Author Topic: polyagonal rifling and cast bullets...  (Read 1260 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline budman46

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 33
polyagonal rifling and cast bullets...
« on: July 23, 2010, 04:05:13 AM »
veral,

i cast a lee 95 gr for a 9 x 18 czech vz-82 using wheel-weights. .362" as cast bullets are tumble-lubed.

serious leading and wildly inaccurate with 3.5 gr of ww-231; a second try with 2.0 gr of red dot (0.4 gr below recommended starting load) is a lot better, but still a trace of leading after 10 rounds fired.

should i be going harder or softer in alloy with the polygonal rifling in this firearm?

budman
budman

ignorance is fixable...

Offline Veral

  • GBO Sponsor
  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1675
    • Lead Bullet Technology
Re: polyagonal rifling and cast bullets...
« Reply #1 on: July 25, 2010, 07:12:58 PM »
  Some users say olygonal rifling is the best possible with cast.  No one has ever told me it is inferior to regular rifling form.  In other words, it is the most forgiving barrel you can get.

  You ask me if you should go harder or softer, when your question should have been to ask what I thought the problem is.    Your problem is Lee mold and Lee lube and in general Lee poor craftmanship of Lee and  Lee trashy attitude of Lee as to whether their products give performance.  They know they outsell all other mold makers combined because of their cheap prices.  However their cheap prices get more people into casting than all other mold makers combined but also their cheap products get more people permanently out than all other mold makers combined!
Veral Smith

Offline Halftime

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: polyagonal rifling and cast bullets...
« Reply #2 on: July 31, 2010, 05:44:58 AM »
Hi Veral,
  I've been using the 108 FN mold you made for me for a couple years in both a Makarov and the CZ82 with no leading and good accuracy (I'm the weak link). I use it as cast at .3655, hand lubed with Blue Soft and a good dose of Universal. I think this is what Budman needs!

Offline Tommyt

  • Trade Count: (51)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3051
  • Gender: Male
Re: polyagonal rifling and cast bullets...
« Reply #3 on: August 01, 2010, 03:42:28 AM »
Hi Veral,
  I've been using the 108 FN mold you made for me for a couple years in both a Makarov and the CZ82 with no leading and good accuracy (I'm the weak link). I use it as cast at .3655, hand lubed with Blue Soft and a good dose of Universal. I think this is what Budman needs!

Halftime
 I like your answer why don't you send Him 10 or 20 and let the Proof be in the Pudding
Just a thought
 Tommyt

Offline Halftime

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: polyagonal rifling and cast bullets...
« Reply #4 on: August 01, 2010, 06:12:35 AM »
Duh! Why didn't I think of that. PM'd budman. Thanks, Tommyt

Offline Terbltim

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 131
  • Gender: Male
Re: polyagonal rifling and cast bullets...
« Reply #5 on: August 16, 2010, 03:21:03 AM »
... You ask me if you should go harder or softer, when your question should have been to ask what I thought the problem is?   
Your problem is Lee mold and Lee lube and in general Lee poor craftmanship of Lee and Lee trashy attitude of Lee as to whether their products give performance. ...

Hey Veral...and everyone else,
I couldn't resist adding a remark or two on this subject.
I've had only 2 "poly" rifled guns. A Steyer GB (in the mid '80s) and a H&K-91.
Both were very accurate.
I sold the H&K when I could get a grand more than I paid for it.
The Steyer was/is an excellent hi-cap (18 rds in the Mag!) 9mm handgun that was perhaps the most accurate semi-auto handgun I've ever seen. It came from the factory with a 10-meter test target...a ragged hole.
That gun gave me a reliable platform from which to develop my harsh opinions of the 9mm cartridge, (only suitable for keeping the bad-guys off you while you reload your real weapon!)
I eventually came to the same conclusions that Veral's reply has made here (and elsewhere) about the Lee products with focus [here] on their molds.
What makes my mind spin is that Lee declares, in their ads and literature, that their molds are "guaranteed to be within 0.001" round."
As with many guys, I have used Lee molds for many years.
I don't spend any more of my money on Lee molds.
I've never seen any bullet come from ANY Lee mold that could be called "round". They are all oval shaped. Usually about 0.003" and 0.004" is not all that uncommon.
I have one of their 6-cavity molds, (C452-300-RF.) Each cavity is different from the others and all are very out-of-round. One cavity casts bullets that measure from .451" to .455" (as cast) on the same bullet! The rest range from .452" to .455" (as cast.) This mold sat new & unused on my shelf because I'd gotten a LBT mold before it got delivered. After using the LBT mold I have trouble rationalizing the use of Lee molds, (or any others for that matter.)

Aside: If you want to find how out-of-round a LBT-mold cast bullet is your calipers won't tell you much. You'll need a good micrometer that will  read accurately to 4 decimal places and 5 places is better. Heck, the rifling isn't that deep!

Recently in a local discussion with fellow casters/shooters I cast a lot of doubt on Lee (very popular with this crowd) by saying I'd never seen a Lee cast bullet that wasn't at least 0.003" out of round, as cast.
If you just shoot at "things" that are no farther than 100 feet, your guns will probably give "adequate" performance to keep the average shooter from thinking anything is wrong.
Also, if you don't shoot it at high power or longer distance you'll never see the inherent inferiority demonstrated. Just try to wring out the power and/or stretch the distance and things will change fast. (That's how it went for me.)
At least that has been my observation with many Lee molds for over 30 years.
I'm thinking of asking Lee what they'll do about all these molds that throw bullets that are 0.003" (or more) out-of-round ??
That should be interesting.
"Stop global whining!"