quote:

Originally posted by srose:
Are R1 and R2 you or the gun? The other 4 look good.

R1 not sure (thought is good). R2 am sure was me. Let me shoot the 6 with out filler and I'll get back to you on that one

quote:

Michael,
I am going to shoot a 6 Rd set w/out foam to see how they do.

OK, R2 is a JLE (my screw ups are MMs), if R1 was tighter in, it really would start to look pretty spiffy!

For sure, 6 without filler might be the sweet spot! In fact, don't let me down, and don't make me ashamed of you, I have a feeling about the no filler-no wad thing! I think these 6 are going to be magic, so I am counting on you now! HEH........

Michael

I've been following this thread and the Terminal Bullet Performance thread on the Big Bore site for some time. Outstanding work, and very enlightening. So, I'm convinced I need to try CEB bullets in my vintage Rodda 450/400 3", based on terminal performance data and the reduced strain gauge readings. Here's the rub: I had the bores slugged by JJ Perrodeau, and they are .409"! Betwixt and between. I've been shooting Woodleigh .408 diameter 400 gr. Softs and solids. The solids shoot lights out in both bores, the softs don't group nearly as well. I had a .409 bullet swaging die made and ran some A Square Dead Tough .410" bullets through it, then worked up loads and they shot fine. So with that as background, do I dare shoot the .409 CEB bullets, or do I really need them in .408 diameter?

BB,

Sounds like you have a nice vintage DR. I imagine that Sam & Michael will also need your actual bore diameter – you’ve provided the groove diameter – to absolutely know if there will be any issues with the current .409 caliber CEB BBW#13 bullets.

Good luck.

BB

Man, have to tell you, I think I will let Sam answer you on that one. Little out of my area of expertise. I would not want to send you wrong! BBW#13s are .409 in that caliber. I watched Sam shoot several in his vintage .408 whatever it was or is, I was a little uneasy with that myself. Sam will get to you on it.

Michael

Thanks to you both, I'll wait to hear from Sam. Sam can reply via PM if you don't want to litter the thread with trivia about my D R.

Whew--It has been a very long day! Just out of the showers now, my clock says 5:24 PM. Sam is in the road home. He still has another 1.5 hours to go. We had another big day with the 500 Nitro. A tremendous amount of data, will take time to compile for sure. I will start in the morning. I count 49 strings of data to compile.

Including the beginning of "Barrel Strains" and they are going to BLOW YOUR MIND!

When Sam and I started doing barrel strains in the 470 Nitro, we really did not have a clue as to how it would work, how we could make it work better and was probing around in the dark. It was new. No one had ever done this! Today, we have progressed in the work to get it down to true science. Barrel strain is REAL. We can prove it! No Doubt About It!

The first barrel strains were done with full Nitro Loads! While not perfect, in the rankings things worked out for the most part. But now we know we must not work with full Nitro, or higher pressure loads to get mere barrel strain. We do not want any interference coming from the chamber pressure, messing with the strains! We learned this with the 458 B&M and trying to work with full pressure loads, just not possible and readings crazy, inconsistent. Dropping the pressures low, and getting no interference from chamber pressures is the way to do it, and all the 458 Data is good to go. We have this now in 500 Nitro as well with a load we developed for it today. We have true barrel strain readings. So good is the 458 and the 510 data collected, that we are going to do 470 barrel strains over again. I will be working with this the coming weeks. I hope this week to do more work in the 500 Nitro, and finish barrel strains by the end of the week. That is my goal anyway! Then to start again on the 470 Barrel strains, tighten up those numbers as well.

For now, later guys, I am out of here!

I am so tired today, I am going to only copy this, post it on the 500 Nitro thread as well.

Michael

Michael and Sam,
here is a picture of the results of the CEB's. I shot one NonCon and one Solid. Left barrel is the top grouop and the right barrel is the bottom group. NonCon's out of the left barrel and they did pretty good. We'll see how my pics turn out.

The 2 shots to the extreme left of the group were me, I'm sure. It has been a long time since I shot iron sights but they seem to shoot pretty good. Don't know about the 3" of vertical separation but they don't really appear to be crossing. Maybe a little. This load is with 106 Gr of IMR 4831 and a Fed 215 primer. What do you think?

Looks like a 2X4 group and I can't see what you have way to the right. Your lfet anf right are OK but the up and down not so good. How do normal jacketed soft points shoot in it.

Sam

Sam,
They shoot identical. It is shooting 3" groups vertically no matter what I put through it. Barnes, Woodleighs or the CEB's. To me, if the group was on the same plane, they would be perfect, just a vertical group. Might be a regulation problem.

pagosawingnut,

Yes I think you have a regulation problem with the up and down groups. This is a hard one to correct with loads. I have done it before but it takes a lot of patience and playing with a lot of loads. Not saying it will work for your gun.

Sam

It's going back to Butch next week anyway. The length of Pull is too short and he's going to go through it. I will visit with him. It is still minute of Buffalo, which is what it will be used for. I thought the groups were not bad except for the point of aim that I obviously screwed up on. I haven't shot iron sights in sooooo long. Like the bullets and will try them next year.
Thanks

This Same Post is on 500 Nitro as well--------Michael



Barrel Strains-------------------------------

OK I will go so far as to say that Sam and I are the "Reigning Experts" when it comes to actual "Barrel Strain"! I totally believe that we have this mystery Unraveled, Revealed, Exposed, and disseminated for all to see!

When Sam first mentioned the possibility of this study I think back in 2010 sometime, it took a bit for me to get interested to begin with. Being a single barrel shooter barrel strains meant little to nothing to me personally. Over some time, the project began to grow on me, I got interested, and here we are. Now, to me, it's one of the greatest studies we have ever done and we have it down to a science now.

We first did this in 470 Nitro as you recall. At that time, we did not know any better and used full loads. We also did not understand how rearward pressure effected the overall strain at the end of the barrel where the barrel strain gage was located. Just as you see from some bullets above during chamber pressure tests the bump or secondary peak just before exit, is located just about where that strain gage would be located, about 4 inches from the muzzle. So getting interference from the chamber pressure caused those numbers to be sometime erratic, and higher than numbers we indicated on the 458 barrel strains. We learned doing the 458 that one cannot run full loads to try and capture real data. Here is an example of that learning curve below, and even 71/AA 2520 is not a full load, 77 is.




OK, as you can see lot's of interference from reward influence you might say. On barrel strains we don't care about velocity, pressure chambers and none of those concerns, what we are after is how much that bullet expands the barrel at the point of where the gage is attached. Nothing more. The number itself is relatively unimportant, but what is important about it is the number of a particular bullet when compared to another, with no other influence involved.

So we reduced the load down to where we got no interference from rearward pressures and this is what we got with the same bullet.



Big difference in consistency eh? This was now showing us what was actually happening as that bullet passed that point inside the barrel, and how much it actually bulges the barrel at that point as it passes, with no other influence on it. This is what we wanted, and this is what the 458 tests gave us.

We needed this same method for the 500 Nitro. Our little bit of experience with the 458 got us there with the 500 Nitro on the first try out, which totally amazed me, I expected to have to do several different loads to get there, and I am very excited about the upcoming Barrel Strain Tests. We ran out of time Tuesday, but I could not stand it, we got 4 barrel strain tests done with different bullets to check and make sure we had it correct, and I think we do. Take a look.











I have all the loads for the upcoming barrel strains loaded and ready. I just have to find the time to get started, which I hope to be tomorrow latest. If I don't get them done by tomorrow it will have to hold until next week. I am very excited about this test.

Michael

Well, very quite down here on doubles. Posted several things yesterday, not a peep out of anyone? Hmmmmm? Maybe no one is paying attention? HEH.....

OK well let's liven things up a bit!


I HATE DOUBLE RIFLES!





That should stir up a Hornets Nest!

OK, put the rocks down, I don't feel like getting stoned today, and the sticks, hate to take a beating this early in the morning! Let me explain;

First off, all the pressure traces and barrel strains has to be done from the bench. You have wires and computers hooked up to the rifle! Sam did all the Chamber Pressure traces, I did the computer work with the 500 Nitro. But yesterday I did the barrel strains by my lonesome. Having wires hooked to the chamber is bad enough breaking open the action you have to be careful not to jerk and mess with the wires, but have one on the end of the barrel 4 inches back from the muzzle is a real bitch when breaking open and closing the gun without jerking the connections! What a PAIN in the Ass!

Second, I am just not practiced enough to manipulate a double with any sort of competence! Being awkward to me is an understatement of great proportions! I am inept, blundering and ham fisted trying to load and unload and not jerk the forward connection! Using a bolt gun that remains stationary is by far easier for me doing this sort of work! But after great strife, lot's of cussing, stomping around, throwing my hat down range and other such shenanigans I managed to get several Barrel Strains completed.

It is just damned hard to work the double for this sort of study, especially for myself!

OK, if you still want to, you can get the rocks and sticks ready again!




Michael

You asked for it ! If the #13 bullet is so good why do you need a second barrel !

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Well, very quite down here on doubles. Posted several things yesterday, not a peep out of anyone? Hmmmmm? Maybe no one is paying attention? HEH.....

OK well let's liven things up a bit!


I HATE DOUBLE RIFLES!





That should stir up a Hornets Nest!

OK, put the rocks down, I don't feel like getting stoned today, and the sticks, hate to take a beating this early in the morning! Let me explain;

First off, all the pressure traces and barrel strains has to be done from the bench. You have wires and computers hooked up to the rifle! Sam did all the Chamber Pressure traces, I did the computer work with the 500 Nitro. But yesterday I did the barrel strains by my lonesome. Having wires hooked to the chamber is bad enough breaking open the action you have to be careful not to jerk and mess with the wires, but have one on the end of the barrel 4 inches back from the muzzle is a real bitch when breaking open and closing the gun without jerking the connections! What a PAIN in the Ass!

Second, I am just not practiced enough to manipulate a double with any sort of competence! Being awkward to me is an understatement of great proportions! I am inept, blundering and ham fisted trying to load and unload and not jerk the forward connection! Using a bolt gun that remains stationary is by far easier for me doing this sort of work! But after great strife, lot's of cussing, stomping around, throwing my hat down range and other such shenanigans I managed to get several Barrel Strains completed.

It is just damned hard to work the double for this sort of study, especially for myself!

OK, if you still want to, you can get the rocks and sticks ready again!




Michael

Have a sip or 2 of Grey Goose prior!

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...what? Michael, did you say something? :-)

quote:

Have a sip or 2 of Grey Goose prior!
J. Lane Easter, DVM

HEY, Now that might just turn the tide on this issue! I like that suggestion!

quote:

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...what? Michael, did you say something? :-)

What? I can't hear you! HEH............

quote:

You asked for it ! Roll Eyes If the #13 bullet is so good why do you need a second barrel ! Whistling

Mete, I think you have a very good point!

Well I wish someone would say something? I thought sure that last post would get things stirred up a bit? LOL.........

Been thinking about something for these double rifles for some time now! Since I now have Sam's 470 it might just be the ticket to try something new out for you guys! .474 needs a new kick in the ass with something new anyway! Been the same tired old crap for the last 75 100 yrs, whatever! Time for something new!

Michael

What are you going to do now with my doubles?

quote:

Originally posted by srose:
What are you going to do now with my doubles?

You worry Too Much!!!!

OK maybe you are thinking of using those 475 B&M #13s in it. Not a bad idea!

quote:

Originally posted by srose:
OK maybe you are thinking of using those 475 B&M #13s in it. Not a bad idea!

Yes, YOU WIN! Exactly what I was thinking. We stuck with traditional weights only because of regulation! Now that I have 450 BBW#13 Solids and 420 NonCons for the 475 B&M, along with a whole set of 425 North Forks, FPS, CPS, and Premium Softs, I wonder how those would do in a 470 Double Rifle? Would they regulate? What velocity can we run and stay under pressure? How much performance can we tweak from the tired old cartridge, by an introduction of new bullets? Since we already have an AMPLE supply of all of these because of the 475 B&M, it would be a good start, and if it works, then it can be carried over to other calibers as well. ????? Who knows?

We already know from the TBP thread upstairs that one no longer has to have heavy for caliber bullets to get superior performance. There is but one reason to do so here, regulation. If lighter bullets regulate on a "regular" basis, heh, pun intended, then changes can be made. I thought about sending Dan a note to make me some 525 gr .510s and matching NonCons, as you know how good your rifle shoots with that weight! But with 1000s of the new .474s here already, and your 470 here as well--there you go! Speaking of, those dies came today.

Michael

OH and by the way, anyone interested in seeing the latest barrel strain work done in .510 caliber???

M

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
OH and by the way, anyone interested in seeing the latest barrel strain work done in .510 caliber???

M

I am!

I read everything you write...sometimes just too stupid to reply...at least with anything intelligent.

Michael,

I used 72 grains of Varget in my 470 with 400 grain Speer Gold Dots for my practice load. It regulated fine. I never checked the velocity though. We can surely see what the tired old 470 can do with new bullets and powders. I'd say pick one of our good full house loads and replace the 500 grain bullet with the lighter ones to start with.

quote:

I read everything you write.

Damn Lane, You must be Bored to death!

HEH..............

quote:

Originally posted by srose:
Michael,
I'd say pick one of our good full house loads and replace the 500 grain bullet with the lighter ones to start with.

My Plan Exactly! Especially since our gage is still good to go on the chamber pressures. I swear I hate doing barrel strains with the doubles. Very tempted to put a gage on the 475 B&M. But will most likely put a new one on the 470.

Michael

I'll come run the double for you.

Sam/Mike.

At what velocities do those 535gn #13's regulate at ? (in 24" tubes ?).

Is this out of Sam's V.C or Sabatti ?

Thanks,

Paul.

Paul,

About 2100 fps and thats out of my Sabbati. I haven't tried them in the VC yet. With the #13s in the VC I use the same 108 grain load of my IMR 4350 with both the solid and non con. They shoot the same POI. Now remember my IMR 4350 isn't the same as Michael's. My powder is older and slower. Most of the 535 grain bullets I've shot have been Woodleigh softs and they shoot great out of my Sabbati. This was what I thought you were talking about.

Sam

2100fps with a 535gn, I suppose that's enough for anything that walks !

Are they (535gn) available in both solid and non-con ?

Sam, I would love to see that 535gn #13 used on our buff if your going to bring your .500 this year. Looks to be just about the perfect recepie.

I note in the above table that this specific bullet also registers the least barrel strain reading.
I presume this is the standard 4 band version.
Just comparing to the two band, copper EXP version which has registered more barrel strain.

I'm having a hard time getting my head around why a 4 band with more bearing surface would register less than a two band.

Paul.

quote:

I'm having a hard time getting my head around why a 4 band with more bearing surface would register less than a two band.

Even more interesting is that the two-band is the lightest weight of the four CEB BBW #13 bullets tested! It does note 'Experimental' so perhaps that has something to do with it...or perhaps not.

Paul,

Right now the standard #13 for the 500 is a 570 gr solid and a 535 gr non con. Yes I will be using the non con when I come to hunt with you. I have thought about doing a 535 solid and a 500 non con but just not sure it is needed right now. We have played with a 535 Raptor but I think I like the standard non con better.

Sam

Jim,

The 2 band tested was some of the first two band solids Dan made in copper that I had turned into cup points for testing and Michael never shot them. Copper might be the difference or something else. I would have thought it would show lower strain. Michael has tested and pretty much proved that the difference between copper and brass is not enough to worry about. Kinda proved that again. It also proves that the 4 band brass is a good bullet for low barrel strain.

Sam

quote:

Originally posted by srose:
Jim,

The 2 band tested was some of the first two band solids Dan made in copper that I had turned into cup points for testing and Michael never shot them. Copper might be the difference or something else. I would have thought it would show lower strain. Michael has tested and pretty much proved that the difference between copper and brass is not enough to worry about. Kinda proved that again. It also proves that the 4 band brass is a good bullet for low barrel strain.

Sam

Sam,

Yep makes no sense at all...so guess we need to put it down as a fluke!

Sam/Mike,

have either of you noticed any direct correlation between barrel strain and accuracy/grouping.

i.e less barrel strain resulting in better grouping ? or am I dreaming/wishful thinking.

Paul.

Well now you given Michael something else to test!

Jim,

Remember we are dealing with a different caliber and cartridge in these tests. Most of what we did in the 470 has shown the same results in the 500.

Sam