Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
smaller then bore slicks
08-29-2012, 01:10 PM,
#1
smaller then bore slicks
my first posting here so... HELLO ALL!!!

here is my position on the smaller diameter slicks...tryed some soft lead slicks in .441 and .444 inch diameter in a 350 grain for both and a 400 grain in both diameters. patching is done with baco's 9 lbs onionskin paper and the final dry diameter of these slicks are....441 patched to .446 inch....and....444 patched to .450 inch diameter.

shooting is done in a browning BPCR rifle with a 30 inch barrel and an 18 inch twist. rifle has a leopold 6 to 18x mounted for load development.

the two diff weight bullets did poorly in the accuracy dept. im comparing them to a baco mould # 45-500 in .460 diameter that groups very well in this rifle when seated out to kiss the rifling ahead of a charge of 68 grains of GOEX cartridge powder.

so my next purchase is/was a 550 grain bullet in both diameters with the diameters of the above patched to the same diameter...to trial them to see if the longer length will bring together the accuracy of paperpatch i search for.

my method of shooting includes wiping with a wet patch and drying the bore with a dry one for each shot. i rest the barrel on the best node for vibration which is around 8 inchs from the muzzle. i hold the angle the same with the front sights level before each shot thru the scope. the trigger is the best on a rifle without set triggers so it is nice n crisp with a bit less then 2 lbs letoff with no creep.

so there is my first post and the question for all is do you think that the length and weight of bullet is going to help cure my patch accuracy problems?
Reply
08-29-2012, 01:25 PM,
#2
RE: smaller then bore slicks
Ted might I suggest it will save you considerable money, yet get you quality moulds if you go thru accurate and get him to make you the slick you want in his aluminum blocks. Then you can later go with that diameter bullet in an iron block from someone if you think theres a need...
Good to see you here by the way.
Reply
08-29-2012, 02:03 PM,
#3
RE: smaller then bore slicks
don..thanks for the welcome.

so far i have purchased three slick moulds and 2 of them are from accurate. they are flawless in brass and throw great bullets but they are all in groove diameter sizes..[ read .452 inch diameter]. the slicks i have played with have been the swaged bullets from baco till i figure out what is gonna work in the 45-70 to purchase a mould in the smaller diameter bullet slicks. i wouldnt even examine these smaller slicks but i cant get enough powder in the case with any sorta wads or lube cookie so im playin with the ODG's way and patchin to bore or under...that way i can seat em out far enough to get all the cookie n stuff in there and still have a decent amount of powder to send it along with good velocity.

been thinkin about elongating my 70 chamber [2.1] to a 90 chamber [2.4] for this very reasson but want to experiment with all other combo's before i have any barrel work done on an otherwise perfect rifle.
Reply
08-29-2012, 02:48 PM,
#4
RE: smaller then bore slicks
I know of more than a few who re-cut those bbls and wish they hadn't.
Have a new bbl put on or buy a Browney in '90.
Gary
Hav'n you along, is like losing two good men.....
Reply
08-29-2012, 10:14 PM,
#5
RE: smaller then bore slicks
thanks Gary...this has been my observation as well but it still seems tempting for some stupid reason. i had a browning re-barreled and by the time i got done with all the stuff i wanted it cost me slightly more then a new shiloh and i could have easily purchased another BPCR browning or winchester for less dollars.

i just have not gotten my bore size and under slicks to shoot yet and maybe that is the length and weight for the twist having more to do with it all...dont know yet!
Reply
08-29-2012, 10:52 PM,
#6
RE: smaller then bore slicks
BT quit messing around and get some thickwall brass to use for this. What is happening now is your soft lead patch to bore bullets are being bumped up before they are completely in the rifling. just my own opinion. bobw
Reply
08-29-2012, 11:45 PM,
#7
RE: smaller then bore slicks
Ted I think bob is probably pretty close with the thicker brass, cut down some Norma or Jamison 110 or 120 brass and see if that doesn't help. Also back the bullet weight down to 500, actually the length is more critical to the twist than weight but since the sort of go hand in hand....
Reply
08-31-2012, 08:52 PM,
#8
RE: smaller then bore slicks
You need a longer, heavier bullet with the 1-18 twist. Set your mold to throw a bullet 1.3 inches long and you will be in the ballpark. Shoot straight, rdnck.
Reply
08-31-2012, 09:51 PM,
#9
RE: smaller then bore slicks
(08-29-2012, 02:48 PM)Lumpy Grits Wrote: I know of more than a few who re-cut those bbls and wish they hadn't.
Have a new bbl put on or buy a Browney in '90.
Gary


Gary
The one's that recut the chamber most likely didn't know what they were doing using a bad fitting pilot and not supporting the shank of the reamer.
Or they borrowed a reamer made for a rifle with a different dimensions their chamber has.
I would hesetate borrowing a throating reamer made for a different rifle with out verifying the inside dimensions.

Kurt
The reason a dog has so many friends is because he wags his tail instead of his tongue.
Reply
09-01-2012, 12:37 AM,
#10
RE: smaller then bore slicks
YUPExclamation
Gary
Hav'n you along, is like losing two good men.....
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Contact Us | HistoricShooting.com | Return to Top | | Lite (Archive) Mode | RSS Syndication