Does anyone go beyond visual inspection of the bullet base for female tears or male protrusions before size, gas check and lube?
Would it make any difference to group size if you did? Bill Cook.
A “Measured Response” is as effective as tongue lashing a stuck door.
Attached Files
FWIW!
After I sized and gas checked them, if the edges were nicely rounded and the edges of the gas checks were level, I shot them in matches.
If the edges of the check were not equal all around, they became foulers.
I won four military rifle nationals, so take that for what it is worth.
Attached Files
Ric, I understand what you mean about the flat sharp corner. Assume that was a 30 cal around 220g?
After casting I can see differences on how flat the base is by setting it on a flat hard bench top. Some plop down on their base straight up and proud while others may look good but they teeter enough that what visually was considered good, maybe wasn’t as good as I first thought.
I was wondering if anyone tried to uniform the base before gas check, size, lube. I lightly smoothed the bases on 600 grit paper on a couple different 120 piece cast sessions this week and will give it a go this week at the range. Nothing aggressive, just a couple wipes to make them sit up straight.
Even those that looked good, but wasn’t until after smoothing, lost about .1g to get them to stand flat and straight. Still have to size, check & lube. Bill.
A “Measured Response” is as effective as tongue lashing a stuck door.
Attached Files
back when i wuz trying to get groups around a 1 moa .... one of the few things that actually impressed me was
lathe squaring the bases before i put on the gas checks ... i used a fitted collet and a very high rake ... sharp ... cutter .
so maybe there is actually another rule except bullet snug fit for maximum guidance ... maybe square bases
i did only a couple hundred of those bases, so i can only say that it seemed to help compared to " good " as cast bases ... with my current status as dedicated plinker/slacker shooting plain base cast, i only check for visually good bases .
i might add that small nose errors don't seem to hurt but off-center dents etc. on bases do ... at least at my 100 yard targets.
Attached Files
the only way to tell if flawed or culled bullets cause flyers is to mark the bad bullets with a marker and them shoot them and see.Sometmes things that we think matter doesn't seem to show up on the paper.This is my standard practice and I've had horrible wrinkled bullets and ones that are light go right in the group.Only to have my match selected one be the off shot. Im.not saying all "bad" bullets hit in the group buy it wasn't as often as I'd thought or as far out as I'd expected.And with .22 bullets you hear nightmares about how perfect they need to be seem less fussy about how perfect they need to be??(this one baffles me?) I guess this is why it's "fun" ?
"if it was easy we'd let women do it" don't tell my wife I said that!
Attached Files
Linoww is right. The first reaction most have about going to extremes such as trueing a bullet base is why in the world would anyone in their right mind chase a variable that is virtually impossible to prove.
With cast bullets in a production class rifle there are literally scores of variables that could upset conditions causing a group in the .6’s to open up to a group in the .8’s. Most but not all would be consider to be wall hangers.
However I think there’s a percentage of shooters that pursue accuracy with such ardency that they take on extra work for potentially small or uncertain gains in order to keep pushing the envelope. Ken’s effort to true bullet base is an example of that. And since I don’t think for a moment that I’m super creative I know others have looked at this.
Why do we shoot 10 and 20 shot groups? Is it to prove bullet to bore fit, our individual casting skills, bench practices, our bench equipment, our hand loading equipment, the platform you’re shooting with, your wind reading skills? Heck why were we just talking about suppressors (tuners) if not to tighten our groups.
Just to be clear, I’m talking about bolt action long guns in a caliber that most would considered to be capable of shooting small groups.
And I’ll be the first to agree with most of you that I’m a guaranteed half bubble off being this picky about accuracy.
A “Measured Response” is as effective as tongue lashing a stuck door.
Attached Files
I mill bases....
First started awhile back because of a particular factory Savage 7-08 barrel. They produced a WAY too slow twist for about a year,maybe less. It was a complete nightmare for them.
I was chasing some pretty high velocity numbers at the time and fell into this barrel... the owner wasn't into cast and never fully appreciated the idea that anyone would actually want this thing.
So I get it with the notion that the Lee 130 7mm mould was "ripe" for taking off the lowest drive band and utilizing the next groove as the GC band. Made a gang fixture for milling 5 at a time on a Bridgeport...worked perfect and it all fell into place. Shoots fine at starting JB velocity/pressure. Forget the weight,and honestly the twist involved...
Still have it all so if anyone wants the dope I can dig it out.
Attached Files
"Sat" on the idea for awhile...
Backing up a bit;
When shortening the 130's the resulting band that the check was seated onto... the top of the Hornady check,lightly digs into the drive band. "Everyone" kinda assumes there needs to be a space above a seated GC....
The experience told me different. Never was a problem. Now it gets interesting...
Moving on from the 7-08,I got into 260 Rem chambering,like really digging my heels in going down a rabbit hole. In that quest,I get a Saeco mould... copy in several key ways of an Eagen(sp) mould. Tapered,conical nose,etc. It matched up ridiculously well with a HV Brux 28" barrel on an old R700 action. It will shoot bugholes,just a delightful rig... the interesting part;
This factory,unmolested mould came with ZERO clearance above the installed GC...
So there was two examples of really good rigs that don't seem to care if that space exists.
Attached Files
I did a comparison test of bullets that stood up strait and those with noticeable lean and reported in the Fouling Shot #212 several years ago. If I remember correctly those that leaned the most shot slightly larger groups, But noticeable leaners not extreme shot the same size. The worst leaners leaned up to 2 degrees but five groups averaged 1.3 moa about about 30% larger than the ones the seemed straight. But then 1.3 moa for AVERAGE for five shot group, is better then most
John
3
Attached Files
One,at issue for me is our shop....
It's a working professional,some would say "job shop" and am OK with that label. It's way more complex but you sorta get the gist.
I don't handload in there.... have a beautiful spare bedroom that's a handloaders dream room. Corner room with 2 windows,yadayada.
I really didn't want to be going to the big shop to mill bases on the Bridgeport. Obviously it was completely overkill.... so a year or so ago I started thinking about milling bases on a much more appropriate "scale",and do it in the loading room.
Again,backing up....
One of the things we do(used to) here is rebuilding equipment. Lots of cool stuff,3k sq feet worth. Point is,finding donor pieces if equipment is well,dang easy for us. Back to the story;
I figured milling bases,along with a host of loading chores could be handled very nicely on a beefy little bench top DP(drill press)... so I put the word out to one of my equipment guys on what was needed.
He comes through with an absolutely amazingly clean Atlas DP... and at a "you suck" price (this is an endearing term in the biz when a VERY low price is paid). It is the perfect piece for what I was intending to do. The table doesn't have even a scratch on it.
I get it,then find a really nice XY "milling" table for it and a spotless NOS vise. This DP,like all of our Walker Turners in the big shop are of a collar retention design on the chuck. Meaning,the chuck isn't going to pop out when doing certain,"don't try this at home" type ops.
So now I was in business...
Attached Files
One of my rigs is a R700VS in 308. Came with the HS precision stock. I put that stock on the Brux 260 for a cpl reasons. Which then put a nice walnut stock on the 308.
The Smooth-On EA40 epoxy(hint hint) bedding had barely cured when on another forum(THR) someone asked about H4895 for cast,in 308.
I was like,"give me a minute"... which was more like a week and by that time the thread had died,a decent death. Sayin,wasn't a whole lot of interest... mainly the OP doing sort of a drive by. So I took the efforts to the,what did you do in the loading room today thread. And it's still there,with pics.
Part of this deal was;
This particular 308 Varmint rig has always been a sweetheart. I used to use it whenever some big mouth was maligning how cast has accuracy issues. This rig will shoot one hole 10 shot groups with low node 4198 loads. It is just one of those rigs. But,there's this new stock thing and so part of the challenge was not the loading(getting to the milled bases),it was fleshing out the new stock. This could've been a train wreck,all things considered.
Well it wasn't.... 40 years of building bows,and buying epoxy in one gallon units,I know a thing or 12 about bedding. So the stock job came out swinging for the fence.
Onto the bases...
Attached Files
I've burnt some 4895 in the past. It's a great powder. And have a good stash of it so the challenge wasn't,that big of deal powder'ly speaking.
Neither was the mould;
A very non descript Lee 150 rnfp of newer manufacture. I use a 2*(included) taper nose size die,about 60% of the way to the top drive band. No biggy here,it flat out works... and will spare the engineering on taper by push through vs rolled tapers...
Body of the Lee is as cast with a very mild "spin" to knock off any high spots.
The bases get milled on the little Atlas by .010" then the GC gets installed on a wonderful little C frame jewelry press. This same press is what I use for the nose taper die...old press from the 1930's.
Taking .010" off the base dosen't close the gap above GC like the 7-08 or the Saeco 260... but could @.015 or so, .010 cleans them up,and squares them to perfection.
Now is where it's going to get real stuff because,well just because...
I know this rigs capabilities,so no I'm not going to waste my time trying to give y'all dreams of data to prove a point. I maintain a heart rate BPM in the mid 40's... yes that is correct. I've been a competitive traditional archer for going on 50 years .... I can tell what this 308 is "doing" without having to right a book about it's statistical abilities.
The 1st 3 shots with the milled bases went into a barely larger the bullet diameter hole. I almost quit but went ahead and yanked 2 more at a hundred that blew the group up into the high .2's...
And gotta say,this is taking the rig outta the bags for every shot. No wind flags... NO FOULERS,and no warmups. We have an indoor range(WELL vented) and an outdoor range right out the shop door.... spoiled? Maybe but then I did build every last dang bit of it basically by myself so no,it's more like hard work.
Attached Files
I will say,again not gonna argue about statistics...
Milled bases "can" if your rig is capable.... and you're already shooting bugholes or dang close to it....
Cut a third off your group size.
Flyers* should reduce over the long haul but honestly.... if you can't keep a cold bore shot in the group,or know where flyers come from.... milling bases probably isn't going to help you. Might not want to hear that but it is what it is.
Attached Files
After weighing the bullets, I sort based on bases. (The selected bullets are within +.2/-.3 grains of a median weight.) The sharpest bases go into the rows reserved for record. The slightly rounded bases are used for sighters.
Note: I weigh bullets to find the hidden voids. Any wrinkled bullets are immediately sent back to the pot.
Does this make a difference, I think so. I want to do an experiment where there is a statistical basis for this methodology, probably this Fall.
Frank Marshall wrote of his first season shooting cast bullets. He sorted bullets at the start, reserving the culls for practice. At the end of the season, he was running short of bullets and thus shot some of the culls. He shot his best score of the season with these culls. Sometimes I think there ae no rules and definitely no absolutes.
Farm boy from Illinois, living in the magical Pacific Northwest
Attached Files
Before GCing and lubing I inspect the bases to ensure the GC shank is fully filled out with a sharp edge. If there is any sprue protrusion, I cut it off. The bullet is then weighed for sorting before GCing and lubing also.
LMG
Concealment is not cover.........
Attached Files
how come all of the "one hole group" cast bullet production guns never make it to the matches?
"if it was easy we'd let women do it" don't tell my wife I said that!
Attached Files
that's a good point Pat I never thought about that. I used to anneal my checks and after bumping and they came out very sharp edged. Then I noticed some were tearing at edge as I'd softened them too much.
"if it was easy we'd let women do it" don't tell my wife I said that!
Attached Files
Larry: how do you "cut off" such a thing as a small sprue portrusion??
Attached Files
"how come all of the "one hole group" cast bullet production guns never make it to the matches?"
I think most of us know the answer to that. Best to chalk it up as an attempt at humor,
John
Attached Files
Larry: how do you "cut off" such a thing as a small sprue portrusion??
I lay the bullet on its side on a 5 lb lead ingot and use a sharp knife to slice the sprue remains off smooth with the bullet base.
LMG
Concealment is not cover.........
Attached Files
The above posts recite a lot of "best practices"
Does anybody know of any experimental work indicating that bullets with rounded base edges, either on the casting or the seated gas check, has any effect on group sizes. I have never seen any and I have been reading CB stuff for about 75 years.
My rounded bases seem to shoot the same as sharp but then I wouldn't claim to have done a proper experiment either.
Frank Marshall isn't the only CB shooter that has found that his culls seem to shoot as well as the good ones. Most of us throw them back in the pot so will never learn whether or not.
John
Attached Files
John here's poor pictures of three good jacketed bullets. Nosler, Sierra, and Hornady. As you can see they all have rounded edges on the base.
Attached Files
I have used the NOE chamfer tool to take the sharp edge off the base THINKING that this lets the gas check seat more easily and squarely. I have also used sandpaper to smooth the base of the bullet and remove the sprue nub. Both have proven quite effective at occupying my time on long cold winter days. My rudimentary testing has failed to identify an advantage.
John Carlson. CBA Director of Military Competition.
Attached Files
It's not the rounded edge of the GC that is the concern, for me at least. It is the sprue nub preventing the GC from being flush with the bullet base and perpendicular to the bullets axis. That is need for a smoot launch at the muzzle.
LMG
Concealment is not cover.........
Attached Files
if the sprue is cut correctly you shouldn't have bumps. I throw raised sprue cuts back in the pot.
"if it was easy we'd let women do it" don't tell my wife I said that!
Attached Files
Raised is not a problem for me as I cut the sprue with the gloved right hand pushing down on the cutter. My thing is not waiting long enough to stop the divots.
Attached Files
Some raised protrusions are so hard to see that you wouldn’t notice them unless you set them upright to see if the bullet snapped straight upright without a wobble. And even then it would be a subjective opinion.
Seating a gas check over the protrusion could cause the check not to seat square with the bullet and that would cause an imbalance in flight.
So eliminating a male protrusion may be a practical way for me to spend my spare time. Be it with a pen knife or by milling.
There’s too many variables to do a study. Considering the shooters bench practices, the bench equipment, the hand loading practices, loading equipment and the wind I don’t think you can wring out a yea or nay with a couple dozen groups over the span of a couple weeks. Not when you’re trying to shave off .250” off your agg with a setup that’s already giving you sub MOA on a day with readable winds.
That’s a blatant plug for sanctioned competition. Kinda makes you scratch in all the corners. For what it’s worth that’s my 2 cents worth of input. Thanks, Bill.
A “Measured Response” is as effective as tongue lashing a stuck door.
Attached Files
Years ago when I started bumping my bullets for Hvy & UnR, I had noticed some of the sprue bumps when I seated the GC. But after bumping the bullets, the bump went away and the base was flat. Where did that little bump of lead go? I'm pretty sure the bullets all shot well as at the time I used them intermingled with those that didn't start with a bump. But like Ric I now cut the sprue with a gloved hand while pressing down on the plate so I don't really get any bumps these days.
Attached Files
I’ve recovered bullets that show raised sprue cuts through the gas check. I’m thinking combustion sets those check’s pretty squarely.
Attached Files
Why do the bullets have excessively raised or torn sprue cuts in the first place. I try to correct problem during casting. Sometimes the sprue plate hole diameter is cut too large causing problems. I use one or two cavity moulds for easier opening and adjusting of sprue plate.
Attached Files
I have one 22 caliber mould with a too large sprue hole diameter that very difficult to open and actually deforms bullets during opening. Needs a new sprue plate made with smaller/sharper diameter hole.
Attached Files
Some sprue plates interchange and can be swapped. You can see some holes are larger or smaller.
Attached Files
Some problems cannot be solved by the same mind that created it.
Attached Files
OU, one very interesting(to me)thing happens when milling bases;
Without reams of data,but it keeps happening.... whatever the as cast bullet weight variance. Not making piles of bullets here,grab 20 or 30 and get some numbers on your pile...(we're talking the visual keepers). In the case of this
Attached Files
Case of this Lee 150,they were .4 grains low to high,very consistently.
After milling,that number was .1 to .2 grains.
Not hating on Lee but,their sprue plate and their mounting system ain't hitting on much.
The take away is;
The cheaper the sprue plate,the more weight variance.
Attached Files
Here's another little observation...
Defying all materials logic. Am not questioning "why" because I honestly don't care... think it's kinda funny really.
We have some stupid high $ Jo-blocks in the shop. They live a charmed life... it's called wringing,and is thoroughly documented. Believe it or not,fresh milled Lee 150's start to wring when butted together. That's how flat they're coming off this op.
Attached Files
I’ve found that the looser my sprue plates fit the higher the cuts can get. I like o hold my molds up against a light source and eyeball to see if light is between the plate and mold top. Sometimes I stone the bottom of the sprue plate to make a sharper cut. I hate doing this with Lee’s because then the plates loosen constantly when I use them. I get more high cut’s when I let sprues cool off too long and I get smears when I don’t wait long enough then the smear buildup makes high cuts. If someone didn’t know better they would think this business was work.
Attached Files
The NOE chamfer tool is one that he made at my request from my sample of an original Eagan. I think my Eagan worked a little better. As it actually had a slight cutting action. The NOE just burnishes but it does work well.
"if it was easy we'd let women do it" don't tell my wife I said that!
Attached Files
Ric that's my practice as well for my match bullets. You sure know quick when you wear a hole in your gloves, though.....
"if it was easy we'd let women do it" don't tell my wife I said that!
Attached Files
"At a Nationals a few years ago, I was on a bench next to Ed Krasny. We talked a bit and I asked him about the rounded bases vs the filled out bases on an LBT mold. My wife’s rifle and Ed’s were chambered with the same reamer and we had identical molds. He said he had noticed that and had done a test. He said the rounded bases shot into the group the same as the well-filled bases. "
Thanks Paul. Of course that is a limited test but the results don't match the conventional wisdom so is worth thinking about instead of ignoring which is what we like to do with information that challenges our beliefs.
John
Attached Files
Bill wrote:
"There’s too many variables to do a study. Considering the shooters bench practices, the bench equipment, the hand loading practices, loading equipment and the wind I don’t think you can wring out a yea or nay with a couple dozen groups over the span of a couple weeks."
I would like to respectfully disagree . I think you can test to see if bumps on bases (or almost anything else) cause larger group averages. Most of the other variables can be cancelled out by shooting alternative groups of "defective bullets vs "good bullets as a control -- at the same time, place, and with the same shooter. The human factor can be further reduced by a blind experiment.
If the good ones seem to shoot better but only by a small margin, you may be right that a couple dozen groups may not be enough to prove a significant result. But if bumps are as bad as everybody seems to think a few groups may be enough to have a high confidence answer.
The interesting (and somewhat depressing) thing to me is that nobody claims to have shot the bullets with bumps to find out. It seems like anybody getting a fair percentage of bumps would want to find out if it mattered before buying a milling machine. And if we don't know what bumps do, are we sure that shaving them off with a knife doesn't make them shoot worse rather than better?
John
Attached Files
John I agree. Back in my running days when I wore my red hat I had my best races. So it must have been the red hat so I never ran with another color. You can't argue with me that it wasn't true...
"if it was easy we'd let women do it" don't tell my wife I said that!
Attached Files
Thanks to you and everyone for their feedback. There's a number of contributors that don't fully appreciate the value they bring to developing cast shooters like myself through the CBA forum. You'll have to excuse my ignorance on a score of things since I've only been working on cast accuracy a little over two years.
... anybody getting a fair percentage of bumps would want to find out if it mattered before buying a milling machine. And if we don't know what bumps do, are we sure that shaving them off with a knife doesn't make them shoot worse rather than better?
In my opening post I didn't mean to imply that I have a chronic problem with male protrusions. To be honest they all pass visual inspection. It's only when I set the bullet op its base to weigh them that I notice that they are not sitting "perfectly flat". I saw this as a variable that could impact accuracy. But for me, cold sprue cuts are a 1 on a scale of 10 as far. I have bigger opportunities for accuracy improvement. I've mastered casting but still chewing on bullet fit to bore.
Its was only when I set the bullets up on their base to weigh them that I even notice some were not "perfectly flat". Its hard to put a number on "not perfectly flat" but you get the idea. And before anyone ask, I have no data to prove the need for weighing. Its always in the top 5 things I want to prove to myself but new opportunities are popping up. However when I weight my bullets I get immediate feedback on how consistent my casting methods are.
I would like to respectfully disagree . I think you can test to see if bumps on bases (or almost anything else) cause larger group averages
My comment about there being "Too many variables to control" was harsh and I apologize for that. I think repeatable accuracy requires the shooter to be using match grade casting, reloading and bench equipment and match grade casting, reloading and bench practices. When someone describes a game changing practice they use to improve accuracy, the first thing that pops into my head is what equipment, what bench practices were used and what were the wind conditions. Right after that I ask myself if they can repeat it again next week and again the week after that.
Nothing of what I just said is super hard to do, but it requires due diligence. Thanks for all the feedback. Bill C.
A “Measured Response” is as effective as tongue lashing a stuck door.
Attached Files
Still using my firefighter's right hand glove since I retired. 25 years ago. High quality!
Attached Files
I use a righthand Lincoln welders glove to open sprue plate. Made in China, but good enough. You can buy these at walmart.
Attached Files
I cast with no gloves usually and in shorts.Unless glive cutting,then I just wear the one.
"if it was easy we'd let women do it" don't tell my wife I said that!
Attached Files
Pot holder will work very good. When opening sprue by hand its easy to feel for galling.
Attached Files
this is from a copy of our 1978 journal I was reading last night written By Carl Johnson.
"if it was easy we'd let women do it" don't tell my wife I said that!
Attached Files
..i need to go back in the official observed national records results and observe all the 1/2 moa results and observe what gas check tricks are used to achieve that level ... won't take long ...
ok, I'm back ... not many 1/2 moa groups, but by chance I noted that the consistently smallest, officially observed smallest, groups are either open class ... or Plain Base ... both are 96 per cent oriented to bullet fit above all else ...
i think a lot of the discussion about gas checks is because we secretly hate them ... roasting them and re-shaping them to our will to punish them for their sins ... " a 10 cent check on a 4 cent bullet --- just not right " ... ...
I think the Great Mystery of * The Sicks-Tenths MOA Wall * ... persists ...
**********************
maybe in this new age there is an App for this puzzle ?
ken the sinner
Attached Files
Chauncy Roe at a Springfield CBA match 25 years ago told me the decline of western civilization can be traced to John Barlows introduction of the gas check.
"if it was easy we'd let women do it" don't tell my wife I said that!
Attached Files
Would it be out of line to ask someone to please start another thread specific to gas checks and accuracy? This thread is becoming unwieldily. I’d do it myself but no one knows me and I’d hate to lose the momentum we have here.
Wouldn’t Pat Marlin’s check maker come into play here. I know Larry has history on his check maker and he’s used different materials. I have one on the shelf but I’m neck deep working on three different nose diameters on three different Accurate 230E molds to see if I can sort out the best bore rider nose to bore tolerance for my rig.
I put lubed, sized and gas checked a hundred rounds today that had an absolute flat base to begin with and after putting the check on they were worse than before they were sized. The gas check did not fit flush with the bullet base. Jacketed bullets have rounded edges but they all have flat bases.
In the AM I’ll put checks on with that Lyman stopper piece thing they have for their lube sizer and put a few gas checks on without lube, size as a “what the heck” try it and see how they crimp.
Kinda figured all along that those plain base shooters were cheating.
A “Measured Response” is as effective as tongue lashing a stuck door.
Attached Files
" I’d do it myself but no one knows me"
Ah ha. -- we al know you Bill. You are the guy that asks lots of good questions that start interesting discussions.
John
Attached Files
I must be lucky for once in my life because a raised sprue bump has never been a problem for me. Tearing a divet in the base is another story because patience isn't exactly one of my virtues. That aside, when I was shooting heavy rifles I listened to Veral Smith's advice and drilled my H&I die ejection pin so there was about a 16th of an inch left on the circumference that contacted the gas check. A simple bump at the end of the lubing stroke left a noticeable ring on the check that you could visibly see. Did it make a difference, who knows because I never checked but it made me feel better. I shot with Ed Doonan a lot and looking at the base of his bullets with the gas check installed would make your hair stand on end with the lumps and bumps but you can't take away from the way he shot. I sure miss that guy. He was one hell of a man and cast bullet shooter. A great man and friend like a lot of other guys I met playing this game which it should be all about.
Attached Files
I scrape the sprue lumps and the sprue crater rim off my gas check bullets, but for a different reason. I do this with a sharp knife, cutting the sprue lump and scraping any high spots down level.
As mentioned in recent posts, I engage in the heresy of extreme bullet sizing, taking .322" bullets from #U321297HP down to .312" for .30-30. I lube and gas check in a .323" die in the Lyman 450, then do the sizing with a pass through a .314" Lee die, then through a .311". Springback gets the diameter back to .312".
One consequence of sizing the 8 mm gas check down to .312" is that a dimple appears in the base of the gas check - despite seating the check with the Lyman tool in place, and despite the force applied sizing .010" off a hard bullet in the Lee push through dies. If there is any sort of raised area on the bullet base the dimple will be out of round and off center. With the base shaved flat, the dimple is even and in the middle of the gas check. Minor craters in the bullet base do not seem to matter.
Does it make a difference? The gas checks stay on and are still there on the bullets recovered from pigs. I am not sure about accuracy benefits, not having looked at it very closely. With these scraped (or at one time milled) bullets in a scoped Savage 99 .30-30 I have shot numerous sub 2" groups at 100 meters, and even one under an inch with full power loads (175 gns at 2200 fps).
The other benefit of course is aesthetic - turning out a good bullet.
Attached Files
A very hot soldering iron could smooth out raised or torn sprue holes. Is this ridiculous
Attached Files
John Carlson
20
linoww
15
Bud Hyett
10
drone
9
beltfed
6
Lucky1
6
RicinYakima
5
MP1886
5
mashburn
4
Aaron
3
