Who is winning matches with PP Bullets?

[mdeland]

Bruce,if that 60 percent stat was true PP's would have taken over years ago.
You need to go back and read some of Dan Theodores testing posts of mini grooved and grooveless grease bullets, tested against PP bullets of the same weight and profile. He found they were nearly identical ballistically, shooting them side by side.
Now if your comparing and older style, large groove, grease bullets with old nose profiles against the best of the current PPs, you might be able to prove a 40 percent advantage, though I seriously doubt it, but it simply "taint so" with new generation grease bullets.
The other thing is that PPs have to hold their nose shapes to have any advantage at all and this can be problematic at times with the softer lead tin alloy ratios popularly used.
Grease bullets can take advantage of much harder alloy to maintain their nose profiles better so there are trade offs and advantages on both sides of the ledger. Mike D.

[Don McDowell]

The other thing is that PPs have to hold their nose shapes to have any advantage at all and this can be problematic at times with the softer lead tin alloy ratios popularly used.
Grease bullets can take advantage of much harder alloy to maintain their nose profiles better so there are trade offs and advantages on both sides of the ledger. Mike D.

Now that right there is a truck load of bullspit if there ever was one. While it is true some folks shoot dead soft alloy, shooting 16-1 and harder alloy with patched bullets is a pretty common thing. Even the old dead guys were shooting hard, real hard alloys in the target games. The 1875 Remington catalog refers to having discovered that using soft alloy was the wrong thing to do for long range work, so they now recommended the harder alloys. Winchester even in the 1878 catalog loaded many of the long range rounds with 11-1 and 14-1 alloy bullets.

[Don McDowell]

Aero, you can change the elevation points needed by simply changing the length of the patch. Shorter patches (patches stopping well short of the ogive) will most often shoot 2-4 minutes less elevation than those patched out to the ogive.
It's plump possible to change how a bullet shoots by simply changing the patch, the wad stack, the seating depth, and even the neck tension. The trick (what I consider to be the hard part of patched bullets) is figuring out just exactly which combination of elements is going to make the bullet shoot the best from any given rifle. Having 2 44-77's is proving to be quite a learning curve, as sometimes what shoots lights out in one rifle will be spray and pray in the other one. They do on occasion like the same bullet, but that is one copied from an original Sharps bullet.

[mdeland]

Just what part of that post is bull spit Don? The part about PP bullets having to maintain their shape and length to have any advantage ballistically or that harder bullets with some antimony in them, that is often used in grease bullets, maintain their nose shape better?

[Distant Thunder]

I can only relate my own experiences, but what saw when I went from my grooved bullet to paper patched in my old Shiloh 45-90 was just the opposite. That is the PP shot with lower sight settings than my GG bullet did. In fact my GG 800 yard sight setting was almost the same as my 900 yard with PP. The bullet weights were somewhat different, PP bullet was a few grains lighter, and the PP load had a few more grains of powder. The exact numbers I'd have to look up. The real difference would be in how much different the come up was from one yardage to the next. I'll look for those numbers tomorrow. I can also look at the numbers for my old 45-70 Sharps with the Lyman Postell (528 gr.) with 82 grains of 1 1/2 Swiss which will be very similar to my new Hepburn 45-70 with a PP bullet (540 gr.) with the same 82 grains of 1 1/2. Both rifles have 34 inch barrels. Different rifles, but it should show something.

I have enough info recorded to see if there is much difference between PP and GG, I just have to dig it out and sort through it.

[Distant Thunder]

The PP bullets I have been shooting lately are 12 BHN. I think that's harder than most GG bullets? That's up around 10 to 1. They shoot damn well too! PP don't need to be soft to work, just the opposite, harder is better. YMMV

[bobw]

Sorta sounds like something you read on the internet Mike, and yeah sounds like bullspit to me too. Last weekend It took me 3 shots to get my elev right on the postage stamps then went 4 in a row, 1 shot for correction on the diamonds and 7 in a row, 3 shots for correction at 417 and 5 in a row, intermingled hits on the offhand, 4 in a row at 805 and 7 in a row at 600. How the hell could I get those bullets to fly straight bumped along with 107.5 grs of bp at 1350 fps cast out of 1 in 60 alloy with slumped noses? Sh*t I guess I should have bought a lottery ticket heading out of Forsyth, just lucky huh? bobw

[bruce m]

md,
I will stand by my statement based on experience.
what the guys say about harder alloy for pp is true.
I have a 450 gn 1.55" long 40 cal micro mini groove mould, and you are right it shoots way flatter than standard grease groove bullets, but other issues still make pp superior.
lube exposed to blowing dust is one, and the other is bore riding nose bumpup causing leading unless you lube the bore.
shooting a 1.55" long bullet with soft alloys does not present the flatness of trajectory that the same harder bullet will offer.
16:1 is 2 to 5 min flatter than 30:1 as ranges increase from 700 to 900 mt.
soft alloy and dumpier noses probably suit hunting more than target shooting, but I am not as experienced in that area.
for me now the only use for a greaser is hunting and sil shooting dirty.
I feel a bullet design coming on.
this bullet will have a flat nose 50% of groove dia, carry a ton of lube, and the nose will taper away from the bore at a fast rate.
keep safe,
bruce.

[mdeland]

Read the post again, what was said was that soft alloys commonly used in PP bullets can have nose slump difficulty at times. Same is true of a grease bullet . I have seen them and so have all of you who frequent this forum.
Antimony alloy is stronger than is lead tin alloy to resist slumping and shortening better and is used more commonly in gg bullets.
The point was that if slumping or shortening occurs, a patched bullet will have no advantage ballistically over a harder bullet with grooves, that maintains it's shape. I shoot harder antimony alloy regularly . I believe the harder antimony alloys maintain there length and have less tendency to slump than do softer lead tin alloys.
Recently there has been some stirring about the reverse being true in certain instances but I have yet to experience it. I also think that antimony alloy, even if of the same BHN as a lead tin mix, will be stronger overall and have less tendency to deform.
One mans opinion !

[mdeland]

Bruce, I'm currently trying to design and make a mold for a PP bullet to shoot in my .303. I plan on using antimony alloy in it. I've tested several different bullets with paper patches but have not rung the bell yet on a good design. Mike D.

[bruce m]

interestingly the poms chose to shoot groove diameter pp bullets, and they worked well also.
metford pioneered using tin and antimony to harden bullets, and it became the norm in their rifles.
I have used as hard as lyman no 2 in an attempt to avoid bore riding nose leading, with no joy. (with and without silver)
mike, good luck with the 3-o.
there seem to be some ruger no 1s around in 303. interesting.
keep safe,
bruce.

[DAVE ROELLE]

Pretty nice discussion on Paper Patch gentlemen-----however its has strayed far from the original OP's request

In Mr. Sage's case its a question of business capital expenditure and his expected return on that risk--------------perhaps a better question might be

"what PP molds do you gentlemen believe would be good sellers ?"

With some criterion weight, caliber, profile----------how about "Hunting and Target"-----------------how about ORIGINAL DESIGNS OF THE PAST that catorgory pops up frequently.

A marketing campaign could be crafted for and or all of these thoughts

Dave

[opencountry]

Harlan,

I don't think you can go wrong with a .45 caliber (.443" diameter) flat base, base pour Money paper patch bullet patched with 9# onion skin paper (Buffalo Arms sells it), cast 16:1. This is a bore diameter patched bullet which fits the rifling just the way it should, nice and snug. I shoot this combination in my 45-90 with great success over 95 grains of Goex Fg (full case) compressed with a .030" vegi-fiber wad .469", WLR primer. I add two .060" poly wads over this, and a 1/8" cork gasket under the bullet. This is a 200 yard group I shot recently with this load. The fifth shot went out of the group, for reasons unknown to me.

Robert

[Orville]

Dave R mentioned it look at the original equipment. There is no magic bullet, why is everybody trying to reinvent the wheel.
I have original guns and one with records of what it shot, I know if I was to show any of you a chamber cast from that gun or it's sister and you not knowing what gun it came from you would tell me there is no XXX way that gun can shoot accurately.

[Don McDowell]

Well actually the original designs for hunting bullets was mentioned much earlier,, back before the troll that has zero experience with patched and match shooting jumped in...

Don't really think anybody is trying to reinvent the wheel, but there are some seriously pursuing and trying the information left for us by those who were here when this cartridge thing started. Perry's book is quite thorough in what it the original Creedmoor shooters were doing. Most of what he leaves us in his book fly's straight in the face of what some modern day experts claim to be the way, the light and the truth....
Harlen's question was about winning matches. I still think he has the wherewithal to jump straight into the middle of the patched bullet thing and create a demand for a patched bullet mould in his lineup.