- This topic is empty.
-
Topic
-
stevendragonjr
stevendragonjr
-
Replies
-
andyadkins
randypatterson
I hope that satisfies your concerns. And, I don’t care what alloy you are using!
I thought this was a discussion thread? No need to be rude by telling me you don’t care what alloy I use. I was simply stating my concerns. I will say that I’ve had much better luck w/ NOE molds dropping at the correct weight compared to other makers. 96/3/1 isn’t far off from wheel weights so being speced for it works fine.
frankelliott
Looks like the front band behind the bore ride is a bit small. Perhaps increase it by 0.050″ thereby giving .10″ front band width?
Should still allow seating with out bulging the case as well as still being far enough in the case to prevent chambering issues.The reason that the lube groove is forward of center is my idea of making sure that the bare lead of the base band, get maximum lubrication. That and knowing that by the mid point of the 2 deg taper, you have in effect, a longer forward band. I think with the lube groove located in it’s current position, it would be less prone to leading.
If you guys want it set back to the center of the driving bands, it’s easy to do and I’ll do it for you.
The reason for the WW spec, is that is what Al uses for making his cutting tools and that’s kind of a “take it or leave it” thing, I believe.
I don’t want to change things for one guy and then mess it up for others so, if 3 guys agree with a change, I’ll do it and the same goes for the weight issue, if 3 or more want it reduced to 147 w/o the HP, I’ll also do that.
Regarding the weight, keep in mind that the 147 bullets, I believe are basically a subsonic load and a heavier bullet will give more power and penetration especially at subsonic speeds.
I’ll do what ever is needed for this but, I would like some consensus before making changes so (I already have 10 different drawing for this on file), don’t be shy about agreeing or disagreeing in this discussion.
The only thing that I feel shouldn’t be changed is the 2 deg taper, that matches the leade, for accuracy.
Frank
The position of the lube groove isn’t of importance to me. I was looking at the total flat bearing surface. I was thinking that more bearing surface would increase the accuracy of the bullet. I may be wrong about that. I am just used to bullets looking more “balanced” in the driving band area. It may not need to be that way.
I had forgotten to consider that the taper will also be part of the front driving band over a portion of it’s length. I was mentally disregarding that portion of the taper that would be gripping the rifling. My mistake.
I am flexible on the weight. A few grains either way isn’t going to be a deal breaker for me.
I like the idea of the bullet being self aligning using the taper to guide the bullet.
After further consideration, I think I like this one just the way it is. There are some features there that are very intriguing.henryambrose
I like the LS design generally. The lube groove set back is good to allow seating the bullet out. I have a 9mm with a really long throat and would prefer a fatter nose than .346″ (could be .355 for me) but I understand that might cause trouble in a standard throat barrel.
I wonder if there is enough interest for a fat nosed version too? It would seem to be a minor programming change on the mill.
I may go for a 5 cavity of each.
SwedeNelson
charlesnuss
Well, I’m unsure of what Al just said means.
However, … my thoughts up to this point:
Must Have
2 degree lead on the first band
Sufficient bevel base to prevent bulging case when seated to min OALNice
.100 width on first band
This would allow more latitude in seating depth for different firearms.147 gr in HP is good with me.
.358 is good. This is what I usually size to for 9mm.
Alloy
With the velocities we can get, I suggest some pretty soft stuff. Range scrap will be too hard as will straight WW, even 50/50 WW/Pb. I’ve been working with HP in .38 Spl, and the successful alloys for expansion there are like 20:1 Pb/Sn. I know we must have something harder to survive the trip from magazine to chamber, but I found in .45 ACP and .40 S&W that 25% range scrap and 75% soft lead with just a smidgen of tin when needed for fill-out worked pretty good.
This is one area where we might need more discussion.
Assuming I am reading the drawing correctly, there should be no more than about .260-.270 inside the case if that. That would leave you with an OAL of 1.14 or a little more. I doubt that would be enough to cause a problem with bulged cases even with a flat base.
Please correct me if I read it wrong.I am not concerned myself about getting them to expand so harder alloys will be what I will use. My only concern is getting 100% feeding and good accuracy.
I will probably be using water quenched range scrap. That alloy works well in my pistols with the other projectiles I use.Assuming I am reading the drawing correctly, there should be no more than about .260-.270 inside the case if that. That would leave you with an OAL of 1.14 or a little more. I doubt that would be enough to cause a problem with bulged cases even with a flat base.
Please correct me if I read it wrong.Yes, you are correct. I have some Remington brass and using the “nibs” on my calipers, fired brass measures .358 back about 5/16″ from the case mouth so, there is no problem with buldging.
Frank
Guys, I believe that we should go with this Design by Tom. The only change we would need would be to make it have a deep conical hollow point for possitive sub sonic velocities. This design in solid form is right at 155 grs. With a deep conical wide hollow piont similar to the 147 grs Golddot it would wiegh right at 145grs with the hollow piont.
http://www.accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=35-155P-D.png
We have had alot of discussion and I believe that this simple approach will give us our original design intent. A true heavy sub hollow piont. Or in solid form a really heavy sub.
What say ye???The Accurate 35-155P is a proven design that does not bulge the case. It feeds like grease lighting and it has a nose meplat that is wide enough to accomodate a hollow cavity that will allow excellent expansion at sub sonic velocities.
I would think that a hollow cavity that goes down to below the top band would be excellent as well as offset center balance to give the best accuracy possible.
What say ye???daveridenour
When we started the discussion, we kind of kicked around the idea of possibly coming up with more than one bullet design. Obviously, not everyone has the same needs and desires. It isn’t unreasonable to think we really could come up with more than one really good design here. A lot of people thought it wouldn’t be possible to come up with a 6.8 SPC/270 Winchester bullet design. Last summer we had a long discussion thread for those, and not only came up with one, but actually two different 6.8/270 Winchester bullet designs. Frank designed both of those too!
For my needs, I’m not looking for a “soft shooting” load that just makes minimum power factor, with the fastest elapse times, for competition in IDPA, etc. With my astigmatism and bad knees, I’m not into that any more. I want a hollow point design that would be best for full power defensive loads at the highest velocity and accuracy possible.
For my needs, and I’m with Tazman on this, I think Frank’s design as it is now would suit my needs best. I would buy one of these now, if it was available.
Having said that, I also really like GoodAlloy’s suggestion of the Accurate 35-155P. To me, it looks like a cast lead version of the Speer 147gr Gold Dot HP design. Accurate, however, doesn’t do hollow point designs. From what I understand, Erik at Hollow Point Mold Service is charging $50.00 per cavity to do HP conversions now. When you consider the cost of converting a mult-cavity mould, the cost adds up really fast. If we had a design like the Accurate 35-155P, I would also buy that one if it was available today.
So here’s where I am now: Count me in as a buyer for one of Frank’s designs as it is now, and for one of the Accurate 35-155P/Speer GD HP type designs, if we run with that one too.
Dave
andyadkins
randypatterson
frankelliott
henryambrose
SwedeNelson
charlesnuss
daveridenour
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.