antimony experiments with lyman no2 cut 50/50 with lead and never got ant further.
i lent mu hardness tester to a guy who died and will never see it again, so could not compare hardness with lead tin alloys.
you are probably one of the guys who has rung out antimony in bpcr alloys more than most.
bruce.

[SSShooter]

Kurt - where did you get that fabric in your pic? Looks pretty handy for keeping things from rolling around.

[Kurt]

Bruce,

I found cutting #2 Lyman 50/50 is a good place to be. As well as WW cut 50/50 if you like to use them.

The problem now days around here is getting quality lead. When I was still working in the plumbing trades I could pick up a 25# chain link ingot and drop it on the concrete floor and listen for a ring telling me if it was whipping solder or pure packing lead.
Now when I get a pig of 99% pure lead from a supplier and drop it, it sounds like a alloy mix.
And I see a change in the bullets with a new supply of lead, like lot changes in black powder.