Is anyone familiar with this mould/bullet? Not having seen or measured one, I'd like to know if, when the gas check is seated, does the check shank extend forward from the check forming a space for scrubbed lead to collect (per Veral)? If any, how much space is up there?

Has anyone used this bullet? Thoughts, opinions?

akriet I believe Don G who still presides over some of the forums here has used that bullet. You might give me a shout and ask.

I seriously doubt the need for a gap in front of the check. I have run tons of tests in one 06 Hart barrel and the best shooten was with the .095 check length on the .10 shank. Which means no lube or near none between the check and last driver. Most of the speeds I shot too were near and over 2400 fps. BR cast designs often employ near zero clearance between the check and first driver, and usually their chamber pressures are quite high along with the speeds.

I mean how much 'scraping' can happen when the bullet is making that barrel trip in 2-4 thousandths of a second? If anything the friction vaporizes the lead if a minor amount is present.

I asked on another 'channel' how a scraper model test could be run. Anyone?

A little off the stated topic, but lets look at the action of the check - it presses hard against the sidewalls and is a bit more resilliant than the lead alloy. I can think of several situations to test - a boolet with no check, the same boolet with the check normally installed, again with the check moved back (insert a spacer inbetween the end of the shank and the check), and once again with the check backwards (rounded end forward).

How then would one MEASURE the differences in performance? Perhaps 10 - 50 rounds of each and do some cleaning test or an accuracy test - accuracy of first, second, third sets of 10 rounds.

Okay...here's how to do the test. Take a cast bullet you shoot, but one without anylube or gascheck. Load a few of these and shoot enough of them in your rifle until you lead the barrel up some. This depends on how far you want to go. Then take the same bullet lubed and gaschecked and shoot it and see if it cleans out any of the lead. I doubt any lead left in the bore is getting vaporized, that's what the lube is for..friction. If lead left in the bore was getting vaporized by friction why wouldn't some of the surface of the bullet.

Joe

I use the RCBS 416-350 in my Ruger #1 .416 Rigby with great success. To date I have likely cast around 3000 bullets from this mould.

In my straight-wheelweight alloy, it weighs 365 grains, and casts at just over .416"....the RCBS .417" sizer die barely smooths up the mould parting lines.

I've loaded it to over 2600 fps with fine accuracy, but find it's a lot more enjoyable at around 2100! XMP 5744 in charges from 40.0 to about 52.0 grains (and dacron fill) give me very nice-shooting loads in the 1800-2100 fps ballpark. Hodgdon or IMR4198 are also good candidates.

I've never hunted with this bullet, but seriously doubt that ANYTHING in North America will shrug off this bullet at 2000 fps or more. I have cast it much softer than my usual water-dropped WW on occasion, and it still shoots nice and clean without leading.

With a Hornady gascheck seated, there is VERY LITTLE shank remaining, maybe a few thousandths is all. Based on my experience, it simply doesn't matter. Even after several hundred rounds without cleaning, the .416's barrel shines like a mirror. (I make a habit of NOT cleaning the barrels of my cast-bullet rifles until they really need it, which is very seldom indeed. Once the bore is "conditioned", I hate to disturb it.)

I like the RCBS .416 design a whole bunch, as you can tell....

Regards from BruceB (aka Bren Mk1)

Thanks to all for the info. The mould sounds like what I need. This forum is sure a great learning resource.