Bullet to bore velocity increase over non sized bullets?

[razorsharptokill]

How much of an increase in velocity if any, is there going to sized bullet from a non sized bullet?

 

[ENCORE50A]

Trying to understand the question?

A sized bullet is sized to load at a certain force, normally that force "could be" determined by accuracy and/or barrel preference.
A non sized bullet is just that. It'll either fall down the barrel or require sizing. Some get lucky with a bullet that fits without sizing.

Are you asking any difference between sized bullets and bullet to bore vs sabots?

 

[razorsharptokill]

Is there an increase of velocity with a sized(better fitting/sealing) bullet than say a powerbelt ELR?

 

[ENCORE50A]

Yes

 

[FredB]

Not sure about velocity, but it sure seems to matter for accuracy. At least in the one ml I've tried with sized bullets from No Excuse, verses some bullets I got off the shelf. Not a very big sample size, but I'm sold now on No Excuse.

 

[ENCORE50A]

NOTE: THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION WAS COMPILED USING A CUSTOM 45CAL RIFLE. THE RIFLE IS CAPABLE OF BOTH HEAVY CHARGES OF BH209 AND ALSO SML.
DO NOT USE CHARGES THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE MENTIONED.

Last summer I decided to do some testing. I wanted to know how different loading forces of sized bullets may affect flight (accuracy & velocity). Another shooter did the SML portion, while I did the BH209 testing. I will leave the SML information out short of the final results...... Loading force while using SML made no significant difference. But we're not talking SML, so on with the substitute.

I sized two totally different 300gr bullets, the Arrowhead XLD and Pittman Accumax to three precise loading forces. Loading forces were determined in a CLEAN barrel using a Wagner force gage. I sized 5 bullets for each force measuring 8#, 13# and 18# and each brand of bullet. Each bullet was run through the sizer 5 times to meet the exact force required.

I weighed my charges of BH209 on my balance beam scales as close as I could. Charges were much heavier than for production rifles. All weighed charges were placed in sealed Lane's tubes.

Targets were setup on one large piece of cardboard and the distance was 300 yards.
Rest consisted of a front bipod and rear bag.
A Caldwell chronograph was used.
A wool wad was used.
ZERO SCOPE ADJUSTMENTS.


I'll post the target photo and the information gathered. I believe you'll find your answer




THE TIGHTER THE LOADING FORCE, THERE WAS AN INCREASE IN VELOCITY.

 

[razorsharptokill]

Thank you. Impressive groups Encore!

 

[Mechanic1]

Good info

 

[Decay]

Thank you for reporting this info. I really like this kind of testing. Clearly, you have a great rifle for performing the tests and you’re obviously good with the shooting technique. Your group sizes bear that out. You have eliminated many variables.
So of course I have a question. Is measuring loading force a measurement of the friction (force) it takes to push the bullet down the barrel OR is it the measurement of the amount of compaction you exert on the powder under your wad?
Perhaps it’s both.
How does a goomba like me know how much force I’m exerting without a force gauge? I don’t think I know the difference between 10 lbs and 20lbs. I only know what “feels” consistent, but I couldn’t put a number on it. And what feels consistent probably isn’t when compared to a gauge measurement.
Again, thanks for posting the test.

 

[ENCORE50A]

Thank you for reporting this info. I really like this kind of testing. Clearly, you have a great rifle for performing the tests and you’re obviously good with the shooting technique. Your group sizes bear that out. You have eliminated many variables.
So of course I have a question. Is measuring loading force a measurement of the friction (force) it takes to push the bullet down the barrel OR is it the measurement of the amount of compaction you exert on the powder under your wad?
Perhaps it’s both.
How does a goomba like me know how much force I’m exerting without a force gauge? I don’t think I know the difference between 10 lbs and 20lbs. I only know what “feels” consistent, but I couldn’t put a number on it. And what feels consistent probably isn’t when compared to a gauge measurement.
Again, thanks for posting the test.

The measurement was to determine the "force" required to move the bullet through the barrel only.

Seating force data was not collected. I use a two handed seat or a "thump" as I like to call it. Maybe a possible test at some other time ???

Its extremely hard, exceptionally hard actually, for people to determine actual forces, so you're not alone. You can get a "ball park number" by using a set of bathroom scales and have someone take the readings. To ACCURATELY measure the force, you only use the amount of force (movement) to slowly move the bullet down the barrel in one steady motion. Once the bullet starts to move, DO NOT ACCELERATE beyond that movement. Acceleration will give you a false reading.

 

[Decay]

Thank you. I believe that this test proves that proper fit of bullet to bore maximizes velocity for a given powder charge. The proper, optimum size is probably measured to the ten thousandth of an inch, however that is difficult to do with a cheap dial caliper like mine. Very good information to aid the shooter/loader in being consistent. I've already adopted your technique of sizing the bullet 5 times to assure consistent bullet diameter and concentricity.

As you're undoubtedly aware, consistency of chamber pressure as a smokeless centerfire cartridge is fired is a significant factor in developing a super accurate load. Consistency of the powder volume, and compression, and crimp of the bullet and brass, are essential in getting super accurate loads. In a muzzleloader, I equate the bullet to bore fit to be comparable to the crimp on a centerfire cartridge. Dumping consistently measured charges of black powder, or substitute, compressing with a wad, then further compressing with the bullet being rammed down seems like a very worthwhile test for your force gauge. We would use the findings and data data to develop a loading technique that is consistent and repeatable. Probably more consistent and repeatable that I currently am.

I wish I was closer to Michigan and could help you.

 

[ENCORE50A]

Thank you. I believe that this test proves that proper fit of bullet to bore maximizes velocity for a given powder charge. The proper, optimum size is probably measured to the ten thousandth of an inch, however that is difficult to do with a cheap dial caliper like mine. Very good information to aid the shooter/loader in being consistent. I've already adopted your technique of sizing the bullet 5 times to assure consistent bullet diameter and concentricity.

As you're undoubtedly aware, consistency of chamber pressure as a smokeless centerfire cartridge is fired is a significant factor in developing a super accurate load. Consistency of the powder volume, and compression, and crimp of the bullet and brass, are essential in getting super accurate loads. In a muzzleloader, I equate the bullet to bore fit to be comparable to the crimp on a centerfire cartridge. Dumping consistently measured charges of black powder, or substitute, compressing with a wad, then further compressing with the bullet being rammed down seems like a very worthwhile test for your force gauge. We would use the findings and data data to develop a loading technique that is consistent and repeatable. Probably more consistent and repeatable that I currently am.

I wish I was closer to Michigan and could help you.

Did you notice that the best group of the bunch was with the XLD and with the least amount of force but also the highest spread?

Ordered a new RCBS Chargemaster the other day. May or may not make a difference.

 

[Decay]

I didn't notice the most accurate group. I didn't think any of the groups were very different, other than1 low bullet striking out of the group on XLD 13#. I think your shooting was very good, I'm no statistician, but I think a statistician would say you'd have to repeat this test at least 10 times in order to draw a conclusion that it's conclusions are valid. (That statistician isn't using Blackhorn that is in short supply and high demand and horribly high priced.)
Too many variables affect accuracy. You eliminated a lot of them in a controlled test. That one, slightly better group, could have been caused by other factors not measured or identified here. Less wind, less fatigue, better breathing, your health condition, squirrel farts or sunspots. It's damn near impossible to eliminate all the variable conditions.

Bullet to bore fit has been recognized as a necessity for super accuracy for a long time. But I've not never read about measuring compaction of the powder column. I've read about and compacted loads in metallic cases, where you compress more powder in than there is normally space for, but not in an open end breech plug like we do with our muzzleloaders.
I think you're onto something with this force gauge that will help lead us to greater consistency and accuracy.

 

[ENCORE50A]

I didn't notice the most accurate group. I didn't think any of the groups were very different, other than1 low bullet striking out of the group on XLD 13#. I think your shooting was very good, I'm no statistician, but I think a statistician would say you'd have to repeat this test at least 10 times in order to draw a conclusion that it's conclusions are valid. (That statistician isn't using Blackhorn that is in short supply and high demand and horribly high priced.)
Too many variables affect accuracy. You eliminated a lot of them in a controlled test. That one, slightly better group, could have been caused by other factors not measured or identified here. Less wind, less fatigue, better breathing, your health condition, squirrel farts or sunspots. It's damn near impossible to eliminate all the variable conditions.

Bullet to bore fit has been recognized as a necessity for super accuracy for a long time. But I've not never read about measuring compaction of the powder column. I've read about and compacted loads in metallic cases, where you compress more powder in than there is normally space for, but not in an open end breech plug like we do with our muzzleloaders.
I think you're onto something with this force gauge that will help lead us to greater consistency and accuracy.

One has to realize that compression can be tight but, bullet won't remain at the compacted force. My "two handed thump" has been measured accurately in the past and it measured 106flbs. If for example the bullet loading force in the barrel is 20#, then the compression never remains at 106#. Its compressed but the holding force on the propellant is only 20#.

 

[Ninering62]

Is there an increase of velocity with a sized(better fitting/sealing) bullet than say a powerbelt ELR?

Good questions. Its not an exact comparison to " sized land riding bullets " with the 280gr ELR's - the closest in weight to them would be 275gr & the diff BC's matter. I'm not 100% sure about the exact chrony numbers from when I started out over 2yrs ago shooting the ELR's with 105gr W BH 209 & switched to 275gr Fury ST2P smokeless rated bullets. I think the ELR's were about 2415fps & the Fury bullets were about 100fps faster. It was somewhere in that neighborhood. Accuracy with both out of my Paramount were & still are sub MOA

 

[Pathfinder60]

NOTE: THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION WAS COMPILED USING A CUSTOM 45CAL RIFLE. THE RIFLE IS CAPABLE OF BOTH HEAVY CHARGES OF BH209 AND ALSO SML.
DO NOT USE CHARGES THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE MENTIONED.

Last summer I decided to do some testing. I wanted to know how different loading forces of sized bullets may affect flight (accuracy & velocity). Another shooter did the SML portion, while I did the BH209 testing. I will leave the SML information out short of the final results...... Loading force while using SML made no significant difference. But we're not talking SML, so on with the substitute.

I sized two totally different 300gr bullets, the Arrowhead XLD and Pittman Accumax to three precise loading forces. Loading forces were determined in a CLEAN barrel using a Wagner force gage. I sized 5 bullets for each force measuring 8#, 13# and 18# and each brand of bullet. Each bullet was run through the sizer 5 times to meet the exact force required.

I weighed my charges of BH209 on my balance beam scales as close as I could. Charges were much heavier than for production rifles. All weighed charges were placed in sealed Lane's tubes.

Targets were setup on one large piece of cardboard and the distance was 300 yards.
Rest consisted of a front bipod and rear bag.
A Caldwell chronograph was used.
A wool wad was used.
ZERO SCOPE ADJUSTMENTS.


I'll post the target photo and the information gathered. I believe you'll find your answer

View attachment 18098


THE TIGHTER THE LOADING FORCE, THERE WAS AN INCREASE IN VELOCITY.

View attachment 18099

Logically speaking, those results make sense. The closer BH209 gets to a completely sealed breach, the better off you are. Nice job presenting this information!