Bulk ammo sale

Via email from Bulk Ammo Direct. These look like good prices:

Bulk Ammo Direct is having a sale on the following items:

-Federal American Eagle 5.56, loaded with Lake City Brass to NATO specifications. This ammunition is an ideal choice for the shooter looking for a great, affordable round for target shooting, training and practice. The ammunition is new production, non-corrosive, in boxer-primed, reloadable brass cases.
$283.00/case of 900, 30 rounds/box, 30 boxes/case
$30.00/case flat rate shipping fee to be added
Minimum order 1 case

-New Federal .223 in bulk. 55GR FMJ – 1,000 rounds per bag encased.
$315.00/case
$30.00/case flat rate shipping fee to be added
Minimum order 1 case

-New production 22 LR
$85.00/Brick
$850.00/case of 5,000 rounds
$30.00 – $40.00/case shipping fee to be added
Minimum order 1 case

We also have another supply of pulldown WC 872 propellant, packaged in 40 LB boxes, 60 boxes per pallet, total of 2400 LBS/pallet.
$6.25/LB plus shipping
Minimum order 1 pallet

To order ammo, go to: www.bulkammodirect.com, or email: sales@bulkammodirect.com.

To order propellant or 22 LR ammo, call or email:

Marc Coury
Bulk Ammo Direct
OFF: 310.766.1121
DIRECT: 949.645.3815
marc@bulkammodirect.com
www.bulkammodirect.com

Jeff Semko
Bulk Ammo Direct
OFF: 310.766.1121
DIRECT: 310.493.9400
jeff@bulkammodirect.com
www.bulkammodirect.com

28 Nosler

175 grains at over 3,000 fps. Owww!

I’ve been using the Berger VLD (Very Low Drag) 7 mm bullets which have an amazing ballistic coefficient for the weight, and do very well in the 280 Remington A.K.A. 7mm Remington Express cartridge. I’m sure they’d do very well in the new Nosler cartridge also.

Rounds

I reload my own ammo and occasionally a few rounds for friends. I have log files for each caliber and I recently wondered how many rounds I have reloaded for the various calibers. The log files were simple text files and included calibers for which I just did some chronograph measurements and calibers I only did preliminary things like explore powders and bullets to use.

It turned out that the typical log file entries were consistent enough that I could write a simple program to count the number of rounds I reloaded. A typical entry looks like this:

12/27/2014 100 rounds. Win primers. 180 grain Winchester JHP over 6.0 grains of N350. 0 rejects.

All the program had to do was search each line in the files for the word “rounds” preceded by a number then sum those numbers. I found a few cases were I had recorded group sizes or chronograph tests that match the format and changed those to something like “10 shots over the chronograph” from “10 rounds…” and ran the program on *.log in the reloading directory. The result was about double of what I expected in every caliber:

223.LOG: 2027 rounds.
22LR.log: 0 rounds.
3006.LOG: 467 rounds.
300WIN.LOG: 1351 rounds.
40SW.LOG: 34941 rounds.
45.log: 0 rounds.
9MM.LOG: 18643 rounds.
Total: 57429 rounds.

It’s not near as many as a lot of people but I was still amazed. Of course I did start reloading on October 3rd, 1996 which is over 18 years ago. So that only figures out to about 3200 rounds per year. I’m hoping to up that considerably and do a lot more shooting this year.

Regarding primers…

…and getting testy;
There is total energy, and then there is peak power, time to peak power (which in audio circuitry we referred to as “rise time”) and duration of peak or near peak power. So you’d likely want to be able to graph it as power over time, to “really know” what’s happening. Point being of course that total energy would be somewhat inconsequential unless the power were up to a certain level for a certain period.

But maybe you got it just like that already. If so, carry on. Don’t mind me sitting in the corner and muttering.

Experiments with oil and primers

A week or two ago Ry showed up in my office and said he wanted to do an experiment. He and I have had conflicting information on the contamination of primers by oil. The common word on the Internet and word of mouth is that if you get the tiniest amount of oil on the chemically active portion of a primer then it would go dead.

However Ry had seen Lyle demonstrate this was not true by putting CLP in a shell casing with an active primer then detonating it a minute or two later. I had done similar things myself. I wanted to deprime some cases with live primers and to test the “kill the primer with oil” hypothesis I put a thin oil in the mouth of a shell casing and waited, sometimes a day or more, but they would still fire just fine. Bah! As usual the Internet is wrong. Right?

As we talked about the experiment we realized the Internet story wasn’t quite the same thing as our first hand data. Our first hand data wasn’t of putting oil directly on the primer. It was putting oil in the mouth of a shell casing. We believed the thin oil would make it through the flash hole into the active area of the primer.

IMG_1815CroppedAdjustedIMG_1816CroppedAdjusted

But that was an assumption. It was not a proven fact.

So what we decided to do was soak the primers for few minutes in a paper cup and then load them in a shell casing. We would do several primers then test them at various time intervals, like an hour, a day, a week, and a month. We expected the primers would still be fine after a month and the myth would be busted.

Here are the solvents we tested:

IMG_1802

We used Winchester small pistol primers:

IMG_1806IMG_1812

Here are the primers being soaked prior to inserting on the empty shell casings:

IMG_1803

An interesting thing occurred. The primers soaked in Break Free CLP turned the CLP slightly red after a few minutes:

IMG_1804

And the primers in the water turned the water slightly yellow:

IMG_1805

We also created two control sets. One set had dry primers in a dry shell casing and the other set had dry primers with solvent put in the shell casing.

After we had all the shell casing loaded Ry added more of the solvent to the test shell casings so evaporation would not be a factor in the long term testing.

We then tested both control sets and the test set.

We hand loaded the empty shell casings into a handgun and put the muzzle tight against an air pillow used for padding in Amazon shipments. We then fired the gun. If it failed to fire we would cock the hammer and try a second time. If it failed both times we called it a dead primer. There were no primers which failed on the first attempt and succeeded on the second. If it popped the air pillow it was a “vigorous” detonation. If it failed to puncture the air pillow it was a “mild” detonation:

IMG_1809

The dry normally inserted primers would punch a hole through both sides of the air pillow even though there was a significant air gap between the two sides:

IMG_1810

We tested two primers for each solvent. The results with solvent only in the shell casing mouth were as follows:

Solvent Detonation Result
Water 2 vigorous
Break Free CLP 2 vigorous
WD 40 2 mild
3-IN-ONE 1 vigorous, 1 mild
Tetra Gun Lubricant 2 vigorous

This confirmed the tests Lyle and I had done years ago. The primers were still active after putting oil in the case mouth.

Here are the results of the primers soaked in the paper cups with solvent:

Solvent Detonation Result
Water 2 dead
Break Free CLP 1 mild, 1 dead
WD 40 1 mild, 1 very mild
3-IN-ONE 2 mild
Tetra Gun Lubricant 2 mild

We will have updates later after the remaining primers have soaked for longer periods of time but it is clear that the flash hole is a significant barrier to the entry of solvents into the primer compound and the common wisdom of oil damaging primers is true.

Update from Ry after one day:

Solvent Detonation Result
Water 2 dead
Break Free CLP 1 mild, 1 dead
WD 40 1 very mild, 1 dead
3-IN-ONE 1 mild, 1 dead
Tetra Gun Lubricant 2 dead

Simple homemade gift

I hadn’t done any reloading in a couple years so it felt really good to crank out a few hundred rounds. My last rife reloading was done in 2001.

The picture below is a sample of the result. It is a gift for a friend. It was simple, shiny, and you can’t buy it in stores:

WP_20131209_001

Plus it should give the anti-gun people heartburn.

See also this video:

Shiny

I recently purchased some Hornady One Shot Sonic Clean Solution (currently on clearance at Midway USA). This is only for cleaning brass, not gun parts in general.

I put a bunch of dirty, deprimed, brass in the sonic cleaner with the solution diluted 40:1 with water and let it run for 30 minutes while stirring every six minutes or so. The result is quite pleasing:

WP_20131128_001

The interior of the brass and even the primer pockets are shiny clean. This is faster than using the tumbler with corncob media and gets the interior clean as well as the exterior.

Cast bullets for an auto pistol

Down the rabbit hole into the esoteric. Before the current ammo shortage I decided to start casting bullets, just because I liked the idea of an extra level of independence. The 30-30 cast bullets worked OK but there’s more to do there. This time though its the 10 mm Auto.

I’ve been loading the Hornady 180 XTPs with good results, but I wanted a 200 grain cast bullet too. The RCBS 200 SWC has gotten good reviews so I got that two cavity mold a while back. The mold handles I use for the Lyman molds didn’t fit the new RCBS mold, and people were starting to run low on things. Buffalo Arms in Idaho sells a hand-fabricated-looking handle set that works like a pair of Vice-Grips. Pretty expensive and heavy, but they had them in stock. They’re great. You get VERY consistent closing pressure for each pour. I weighed 20 already lubed bullets tonight and the extreme spread was 1.5 grains, 201 gr +/- .75.

Of course, to “save money” casting bullets from one dollar per pound lead, I had to buy a lube sizer. Seating the lead bullets, I was shaving lead on the case mouths, so I bought a 10 mm M die. It expands deeper into the case than a regular expander die, plus it makes a wider spot at the mouth. I’d been seating crimping in one swipe with the jacketed bullets, but since that’s not really an option for cast, I had to readjust my otherwise permanently adjusted seating die. Now I figure I’ll buy another seat die in this “money saving” venture.

To prevent the case mouth shaving lead from the bullet upon seating, I had to put LOTS more flair on the cases. I tried chamfering the mouths a little and that didn’t help much, so now I’m working the brass a lot more, which means it will work harden sooner. The bullets aren’t getting shaved now, but the cases are so wide at the mouth that the seating die can’t be lowered nearly as much as normal or the crimp taper starts to erase that wide belling, shaving lead anyway. And that means that the seating stem is just a bit too short, so with the locking collar removed from the seating stem and the stem screwed in as far as it will go, I still have to screw the die body down to where it is narrowing the flair just a bit. That means there is no support on the case at all except at the very mouth. I noticed that if I nicely align the bullets on the case mouth by hand before seating, they now don’t get shaved. When the bullets shave, the lead that’s stuck in front of the case mouth interferes with head spacing. It’s not serious, but it is annoying.

Loading dies, at least for straight wall auto cases, are not made with cast bullets in mind. These are RCBS dies, but I doubt there’d be much difference. The whole paradigm is wrong. Since you apparently need much more flair at the mouth, and you’re shoving the case up into the die mouth-first, your die has to be too large to support any part of the case except for the very mouth, or else it will erase your mouth flair. Instead of going mouth-first into the seating die, the cases should be going head-first into a support die, and then up to a seating stem, with the bullet pre aligned before it touches the case. That way, much of the case, and all of the bullet’s drive bands, could be aligned prior to seating. It couldn’t be done “right”, in my opinion, any other way.

But we make it work, somehow, with what we have. There’s still more testing to do, but initially I got two groups of just under 5 inches at 20 yards standing unsupported. Lots more recoil than the 180 XTP loads, but my chrono got lost along a 20 mile stretch of highway in a snowstorm so no vel data. A third group was MUCH larger, so I quit. There was leading in the Lone Wolf barrel. That was before I eliminated the lead shaving at seating. We’ll see later whether the shaving verses not shaving makes any difference.

The load is 9.4 grains Blue Dot, CCI 300, OAL 1.255, #2 alloy, Super Molly lube that came with the Lyman sizer. Still don’t know if it’s a keeper, but I do know I can get off at least 10 decent shots. Whoopie, eh?

Parts and percentages

When I got into bullet casting, I noticed right off that there was confusion over parts and percentages.  People tell you that 20 parts lead to one part tin equals 95% and 5%, but when you start adding your “parts” you put in 20 parts this and one part that, and you realize that you now have 21 parts, which isn’t 95:5.  It’s actually 1/21, which is more like 95.3% and 4.7%.  Not a big difference, and not enough to really matter in this case, but when mixing several ingredients, you can end up farther off.  If you use this oft repeated “method” of calculating for things that really do matter, you’re in trouble.

Anyway, I wanted Lyman #2, and Lyman states the actual percentages.  I use other alloys too, and several sources of metal, so I made up this alloy calculator.

I think my assumptions are right…

Alloy Calculator.xls (26.5 KB)

You can fiddle with the composition of your various metal sources, plug in the number of parts in each, and it gives you the makeup of your final alloy in percentages.  So I can make #2 alloy from wheelweights, pure tin and 70:30 antimonial lead, or from pure lead, tin, and 70:30, etc. and in theory get a pretty consistent product without having to do much calculating.

The Kaboom That Wasn’t

Yesterday I had a bullet in the bore in front of another complete cartridge that was fully chambered.  The bolt was in battery, the hammer cocked, and the safety was in the Total Devastation position.  But I thought better of dropping the hammer.  Well I didn’t think so much as feel that for some non-specific reason it might be a good idea to get out of my ready-to-shoot position and open the action.

I had fired hundreds of these cast bullet loads for a Win ’94 carbine and was having quite a good time shooting, using the new tang aperture sight after getting the sights dialed in.  The 311291 mold puts out a “bore rider” bullet, meaning the shank of the bullet ahead of the drive bands kisses the rifling as it’s chambered.  It’s supposed to make for better accuracy, and so far these have been pretty good in that department.  But my mold produces bullets that more than kiss the rifling– they have to be jammed in with just a tad bit more force than optimum.  I’ve chambered and un-chambered lots of them before without observing any sort of problem.

Yesterday, I don’t remember why, I decided to check the status of the rifle before taking a shot.  It was harder than usual to extract, so when it came loose, the bolt came back rapidly, expelling an empty case.  “Odd” I thought, “I’m pretty sure there was a loaded round in there.  Oh well.” (first red flag).  So I rammed the lever home to chamber another round.  It took more than the usual amount of force to chamber (second red flag).  But it chambered.

I actually had the rifle up to fire, and then…”Naw…I’ll be needin’ to see that cartridge.”  Again it was harder than usual to extract, and this time I could see fine ball powder all over the action and my hand.  “OK then, I’m done with the Winchester for the day.”

That first hard extraction had pulled the bullet from the case, but I didn’t notice the spilled powder because I had my long-range shades on (can’t see close-up very well) and the low, direct sun made for so much contrast that anything in shadow was much harder to see.  I didn’t notice the little detail of the still un-dented primer.  The next round was harder to chamber because I was forcing the first bullet deeper into the bore in front of the fresh cartridge.  The new brass was maybe a little soft, and maybe that bullet was on the large side of the size variation range, and maybe the case was on the short side of the narrow length range I had allowed, the crimp design is very good at preventing bullet set-back (which is the concern with tubular magazines) but poor at preventing bullet pull-out, so anyway the bullet pulled free and stayed behind when I extracted the case.  Never heard of such a thing, which is why I bring it up here.  Maybe I should get another bullet mold.

You know they say that for a single shot action, you don’t need any crimp at all.  After yesterday, with any bore rider design I would recommend a crimp no matter what.

Shooting alone is a real pleasure for me.  I love taking other people along and having a good time that way, sure.  Some of my best shooting memories come from having other people along.  I have to get out alone once in a while though, especially with rifles, and I highly recommend it for everyone.  It allows focus, and the contrast between the fire and the total silence during breaks does the heart good somehow.  On the issue of focus; I believe that the chances of my pulling that trigger on that double bullet load were fairly high, had there been company along.

Edited to add; Below is the bullet in question.  You can just see the engraving from the rifling.  That individual bullet fit pretty well, but others are a bit tighter (random variations in casting).  I should have posted this photo earlier to avoid some of the confusion.  “Regular” bullets begin to taper off right in front of the case mouth, but this one is designed to enter the bore in front of the throat, touching the lands.  The design helps align the bullet right from the get go.  For actual use, the front drive band at the case mouth (and those behind it) is sized to .309″ to tightly engage the .308″ barrel groove diameter and produce a good seal.  Also notice the ring around the back of the short ogive, from the seating plug that was designed for longer ogive bullets.  This photo was taken over a year ago, before I fired any of these rounds, and you’ll see that the case is either crimped very lightly or not at all.  This was a test seating.  You also see that the chamber throat is super short (the rifling comes very close to the case mouth, but it’s a largely non-issue here).  That’s not a problem with most modern full-copper-patched bullets either, but it does limit the styles I can use.  This #2 alloy cast 170 grain gas checked bullet load reaches 2,000 fps from a 16″ barrel, using White Label Carnauba Red lube and 33.5 gr of Win 748 with a WRLM primer.  The powder charge and primer are from the Speer manual as a jacketed load.  After 50 shots, the bore looks like a polished mirror (the powder burns clean and the bullets don’t leave lead behind).

Velocity

As kids, we liked to shoot, and one of the things we liked to shoot was cans.  Bottles were cool too, but we mostly did that at the dump since it sprays broken glass all over the place.  One of the first cans I shot was with .22 Shorts (very low power ammunition) from a handgun.  One bullet entered a can at a tangent and spun several times around the inside (“PZzzzzit!”) making the can levitate off the ground a little and leaving raised ridges protruding around the outside of the steel.  Fascinating.  That was in the 1960s.

So of course when I recently got some good performing loads worked up for a 30-30 Winchester carbine model of 1894, I was going to shoot some cans.  It’s the natural order of things.

The two milk cans below (both were filled with water) were shot using the same 170 grain bullet cast from #2 lead alloy, from the same carbine at the same distance.  The only difference was the powder charge.  The can in the first photo was hit at around 1600 feet per second, with the bullet coming in from the left and exiting to the right.  Note that the entry side is blown out much more than the exit (a not uncommon phenomenon when you have a harder outer shell containing a softer, more fluid material).  You can see that the neat little bullet entry hole is split in half.

The can below was hit at around 2000 fps, again with the bullet coming in from the left and exiting to the right.  It’s more like a cherry bomb went off inside it.  The top separated and flew waaaay up into the air.  I never did find it.

Yes it’s a little bit childish, and yes it is a lot of fun.  Though I’ve done this sort of thing hundreds of times and I’ve had this carbine since the mid ’90s, just the other day I found myself chuckling like a ten year old boy with a new toy.  It’s hard to explain.  Several previous outings were for the purpose of recording velocities, accuracy and sight adjustments for various loads.  That may be some fun, but it resembles work too.  This time out, just for shooting, was very different– more like a meditative state of near total concentration and peace.  Would that we could spend most of our lives in that state.

In case you’re wondering; I doubt there was any significant bullet expansion.  The hard cast round nose bullets were not recovered, but at those low velocities (for a rifle) I’d bet they held their shape fairly well.  I plan to try recovering some later, using several water jugs as a trap.  So we’ll see.

Shiny

I put some brass in the tumbler in the garage in Idaho to clean and forgot to turn it off. I then went back to the Seattle area. When I got back to Idaho nearly two weeks later the brass was very shiny:

This isn’t the first time I have forgot to turn off the tumbler. But I have never let it run for 13 days before.

Standard Deviation = 1

Never heard of it, though mnaybe y’all are getting it all the time and haven’t told me.  The first time I thought is was a fluke.  20 shots from a G20 pistol with SD of one foot per second.  During the string I thought something was wrong with the chrono, because shot after shot it displayed the same number.  Then there’s the saying; if you test your velocity once, you’ll know it.  If you test it a second time, you’ll never be sure again.  Though I never got any error readings, I discarded the data.

So I went out a second time on Saturday with the same load.  The CED chrono was unwilling to get any readings from the 30-30 loads I really wanted to test.  It’s like that sometimes, even with the IR LED screens.  But it took readings from the slower, bigger 10 mm bullets just fine.  I only measured ten shots this time, so a SD is of little meaning, but the extreme spread was 6.  It might correlate to a SD of 1.  I don’t know about anyone else, and the ammo manufacturers rarely say anything about it, but I’ve thought I was doing pretty well in the past if the SD was 12 or so.

This is a light load for the ten, getting barely under 1100 fps.  More like a 40 S&W.  It’s 9.6 gr. Blue Dot (checked against a check weight) with new Starline cases, 180 XTPs and a CCI 300, just going by the dimensions in the Hornady manual.  Nothing special.  This was my starting load, but it may end up a keeper.  We’ll see.  At the moment it’s my carry load, with 43 rounds on board.

I know – handloaded ammo for self defense, blah blah.  Don’t care.  I can practice a lot more with this stuff because I can afford a lot of it, and practicing with the same load you carry makes sense.  That’s what I’ll tell the lawyers– I can shoot this load more accurately and therefore more safely, etc., because it’s exactly what I use for practice.  I tried some of the hot Double Tap 200 grain FMJ stuff.  It’s affordable for practice, and while I’m sure it’s fine ammo for some guns, my Glock did something with it that it’s never done before.  The fired case would stick in the chamber (that’s what you call a pressure sign, right there) the extractor would strip off over the case head, and a fresh round would feed into the back of the fired case.  Yikes that’s some hot stuff, but no thanks.  Two stoppages or so per magazine is more than a deal killer.  If your 10 mm can cycle it properly, it would make a good deep penetrator though.

The crimp has to be a touch under the case diameter just below the crimp though, whereas I went with “about equal”.  A couple of these XTP handloads (2 of about 150) did fail to lock up all the way – something else that’s never happened with this gun.  I’m sure it’s the crimp, and maybe that I need a new slide spring as this one is the original from the early 1990s and has been cycled umpteen thousand times.  A gentle “forward assist” on the back of the slide was all it took.  Yes; more crimp.

The Ultimate Reloader

Spending more time on the loading press.  Thinking hard about a progressive, as this one step business grates.  The loading rates they talk about are of course totally wrong, as they don’t include the hours upon hours spent prepping cases before you can start “reloading” on your 600 rounds per hour progressive machine.  I once timed a guy with his new state-of-the-art case prep center on Youtube, and came up with eight hours per thousand, IIRC.

I once sat down and figured how much technology would be needed to take your spent brass from the range and go straight to the progressive with it.  There was a motorized cleaning station, an RF induction annealing die, followed by a water-cooled sizing die (the brass would come in hot, you see, and since you’ll have to run water through your annealing die there’ll already be a cooling system) plus trimming and chamfering stations.  Depending on the case and bullet type, there may be an “M” die station.  I think I once came up with twelve or thirteen stations in all, to really have it all, no matter what.  I don’t know– $20,000.00?  Thoughbeit a small one, I figure there’d be a market for it.

I was looking at the Hornady L&L, but I’m being told the Dillon 650 is a better bet.  It’s listed for something like 600 bucks, but looking at the required hardware for actually loading a few calibers it’s over a thousand for sure, and from there you spend a little more.  I’ll have to resign myself to prepping cases the old-fashioned way– one at a time.

You have to like it, considering it a hobby, because if you figure the value of your time I don’t see the numbers working out.  You do get a little bit of independence from it, though you still need a supply of consumables.  If you want near total independence you should have a flintlock, make your own black powder using nitrate from the stockyard (I’ve heard of it being done without sulphur. It’s less powerfull but it works. If you live near an active volcano you may be covered there) and cast your own lead from scrap.  Ah, but you still need a supply of flint.  Man, this deteriorated quickly.  Sharp sticks.  There you have it.

Grains by Volume

I’ve said before that some things are so simple they can’t be grasped.  “Co witnessing” of iron sights is one of those.

“Grains by volume” is another.  It started when Pyrodex, a black powder substitute, came out.  People were accustomed to using a powder measure, used to charge a rifle or pistol with a consistent, known amount of black powder, back in the day when black powder was just “gun powder” simply because there wasn’t any other kind.  As we do today when reloading metal cartridges, people way back then used a volumetric measure to easily charge a muzzle loader with powder, but of course someone needed an accurate scale to verify that the volume of powder they were dispensing was of the correct mass.  Same thing with metal cartridges.  Verify with a scale, then dispense time and again, easily with that volume so you don’t have to weigh each individual charge.

Same thing was done for hundreds of years in the field when using black powder guns– you pour from a flask into a measure that was pre-determined to hold a certain number of drams, or of grains, of black powder.

Then Pyrodex came along with their “volume equivalent” and few seem to have understood any of it since.  Pyrodex is a substitute for black powder.  It’s chemically different, safer to handle and ship (ostensibly) and doesn’t require the onerous licensing, confiscatory fees and demeaning inspections of premises associated with black powder.  By design, Pyrodex will generate approximately the same results in terms of pressure and projectile velocity as the same volume of black powder.  This makes it super easy to use the old way– you use the same measures that you always used for old fashioned black powder.  Though Pyrodex isn’t nearly as dense, so if you were really meticulous and wanted to know precisely the “volume equivalent” grains of Pyrodex powder you’re using, you’d need to weigh real black powder from your measure.  Dreaming up the “volume equivalent” was their way of making it easy to switch to their new powder.  You didn;y have to think about– just use the same measure, made of brass or deer antler, etc., that your great great grand pappy used in the War of Northern Agression.

Totally, super simple, right?  Use the same volume of Pyrodex you’d use of black powder.  That’s it.  No; shut up– that’s it.

But now it seems we can’t discuss even real black powder and real black powder alone without people (experienced people even) chiming in about “grains by volume” verses “grains by weight”.  That would only come into play if substitute powders were somewhere in the discussion.  Otherwise there’s no difference, which we all knew centuries ago (or would have known, had we been alive centuries ago).

“Sure; you verified your charge by carefully weighing it, but you might be off ’cause you’re using grains by weight instead of grains by volume.”  I actually got a comment like that today, and I’ve seen it many times before.

Now maybe it would be simpler if Pyrodex loads, just like loads made up from dozens to hundreds of very different smokeless powders, were expressed in actual mass instead of “volume equivalents”.  At least I wouldn’t have to explain things when someone tried to tell me that there is something out there called a “grain by volume” of black powder.  Then I have to remember that we actually do have something very similar– the milliliter, which is the volume of one gram of pure water, which is what you get from a cube that is one centimeter on a side IIRC.  Or was it the other way ’round?  Something like that.  I forget the actual starting point but last I heard it had been decided that we’d count a certain number of wavelengths from the emission from a certain energy state jump of a certain isotope of a certain element and call that a meter.  Look it up and count wavelengths (somewhere in the yellowish range of visible light I think) to calibrate your measuring tape, but please don’t talk to me about “grains by volume” unless we’re discussing Pyrodex or other substitute-for-black-powder loads.

Redding G-RX Carbide Push Thru Base Sizing Die

For quite some time about 80% of my .40 S&W reloads would not fit in the case gauge even though they would fit in the chamber of my gun. The base of the brass had a slight bulge that the resizing die did not address.

I ended up using an old barrel to verify my reloads were not so far out of spec that they would fail to chamber. I was always concerned that using my old barrel as a case gauge was risky because it could be the current barrel chamber was slightly smaller than the old one and I would have a problem with some small percentage of the rounds. I really wanted to build the ammo to spec and use the case gauge.

I then discovered and purchased a Redding G-RX Carbide Push Thru Base Sizing Die via Sinclair.

I had some strong hints before purchase that it wouldn’t directly work in my Dillon 550B press but I figured I could figure it out. I was correct on both accounts.

The bottom end of the pushrod did not fit in the shellholder of my press. The die itself worked fine in the 550 toolhead. But the bottle intended to be used that attached to the top of the die would not fit among the other dies of the toolhead with an available opening.

It wasn’t a perfect match because it had different threads but the neck of a Dr. Pepper bottle (Coke, Pepsi, and most other soda bottles would not have worked because they have a shorter neck) had a gradual enough taper that it would fit among the dies. I cut the bottom out and screwed it into the adapter:

WP_000361Corrected

I took off the shell plate and verified the stroke and alignment of the pushrod on my press were close. But I needed some method to hold the pushrod in place. I strongly considered double stick tape and actually was about to buy it at the hardware store when I saw magnets just a few feet away. I found some very thin disc magnets that looked to be about the correct size and appeared to be strong enough to handle the pressure:

WP_000362Corrected

These worked wonderfully:

WP_000360Corrected

These magnets, as the packaging says, are extremely strong and held the pushrod firmly in place.

I resized about 100 cases in a few minutes and verified the base sizing die works as advertised. I’m very pleased with the result. My only tweak will probably be to buy a toolhead just for this die so I can use the correct bottle.

Ammo makes a difference

I have had lots of experience with rifle ammunition being the cause of extreme inaccuracy. But I had not seen a huge difference in accuracy with handguns. Shooting offhand at handgun distances I just couldn’t see it making that much of a difference. For nearly all my purposes I just didn’t think it could matter when the human error was going to dominate (I thought) the results.

When loading rifle ammo for accuracy I measure each charge down to the 0.1 grain. I measure and trim the necks of the shell casing which are all of the same brand. I clean the primer pocket. I weight the cases. I use a special seating die that aligns the bullet precisely. I use match grade bullets. I sometimes weigh and sort all the bullets. All total, each round takes about two minutes of my time to assemble.

When reloading for pistol I shop around for the cheapest bullets I can find. I use whatever cases of whatever brand I happen to find on the range. I load 300 to 400 rounds per hour.

As I reported a couple weeks ago I discovered some cheap gun show pistol ammo was key-holing once the range exceeded about 30 feet. This was 180 grain .40 S&W BVAC remanufactured ammo.

The ammo will still work fine for USPSA short range practice on the indoor range which doesn’t allow lead bullets. But for an actual match or where the range exceeds 30 feet I needed something better. I had some 180 grain Montana Gold JHP bullets that I loaded up last weekend with 6.0 grains of VV N350 in mixed casings with Winchester primers.  Yesterday I tested my loads. I also tested my carry ammo, 180 grain Winchester Ranger in .40 S&W, and some other cheap ammo I bought at Wal-Mart a year ago.

Here are the results from shooting offhand at 75’. Some of the outliers are my fault but you should still get the idea:

IMG_6357
This is my target from two weeks ago with the BVAC ammo.

IMG_6356
This is another tests of the BVAC ammo (8” group).

IMG_6354
This is another test of the BVAC ammo. Ignore the 2.5 holes at the top center. They do not belong to the same group. That outlier at the top left was not my fault. I know when I pull the trigger wrong. This was not one of those times.

IMG_6351
This is 180 grain Winchester Ranger ammo that I carry on a daily basis. The four holes at the bottom are probably my fault.

IMG_6352
This is 135 grain Winchester Ranger ammo.

IMG_6353
This is 180 grain Federal FMJ AN from Wal-Mart.

IMG_6355
This was my new handloads with 180 grain Montana Gold JHPs over 6.0 grains of VV N350 (5.25” group).

It looks like I have some new loads that work well in my gun and that are welcome at indoor ranges.

Making Your Own Ammo – Cheap?

I started casting bullets last winter for my percussion guns, and since it’s been going well I recently started looking at bullet molds for the .30-30.  I don’t use the Winchester much, but if I could make ammo for a few pennies per round, I might use it more often.  I already have loading dies for that cartridge.

 

I figured a bullet mold would be a good investment, but then I figure for the .30-30 I need a bullet sizer (maybe a lubrisizer while we’re at it, ‘cause lead bullets need lubed), a .309” sizing die, top punch, gas checks, gas check seater plug, some good lube, handles for the mold.  Then I’ll need some different powder…

 

That’s several hundred dollars to start loading “cheap” ammo for a rifle I probably haven’t fired 100s of dollars of commercial ammo through in all the years I’ve owned it.  But then I figure I could also cast 9 mm and .357” bullets, but that’s more molds, sizing dies, and punches.

 

I don’t know; do any of you have all this extra hardware and cast a lot of bullets, and do you find it’s paid for itself?  Sure it depends on how much you shoot, but there’s also the independence factor – you’re making your own bullets.  Or is it just a big drag on your time, such that you find yourself buying more bullets or loaded ammo than you make?

 

Hmm.  The percussion revolvers’ chambers act as their own sizing die, the loading ram acts as it’s own “top punch”, I can lube the bullets by dipping them in the tallow I get as a byproduct from hunting, they don’t need gas checks or special lead alloys, or loading dies, punches, et al.  I already have the ~20 dollar conical bullet mold and the ~20 dollar ball mold and the ~60 dollar furnace.  That’s an investment of about 100 dollars.  After that it’s mostly just lead, powder and caps, and there’s no recovering of spent brass, no cleaning of brass, and no decapping, sizing or crimping the brass.  The drawbacks though are obvious in that we’re back to the mid 19th century.

 

I see that Lee is soon to come out with an eighteen cavity 00 buckshot mold.  It’s near the bottom of the page here.

Are you into reloading?

If you are into reloading in a big (and I mean BIG) way I have just the deal for you.

I received a phone call and follow up email from Marc Coury:

From: Marc J Coury
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 5:22 PM
To: JoeH@boomershoot.org
Subject: RockTek/Marc Coury-Ballistic Solutions-50 Cal Powder

Joe,

Just left you a voice message after hanging up with Ron Gilbert. He said to give you a call immediately regarding this powder.

As I mentioned, Ballistic Solutions, Inc., has been manufacturing small arms ammo and sniper rifles for 15 years. Our CEO, Jeff Semko, is a sniper instructor and has consulted for Homeland Security and many law enforcement agencies. We’re currently in process of re-locating our production facility onto the Tooele Army Depot in Utah. We also have a contract with Tooele, marketing their demil and other military surplus: powder, brass, projectiles, heck, you name it.

I’ve attached a detailed overview of what we currently have for sale – we’re down to 45,048 lbs. from 190,000 lbs. of Winchester 50 cal pulldown: 872 & 867.

The powder is stored at Tooele and is packaged in DOT approved, mil spec containers, so we can have it shipped out as soon as a wire transfer clears. We had it priced at the low-end wholesale of [call for details–it is awesome price–Joe]/lb.

However, as we need to make room in the bunker, if someone wants the entire remaining lot it’s theirs for [even more awesome price–Joe]/lb.

That’s a substantial loss for us, but a gain to the buyer. As you know, retailers are selling it between $8.50 – $11.75/lb., with smaller reloaders paying up to $25.00/lb.

If you or anyone else can use it, you know where to find me!

Best,
Marc

Marc J. Coury
Ballistic Solutions, Inc.
Satellite Office:
2715 W. Coast Highway, Suite: A
Newport Beach, CA. 92663
TEL: 949.645.3815 FAX: 949.646.8746

You don’t have to buy it all. You can buy it in quantities as small as three pallets (6,480 pounds). Call Marc for the details.

Shooting Fun

I’ve had an 1858 Remington New Model Army revolver for a while, but was never able to get decent accuracy from it.  Maybe it was the wrong grip fit for my hands.  Maybe it was the extra weight and maybe it was the very long creep in the trigger.  Don’t know, but it had been sitting for a long time, such that the grease was getting stiff, so I took it out alone for some exercise yesterday.

I’d been experimenting with bird shot loads in handguns because I’m interested in handgun trap shooting.  Turns out the rifling pretty well renders that a losing proposition (I could get a spare barrel for the 1851 Colt repro, and ream out the rifling. we’ll see).  Anyway, I ended up with a selection of fiber wads and cards for the .44 Remington, and since my current charge of 28 grains 3F Goex takes up little room in the chambers, and since everyone says the projectile should be close to the forcing cone for best accuracy, I added a quarter inch fiber wad on top of the powder, with a felt wad on top of that.

Now the revolver shoots OK.  Don’t know if it was the extra spacing, or that I’d been handling the gun a lot more, but I was able to match my long standing 25 yard grouping (previously held by the 1851 Colt) several times that day, with this gun.  It may not be anything to brag about, but it’s better than I’ve done with any automatic so far.  That’s 25 yards, standing, two hands, unsupported.  I’m sure there are people who can do a whole lot better, but as the saying goes, “This is my group. There are many like it, but this one is mine.”

That’s the way it went several times– four shots in a decent group, with one flier.  It didn’t matter whether the group was fired from one cylinder, the other cylinder, or a combination of the two.  I shot a smaller group that day, but this one gives me hope that those four in the middle better represent the gun’s potential.

There was zero wind that day, such that when I was all done, there was a layer of white smoke that covered the whole 5 to 7 acre range.  Cool.  It also means that you have to learn to aim through a cloud of smoke.

Several shooter have written about this other phenomenon; I found myself contentedly driving under the speed limit on the way home, which is something I practically never do.  I’m usually irritated by people who drive under the limit, the lot of serene bastards.  It seems that shooting can have a pronounced relaxing effect that can last for several hours after the fact.