Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Early Ballistics Work (Read 12266 times)
BP
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 8039
Location: Westside
Joined: Aug 27th, 2006
Re: Early Ballistics Work
Reply #15 - Oct 10th, 2012 at 12:52pm
Print Post  
I believe Ackley duplicated one short barrel/no barrel test, and his book has a picture showing the enlarged base.
  

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
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JLouis
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 10625
Joined: Apr 8th, 2009
Re: Early Ballistics Work
Reply #16 - Oct 10th, 2012 at 1:03pm
Print Post  
The short barrel tests show how the lead tin alloys turn to putty, a direct relationship to nose slump and the accordion affect. It is discussed in more detail in Boats Twist Rate thread.

J.Louis
  

" It Is Better To Now Have Been A Has Been Than A Never Was Or A Wanna Be "
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BP
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 8039
Location: Westside
Joined: Aug 27th, 2006
Re: Early Ballistics Work
Reply #17 - Oct 10th, 2012 at 2:04pm
Print Post  
I see mention of a 1/30 alloy used for these tests (pages 64-65 of the download copy). Did he mention the use of any other Sn/Pb mixes for these "putty" tests?

  

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
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JLouis
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 10625
Joined: Apr 8th, 2009
Re: Early Ballistics Work
Reply #18 - Oct 10th, 2012 at 2:39pm
Print Post  
That I don't recall and my book is currently out on loan, but what I find interesting is 1-25 and 1-30 are still very popular alloys and still being used to this date. Sometimes even softer than the 1-30 at 1-40. It is also interesting knowing Mann's findings that the trend has not moved to the harder lead and tin alloys. As stated earlier I currently use a 1-16 alloy as I have proven to my self the increased benefits by doing so. When I share this with others the typical response is the concern for the added costs of the tin and they opt to save money in lieu of improving their accuracy as well as thier day in and day out consistency. I think this due to the mindset that the little things cannot make that much of a difference, when the opposite holds true and that being the difference is substantial. The name of Schuetzen game is to pickup points and not to loss them, yet due to the minor additional costs of tin and match primers of which can also follow suit, there are those that just won't spend the money to get that little extra out of their rifles to take them to the top. 

J.Louis
  

" It Is Better To Now Have Been A Has Been Than A Never Was Or A Wanna Be "
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
frnkeore
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 7249
Location: Central Point, OR 97502
Joined: Jun 16th, 2010
Re: Early Ballistics Work
Reply #19 - Oct 10th, 2012 at 3:01pm
Print Post  
I don't doubt that it happened but, what doesn't make since to me is why doesn't it appear to happen in pistols, did I miss something?

I just went over the area that I'm not understanding. One thing that I forgot is that he used bore size bullets to start with and 30/1 lead. I'm sure that the higher sectional density has a effect as, pistol bullets have less. But, pistol bullets usually use soft lead and 30/1 used to be a pistol mix (it may still be?).

2" & 3" barrels are very common in pistols. If you look at figure 35 in the book, you'll see that at 8 1/4" the base starts flaring quite a bit and at 2 3/4" it flairs from .322 to .400.

Rifle barrels are measured from the breech but, he must be using a barrel length in front of the case to obtain 5/8" and 1/4" barrels so, the barrel lengths would be comparable to revolver type pistols in that respect.

So, it would seem logical the pistol bases would still flair enough to be noticeable at the target even with a lower SD and that is what has always confused me all these years.

Frank
  

ASSRA Member #696, ISSA Member #339
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
JLouis
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 10625
Joined: Apr 8th, 2009
Re: Early Ballistics Work
Reply #20 - Oct 10th, 2012 at 3:39pm
Print Post  
I hope this conversation continues and only wish I had my book in hand. It is discussions like this that take competitors to a higher level as it is about the most important part of the accuracy puzzle, the bullet and the bullet is the component that is ignored the most.

J.Louis
  

" It Is Better To Now Have Been A Has Been Than A Never Was Or A Wanna Be "
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
frnkeore
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 7249
Location: Central Point, OR 97502
Joined: Jun 16th, 2010
Re: Early Ballistics Work
Reply #21 - Oct 10th, 2012 at 4:13pm
Print Post  
Regarding bullet alloy. You have to get up to 10/1 to make much of a difference the strength. I did testing back in the 90's and found no repeatable difference between 30 and 20/1. The first time I used 30/1, I shot a better group than I had shot with 20/1 so, I used that for a while. When I shot a bad group or two, I went back to 20/1 and later settled at anything in the 22 - 23/1. The .512, 10 shot group shot this year was done with 20/1 as noted on the target.

Here is the differences in hardness from 30/1 to 10/1.

30/1 -  9.00 bhn
23/1 -  9.86
20/1 - 10.00
16/1 - 10.60
10/1 - 11.50

Frank
  

ASSRA Member #696, ISSA Member #339
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
BP
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 8039
Location: Westside
Joined: Aug 27th, 2006
Re: Early Ballistics Work
Reply #22 - Oct 10th, 2012 at 4:45pm
Print Post  
Frank,

I do think the same happens with pistol bullets. When testing magnum handgun loads, I have recovered heavy jacketed bullets whose bases started out flat but were quite cupped after the shot. I did not measure to see if the base had expanded over groove dia as I was concentrating on nose expansion.

  

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
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JLouis
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 10625
Joined: Apr 8th, 2009
Re: Early Ballistics Work
Reply #23 - Oct 10th, 2012 at 5:57pm
Print Post  
I would have to disagree with the alloy strength comment and repeatable difference. I have observed a substantial difference in my extensive testing. If you Solly look at the difference of seating pressure required as you move up the hardness scale it goes from a slip fit at 1-30 to requiring a mechanical seater as you move up there to distorting while trying to seat it. It is especially more noticeable while using a cylindrical as was my case and or the bullet is over one thousandths larger the groove dia. There will be some that will say what was being felt was the increase in bullet diameter while moving up the hardness ladder. I have to tried to measure those differences and from 1-30 to 1-16 from what I could detect with my digital micrometer was just about a five ten thousandths difference. When going back to the bullet trap as one moves up the ladder from 1-30 to 1-15 nose slump noticeably decreases. I spent well over a year working with harder than lead and tin alloys and all though the strength went up and a slight increase in accuracy was noted it never remained as consistent as the richer lead and tin alloys in the 1-20 range and moving up from there. Bullet fit also becomes more critical in regards to bullet diameter in relationship to groove diameter, freebore dia in relationship to groove diameter, leade angle in relationship nose taper etc. When going down from 1-20 it tends to get less critical but the perfect relationships mentioned should not be ignored if the goal is extreme accuracy, consistent top three finishes and beyond.

J.Louis
  

" It Is Better To Now Have Been A Has Been Than A Never Was Or A Wanna Be "
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MIKE-T
Oldtimer
*****
Offline


[SHOOTCAST>

Posts: 636
Location: Wexford Township Michigan
Joined: Apr 16th, 2004
Re: Early Ballistics Work
Reply #24 - Oct 10th, 2012 at 7:35pm
Print Post  
I might as well join the party, I think most of what everyone has written is correct in some way, after using QuickLoad for 9+years I have some thoughts about the expanded bases on the bullets in very short barrel/no barrel rifles and the handgun, especially revolvers with very short barrels.
Compare the 357 magnum, bullet is 18.75” down the barrel for a almost max load of AA#9 to powder to al-burnt 95% in a 20” barrel with a muzzle pressure of about 1550psi and 1596fps, the same load same cartridge out of a 2” revolver barrel produces 21,500psi muzzle pressure at 830fps.
 
Switching to Bullseye Powder and almost max load in the 20” barrel produces 890psi and 1385fps and the 95% powder al-burnt distance in the barrel is just less than 2 inches. Muzzle pressure being 17,890psi with the 2 inch barrel and 795fps these figures are all using a 168gr cast bullet if you change to a 4” barrel everything else the same muzzle pressure drops to 6900psi.
 
So has anyone here shot max loads with soft cast bullets in a 2” barreled 357 Mag. I have not. 

But I have a S&W M36 with 3” barrel and adjustable J-fame sights I installed, tried to hot rod into a strong defense gun in the late 70’s, it was not accurate with heavy loads of Unique and a soft bullet alloy I used of mostly free smelted down shot, the carbine actually shot pretty well and did not lead, cannot say the same for the 36, leaded bore and muzzle, sprayed bullets all over at 50ft.

Let’s look at that load from the QuickLoad side of pressures and muzzle velocities.
Near max 16,500psi 38 special load of Unique in 18” carbine barrel (had a converted M92 for a while) muzzle velocity 1130fps, muzzle pressure 700psi, 95% powder all-burnt distance is 6.5” down the barrel, same load 3 inch barrel velocity 740fps, muzzle pressure 7426psi.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MIKE-T
Oldtimer
*****
Offline


[SHOOTCAST>

Posts: 636
Location: Wexford Township Michigan
Joined: Apr 16th, 2004
Re: Early Ballistics Work
Reply #25 - Oct 10th, 2012 at 7:35pm
Print Post  
My thought is a combo of muzzle pressure and the resultant un-burnt powder & gases escaping against the base of the bullet may be part of the cause of base deformation with short barrels & soft lead bullets.

I wish I still had my Dan Wesson in 357 Mag. I would make a threaded sleeve to protect the threads and see what was that with bullets cast out the 25:1 alloy what I use for Schuetzen shooting, sure would be interesting to catch some of those bullets and check the bases testing different powders using no barrel and the 6” it came with.
Mike
« Last Edit: Oct 10th, 2012 at 8:04pm by MIKE-T »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BP
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 8039
Location: Westside
Joined: Aug 27th, 2006
Re: Early Ballistics Work
Reply #26 - Oct 10th, 2012 at 9:16pm
Print Post  
Mike,

Interesting info, and an indication to try fast burning powders (relative to the application) to keep the muzzle pressures lower. 

Were you using the 358429 Keith bullet with Unique in your 3" J-frame?
  

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
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MIKE-T
Oldtimer
*****
Offline


[SHOOTCAST>

Posts: 636
Location: Wexford Township Michigan
Joined: Apr 16th, 2004
Re: Early Ballistics Work
Reply #27 - Oct 10th, 2012 at 9:45pm
Print Post  
BP have found that in smaller cases especially with the softer bullets we use that lower muzzle pressure's helps with group size, at least in my own tests, I shoot a 7mm Brewer, shortened 30/30 case and have settled on about a 7gr load of AA#5 with a 155gr Barnett mould spire type bullet, with a scope I can shoot very small groups at 100yds, have to do some work on the load for 200yds. 

Yes I was using the only 38/357 PB cast bullet that shot accurately in almost every revolver I have ever owned the 3582429, I looked back at my old paper records (actually 3x5 cards) and see that with the alloy I used then they weighed 173grs before lube.

Still have the mould will have to dig it out and cast up some WW bullets and shoot them out of my 5" M27, been shooting the Berry plated bullets for so long in hand guns that I have not cast a revolver bullet in a long time, take that back I do cast soft 430gr 44 mag. bullets, but they go in a 10.4 Vetterli I converted to CF a few years ago.

Mike



BP wrote on Oct 10th, 2012 at 9:16pm:
Mike,

Interesting info, and an indication to try fast burning powders (relative to the application) to keep the muzzle pressures lower. 

Were you using the 358429 Keith bullet with Unique in your 3" J-frame?

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JLouis
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 10625
Joined: Apr 8th, 2009
Re: Early Ballistics Work
Reply #28 - Oct 10th, 2012 at 9:52pm
Print Post  
Mike provided very interesting information while trying to address Franks confusion. Lets keep the original discussion going, it has allot of value in it and I don't think we want to see it morph into a discussion about pistols and loads.

J.Louis
  

" It Is Better To Now Have Been A Has Been Than A Never Was Or A Wanna Be "
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BP
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 8039
Location: Westside
Joined: Aug 27th, 2006
Re: Early Ballistics Work
Reply #29 - Oct 10th, 2012 at 10:12pm
Print Post  
John,

I'm not trying to morph this into a discussion about pistols and loads. What I am considering is that a pistol has greater similarities to Mann's short barrel tests than a rifle barrel length, and there is the possibility that results from Mikes handgun results may show indications sooner than would be observed if one sticks only to rifle barrel lengths. What you learn from one might be usefully applied to the other. 
  

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
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 
Send TopicPrint