shooting results

Support for the 1863 shooter. Discussions of powders, loads, bullets, etc.
Post Reply
Todd Birch
Posts: 2124
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 12:01 pm
Location: Somewhere in the Cariboo ....

shooting results

Post by Todd Birch » Mon May 17, 2010 10:01 am

For the 2nd time in a week, I arrived at the range (20 mile drive) with my '63 carbine, minus caps and my cleaning cradle. The 1st time, I had something else to shoot with me, so it wasn't a total waste.

So, I drove home, picked up the missing items and headed into the boonies a short distance from home.
I paced off 100 yds and sat down to shoot. No benches in the bush.
Then I noticed the bugs ...... I was wearing shorts and had no bug juice. Oh well .....

My Lyman 515141 bullets and 55 grs FFg gave me a 5 shot group measuring 3 3/4"V x 5"H. Shooting from a bench would have cut that in half. I cleaned the bore with a couple of wet patches and dried it.

The wheel weight bullets put 5 rds into 2"V x 5 1/2"H. I can't account for the horizontal stringing other than the fact that I was busy swatting mosquitoes between blow tubing and loading. I even had to blow them off the front sight! A smack on my leg would kill half a dozen!

Both loads printed 2-3" below POA with the 100 yd sight setting.
Then I walked up to 50 yds for the off hand.

My bullets put three rds into 2 3/4", 2 bullets touching. They impacted 2" above POA. No blow tubing between shots. The wheel weight bullets put 3 rds into 4 1/4", 2" above POA.

So what did I learn, other than to not wear shorts and have bug juice with me in the bush?
This is the second time I've fired wheel weight bullets out of a '63 and both times, my alloy bullets have proven more accurate by a narrow margin. For casual plinking and rock busting, the ww bullets are acceptable.
For hunting, I definitely would use my own. Neither prints the 1st rd into the group, so a fouling shot is essential.

Fouling was a problem, causing me to spritz a little cleaning solution to aid in dropping the block. I had filled the block cavity with grease. After cleaning at home, I got a brain wave ....

I filled the block cavity with the ML patch lube I concoct and spread a film of it on the face of the block. Having a non-petroleum base, this ought to prove beneficial. Next time ......
"From birth to the packing house, we travel between the two eternities ....." Robert Duvall in "Broken Trail"

User avatar
Rooster-Rancher
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 6:31 am
Location: IOWA
Contact:

Post by Rooster-Rancher » Mon May 17, 2010 11:34 am

I filled the block cavity with the ML patch lube I concoct and spread a film of it on the face of the block. Having a non-petroleum base, this ought to prove beneficial. Next time ......
That's what I do with Wonder lube. works well. Nice shooting by the way. :wink:

Todd Birch
Posts: 2124
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 12:01 pm
Location: Somewhere in the Cariboo ....

ML lube

Post by Todd Birch » Mon May 17, 2010 1:32 pm

rooster-rancher

Don't know why it never occured to me before that ML patch lube would be a good idea to keep a '63 block from seizing up, instead of a petroleum based grease.

Considering that the '63 carbine was regarded as a cavalry close combat weapon, I'm always surprised at it's accuracy potential.

I just bought a magazine on all the current 'bull pup' design fighting rifles, and they are in the same league, producing 2-3 moa for close range street fighting, the wave of the future.

The odd one produces sub 2" groups at 50 yards with optical sights, which I can do with the '63 carbine and the Lawrence/blade combo. Of course, there is a slight difference in the rate of fire ......
"From birth to the packing house, we travel between the two eternities ....." Robert Duvall in "Broken Trail"

Post Reply