Bullet Fitting-Continuing Saga

[BrushBuster]

I have recently completed chamber casting my .348 Winchester, using both the Lead-Slugging method (Aladin) and Cerrosafe methods.

My bore size is .3475, and from what I have learned, should have me looking for a sized cast bullet dimension of .350 and more.

What has me a little concerned, is that the chamber Neck dimension is only .002 over the loaded .348 condom cartridge! Now this is a great fit for a condom bullet, and I will not consider resizing my neck-throat dia., because I want the capability of shooting both cast and condoms, but does this mean that when I begin seating .350 (min.) cast bullets I could be entering into a high pressure situation and possible chambering difficulty? I want to use CB's with a BNH-18 minimum.

I haven't got cast bullets of that size to try out, so this is hypothetical, but I would like your opinions as to my having a legitimate concern or not!

Thanks

[stocker]

Brushbuster;

That neck dimension seems curiously tight. What does the neck of a case fired in the rifle measure? I'm wondering about shrinkage of the casting compound. Your bore measurement is about identical to my old Winchester and I size with either a .349 or .350 die. For oven hardened bullets I initially size and check them them .349 and after hardening lube them using the .350. Unhardened bullets get one pass through the 350 die. Bullets sized at either diameter seem much the same in terms of accuracy.

[BrushBuster]

Hi Stocker:

Here's what I have.
Chamber Neck Dia.:  .377 (measured with micrometer)
New unfired Brass:     .375
Fired brass Neck Dia.:   .376

Perhaps there's no concern here, but it all seems a little snug to me.
Can you tell me what neck dia. you end up with after seating your .350 CB's?

[Cat Whisperer]

Brushbuster -
  You're on the right track.  While some benchrest shooters will go for .001 on the diameter for clearance a little more (.002 total on the diameter) is a better minimum clearance.

You can neck turn the cases for both uniformity and thickness.  (Inside neck trimming will quickly and easily reduce the amount of metal, outside neck turning is a little harder but also makes the inside concentric to the outside.)

There HAS to be SOME clearance.  Don't take my word for the safe numbers - post the question on some of the bench-rest shooting boards and get several others experience.

[stocker]

Brushbuster:

Maybe yours isn't too unusual at all. My rounds loaded with .350 sized bullets measure .376 at the mid point of the neck. Hornady jacketed bullets measured the same way are .374. I have no fired cases on hand to measure right now as I've got it all loaded.

In any event I've experienced no unusual pressure problems shooting the cast and if there is any squeezing as the case enters the chamber I can't feel it.

[stocker]

Aladin:
The 71's I've examined have virtually no throat- there is just a bit more room than the exposed full dimension bullet in front of a typical crimp groove. Probably something like .010 or thereabouts. Bullets must have bore ride dimension on the nose and if I recall correctly most mold makers settle on .341 for the nose. I have the first Mountain Mold made in that caliber and although I had repeatedly mentioned a bore ride nose Dan neglected to do this. If I attempt to chamber one of these bullets the nose is heavily land engraved for quite a ways - enough to pull the bullet from the crimp and case. I had to make up a scraper to reduce the nose diameter which is a major pain in the neck to do but it makes the mold usable. I'm sure Dan has modified his initial design now and the mold casts very nicely. My RCBS mold does have a bore ride nose and also casts very well. The RCBS mold could do with a larger platen for hunting but it does shoot well. Sky C had Tom Ballard make up a mold that casts a heavier bullet than either of mine and has a wider  platen.

[BrushBuster]

BrushBuster I have to think that 348 is accurate with the condom's right? About ideal bore dia related to store boughts-- or half a thou interferance fit.

Answer:  Condom dia. is .348, I would describe accuracy as good, my rifle range bench consists of a stump and my jacket!

Now-- if your goal is 2000 fps or so methinks IF the design has enough metal on the bore a 3490 should shooten fine given some semblence of hardness.

Answer:  I would be happy with 2000 fps. + accuracy!

Does your bore have any constictions/tight areas? Pushing a slug thru that's already been fired thru slowly will tell that story. Another more advanced trick is taking a slug or whatever the size of the land tops and pushing that thru for feel.. Can be interastin' too.

Answer:  Been there done that! If a rifle bore can be beautiful, this one is.


What is your throat length and dia BTW? What would be interastin' is comparing your throating specs to Sky's and other 348's.

Answer: Stocker is quite correct, there is virtually no throat. Rifling lands end abruptly at the neck without even a ramp. Any bore ride design is going to have to accomodate quickly or jam. The two things that got my gunsmith's attention were the lack of throat and snug neck dia.

Was the impact slug just slightly larger than the cerrosafe cast?

Answer:  Yes, .0005 larger

I have ordered a long rider to try out and should have it soon. I will certainly pay a lot of attention to the seated bullet neck dia. before working up the load, and stay well to the safe loading side. I also expect that as Stocker experienced it may be neccessary to reduce the bore-ride portion to avoid jamming.  I didn't do my homework adequately before ordering this first CB, but the second one is going to be quite different. I must say that at this point I am leaning toward the simplicity of the Louverin.

[BrushBuster]

Yes Aladin I do understand, and your right. I'm sure that design would shoot like a damn! The problems seem to be for the lever gun hunter; will the boolit still weigh 250 grains (a major goal) and will it feed from the magazine tube without stumbling over its long nose?

Stocker, how are you managing with crimping on the rider? Any set-back problems, and are you using the Lee Crimp die as I plan to?

[stocker]

Aladin: The scraper was pretty simple. I used a block of iron wood drilled through and cut so I can slip a shaped and sharpend piece of hacksaw blade into the edge of the hole. The scraper is held in place with a setscrew so can be adjusted. This gets clamped onto my drill press table and the bullets are lightly held in the chuck. Doesn't mark the bullet at all but I do this before sizing. Takes a few minutes to set it just right but as I usually do 500 or more at a time it works pretty good. My press runs pretty true and I can't detect a difference in accuracy between them and the RCBS bullet which is not scraped.

Brushbuster I crimp in the crimp groove using my usual dies although I do it as a second pass after backing off the seater. The short full diameter in front of the crimp groove is not touched by the die. One day I'll pick up a Lee die for it. However I have no problems with case swelling behind the crimp if that is what concerns you. I also need a Lyman M die but for the meantime I slip a 30-06 case into the neck of the 348 and give it a soft rap with a mallet to flare the case. Not high tech but it works and you get pretty consitent after practice.

[BrushBuster]

Aladin:

After due deliberation, I can see that your DD concept would solve several problems; crimp location dia.and flexibility, aleviate jamming of the rider portion, and possibly increase bullet weight;  as well, it would appear to be better suited to tubular magazine loading.  But, doesn't this concept to maintain bullet weight neccessitate moving the bullet mass further back in the case, with the bullet base and gas check out well beyond the neck? Would we not be getting into reduced load potential , pressure increases, etc?

Reducing Cartridge OAL to a maneageable length for loading would be a real benefit with this rifle. Just how serious is it to have deeper seating?

Way out of my league here I know, appreciate your patience. And yes I would like a sketch.

[Aladin]

Aladin:

After due deliberation, I can see that your DD concept would solve several problems; crimp location dia.and flexibility, aleviate jamming of the rider portion, and possibly increase bullet weight;  as well, it would appear to be better suited to tubular magazine loading.  But, doesn't this concept to maintain bullet weight neccessitate moving the bullet mass further back in the case, with the bullet base and gas check out well beyond the neck? Would we not be getting into reduced load potential , pressure increases, etc?

Reducing Cartridge OAL to a maneageable length for loading would be a real benefit with this rifle. Just how serious is it to have deeper seating?

Way out of my league here I know, appreciate your patience. And yes I would like a sketch.

The note I sent per the bullet length just fills the neck length and whatever nose/meplat your want is doable. Actually the finished wt of what I propose is probably heavier than the 265 grs I figure. You do NOT want to push the bullet DOWN into the case-- you want the front driver to bump into the throat but not have an interferance fit-- which would HOLD it.  Adjust weight by adjusting nose length. When the hammer drops you want the bullet to start offering resistance with it's FIRST movement.

Did you get the e mail I sent?

A.

[BrushBuster]

Aladin:
Yes I did get your E-mail. thanks.

When you start talking about achieving an even heavier bullet, you are really tickling my fancy! Keeping everything within the neck was my only concern, it sounds like a real hammer!

Stocker, that was a real gem about the 30-06 M die. Now I can retire my tapered punch for something with class!

[stocker]

Brushbuster: Our buds in the States have a lot of good sources to quickly get all the neat little accessories for reloading in short order. They actually have competition between dealers and even (Heaven must forbid it in Canada) sale prices.
 Even from our larger supply houses we order an item and wait, and wait. Sometimes a solution is easy and I may never bother ordering a proper M-die although I have a couple in other calibers and they work very well with near absolute repeatability.
I do occasionally order direct from a U.S. supplier when I'm stymied but by the time all the attached costs are included I have to visit my loan manager.
It has become more difficult to order direct since 9/11 as the U.S. Gov't. brought in regulations prohibiting sale of a lot of shooting supplies out of country except to licenced importers and under permit .
I had to send some dies back to RCBS with several once fired cases so they could make me another set of custom dies (both F.L dies and forming dies from their custom shop which had already cost nearly 400.00).  Until I got them back I was never quite sure whether the whole lot wasn't going to be seized by U.S. Customs because of the inclusion of the cases. Fortunately all went well and RCBS supplied dies that worked perfectly at no additional cost. I have a high regard for that companys customer service group, for sure.

I smear a tiny amount of Smiling Mink (my standard sizing and case forming lube, by the way) on the /06 neck and shoulder to lubricate it a bit when using it to bump the case mouths of the 348 as it reduces the amount of impact required.

[BrushBuster]

Stocker:
Amen to your experiences with customs clearance, duty, GST, PST. and exchange rates. No moths in my wallet anymore either!

But you know, I'm sure its gonna get worse! Don't delay too long.

In the meantime, your advice and tips are cheap, keep them coming; and hallelujah, I just got 1500 lbs. of wheel weights from an X-caster!

[Sky C.]

Hi Brushbuster-

Harkening back to your original post re: is the .350" bullet going to cause you trouble...

And - looking at your neck dimensions... (.376" fired case, .377" Cerro)

I believe you will be just fine.  Do double check your brass thickness but...

If the brass thiskness is .010" (most of mine is)

Subtracting the total brass thickness that would contribute to the diameter:

.376" - (2 x .010") = .356"   -  That leaves you .003" clearance all around the bullet and should be a great situation.  Enough clearance for clean release - tight enough to keep the cartridge centered mechanically pretty well.


I was back out to the range last weekend - more testing of the RL-19 loads with my 235gr GC bullet.  This time used HT WW bullets at BHN 26, CCI-250 primers, enough powder to take me ijust below the 2200 fps range.  Again - shooting Williams FP rear / bead front at 50 yds.

I have been using the "A-10 - 50 yd Small Bore Rifle Target" which features a black bull just under 4" diameter.  I attach a flourescent orange spot approx. 1" dia. to the center which provides a considerably more consistant aiming point.

I had changed front sight height previously (needed when working with the 1800 fps loads) but went back to original height which works well for these higher velocities.  After 3 shots to get rear sight re-adjusted.  This load sent 8 shots into 1.75"H x 1.375"V.  Not where I want to be yet - but getting significantly better.

FYI-  ES ran 69fps and avg. velocity was 2197fps.  I will work the charge up a bit to see if the ES will improve any.  I note that 250gr jacketed bullets get pushed to 2300 fps range at the top end.  I will also take some time to to carefully inspect bullets for final trials - up to now these have received a cursory check and called good.

Will also do further testing with H-4831SC & AA 3100 to see if they offer any advantage for accuracy.

I  believe the end of load development for my rifle is in sight.

Best regards-

Sky C.

PS.  I had previously reported that loads above 2100 fps were giving somewhat sticky extraction.  Upon further careful observation - I note that the sticky extraction occurs even when cycling the lever with no cartridge.  I think I need to tear down this gun and see where things may just need to be slicked up some.  When I get into this - I'll advise about findings.  In any case - I don't think the loads at 2200 range present a problem.

[BrushBuster]

Thanks Sky C:

That was like a trip to the range without the sore shoulder!

I'm curious about your load densities with R-19, are you compressing with those loads?

I have really good reports on AA 3100 and the .348. When ordering supplies, I was hard pressed to decide between the two based on their performance. Very similar weight and density, with the edge going to AA.

Just had my M-71 stripped and cleaned, and noted the preponderence of sliding hand-fitted parts! The action was dirtier than it appeared visually, and left me thinking a bi-annual take-down and cleaning with a top of the line lube would be right for it.

With your homework almost done, you must be getting itchy for hunting season!

[Aladin]

I wonder if a custom run of 348 molds would draw enough interest to make the 25 needed with Lee to wave the setup fee of $100?

Just some preliminary prospecting guys... what do ya think?

[Sky C.]

Brushbuster-

RL-19 loading is filling case to approx 90% - 95% capacity - not compressed.  I'll probably try nudging it up a bit to see if that helps some more with ES.

Re: the AA-3100...  have you played with this yet?  I'm curious to hear what your observations are if so.



Aladin-

A run of .348 moulds may be of interest - depends on whether everyone could agree on a design.  Heavy, GC, wide meplat, no encroachment into the powder space, would be the central theme + anything about the design that could help in the accuracy dept.

LEE moulds...  I've used the single cavity & double cavity moulds.  The bulets come out OK but I've not had good luck with longevity - and I am extremely gentle with my moulds.   Gloved hand only to cut sprues, gentle closing of the blocks, etc.  The blocks seem to loosen on the handles in somewhat short order and closing the handles requires a bit of fidgeting with to get the block halves to align.  Also - sprue plate design is a bit wanting in my opinion.  Are the "custom" moulds the same as production in this regard?  What are the prices for the "custom" mould?  


Best regards-

Sky

[Aladin]

Brushbuster-

RL-19 loading is filling case to approx 90% - 95% capacity - not compressed.  I'll probably try nudging it up a bit to see if that helps some more with ES.

Re: the AA-3100...  have you played with this yet?  I'm curious to hear what your observations are if so.



Aladin-

A run of .348 moulds may be of interest - depends on whether everyone could agree on a design.  Heavy, GC, wide meplat, no encroachment into the powder space, would be the central theme + anything about the design that could help in the accuracy dept.

LEE moulds...  I've used the single cavity & double cavity moulds.  The bulets come out OK but I've not had good luck with longevity - and I am extremely gentle with my moulds.   Gloved hand only to cut sprues, gentle closing of the blocks, etc.  The blocks seem to loosen on the handles in somewhat short order and closing the handles requires a bit of fidgeting with to get the block halves to align.  Also - sprue plate design is a bit wanting in my opinion.  Are the "custom" moulds the same as production in this regard?  What are the prices for the "custom" mould?  


Best regards-

Sky

Sky I do not have firm pricing for the run of HBC Single cav molds yet. I am stating I think they'll be on the order of 14-15 dollars each plus shipping. This a run of 25 molds or more.

I do understand your comments per the Lee mold. Amen I say. But I and others have refined ways to tune the Lee mold...essentially polishing and adding a feature or two if a person wants. These steps actually are very simple and require little investment of time. I will run a thread on tuning the Lee mold again before shippment of the HBC run.

Handle slack isn't a large problem if their kept lubed-- but that slack varies in molds. Some are worse to be sure. Note my posting on the "ask Veral Smith" forum per using the Lee handles on those LBT molds. Something on that order might work with the Lee SC's. We could figure another angle out too.

Actually the proposed design 348 is about finished here. Drawing is all that's left and figuring out each gun's tolerances per throating, land height, loading OAL and clearance-- and then picking the meplat width. Making sure each gun will handle the blunt meplat is paramount.

[stocker]

Aladin: Look forward to seeing the drawing. Might be interested if it's a heavy weight.
Thanks.

[Aladin]

Aladin: Look forward to seeing the drawing. Might be interested if it's a heavy weight.
Thanks.

 

Question stocker for you and all the 348 guys. My drawing here sez the 348 has .605 of neck length-- is that correct??

Is the Lee Factory crimp die or using a full case compressed going to suffice for the magazine-- ie, no crimp groove?

If the varying degrees of barrel dia's and lang heights was known that'd help too.

[BrushBuster]

SKY C:

Re: AA 3100
Look up GB member SAWFISH and send a PM.

He has several .348's, both Winchester and Browning.  He has done EXTENSIVE work with Re-19 and AA 3100 and has helped me a lot with his research.
Here's a sample with the Barnes Original 250:

"62.0 gr AA-3100 2297 fps Win M. 71 DL (Federal 215 Primer)
61.0 gr AA-3100 2249 fps Win M. 71 DL " "
61.0 gr AA-3100 2119 fps Win M. 71 Std. (different gun-note variation)
61.0 gr AA-3100 2075 fps Browning M. 71 Carbine

55.0 gr AA-4350 2243 fps Win M. 71 Std.
55.0 gr AA-4350 2035 fps Browning M. 71 Carbine

I settled on 61.0 gr. of AA-3100 because of a slight edge in accuracy. Federal Magnum Primers were used with AA-3100 and H-4831-SC. CCI-BR primers were used with AA-4350 and RL-19. All of these loads are maximum, or near maximum, so proceed with caution. AA-3100 falls between RL-19 and RL-22 in burning rate, and should make a fine powder for you in the .348 Winchester.

I have loaded and shot 60.0 gr of RL-19 as well as 60.0 gr of H-4831-SC (but have not chronographed either one), and both loads are very similar to AA-3100 in behavior and point of impact. Note the recurring 60.0 gr. load theme with different powders. This is because 60.0 grains represents just about maximum case capacity with those powders."

[BrushBuster]

Aladin:

My figures are .451 neck-length, from the book and measured directly.

I would have full confidence in the LEE FC die in this application.

My bore dia. is .3475
My land height is  .004

[EDG]

>>What has me a little concerned, is that the chamber Neck dimension is only .002 over the loaded .348 condom cartridge! <<<

Was this measured with calipers or a micrometer? Calipers are often not terribly accurate and are sensitive to technique. If your neck diameter measurements are accurate you can always turn the case necks to give you enough clearance.

Ed

[BrushBuster]

Hi EDG:

The Chamber Neck Dia. and the Cartridge neck Dia. were measured by a competent gunsmith with a micrometer. He drew my attention to the close tolerance. My personal attempts to achieve accuracy with a vernier have ceased and a mic. is on my Christmas shopping list!

The concerns I had with this clearance, may not be a problem as long as I keep an eye on my case neck diameters. And as you and others have mentioned, I can get into neck turning either inside or out if required.  
 
Snug is nice, tight hurts.   :oops:

[Sky C.]

Aladin, et. al.-

Case neck length on all of the "Wolfe" sources for the .348 Win are WRONG.  Note that those drawings have entirely neglected the length of the shoulder.

e.g.  Neck length + body length = total case length per those drawings.  WRONG!

Correct length per SAAMI drawings = .4509".


Other comments:

Meplat width - my bullet is 72% and required a bit of minor work to the gun for it to enter the loading gate.  (needed to lighten the loading gate spring).  Prior to that work - the noses would hang up and not enter the mag tube.  Scraped the dickens out of the noses too.  Now all is well.  Have not tried any larger meplat designs since the work but it would be nice to get up to 80%.  I have a 425 gr. WLN type design for a .45-70 bullet by Rob Applegate that shoots "A-house-O-fire"!

Gas Check shank:  My preference is for there to be lube space in front of the check both for lube properties and for possible space to scrape bore (if such a thing actually happens...).  That said - keeping the GC shank inside the neck seems a better plan.

Heavy weights:
I note multiple sources using 250gr. Jacketed bullets reaching the 2300fps mark.  The highest velocity for CB's reported 2217fps but the vast majority stop in the 2100fps - 2150fps range.  This would suggest that going heavier may drop potential for max velocities back even further.  Now I'm not a velocity fiend by any stretch of the imagination - but I'm not sure that going heavier is going to buy anything in terminal performance over 230gr. to 250gr. in the .348.  Penetration should be sufficient for anything in this weight renge out to 200yds. or so which is about the limit for this gun with iron sighting equip. and the trajectory of the round.   Just my $.02 worth.


Best regards-

Sky

[Aladin]

"Gas Check shank: My preference is for there to be lube space in front of the check both for lube properties and for possible space to scrape bore (if such a thing actually happens...). That said - keeping the GC shank inside the neck seems a better plan"

Thanks Sky for the info on the neck length BTW...now we have that nailed down.

I do understand the desire for a contained check so to speak inside the neck area. Take a very hot day and a thin bodied lube and you have powder contamination from melting lube. That's the only consideration I've found regarding a contained check too. I've never experienced problems in any other form, or lube contamination for that matter as the lubes I use are fairly firm. This referring to leaving the bullet base into the powder.

Scraper theory. I do not know with any definitve evidence either way which is correct.  But consider the velocity of the gases going down the bore and the amount energy being expelled otta the barrel. And the bullet makes the trip in 2-4 thousandths of a second... I wonder how much scraping could actually take place?  I do doubt the relevance of such using normal reloading fuels.  I do note several of the BR Eagan designs employ shank lengths were the check just fits that area for length. Some advantages must have been found to doing such-- I found very good results with 311644 using a 'rouge' lot number of Hornady's that went .095" on the .10 shank-- this to speeds over 2500 fps.

I wonder how a scraper testing model could be designed and trialed??

As to bullet wts... I agree again. No real difference between a 235 or 250. Meplat dia is very relevant for sure. More dia means for energy dumped in the target. One of the reasons to stretch the bearing surface is to employ a wider flat up front which likely reduces the OAL of the cartridge hence reduces wt... if no other accomodations are made.

Appears to me a bearing surface of .050 + .451 + .010= .511 is doable minus going into the powder. Hornady checks are .070 for length [.050 used], the .010 for a minimum throating in the 348 and of course the .451 neck length.

Given the left over capacity of the case using #19-- going into the case with bullet shank is worth looking at thoroughly.  There's simple ways to fill the air room which are easily employed by all. Or design a shank where the length matches the check. I believe Aliant would supply psi data if a pressure barrel is available there.

Lots of options and lots of time to work them all out. Sounds interastin'.

[Aladin]

BrustBuster sent this over-- a dandy for sure. What was the rack spread by the way?? I'll guess 49"

[BrushBuster]

Tell me, how can a guy from Wisconsin be so presumptuous as to expect to determine the spread of a Canadian Moose?  

Yes, 49 inches on the button! :roll:

[Aladin]

Tell me, how can a guy from Wisconsin be so presumptuous as to expect to determine the spread of a Canadian Moose?  

Yes, 49 inches on the button! :roll:

Oh good Lady Luck!!  No computer stuff either.. I'm a fairly good 'guest-I-mator' at many things. Not good at anything...just a guesser.

I think it comes from Fishing and not taking the stick along to measure for legal lengths-- and with the fines now you have to be pretty much on the '$$$$$' or ELSE.

IMO one of the best hunting pics I've seen. Your expression sez it all.  Thanks for letting us see it.