Shiloh Rifle Forums

I am working up a load for a new bullet in my 40-65. The slight taper of the 40-65 case concerns me about blow by around the bullet's base before it enters the case neck and barrel. I have all the usual thicknesses and compositions of wads to choose from, but where to start? I read about mutiple wad stacks and the usual line about " well, that's what works ! ". I don't doubt the validity of that statement, but is there a consensus on exactly what each wad in a stack does? I am simply trying to avoid having to try every wad combination with every powder charge and every level of compression. Any help?

Call John Walters. He has an oversized .40 cal. wad that works great. Thanks, Joe

I have used Walters wads for many tears now and have never come across the problem you are worried about

The base of the bullet (and wad) should not be located in the tapered part of the case, only in the straight section below the mouth. This is especially true in the 40-65. Standard .409 wads should work just fine.

Bryan

The exposure of the base is not my main concern, I was wondering why so many wad stacks were used and if a single wad would be sufficient. In high power it is possible to use up the useful life of the barrel before all the variables were tried, and eliminating variable was the point of testing. Here in BPCR, I am not worried about the barrel life, more about the large amount of time to manufacture and test the loads.

May i ask what your rifle is and the powder you are going to use as well as what your bullet is and what you are going to use it for as in hunting , gong shoots , silhouette ?

Well I have a question along these lines! I have a press mounted wad cutter and got the bright idea that maybe a felt wad would be more "traditional", as in beaver felt, so I contacted a custom hat making company, and they sent me a good sized priority box full of beaver felt scraps. I punched out a few hundred, they are a little thicker than .60, and I have not gotten to test them out yet, but was wondering if anyone else has tried this source?

This rifle is a Uberti 1885 High Wall reproduction, it has a Shiloh style reamer with an actual straight neck ( some 40-65 reamers are strright taper with no neck), there is no freebore to speak of and the original short bullets would have had their bases in the neck, but most modern heavier bullets will have their bases below the neck junction. I am using the Saeco 740 410 gr. bullet for Silhouette matches. This rifle shoots best with neck tension and I use a neck sizing die and can push the neck junction somewhat lower than normal. My original question was what sort of wad would best protect the base, poly or vegetable, or more than one? Just looking for guidance to avoid trying every combinetion of charge, wad, and compression rate.

I like the .060" vegetable fiber wads made by Circle Fly Wads out of PA. They are very consistent in thickness, you can get in various diameters and they are soft enough to quickly expand and seal. Also, using a .004" paper wad over top of the vegetable fiber wad serves two purposes: it keeps the vegetable fiber wad from sticking the bullet base and it also provides a secondary gas seal in the event you get blow-by.

FYI: I have used .45 cal Walters wads with good success in the past however, in 2021/2022, I bought 2 bags of wads from John and much to my dismay, I found a large number of wads whose thickness varied anywhere from .003" to .008" above & below the advertised thickness .060". Furthermore, I found a large number to be oval shaped vs round. I wrote to John and included some samples of the oval and varied thickness wads. We chatted on the phone after and I believe he corrected the problem. However, for my 45 caliber, I like the Circle Fly wads much better, particularly for their gas sealing properties. Also: I purchased 2 bags of 38 caliber walters wads and have had absolutely no issues with them.

Just my experience, take it for what it's worth.

Poly wads beat veg for gas sealing hands down. I use LDPE. I cut my own from material I obtain from McMaster Carr. I have recovered .40 and .45 cal bullets and the .60 veg wads show gas cutting and the base area dimpling from the powder grains. .60 poly wad bullets show zero gas cutting and zero dimpling on the bases. Gas cutting does not mean you will not have an accurate round but it is one of the variables you want to control.

Woody

J.Murphy wrote: ↑Wed Oct 25, 2023 12:27 pm The exposure of the base is not my main concern, I was wondering why so many wad stacks were used and if a single wad would be sufficient. In high power it is possible to use up the useful life of the barrel before all the variables were tried, and eliminating variable was the point of testing. Here in BPCR, I am not worried about the barrel life, more about the large amount of time to manufacture and test the loads.

A single 0.060" LDPE will work extremely well. I use a press mounted cutter that I bought from Buffalo Arms years ago. You don't need a stack of wads to make a 40-65 shoot well. The case is already limited in capacity, no point unnecessarily reducing it with extra wads.

Chris.

What Woody and Chris said. Also, groove diameters in 40-65 barrels can vary, for instance, .4o6" to .411" and wads can vary in diameter. A .406 wad in a .411 chambered and drilled barrel may cause problems.

Ldpe cut .413” from baco press mounted punch.

vikingsword wrote: ↑Wed Oct 25, 2023 5:04 pm Well I have a question along these lines! I have a press mounted wad cutter and got the bright idea that maybe a felt wad would be more "traditional", as in beaver felt, so I contacted a custom hat making company, and they sent me a good sized priority box full of beaver felt scraps. I punched out a few hundred, they are a little thicker than .60, and I have not gotten to test them out yet, but was wondering if anyone else has tried this source?

As Ceph Jones remarked many years ago, "Josh, are burning hair in that thing?"