ASSRA Forum - Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T

ASSRA Forum › General › Reloading the Single Shot Rifle › Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T

(Moderator Group: Moderator)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Page Index Toggle

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies)

Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T (Read 40166 times)

creedmoormatch Ex Member	Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T Reply #15 - Jan 28^th, 2011 at 12:21pm	Print Post
	J. Lewis -- Congrats on the very fine work that you've accomplished with your 32-40 and for wanting to share that information around with others. I hope you don't mind if I look at what you've done more closely. Your target of 29 Oct 10 is noted as being Alliant 300-MP (Magnum Pistol), at a charge of 14.4 grains. What was the initial charge of powder at your first session with A-300-MP and do your recall the group size at that loading. I am also interested in knowing what base band O.D. did you achieve with the Hoch 322-200 mould cast with 1-18 alloy ? I've always cast that mould with 1-25 alloy, per discussions with Paul S. Lastly, do you shoot Dell #59-C lube thinned out a bit for winter temps, and if so, which ingredient do you use as a thinning agent. Thanks for what additional information you will pass along. Creedmoormatch
	« Last Edit: Jan 28^th, 2011 at 1:01pm by »

	IP Logged

UtahDave Senior Forum Member Offline Posts: 396 Location: Heber City, Utah Joined: Aug 14^th, 2010	Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T Reply #16 - Feb 1^st, 2011 at 6:15pm	Print Post
	Great post and my compliments to the scientific method used with this load development. I get my new 32-40 CPA at the end of the month and will start with 300 MP but toned down per your recomendation. Where are you getting Dell 59C? I would cook some up but I'm having a hard time finding lead sterate. Dave


	IP Logged

SSShooter Frequent Elocutionist Offline Posts: 2942 Location: Southern NJ Joined: Aug 1^st, 2010	Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T Reply #17 - Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 9:19am	Print Post
	Excellent and informative thread to a new 38-55 owner. One question is about 'pressure signs' you mentioned watching for while working up the 300-MP load. Are pressure signs the same shooting 32-40 & 38-55 at <1500fps as they are shooting, say a .223 at 3000fps? Thanks.

	Glenn - Stevens 044 1/2, Bartlein SS 5R barrel in 22LR
	GTalk IP Logged

frnkeore Frequent Elocutionist Offline Posts: 7659 Location: Central Point, OR 97502 Joined: Jun 16^th, 2010	Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T Reply #18 - Feb 4^th, 2011 at 7:40pm	Print Post
	John, Would you be kind enough to post the Dell 59c formula? I've near tried it, I hadn't been shooting in 15 years. I've only used Darr, E#mmert, Smiley and a HV lube that I cooked up that doesn't work with anything under 1700 fps GC bullets. I'd really like to try Dell 59c now that I've started shooting again. Frank

	ASSRA Member #696, ISSA Member #339
	YIM AIM IP Logged

Jim_Borton Senior Forum Member Offline Posts: 449 Location: Tipp City Joined: Apr 9^th, 2004	Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T Reply #19 - Feb 4^th, 2011 at 8:24pm	Print Post
	frnkeore if u go to the reloading part of this form and at the top of page u will see luber formulas 59c is their!

	Hugs & Kisses ASSRA life NRA life NMLRA life
	IP Logged

frnkeore Frequent Elocutionist Offline Posts: 7659 Location: Central Point, OR 97502 Joined: Jun 16^th, 2010	Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T Reply #20 - Feb 4^th, 2011 at 8:27pm	Print Post
	thanks Jim. Frank

	ASSRA Member #696, ISSA Member #339
	YIM AIM IP Logged

frnkeore Frequent Elocutionist Offline Posts: 7659 Location: Central Point, OR 97502 Joined: Jun 16^th, 2010	Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T Reply #21 - Feb 4^th, 2011 at 9:12pm	Print Post
	Jim, John, Anyone. What is Paracin 9? Frank

	ASSRA Member #696, ISSA Member #339
	YIM AIM IP Logged

40_Rod Frequent Elocutionist Offline Extremism in the persuit of accuracy is not a vice Posts: 4285 Location: Knoxville, TN Joined: Apr 20^th, 2004	Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T Reply #22 - Feb 5^th, 2011 at 9:12am	Print Post
	If I remember correctly it is a Castor wax. I believe that Charlie moved on from that to using Synaceti 116, a synthetic spermiceti. 40 Rod


	IP Logged

creedmoormatch Ex Member	Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T Reply #23 - Mar 24^th, 2011 at 10:20am	Print Post
	J. Louis Regarding your recent work with the 32-40 WCF using the new Alliant 300 HP, I see that your earlier targets at 200 yards were shot w/ Hoch 322-200 cast 1-25 alloy, which is my regular bullet temper. Then (on 10-29-10) your target note is the same bullet cast at 1-18 alloy. I am wondering what caused you to go to a bit harder casting alloy? Did you have the advantage to recover already shot bullets that my have revealed the need to harden them up slightly, perhaps the bases were eroded by the powder? Thanks for your reply, Creedmoormatch Choose civility


	IP Logged

John Boy Ex Member	Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T Reply #24 - Mar 24^th, 2011 at 12:39pm	Print Post
	Creedmoor, to bear out John's position of harder alloys shoot better groups, Dan Theodore did a test of various alloys, including the 'old stand by' 1:20 and found that a 98:1:1 alloy shot the best. IIRC, the full article is in one of the recent magazines in December 2010. In addition to better groups the 98:1:1 alloy bullets had land cuts further up the ogives. An indication that these bullets had better bearing surface in the bore. As for myself, several years back, here is a 25 shot 100yd group using WW (15.4 Bhn) plus 1/2 % Sn. There's 14 bullets that went into the ragged hole using a vernier (You need to *Login* or *Register* to view media files and links)
	« Last Edit: Mar 24^th, 2011 at 12:49pm by »

	IP Logged

UtahDave Senior Forum Member Offline Posts: 396 Location: Heber City, Utah Joined: Aug 14^th, 2010	Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T Reply #25 - Mar 26^th, 2011 at 1:03am	Print Post
	Just what is a 98:1:1 alloy...perhaps 98 lead, 1% tin and 1% antimony? This is interesting given the high price for tin these days. Have you run any hardness tests on the alloy? Dave


	IP Logged

gunlaker Frequent Elocutionist Offline Posts: 2607 Location: lower mainland, B.C. Joined: Dec 13^th, 2010	Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T Reply #26 - Mar 26^th, 2011 at 11:41am	Print Post
	UtahDave wrote on Mar 26^th, 2011 at 1:03am: Just what is a 98:1:1 alloy...perhaps 98 lead, 1% tin and 1% antimony? This is interesting given the high price for tin these days. Have you run any hardness tests on the alloy? Dave Dave, if I recall, Dan did indeed do hardness tests and his results are posted on the Shiloh site. The alloy is indeed tin and antimony. Chris.


	IP Logged

John Boy Ex Member	Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T Reply #27 - Mar 26^th, 2011 at 3:14pm	Print Post
	J - thanks for finding Dan's detail information of Shiloh. I searched to the high heavens and couldn't find it, thinking that thread was one of the many he did a 'midnight' deletion of. Dan says he's writing a book and accordingly deleted nearly all his good informational posts on threads.


	IP Logged

BP Frequent Elocutionist Offline Posts: 8039 Location: Westside Joined: Aug 27^th, 2006	Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T Reply #28 - Mar 26^th, 2011 at 6:30pm	Print Post
	John Boy wrote Quote: In addition to better groups the 98:1:1 alloy bullets had land cuts further up the ogives. An indication that these bullets had better bearing surface in the bore. John Boy, What were the land cuts further up the ogive attributed to? Any mention made of ogive alteration - slight slumping, OAL shortening etc compared to results from other alloys? I do understand that an alloy with antimony will cause slightly larger as-cast dimensions, including the nose dia, but did any other factors come into play, or am I off-base with this question?
	« Last Edit: Mar 26^th, 2011 at 7:22pm by BP »
	There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading, the few who learn by observation, and the rest who have to pee on the electric fence and find out for themselves. Proud Noodlehead
	IP Logged

John Boy Ex Member	Re: 32-40 & Alliant 300MP MIKE-T Reply #29 - Mar 26^th, 2011 at 8:26pm	Print Post
	BP, my magazines are helter skelter and I can't find the magazine issue with the article for the exact words. Believe it was in BPCR News - Winter 2010 Anyway, it is the concept that the nose of a lead:tin:antimony alloy bullet will slump less in the bore compared lead:tin alloy This was evident that the picture of the recovered bullet with the antimony was longer than the bullets that were only lead:tin Correct me if anyone finds the article before I do


	IP Logged

Page Index Toggle

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

« Board Index ‹ Board Top

Top

ASSRA Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2026. All Rights Reserved.

Valid XHTML

Valid CSS

Powered by Perl

Source Forge

Page completed in 0.6954 seconds.