Lead ?

[SgtDog0311]

Great Thread Guys... (thanks Steve)

Appreciate both your input Kurt and Wayne. I got more questions for clarification but I'm taking so long putting them into words that I got to postpone it or I'm gonna leave here without some ammo boxes full.

I'll do like I encourage my two year old grandaughter to do and 'use my words' better when I take a break next time :-)

[SgtDog0311]

Sorry I took so long to get back… Don't give up on me - just had a heap of reloading to do this week for summer travels.

Wayne, sorry I am not clearer… you are right, I am referring to ” transition step angle from the chamber to the bore”. Great contrast between your two 40-65s and perfect to help me understand here. I’m still working on that part. As for your point about matching up your cartridge with the chamber I understand what you are saying. In this case I’m limited somewhat. The mold I’m using is gonna work fine but is not what I’d have asked for given this chamber. More time to spend on that one. For now I don’t have a grease groove to line up ahead of the case mouth and need to make it shoot with what I have, an LBTLFN for my Marlin 1893. I size it to groove and seat for ever so slight an imprint on the ogive.

On your last statement about rings… don’t want to sound like I’m disagreeing here since I don’t know anything for certain enough to disagree (and I’m the one with questions)… but I don’t understand why you think I should not have lead rings. Seems to me that is exactly what I’d get. If the bullet upset serves to fill the free bore, that’d be the shooter’s side of our transition step angle, and since in our case that angle is fairly abrupt; and it’s being propelled forward at the same time, it seems logical that lead could get shaved vs swaged as it went forward. I thought that was why we were suggesting the lube groove be exposed to help fill that space. I just want to understand it… if I should be able to shoot a groove diameter bullet or even bigger without lead rings then I want to understand why I’m not. And another thing I’m wondering is – might it be so un-used as for that angle to still be sharp enough and hold some possibility of improving (the edge getting a little softer) as it’s shot more?

Once again, thanks Kurt for posting that 40-65 Cast. So the chamber to bore angle is 45degrees and the Lead 1.5 degrees if I'm following correctly So would it be a mistake to use a throat reamer to make that a gentler angle, much like your 40-65? I’m not in a rush but like to ponder ahead. I don’t want to plant any seeds in my brain that would spoil the chamber for black powder.

[TexasMac]

On your last statement about rings… don’t want to sound like I’m disagreeing here since I don’t know anything for certain enough to disagree (and I’m the one with questions)… but I don’t understand why you think I should not have lead rings.

SgtDog0311,

I can't find in any of my post that I mentioned you should not have lead rings. The last sentence in my prior post touched on "oversized bullets" which has nothing to do with creating lead rings since, as I noted, if the bullet was oversized it could not be chambered, and any typical relatively soft lead bullet in front of a reasonable charge of BP will obturate to completely fill the chamber & transition step, potentially, but certainly not always, creating lead rings if the step is not filled with lube.

Wayne

[Kurt]

Once again, thanks Kurt for posting that 40-65 Cast. So the chamber to bore angle is 45degrees and the Lead 1.5 degrees if I'm following correctly So would it be a mistake to use a throat reamer to make that a gentler angle, much like your 40-65? I’m not in a rush but like to ponder ahead. I don’t want to plant any seeds in my brain that would spoil the chamber for black powder.

No my chamber transition is 4 degrees/1.5 degree compound. 1.5 degrees on the lead, 4 degrees in the throat.

There is nothing wrong the way the Browning BPCR chamber is, they shoot just fine as is. My chamber was bad the way the factory chambered it and I corrected it with a throating reamer I had made.
Kurt

[SgtDog0311]

Ok Wayne... took your meaning wrong here "BTW, the bullet diameter should not matter concerning lead rings. If the cartridge can be chambered the bullet can’t be oversize." I got your meaning now.

Appreciate the clarification Kurt.

[SgtDog0311]

Kurt, your cast have been invaluable. Wish I had deeper background - would probably gain even more here and Lord knows I need it. In addition to this Cody I've obtained a Marlin and am planning to rebore it to 40-65, so now have decisions to make on two chambers. Leaning towards the more gradual taper of the originals. Twist on the rebore will also be a decision point. Thanks Again, to You TexasMac and others who contibuted to my education here. John

[SgtDog0311]

Well, I came back to read this all again more than once. I've shot the Cody a good deal. Still getting lead rings but the mold I have does not give me an option for exposing a lube groove so not gonna worry over it till I get another mold. The rifle shot excellent anyway; like Kurt said cleaning does not indicate any leading issue. Case closed for now – with no ill effects.
=====
So why the re-reads... well I have two Ballards just off to John Taylor for reline and still mulling over the transition I want to ask for in one of them, a 40-65.

Kurt, if you see this tell me if I'm wrong - I'm interpolating from the last cast image you posted, and your comments, (where you saved your oval throat with the 4 degrees/1.5 degree compound ‘transition/leade’), that your Manson solution gives a more versatile chamber. And, if not an ‘improvement’ over the Browning BPCR, it's not a detraction either.

Would that be correct to say?

Obviously by my asking you can tell I like it the traditional flatter transition.

The 40-65 chamber reamer that John Taylor uses will essentially give the 45 degree transition. So, if I wanted to go with the one I'm favoring I’ll have ‘some’ additional cost. If my assumption is wrong, I’ll gladly save the extra cost for a throating reamer. If its right, I’d gladly spend the money to get what I “think” is more versatile. One thing I didn’t understand earlier in the thread – probably because I didn’t know the term or implications and am not used to reamer diagrams.. . When you said that your CPA 44-1/2 Stevens chambered in .44-75 Ballard “…will not except a GG bullet unless I have a mould made that will cast a .399 ring bullet”. What is a ring bullet and would you mind educating me how that plays in with the transition angle, or if it even does?

Btw, I've decided on the 40-65 (over the 40-82 Silhouette) as my BP debut rifle/caliber. Had enough fun this summer with others shooting BP that I decided it was time to get my feet wet. Actually have a 40-63 and 38-55 standing in line too.

Thanks a lot Steve!!!

[Kurt]

Well, I came back to read this all again more than once. I've shot the Cody a good deal. Still getting lead rings but the mold I have does not give me an option for exposing a lube groove so not gonna worry over it till I get another mold. The rifle shot excellent anyway; like Kurt said cleaning does not indicate any leading issue. Case closed for now – with no ill effects.
=====
So why the re-reads... well I have two Ballards just off to John Taylor for reline and still mulling over the transition I want to ask for in one of them, a 40-65.

Kurt, if you see this tell me if I'm wrong - I'm interpolating from the last cast image you posted, and your comments, (where you saved your oval throat with the 4 degrees/1.5 degree compound ‘transition/leade’), that your Manson solution gives a more versatile chamber. And, if not an ‘improvement’ over the Browning BPCR, it's not a detraction either.

Would that be correct to say?
Steve.
The throating reamer saved my barrel from replacing it. I did not buy this rifle new or I would have returned it to the dealer. using a throating reamer to take out the 45 degree chamber end can make or break a rifle's accuracy if the reamer is not a proper fit to an existing chamber and how it is used. I hesitate lending my reamers for that reason. I gladly will lend them and I have several times but there is always a chance that the reamers made for my chambers will not be proper for someone else's chamber.
Yes you are correct the throating of the Browning greatly improved it's accuracy.
Steve there are a lot of rifles out there that just shoot lights out with that 45 degree. But I have had problems that I just would not put up with, like heavy leading of the throat and down the bore. The flat funnel transition, what I call a lead bullet throat eliminated those problems.
The only rifle caliber that never changed the chamber is the .22 rimfire as far as I know.

Obviously by my asking you can tell I like it the traditional flatter transition.

The 40-65 chamber reamer that John Taylor uses will essentially give the 45 degree transition. So, if I wanted to go with the one I'm favoring I’ll have ‘some’ additional cost. If my assumption is wrong, I’ll gladly save the extra cost for a throating reamer. If its right, I’d gladly spend the money to get what I “think” is more versatile. One thing I didn’t understand earlier in the thread – probably because I didn’t know the term or implications and am not used to reamer diagrams.. . When you said that your CPA 44-1/2 Stevens chambered in .44-75 Ballard “…will not except a GG bullet unless I have a mould made that will cast a .399 ring bullet”. What is a ring bullet and would you mind educating me how that plays in with the transition angle, or if it even does?
The .399 is a typo, it should have been .4399. My .44-75 has a very tight neck. The bore of the .44-75 is .438" and the normal groove depth is .446" My chamber case neck wall is .464" and it actually turned out to be a .4628" when they ground the reamer. The brass I use has a .011" wall thickness at the mouth that just gives me room for a .4408" or .441" patched bullet to fit the case and have the case chamber. A .446 GG bullet would expand the case mouth to much that it will not chamber.
In the past they also made ring bullets, or what is called now GG, that could be loaded in the case that is at bore diameter or slightly larger that would still let the round be loaded. And when the charge goes off the bullet would expand filling the grooves like a bore or under bore diameter bullet would. In my case I would have to have a mould made with out a bore riding step on the ogive at .440".
Below is one of those bullets I'm talking about.

Btw, I've decided on the 40-65 (over the 40-82 Silhouette) as my BP debut rifle/caliber. Had enough fun this summer with others shooting BP that I decided it was time to get my feet wet. Actually have a 40-63 and 38-55 standing in line too.

Thanks a lot Steve!!!

[SgtDog0311]

Oh Geeze Kurt - I’m a bonehead TWICE!

I muddied the water with my post ending "Thanks a Lot Steve" - that was sort of a joke to Steve Anderson, who started the thread (on my behalf I guess you could say), and who kept pushing his Shiloh towards all of us this summer so we could get black powder under our skin. I actually got to shoot Shiloh's, CPAs and an original Rolling Block for distance at a couple shooting-stops between the Idaho Panhandle and Oklahoma City this summer. I'll answer to anything but now my buddy in Cheyenne is gonna think I'm trying to steal his identity:-)

Second, It might sound lame but I hope I didn’t come off bold enough to make you think I was asking for use of your reamer. Promise I’d have at least had the courtesy of asking your number so I could call. I do like it very much though and note how close the 1877 #1 Sharps long range Creedmoor’s 3.5 degree chamber is to your Manson.

Could be John Taylor comes up with one yet, but couldn’t help but think out loud what I’ll do if he doesn’t. Whatever it is, it will be him doing the work. His backlog is about 6 months so I won’t know right away. Not positive but I think he kind of shares the cost with the customer if he does not already have one a customer is asking for. Or I can pay the whole thing and keep the reamer – not my first choice.

John is well regarded and I can’t speak highly enough of his work. He’s done a couple relines for me and loads for several personal friends. When it comes time I may be asking for you for some tips on negotiating the reamer world. Never had one made or used one, much as I would love to learn. Being an old carpenter and welder I wouldn’t try my hand for the first time on someone else’s fine tools.

So, after clearing up my mess, THANKS… you gave me an answer way clearer than my question.
John

[Kurt]

John,

There are a lot of handles on the net. One never knows for sure if your tongue lashing a friend you might have made at a shoot when they use a handle
I know that you didn't ask to use my reamer, what I wanted to get over was it's not a good idea to use a throating reamer that was made for a persons rifle that was ground from a chamber cast made of that chamber.

Kurt