Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Were they really?
02-11-2019, 01:39 PM
Post: #11
RE: Were they really?
Smile Kevin I have one of those 10# rifles with a 3# trigger lets run that test Tongue
top rifle
   

The old way of lead hardness testing was done using a known pure sample of lead and a ball bearing or small round object squeezed between a known and unknown sample. it's a lot more accurate than a $100. spring loaded tester Smile
As far as the modern technology goes, I'm not as afraid of it as I am of the latest bunch of Democrats that got into office this last run and where this Country is heading.

The reason a dog has so many friends is because he wags his tail instead of his tongue.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2019, 01:58 PM (This post was last modified: 02-11-2019 02:22 PM by Kevin Alexander.)
Post: #12
RE: Were they really?
(02-11-2019 01:39 PM)Kurt Wrote:  Smile Kevin I have one of those 10# rifles with a 3# trigger lets run that test Tongue
top rifle


The old way of lead hardness testing was done using a known pure sample of lead and a ball bearing or small round object squeezed between a known and unknown sample. it's a lot more accurate than a $100. spring loaded tester Smile
As far as the modern technology goes, I'm not as afraid of it as I am of the latest bunch of Democrats that got into office this last run and where this Country is heading.

Hey Kurt, nice rifles.
On lead testing I was talking about a electronic hand held tester that tells you by a digital scan what exactly the lead, tin, antimony and hardness are in a bullet. It’s a heck of a lot more accurate than anything used in the past.

Also remember that the Remington Creedmoor rifle had the 5 groove rifling in their barrels and in 44-100 caliber.

Get a Rolling block action with a 3 pound trigger pull, put a 5 groove barrel on it chambered in 44-100 all under 10 pounds and let’s see someone outshoot Henry Fulton’s score at 1000yards while in the Fulton position. Doubt it will happen or anyone would try.
I couldn’t get the rifle to lay flat enough across my beer belly, of course it might give it enough elevation to hit 1000. I don’t know.

I do know this, my next rifle will be a 44-100 for paper patch only. I’m thinking of a Hepburn from DZ.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2019, 03:41 PM
Post: #13
RE: Were they really?
I been looking at those testers Kevin and also one of those digital once that don't use an impression, not quite sure just how they read the harness.
That bottom CPA rifle has a .45-90 and the switch barrel that goes with it is in the .44-100 Rem St. but it has a set trigger and it weighs in just under 11# so it would not make the test.

The reason a dog has so many friends is because he wags his tail instead of his tongue.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2019, 04:34 PM
Post: #14
RE: Were they really?
(02-11-2019 03:41 PM)Kurt Wrote:  I been looking at those testers Kevin and also one of those digital once that don't use an impression, not quite sure just how they read the harness.
That bottom CPA rifle has a .45-90 and the switch barrel that goes with it is in the .44-100 Rem St. but it has a set trigger and it weighs in just under 11# so it would not make the test.

I looked at one that costs over 30k.
It was pretty cool as to what it would tell you what the lead composition was but for that price it better also shoot them all in the X at a 1000.

You should just turn loose of your heavy 74 in 44-100 so I don’t have to build a rifle.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2019, 05:48 PM (This post was last modified: 02-11-2019 05:52 PM by Kurt.)
Post: #15
RE: Were they really?
(02-11-2019 04:34 PM)Kevin Alexander Wrote:  
(02-11-2019 03:41 PM)Kurt Wrote:  I been looking at those testers Kevin and also one of those digital once that don't use an impression, not quite sure just how they read the harness.
That bottom CPA rifle has a .45-90 and the switch barrel that goes with it is in the .44-100 Rem St. but it has a set trigger and it weighs in just under 11# so it would not make the test.

I looked at one that costs over 30k.
It was pretty cool as to what it would tell you what the lead composition was but for that price it better also shoot them all in the X at a 1000.

You should just turn loose of your heavy 74 in 44-100 so I don’t have to build a rifle.

Kevin that heavy barreled beast has some great accuracy potentials for sure. It has shot the tightest groups that shame all my other rifles, but I just don't like to lug it around. It tips the gun cart over if I don't have 300 rounds in the front to add extra weight and IO shot that rifle once at the Quigley and it put me in the top 20 with out hitting one off hand bucket. Just too heavy to shoot it off hand. I thought about screwing that barrel back off and put the original .44-2-5/8 BN back on it and turn this barrel down to a 1" at the muzzle and shorten the 35" long to a 32" or 30" but I keep thinking maybe someday I would like a lesser recoiling long range rifle.
I just don't understand why now day long range shooters don't use the .44 calibers. I have them in the .44-90 bn(2),.44-77, and the .44-75 Ballard.
I had a chamber cast from a original .44-100 Rem St Hepburn rifle that was used for the Creedmoor matches that had all tools and extra bullets and the rifle was just like new the only thing I changed was the neck diameter to a .438"/.446".
I used this rifle a couple weeks ago for Brians postal match and I fell flat on my face using it, I never seen this rifle scatter the shots like that at 200 yards, even the 600 yard targets are smaller groups than it was but the ammo was several years old and they sat in the hot truck. I should load up some ladder loads for it with the OE and Swiss again. It shot mostly 2F KIK but it's gone.

The left target groups are outside too outside. The right target was shot at 200 yards.
       

The reason a dog has so many friends is because he wags his tail instead of his tongue.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2019, 05:55 PM
Post: #16
RE: Were they really?
(02-11-2019 05:48 PM)Kurt Wrote:  
(02-11-2019 04:34 PM)Kevin Alexander Wrote:  
(02-11-2019 03:41 PM)Kurt Wrote:  I been looking at those testers Kevin and also one of those digital once that don't use an impression, not quite sure just how they read the harness.
That bottom CPA rifle has a .45-90 and the switch barrel that goes with it is in the .44-100 Rem St. but it has a set trigger and it weighs in just under 11# so it would not make the test.

I looked at one that costs over 30k.
It was pretty cool as to what it would tell you what the lead composition was but for that price it better also shoot them all in the X at a 1000.

You should just turn loose of your heavy 74 in 44-100 so I don’t have to build a rifle.

Kevin that heavy barreled beast has some great accuracy potentials for sure. It has shot the tightest groups that shame all my other rifles, but I just don't like to lug it around. It tips the gun cart over if I don't have 300 rounds in the front to add extra weight and IO shot that rifle once at the Quigley and it put me in the top 20 with out hitting one off hand bucket. Just too heavy to shoot it off hand. I thought about screwing that barrel back off and put the original .44-2-5/8 BN back on it and turn this barrel down to a 1" at the muzzle and shorten the 35" long to a 32" or 30" but I keep thinking maybe someday I would like a lesser recoiling long range rifle.
I just don't understand why now day long range shooters don't use the .44 calibers. I have them in the .44-90 bn(2),.44-77, and the .44-75 Ballard.
I had a chamber cast from a original .44-100 Rem St Hepburn rifle that was used for the Creedmoor matches that had all tools and extra bullets and the rifle was just like new the only thing I changed was the neck diameter to a .438"/.446".
I used this rifle a couple weeks ago for Brians postal match and I fell flat on my face using it, I never seen this rifle scatter the shots like that at 200 yards, even the 600 yard targets are smaller groups than it was but the ammo was several years old and they sat in the hot truck. I should load up some ladder loads for it with the OE and Swiss again. It shot mostly 2F KIK but it's gone.

The left target groups are outside too outside. The right target was shot at 200 yards.

Yes Kurt, I do believe that heavy rifle needs to go to a younger shooter trying to get into the long range game. I’m just thinking about your health.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-14-2019, 09:14 PM
Post: #17
RE: Were they really?
Velocity? They didn't have chronys per se but some of them knew of or were privy to info from ballistic pendulums.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)