Testing Bullet Lubes at 3000 fps

4.7K Views
Last Post 04 January 2017

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 24 October 2016

I'm down to my last few globs of the discontinued Rooster HVR lube so I have no choice but to find a new favorite lube. Previous tests have given me a pretty good idea what will work and what won't, but nonetheless I'm going to conduct even more tests and let the results guide my final choice.

The plan is to shoot ten 10-shot groups with each lube at 3000 fps, without cleaning in between the 100 shots. Why? Because "cast bullets at 3000 fps” has a nice ring to it, don't you agree?

Even 100 shots each may not be enough to prove a statistically significant difference between some lubes, nonetheless "100 shots each" has a nice ring to it. :cool:

The tentative list of lubes to include in the test:

-- HVR as the previous “gold standard" -- LBT Blue (the so-called hard version) -- White Label Carnuba Red -- White Label Commercial 190 degrees -- White Label 2500 (preferred by Larry Gibson for hi-vel use, last I heard)

I may add one or two more lubes to the list, but it's not feasible to test every lube out there unless I win the lottery and retire. :D Once a new “gold standard” lube is chosen, I can always use it to do a one-on-one comparison with other lubes.

I thought about giving homebrew lubes another whirl. I've learned a few things since my last attempt at homebrew lube, and I suspect now I could equal HVR without too much difficulty. However, that could take some time and I never seem to have enough time. Also, I don't mind paying a few bucks for storebought lube because it's a minor cost compared to what I spend on powder, primers, barrels, etc.. I can always revisit homebrew lube later if the spirit moves me.

It takes the better part of a day to load and shoot 100 shots, allowing the barrel to cool for a minute between each shot and for 10 minutes or so between groups. At any rate after 100 full throttle shots at the bench I've had enough, so this comparison test may take several weeks or even months, depending on how often Mr. Murphy visits my range.

For today I shot HVR. This will be the control load, the “gold standard” against which the other lubes will be compared. I'm hoping one of the other lubes will prove to be at least as good as HVR.

The test rig and its control load:

-- Remington M700 switchbarrel bench rifle -- Pacnor 6-groove 14” twist 7BR which I have discussed in another thread -- 34.0 gr. WC845. It's not my favorite powder but it was sitting on the shelf, and that counts for something. :D -- CCI #450 primers -- 100 gr. GC spitzer -- J.R. brand reclaimed shot oven treated @470F -- nose sized to match the taper of the throat -- final sized 0.284” (the barrel's groove is 0.283") -- seated for 0.015” jam

Today's target. Group #0 was a warm-up group using wheelweight alloy, while groups #1 - 10 are the “official” groups using reclaimed shot. This will be the standard that other lubes are expected to at least equal.

I repeat for emphasis -- the barrel was not cleaned between groups! At the end of the day I pushed one patch through with Ed's Red, and the only reason I did that was to deter corrosion, not because the barrel was dirty. There was nothing on the patch other than some black carbon. If the barrel had been fouling we would expect groups to open up as more shots were fired, but that didn't happen. If anything groups became smaller and more consistent as more shots were fired, indicating a stable barrel condition. Pacnor makes a good barrel, and HVR is a good lube.

My chrono has no printer so this is as close as I can come to providing tangible proof of the velocities.

Attached Files

64 Comments

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes

CBA Member

delmarskid1 posted this 24 October 2016

That's just spooky.

Attached Files

Standard Member

onondaga posted this 24 October 2016

http://www.castbulletassoc.org/view_user.php?id=608>mtngun

My brain caught an unusual dispersion pattern in your targets. It may or may not be relevant to your curiosity. Your hits show an unusually low number of 6 O"Clock hits.

What are your thoughts on that?

Gary

Attached Files

CBA Member

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 24 October 2016

thanks for including mean radius ...i think that is more magnificent than something called * group * size.....mainly because all shots are considered, not just the two worst shots.

after all it is a team effort ...

ken

Attached Files

CBA Member

RicinYakima posted this 24 October 2016

Thanks, this is going to be fun and informative!

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 24 October 2016

onondaga wrote: http://www.castbulletassoc.org/view_user.php?id=608>mtngun

My brain caught an unusual dispersion pattern in your targets. It may or may not be relevant to your curiosity. Your hits show an unusually low number of 6 O"Clock hits.

What are your thoughts on that?

Gary Well Gary, I was more worried about the 12 o'clock fliers in groups #0, 1, 3, and 5.

To complicate matters, for the first several groups I was making scope adjustments between groups -- for example, I made an adjustment prior to group #3, and it's first shot was the nasty 12 o'clock flier. I was tempted to disregard that flier as related to the scope adjustment, but felt that would be cheating. As you know, sometimes it take one or two shots for the POI to stabilize after making a scope adjustment.

Barrel harmonics is always a possibility, but that's beyond the scope of this test.

Trigger pull, wind, and mirage could explain the horizontal tendency of group #8. There was a 10 - 20 mph wind quartering across the range, and some modest mirage that I am not very good at doping. You wouldn't think a 2 oz trigger pull could shift the POI on a 16 pound rifle, but it can.

The first time you use a 2 oz trigger it seems too light to control. Then after you get used to it, it feels like 4 pounds, and you wish you could make it lighter. :D

Sometimes I observe a horizontal or diagonal pattern but it's the vertical fliers that seem to do the most damage.

Attached Files

CBA Member

R. Dupraz posted this 24 October 2016

I didn't see any unusual 6:00 pattern, but did notice the vertical and horizontal spread.

"Sometimes I observe a horizontal or diagonal pattern but it's the vertical fliers that seem to do the most damage."

Great information and groups. Keep it coming.

Attached Files

Standard Member

oscarflytyer posted this 25 October 2016

following!

Attached Files

CBA Member

beltfed posted this 25 October 2016

style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"MTN gun, style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"I like the technical work you are doing. style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"One thing, I could not help bu notice the style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"circumferential scratches/almost could call style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"them grooves in that 7BR ctg brass. style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"I realize this is a scaled up PIC, but the style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"apparent brass condition “looks almost scary” to me style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"??? style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"beltfed/arnie

Attached Files

Standard Member

onondaga posted this 25 October 2016

http://www.castbulletassoc.org/view_user.php?id=1981>beltfed

You speak in code, is it intentional?

Attached Files

Standard Member

onondaga posted this 25 October 2016

http://www.castbulletassoc.org/view_user.php?id=608>mtngun, you said,

"Well Gary, I was more worried about the 12 o'clock fliers in groups #0, 1, 3, and 5."

12 o'clock fliers are a lot more predictable than a lack of 6 o'clock hits. I have seen this pattern in my own shooting when practicing already developed loads. I believe it is shooter related and the cause is not completely settling into bench form because of a mental wandering caused by wind doping intensity.

I have been there and recognize the pattern as one that gets me to take a break from the bench. Groups with that pattern aren't fliers, they reflect the condition of the shooter. I discard the set when that happens to me because they are not a reliable and repeated condition for a developed load. Some would call it having a bad day. It is not representative of the many targets you have previously posted.

Respectfully, A theory of mine might be helpful. I place a relative importance to trigger pull hand and see my own errors in an order: Lateral dispersion is invariably caused by my trigger hand grip and is noticed most when a difference in vertical dispersion begins and vertical dispersion is a variable that is more commonly up than down for me. So the result is that I get left/right dispersion and diagonal dispersion with a lack of 6 o'clock hits and walk away from the bench because it is me seeing what I'm doing and showing me I need a break.

Gary

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 25 October 2016

Beltfeed: you have a sharp eye. Yes, the cases have scars. If you read my 7BR thread elsewhere on this forum, I believe it mentions that the original chamber had gouges. That is what caused the scarred cases. I set back the barrel enough to clean up the original chamber and the problem is gone ..... but the scars on the cases remain.

Gary: agree that human error is always a factor, but how do we eliminate it short of using a rail gun? I view disregarding fliers as a slippery slope that I would rather not go down. My philosophy is that we can't just cherry pick the good groups and ignore the bad groups, we have to count them all.

Regarding grip causing horizontal spread .... no doubt that can happen, but it's not happening in this test because there is no human contact with the rifle other than through the 2 oz. trigger.

Thank you for following my trials and tribulations. The weather forecast is not looking too bright so I'm not sure if I'll be able to resume the lube shootout this weekend.

Attached Files

CBA Member

45 2.1 posted this 25 October 2016

onondaga wrote: Groups with that pattern aren't fliers, they reflect the condition of the shooter. Actually, if one would go back several years and read what Tom Gray wrote about his lube trials, I think it would be apparent that using the amount of high viscosity lube he is using is the cause. Certain low viscosity lubes do not cause that condition at low or high velocities. Too much of a good thing doesn't always produce consistent results.

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 25 October 2016

45 2.1 wrote: onondaga wrote: Groups with that pattern aren't fliers, they reflect the condition of the shooter. Actually, if one would go back several years and read what Tom Gray wrote about his lube trials, I think it would be apparent that using the amount of high viscosity lube he is using is the cause. Certain low viscosity lubes do not cause that condition at low or high velocities. Too much of a good thing doesn't always produce consistent results. Bill, I have indeed read at least some of Tom's musings on lube and on high velocity -- I believe Tom liked to call it “lube purging", where excess lube was supposedly building up in the barrel until it eventually was blown out, resulting in an unstable bore condition and fliers.

I did not find Tom's claims about “lube purging” at all convincing, and not consistent with my own experiences, which are just as valid as anyone else's experiences.

That said, if anyone wants to send me a sample of Tom's lube -- enough to lube 100 bullets, about 1/3 of a stick -- I'm willing to include it in this shootout. Or if someone wants to post Tom's recipe, I'd be willing to brew up a batch.

(Note that I do agree with Tom Grey about the importance of barrel twist at high velocity. I agree with just about everything Tom wrote other than his “lube purging” theory. :cool: )

In general, everyone and their brother seems to believe that their pet lube (and their pet bullet design and their pet alloy and their pet cartridge) shoots better than everyone else's pet lube. :D I say show me an apples-to-apples comparison with enough data to demonstrate a statistically significant difference, as this lube shootout will attempt to do.

Or, if there turns out there is no significant difference between lubes, as Joe Brennan sometimes claims, that will be good to know, too. I say let the data do the talking.

In the meantime, this shootout will include two popular “pet” lubes, LBT Blue and White Label 2500. I might be willing to include one or two more pet lubes, but there are practical limits to how many lubes I can test in one lifetime, with one barrel. :D

Attached Files

CBA Member

tturner53 posted this 25 October 2016

Wow! That's gonna be a hard act to follow. Amazing results considering the velocity. I love it. Can't wait to see how the 2500 does. Thanks for sharing your project.

Attached Files

CBA Member

45 2.1 posted this 25 October 2016

mtngun wrote: 45 2.1 wrote: onondaga wrote: Groups with that pattern aren't fliers, they reflect the condition of the shooter. Actually, if one would go back several years and read what Tom Gray wrote about his lube trials, I think it would be apparent that using the amount of high viscosity lube he is using is the cause. Certain low viscosity lubes do not cause that condition at low or high velocities. Too much of a good thing doesn't always produce consistent results. Bill Bob, I have indeed read at least some of Tom's musings on lube and on high velocity -- I believe Tom liked to call it “lube purging", where excess lube was supposedly building up in the barrel until it eventually was blown out, resulting in an unstable bore condition and fliers.

I did not find Tom's claims about “lube purging” at all convincing, and not consistent with my own experiences, which are just as valid as anyone else's experiences. While your results and his are your own conclusions, I said nothing about lube purging.... what I did say was HIGH VISCOSITY lube. That in itself causes problems when too much is used on a bullet. I have noted that using a lot of the commercial hard lubes. I've used my mix and others (low viscosity mixes) to some very high velocities with quite excellent results with no position flyers like some of what you've shown. I noted that so you might see that as a possible problem.

(Note that I do agree with Tom Grey about the importance of barrel twist at high velocity. I agree with just about everything Tom wrote other than his “lube purging” theory. :cool: ) Yep, he was a good experimenter.

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 25 October 2016

45 2.1 wrote: 45 2.1 wrote: what I did say was HIGH VISCOSITY lube. That in itself causes problems when too much is used on a bullet. I have noted that using a lot of the commercial hard lubes. In my testing, hard lubes generally outperformed low viscosity lubes, though obviously lube performance is not solely dependent on viscosity. "Commercial” hard lubes are generally formulated to be not be messy or sticky, so that the bullets stay clean in shipping and the maker doesn't get complaints about the lube jamming up dies and feed tubes. Rooster Zambini was formulated for commercial casters, while Rooster HVR was a very tacky yet hard lube, formulated for high velocity rifles.

I did have excellent results with some of the “commercial” hard lubes in a revolver -- Ballisticast lube, and Thompson Blue Angel, for example -- but those lubes generally did not do so well in my high velocity rifle experiments. I settled on HVR in part because it worked well in both rifles and revolvers, though it didn't necessarily come out on top in every individual test. I've used my mix and others (low viscosity mixes) to some very high velocities with quite excellent results with no position flyers like some of what you've shown.

A number of people have told me that they use __(fill in the blank with their pet lube) at high velocities with quite excellent results. What am I supposed to make of that?

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 25 October 2016

Update: RicinYakima has offered to supply some Grey's 24, so it will be included in this lube shootout, assuming I can make it that far without something going wrong.

Most of the people reading this thread have probably tried Grey's 24 and/or LBT Blue so they'll provide a useful reference point to the other lubes in the test.

Attached Files

CBA Member

RicinYakima posted this 25 October 2016

Our old webmaster, Jeff, used to make and sell another all petroleum/synthetic lube call “VooDoo” I believe. Your Grey's #24 lube is in the mail!

Attached Files

CBA Member

45 2.1 posted this 26 October 2016

mtngun wrote: A number of people have told me that they use __(fill in the blank with their pet lube) at high velocities with quite excellent results. What am I supposed to make of that? You are not the first person to entertain the ideas you've mentioned in this thread. It has been done by many people, some in print and a lot not so. Some of your assumptions about a proper bullet to use doing this have features that are holding you back in the accuracy department, but those are your choice. I'm a student of dynamic bullet fit instead of static bullet fit.... it makes a big difference. I've done this with one BR rifle and quite a few commercial and customs. If you're interested, you could PM me.

Attached Files

CBA Member

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 26 October 2016

i have some grey 24... i would not call it high viscosity .....

since i am currently plinking, i am saving my remaining dollop just to look at ...

fwiw, for plinking accuracy ( ok, even i need 2.,5 moa ) ...i think joeb ...and onondoga gary ... is right... i make my own lube from stuff in a 5 gallon bucket ...currently synthetic ball bearing grease and 10 per cent volumn moly ... if the bullet fits throat well, i get my 2.5 moa ... eventually...usually ( g ) ...

i haven't had leading that didn't push out with a single patch ..... with any combination for 40 years ... including 1950 lyman black ....

really looking to read mtn's results. data dots....

ken

Attached Files

CBA President

John Alexander posted this 26 October 2016

“Some of your assumptions about a proper bullet to use doing this have features that are holding you back in the accuracy department, but those are your choice.”

45 2.1 -- We only make progress with the open sharing of ideas. That is the real purpose of this forum. Why wait for a PM to reveal your knowledge to one person? We would all like to know. Please be a good citizen and contribute to the forum by starting a thread on the principles of cast bullet design for high velocity. We have a lot of open minded members here who would be interested in such a thread. “I'm a student of dynamic bullet fit instead of static bullet fit.... it makes a big difference. I've done this with one BR rifle and quite a few commercial and customs. If you're interested, you could PM me.”

That sounds interesting. Probably an excellent topic for another thread or at least a good definition of “dynamic bullet fit” for those not familiar with the term.

To avoid completely hijacking mtngun's thread please put your reply on one of the new threads that I hope you will start.

John

Attached Files

CBA Member

45 2.1 posted this 27 October 2016

John Alexander wrote: “Some of your assumptions about a proper bullet to use doing this have features that are holding you back in the accuracy department, but those are your choice.”

That sounds interesting. Probably an excellent topic for another thread or at least a good definition of “dynamic bullet fit” for those not familiar with the term.

To avoid completely hijacking mtngun's thread please put your reply on one of the new threads that I hope you will start.

John

OK John, the link to the new thread is here: http://www.castbulletassoc.org/viewtopic.php?id=13069&forumid=63

Attached Files

CBA Member

Eutectic posted this 27 October 2016

Tom won matches using Grey 24 so many shooters adopted it. Tom never published the formula or I am not aware of it if he did. The only comment from talking with him I remember was the ingredients were common everyday stuff. Tom wanted to sell his lube, so publishing the formula was not sensible.

I tried Grey 24 and it is a good lube. It was right there with Alox 50-50 which is my standard in rifles. This was a production rifle, 2100 fs load, not the high velocity loads Tom was shooting. I did try his contention Grey 24 would put the first shot from a clean barrel in the group. This was true in several shooting sessions.

Good luck mtngun, I hope to see some good high velocity data.

Steve

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 30 October 2016

Today we continued the lube shootout, this time with White Label Carnuba Red. Range conditions were 10 - 15 mph wind, partly cloudy, and occasional mild mirage -- pretty much the same as last week.

The usual procedure -- beginning with a cold, clean barrel, 2 fouling shots were fired before group shooting began (last week I fired 12 fouling shots because I had to verify the powder charge & adjust the scope). 1 minute pause between shots, 10 minute pause between groups. After a 30 minute interruption to reload, 1 more fouling shot was fired to warm up the barrel before resuming group shooting. All together 103 shots were fired without cleaning the barrel. At the end of the day one patch wetted with Ed's Red was pushed through, not because the barrel was dirty, but to prevent corrosion.

Carnuba Red averaged 1.41", compared to 1.48” with HVR -- not a significant difference.

Velocities were 26 fps lower than HVR. That could be due to the lube, or it could be due to other variables like temperature.

3 groups were MOA or better, though only barely.

Summary to date:

Attached Files

Standard Member

onondaga posted this 30 October 2016

http://www.castbulletassoc.org/view_user.php?id=608>mtngun

The pattern irregularity I pointed out last set is not seen in this set. Your dispersion is better and without an atypical pattern. I call that shooting better.

Gary

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 30 October 2016

The lube shootout continues with Gray's #24 (sorry if I misspelled Tom's last name, I s**k at correctly remembering names. Maybe if we changed the name to “Tom's Lube"?).

The best Gray's could do was a lousy 1.10". :( Actually, it performed much better than I expected it to do, given my prejudice against soft lubes in max or near max loads.

FYI the first fouling shot from a cold clean barrel landed 4 inches high, the second fouling shot landed 1 inch high. The next shot landed within the normal group. I'd say those first two fouling shots were no better or worse than HVR in this particular barrel.

And the shootout highlights to date:

Attached Files

CBA Member

Eutectic posted this 31 October 2016

Please define “clean barrel” Residual oil, even a thin film causes a noticeable problem, this has been shown many times. In my experience pushing a patch through is not enough. When testing lubricants I flush the barrel (and cylinder in a revolver) with petroleum naphtha (lighter fluid), actually I use Coleman Fuel. This evaporates very quickly and leaves no residue. This does not eliminate fouling shots, as some lubes still needed several shots to settle down. Revolvers are the worst. Yes, you can use one chamber but that is a royal pain as well as requiring you to re-grip the gun which can cause an aim point shift. No shooting free recoil with a revolver - rats. Steve

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 31 October 2016

"Clean” in my world means liberally doused with Ed's Red to remove carbon fouling and prevent corrosion. The fouling shots burn off the Ed's Red.

While it's beyond the scope of this test, cold barrels that have not been cleaned often throw the first shot or two as well, even when using the same lube.

And for that matter, even after fouling shots, the first group of the day rarely seems to be a particularly good group. This may have less to do with fouling than with barrel temperature.

I used to not clean my CB barrels based on the assumption that residual bullet lube would protect the barrel from corrosion, and the assumption that the uncleaned barrel would be more likely to throw the 1st shot into the group. That was before I got a bore scope.

Throwing the first shot from a cold barrel is a practical problem for hunters, but I don't know what to do about it.

Attached Files

CBA Member

45 2.1 posted this 31 October 2016

mtngun wrote: That was before I got a bore scope.

With a bore scope I could see that the barrels I was shooting at the time were pitting. It may be that the pitting was an inevitable result of the hot powder gases, but I worried that the pitting could have been caused by residual combustion products that might be corrosive, so I switched to pushing a patch saturated with Ed's Red through at the end of each shooting session. Since I switched to the Ed's Red treatment, none of my new barrels have developed the severe pitting I used to see. Coincidence? Too early to say. I and some others have semi-auto barrels with well over 10,000 (in some cases a lot more) full power 7.62 cast bullet loads thru each of them. They still look new except for those light corrosion pitting when put to the bore scope test. Your observation about corrosion is correct as well as the lubed patch cleaning. Throwing the first shot from a cold barrel is a practical problem for hunters, but I don't know what to do about it. Since you've asked, I'll tell you. The answer is some lubes out there will not throw the first shot out of a group. Those lubes all have low viscosity. Your high velocity lube test show (so far) that lube does make a difference in group size. Keep going with others and see what happens.

Attached Files

Standard Member

onondaga posted this 31 October 2016

Eutectic wrote: Please define “clean barrel”

Steve A specific routine that has shown a small but significant group size reduction for me is different from traditional cleaning and targets consistency of bore condition opposed to a meticulous cleaning regimen for cast bullets.

First the bore is polished to a slightly finer surface than factory finish with my bore polishing method in this forum accuracy section: http://www.castbulletassoc.org/view_topic.php?id=8364&forum_id=63>http://www.castbulletassoc.org/viewtopic.php?id=8364&forumid=63

I only do traditional cleaning/oiling for long term storage. My range routine only uses a clean dry Hoppe's BoreSnake pulled through once at the start of a session and once every 5 rounds. This results in a very consistent bore condition that improves cast bullet shooting consistency for me.

The method is obviously different, but all that learn and try the method report they agree it works with cast bullets better than any other regimen they have tried. The bore consistency level maintains easily and simply with a single pull of a clean dry BoreSnake at session start and once every 5 rounds after an initial one time per rifle polishing with my polishing method. The cold shot flier problem you mention disappears for me with the method also. Bore consistency is a cure and this method accomplishes consistency very simply.

I am not selling anything, I originated and donated the method that uses easy to find stuff that works to the forum for shooters to shoot better.

Gary

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 02 November 2016

Continuing the 3000 fps lube shootout ..... First up, White Label Commercial 190 Degree. This is a “commercial” hard lube as opposed to a “high-performance” hard lube. The commercial hard lubes are formulated to be non-sticky while the better high-performance hard lubes are formulated to be “tough & tacky".

I've had good luck with some “commercial” hard lubes in a revolver, but not so much in high velocity rifle. Today was no exception.

FYI starting with a cold, clean barrel ("clean” meaning wiped with Ed's Red two days ago) the first fouling shot landed 3” high, the 2nd fouling shot landed 1” high, and the 3rd shot landed within the normal POI zone. Different barrels have different personalities but that sort of start-up behavior seems typical for this barrel regardless of lube.

Groups #1 and #2 were fired without cooling between groups. Then I switched to my usual routine of allowing the barrel to cool while I loaded the next 10 rounds (approximately 10 minutes). Groups #3 - #5 threw the first shot high, presumably due to letting the barrel cool for 10 minutes.

I have observed this “first shot high” phenomena with other lubes, including HVR, but Commercial 190 seems to do it to an extreme. So I altered my routine, shooting groups #6 - #10 without cooling between groups. That eliminated the “first shot high” fliers. Nonetheless Commercial 190 turned in an overall poor performance, not particularly surprising for a “commercial” lube.

Today's Stats:

T-Tests using mean radius for each group: -- 98% sure that Commercial 190 is less accurate than Rooster HVR. -- 99% sure that Commercial 190 is less accurate than Carnuba Red. -- 69% sure that LBT Blue is less accurate than Rooster HVR. -- 81% sure that LBT Blue is less accurate than Carnuba Red.

As my shooting mentor used to tell us when we scored our targets “Read 'em and weep, Gentlemen, read 'em and weep.” :D :D :D :D :D

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 02 November 2016

I'll have an in depth analysis at the end of this shootout -- not that there has been any shortage of armchair analysis on this thread :D :D :D -- but for now let me offer a few impressions:

-- 500 shots have been fired averaging ten-shot 1.64” at 3024 fps.

-- there have been several MOA ten-shot groups at 3000+ fps.

-- no substantial leading has been observed despite cleaning only with one wet patch every 100 rounds. Most of the time the 10th group is just as accurate as the 1st group.

-- some lubes are better than others but even the “bad” lubes still averaged less than 2 MOA and didn't foul the barrel (admittedly I was selective in which lubes I chose to test).

-- this has been done using a powder that is not very cast-friendly, just because it was sitting on the shelf looking for something to do. :D

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 02 November 2016

Attached Files

Standard Member

OU812 posted this 02 November 2016

Have you tried White Label's 45-45-10 liquid tumble lube? I can send you a small bottle to try. A little goes a long way.

...

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 02 November 2016

OU812, http://www.mountainmolds.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=502>I tested 45/45/10 in a 357 mag rifle at 2000 fps. I did not fire enough shots to “prove” anything, but for what it was worth 45/45/10 did “OK” but not as good as HVR.

Summary of results from that test:

Attached Files

CBA Member

frnkeore posted this 03 November 2016

mtngun, I really love all the testing that you've done and the dedication you have to this lube testing.

But, as I've suggested in your other tests, I wish you would have chose a better load, with much better ES. I ran external ballistics on your velocity, using a BC of .22 (a little high, I would guess) and the vericle displacement would only be about 1/4” @ 3000 fps but, I would think, that the barrel harmonics would play a much larger role at those ES.

Another point that I feel is playing out, regarding the lube is that many of us CB shooters feel that slippery lubes are less accurated and I think that the Carnuba Red, with it's lower velocity is showing that. Personally, I feel that the more that the powder gas has to push the bullet, the more it dampens it's travel through the barrel, possibly helping dampen harmonics and ES, also.

I'm hoping after you finish the lube test, you might take the top three loads and re-test with a more accurate load with ES under 30 fps.

I've had pretty good results in my 12 twist, XP 100, 7mm TCU, using both AA2520 and 4895 with the RCBS 145gr bullet.

Again, I applaud all your work and testing that you've done a published on this forum, I always look forward to reading, everything you post.

Frank

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 03 November 2016

frnkeore wrote: as I've suggested in your other tests, I wish you would have chose a better load, with much better ES. Good ES is a constant challenge with high velocity cast. Light, slippery bullets don't have enough engraving resistance to make the relatively slow powders burn well.

Another point that I feel is playing out, regarding the lube is that many of us CB shooters feel that slippery lubes are less accurate Agree. The Carnuba Red, with it's lower velocity is showing that. And yet Carnuba Red has posted the best accuracy and the lowest velocity variation ???

FYI Carnuba Red is a “tough & tacky” lube. Not quite as tacky as HVR but close.

It's lower velocity could indeed be related to the lube, or it could simply be due to temperature. WC845 is very temperature sensitive. Velocities climb as the barrel warms up, and as the shooting shack warms up. I tested Carnuba Red on a frosty morning when I had forgotten to leave the heater on overnight in the shack.

The bottom line -- accuracy. And Carnuba Red demonstrated good accuracy. I'm hoping after you finish the lube test, you might take the top three loads and re-test with a more accurate load with ES under 30 fps. Please tell us what that load would be?

I've had pretty good results in my 12 twist, XP 100, 7mm TCU, using both AA2520 and 4895 with the RCBS 145gr bullet. At 3000 fps? I used to load 4895 in a 7TCU with cast -- around 1600 fps. I didn't own a chronograph in those days so I was blissfully unaware of the velocity variation. :D Again, I applaud all your work and testing that you've done a published on this forum, I always look forward to reading, everything you post. Thank you for following my trials and tribulations, and thank you for your intelligent comments. :)

FYI yesterday I played with Quickload to see what the upper limit might be with the 100 gr. bullet:

-- H335 @100% loading density, 3170 fps, 56ksi

-- WW748 @ 100% loading density, 3031 fps, 46ksi

-- RL10 @ 100% loading density, 3057 fps, 50 ksi

There is no Quickload data for some of the new powders like LT30 or LT32. I suspect LT32 could hit 3000 fps. But otherwise, that's it. 4895 is a cast-friendly powder, but you can't stuff enough 4895 in the case to reach 3000 fps.

If money were no object I might have used WW748 for this shootout, because it generates less pressure at the same velocity. But 748 is not known for low ES, either.

There is no Quickload data for WC845, obviously, but there is enough room in the case for a couple of grains more powder, :fire so 3150 fps might be within reach, if I can do it without piercing primers (a smaller, bushed firing pin is on my wish list). Assuming Carnuba Red wins the shootout, I was thinking to retest it at 3150 fps. The added pressure should improve the velocity variation, but an ES of 30 is not likely. 60 might be more realistic.

Bear in mind that it's the % velocity variation that matters. 30 ES would be 1.9% of a 1600 fps load, but at 3000 fps the same 1.9% ES would be 59. I prefer to go by % standard deviation so that I'm comparing apples to apples. Also the ES or SD depends on the number of shots. A 3 shot ES or SD, as often reported on the internets, is completely meaningless. I like to use 10 shots, and even 10 shots is still sketchy by statistical standards.

Alternatively I could calculate the ES or SD based on all 100 shots, but that would result in a big number that readers could not relate to.

Attached Files

CBA Member

frnkeore posted this 03 November 2016

I've had pretty good results in my 12 twist, XP 100, 7mm TCU, using both AA2520 and 4895 with the RCBS 145gr bullet.At 3000 fps? I used to load 4895 in a 7TCU with cast -- around 1600 fps. I didn't own a chronograph in those days so I was blissfully unaware of the velocity variation. :D My loads with AA2520, were 2080 fps and another poiwder I used was AA2460 @ 2150 fps. I ran the loads on QL and my chrono velocitys are about 75 fps greater than QL generates. Niether powder will get you 3000 fps on QL though. The 2460 gave me 25 fps ES and the 2520, 43 fps. 8.6 & 15.9 SD on 10 shot strings. I ran QL and a assumtion of your rifle, 7mm BR, 26” bbl and a .284 groove (it wouldn't give me a bore section with a .283 groove) with a .100 seating depth. It seemed to give simular velocitys but, you didn't give powder charges. I got 3065 with 38 gr of 748 and 3058 with 33 gr of RL 10X. I ran some more powders with 100% or less load density @ 58,000 psi or less. AA powders, 2200, 34 gr, 3075 223, 37 gr, 3026 2015, 33.8 gr, 2979 (full case, but not compressed) 1680, 32 gr, 3059 Ram shot powders, Ram tac, 37 gr, 3009 X terminator, 35 gr, 3039 Hodgdon, 322, 34 gr, 3008 335, 37 gr, 3079 Misc, VV120, 31.5 gr, 3016 4198, 31 gr, 3026 Norma 200, 33 gr, 3042 RX7, 32 gr, 3039 Many CBA competitors use AA223 & H322, and a few use AA2200. They would be where I would go first, using Rem 7 1/2 primers. I hope this helps. Again, great work!!! Frank

Attached Files

CBA President

John Alexander posted this 03 November 2016

"Many CBA competitors use AA223 & H322, and a few use AA2200. They would be where I would go first, using Rem 7 1/2 primers. I hope this helps. Again, great work!!!"Frank ===== Frank,

That sounded a bit strange to me so I checked. Your information may be out of date. None of the shooters that showed up for the CBA nationals this year used any of those powers.In the NW I only see one shooters using one of the three (223) in the match reports. Of course that one shooter is Mel Harris so should probably count double or triple.

John Sorry about all the junk that showed up in this post. I didn't look at it after hitting go.

Attached Files

CBA Member

frnkeore posted this 03 November 2016

yes, John, it is a little out of date But Ed Krasny won UnP with H322 with excellent scores a while back.

And you could count Mel's 223 as 14, one each for the 14 CBA records that he holds :)

BTW, are you going to his match, this weekend? I'm going but, please don't let that keep you ;) I'd love to finally meet you.

Frank

Attached Files

CBA President

John Alexander posted this 04 November 2016

Frank, I told Mel I would go but I had some conflicts come up and had to cancel. John

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 04 November 2016

Thanks for the suggestions, Frank. I hope to gradually add new powders to my collection as my bank account allows. Bear in mind that in my neck of the woods powders have to be ordered, so that rules out buying one pound at a time to see if my gun likes it. :(

Looking back through my 7BR thread, in addition to WC845 I've tried WC844 (same as H335), H4895, WW748, WW760, and RL15. Of all those powders, WC845 had the worst velocity variation! :D :D :D That's why I have said that WC845 is not cast-friendly -- it seems to need a full throttle load to make it burn well. The faster you push it, the better it seems to shoot. It'll be interesting to see what happens if I succeed in pushing it to 3150 fps. :cool:

Nonetheless WC845's accuracy was adequate for this lube shootout and I had 2 jugs sitting on the shelf that needed something to do.

As for what CBA competitors use, the one thing that all the successful hi-velocity shooters -- CBA or otherwise -- seem to agree on is a slow twist in a quality barrel.

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 05 November 2016

Today we tested White Label 2500. Including the 3 fouling shots (2 at the start, 1 after pausing to reload 50 shells) 103 shots were fired without cleaning the barrel.

FYI the 12 o'clock shot in group #1 was the first shot of the group, after having fired 2 fouling shots. Perhaps if I had fired 3 fouling shots instead of 2, there would have been no 12 o'clock flier. Nonetheless I've used 2 fouling shots with the other lubes so I think that's a fair test.

I'm guessing that the wild flier in group #9 was due to some defect in the bullet, not due to a lube problem, but nonetheless I just report the facts and you can judge for yourself. If you disregarded group #9 then the average group would have been 1.42", a virtual tie with Rooster HVR and White Label Carnuba Red. At any rate 2500 did a respectable job.

Stats:

Taran overlay of all 100 shots. The overlay is only appropriate when every group has the same point of impact. If the POI changes because of scope adjustments, lighting, mirage, barrel heating, etc., then the overlay is no longer appropriate. Most of the time the POI does in fact shift a little from group to group for whatever reason, so I normally don't use the overlay. Well, today's groups had nearly the same POI, though not quite, so just for fun I did the 100 shot overlay.

Attached Files

CBA Member

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 06 November 2016

....joeb and mtn. are making me humble .... very very humble...

humble ken

photoshop ?

Attached Files

CBA Member

gpidaho posted this 06 November 2016

mtngun: I'd call that overlay more than “Just for fun". That's well worth bragging about. Gp

Attached Files

CBA Member

45 2.1 posted this 06 November 2016

I would say that the Average Group Size list from 8 different lubes confirms that lube does make a difference...... contrary to what has been said on this site before.

Attached Files

CBA Member

Larry Gibson posted this 07 November 2016

Concur with 45 2.1s conclusion of Mtguns results. The lube does make a difference. My own tests and use of cast bullets of ternary alloy in several rifles of different cartridges with different design of cast bullets with velocities of 1700 - 3000 fps have demonstrated the superiorty of 3 commmercial lubes......one, unfortunately, is no longer available.

LMG

Concealment is not cover.........

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 13 November 2016

Today we tested White Label BAC, which is a blend of the NRA formula plus Carnuba Red. The maker describes it as: This lube is a mix of my Carnauba Red and 50-50. It gives performance similar to Carnauba Red, but does not need a heater. Slightly softer than the 2500+ lube.

But .... the sample of BAC they sent me is what I would call a “medium” hard lube. It was harder than the 2500 lube and it would require a heater. I'm not complaining, I'm just stating the facts.

According to the meter in my back pocket, BAC is the tackiest lube that I've ever encountered, and I consider that a good thing.

Aaaand .... it appears that BAC won the lube shootout.

Stats for White Label BAC:

Student T-Test Results for BAC, based on the mean radius for the 10 groups: -- 56% sure there is a difference between HVR and BAC (that's too close to call).

-- 44% sure there is a difference between Carnuba Red and BAC (not significant).

-- 66% sure there is a difference between White Label 2500 and BAC (probably significant).

So it's a virtual tie between Carnuba Red and BAC.

Correlation Between Velocity Variation and Accuracy ? A scatter plot of %velocity standard deviation vs. mean radius doesn't seem to show a correlation.

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 13 November 2016

FYI I mentioned in a previous post that I might re-test the winning lube, just to make sure it was repeatable. Well, I'm leaning toward doing an alloy shootout and I'll be using BAC in that shootout so BAC will have ample opportunity to prove itself.

Attached Files

CBA Member

delmarskid1 posted this 13 November 2016

This is great! Thanks for the work. I'm looking forward to the alloy work up.

Attached Files

CBA Member

gpidaho posted this 13 November 2016

I'm on my second pack of White Label BAC Lube and I believe it to be an excellent choice. It's a very tacky lube and stays in the grooves the best of any lube I've tried when pan lubing. Will look forward to mtnguns performance tests. Gp

Attached Files

CBA Member

billglaze posted this 13 November 2016

In the spirit of shameless imitation, where does one obtain White Lube BAC? In the spirit of shameless appreciation and gratitude, thanks to mtngun for all the work involved, the publishing of the information in such a readable and sensible form. Many thanks are due to him as well as the other ceaseless experimenters on this forum for their efforts and making their work known. Bill Glaze

In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. My fate is not entirely in Gods hands, if I have a weapon in mine.

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 13 November 2016

http://www.lsstuff.com/>White Label Lube

Their website is not the best. I found it easier to buy on ebay.

Attached Files

Standard Member

OU812 posted this 13 November 2016

Will you test the dry White Label 45-45-10 lube. Keep an open mind and do not predict results without testing. Your high velocity tapered 7mm bullet is a much different animal than your 35 caliber.

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 13 November 2016

OU812 wrote: Will you test the dry White Label 45-45-10 lube. Keep an open mind and do not predict results without testing. Your high velocity tapered 7mm bullet is a much different animal than your 35 caliber.Thanks for reading my shootout, OU812. :)

Sorry, but the main goal of this shootout was to choose a replacement for the discontinued HVR, not to test every lube under the sun. If and when my NASA research grant is approved for “Cast Bullets To The Moon and Back" then maybe I'll be able to quit my job and do cast bullet experiments full time. :D In the meantime I have to place limits on the projects I take on. :(

I.e., I would have liked to have experimented with homebrew lubes, but that could take months or years and I need a reliable lube now so that I can go on to other shooting projects.

Obviously there are many more lubes out there that I did not test, but .... anyone is welcome to test those lubes and publish their data, rather than relying on me to do it for them.

Attached Files

CBA Member

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 13 November 2016

i wish to share my guilt and thus dilute my share of same ...

my guilt for profiting from the impressive work done by mtn. and joeb and many others here and gone before .... which allows me to skip most of the empty rabbit holes and go directly to a modicum of success with my plinking loads.... which, after all, is the object of hard serious work :: the satisfaction of above adequate performance for an hour or two on sunday afternoons with my friends and a sack of old bean cans ...

keep it up guys and be sure to let us know if you find more empty rabbit holes to avoid .....

there, i feel better already .... heck, i better get that white label bac ordered .... my shelf of other best lubes is getting lonely ...

thanks guys...and many others ....

hey !!!....it's sunday afternoon !!!!.... get out there !!!

ken

Attached Files

CBA President

John Alexander posted this 13 November 2016

Great study. Thanks for getting it on our forum.

On the principle that no good deed goes unpunished, please submit this lube comparison as a Fouling Shot Article. For whatever reason, most of our members don't participate in the forum.

By the way the study had to involve changing lube in a lubrisizer multiple times, a job I try to avoid. How do you do it?

John

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 14 November 2016

John Alexander wrote: On the principle that no good deed goes unpunished, please submit this lube comparison as a Fouling Shot Article. For whatever reason, most of our members don't participate in the forum.

By the way the study had to involve changing lube in a lubrisizer multiple times, a job I try to avoid. How do you do it?

JohnThanks for reminding me to submit an article to TFS, John. I'll try to get started on it tonight.

I lubed the bullets by hand, smearing the lube into the grooves with my fingers. The excess is squeegee'd off by the sizing dies. Repeat 105 times for each lube. Yeah, lots of work, that's one reason I had to set limits on how many lubes I could test.

Attached Files

CBA Member

gpidaho posted this 14 November 2016

The BAC lube is available from NOE Bullet Moulds. I was rubbing it on one at a time at first as mtngun does until I tried it pan lubing. I use a pellet tin or such and warm the bullets and lube on my mould warming hot plate. Just let the lube set and wiggle the bullets out. 95% come out grooves full. Gp

Attached Files

CBA Member

harleyrock posted this 14 November 2016

It sure looks to me like this piece of work should be a STICKY.

Lifetime NRA since 1956, NRA Benefactor, USN Member, CBA Member

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 19 November 2016

harleyrock wrote: It sure looks to me like this piece of work should be a STICKY. Thanks for reading my adventures, harleyrock. :)

I did submit a condensed version of this lube test to TFS.

As I mentioned in the TFS article, I make no claims that my 3000 fps lube test is pertinent to low-velocity cast, or to hunting applications where you need the first shot from a cold barrel to hit the point of aim. It may be that different applications require different lubes. I suspect my results will generalize to other high velocity rifle applications, though.

Attached Files

CBA Member

mtngun posted this 26 November 2016

Minor Update: I've been using BAC in my lubrisizer for a while now and have settled on a heater setting of 35C (95F). The maker claims BAC does not require a heater but then again the maker is located in Arkansas where the ambient temperature is often 95F. :D

My reloading shack is often less than warm in the winter so I can't imagine not using a heater with BAC.

Attached Files

CBA Member

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 26 November 2016

... could it be that

BAC .... IS.... the future ??

sorry it is the weekend ...

ken

Attached Files

Standard Member

shastaboat posted this 04 January 2017

I'm impressed. A poster on reloadersnest.com referred readers to review your results. I haven't been logging in to castbulletassoc.org for sometime. I think I'll come over and start watching and commenting on some of the threads. I like the new format forum too. Accurate 3000 fps cast WW is really something.

Testing Bullet Lubes at 3000 fps

Categories

Search

Popular Tags

This Weeks High Earners

Hot Topics