|
Any cartridge can be a challenge and any rifle can be a challenge. I have two CPA Steven 44 1/2's in .32-20 CPA. I did research on the cartridge choice before purchase, from the .32-20 CPA to the venerable .32-40, and went with the smaller capacity knowing I can always rechamber to a larger case. Having owned several wildcat and obsolete black powder cartridge rifles, I also like the ease of forming brass with this choice I have tried several different bullets and several different diameters in the past two years. The best results have been with borrowed mold producing a 206 grain bullet weight with .320 diameter. However, when I went to order the mold, the maker was out-of-business. Last year, I used a four-cavity NOE mold which copied the Lyman 321471 configuration. This is a good mold, but throws a .321 bullet when I have a .320 RKS barrel and a .319 Shilen barrel. The new molds are tailored to the individual bores as a research topic. This year, new molds are matched to each bore, SPG lube will be standardized, there is 125 pounds of 25:1 Pb/SN same-lot alloy in the shed, 6,000 primers of one lot, 8 pounds of powder and scope mounts for a 36X Leupold. If this does not then work, then I can rechamber. I will campaign them this Spring and Summer once the surgeon releases me. I found that I have had an involuntary flinch caused by deformed discs in my upper spine. I could see I was moving the barrel in recoil while the bullet is still in the bore, never understood why until discussion with the neurosurgeon before the surgery. Retirement means I will have time to go to the range, shoot controlled conditions and keep extensive records. I want to do an exhaustive analysis of the cartridge, particularly the relationship of the powder choice to ambient temperature. I will publish the results with analysis come Fall. I remember a gunsmith asking me about ".32-20 CPA" stamped on the barrel stating, "This lettering has to mean something." He knew about breech-seating and was amazed at the adaptation.
|