sabotless shooting-s.m.i. ruger no. 1 .45 cal.

[savagebrother]

this is for you guys on this board who had questions on sabotless shooting of s.m.i. douglas barrels.

ok guys here are the preliminary results of sabotless shooting with my ruger no.1 .45 cal.
65 grains of h-322 and felt wad with a parker 275 grain ballistic extreme. nothing was done to the gun except dry swabbing between shots, no velocity readings were taken. it was an absolutly miserable day. it was raining and the ground was saturated with water. my table was sinking my chair was sinking everything was sinking!!!! but you can see the results.
first target was first 9 shots then i fired the last three on a fresh target. now i think my gun will shoot better with a different powder. more testing to come. with hopefully better weather.
i think you guys will see that the douglas barrel will shoot sabotless.
sb

 

[HunterJim]

SB,

What is teh diameter on the Parker 275 Ballistic Extreme?

thanks...jim

 

[savagebrother]

hunterjim they are really close to .449-.450-parker purposely makes them this diameter, which is a boon to us. you dont have to size bullets.
sb

 

[HunterJim]

SB,

Thanks...jim

 

[RBinAR]

I'd like to thank Terry for all his effort. Despite the fact the shooting conditions I think these and subsequent posts will show that sabot-less shooting is open to every type of 45 caliber rifle.

I think the need now is for a wider variety of bullets. To that end I am now currently trying to get the 290 grain TMZ to speed sabot-less. Some seem to think because it?s solid it won?t shoot very well. They may be right but I think the chance is good enough that it?s worth the effort.

 

[big6x6]

Were the shooting done at 100yds?

 

[savagebrother]

yes it was big6x6. as things proceed i will try things at 200 yards and possibly 300 yards.
sb

 

[bigmedicine]

Question on resized barnes

RB,

Will you also be looking at giving any of the XPB or XFBs a squeeze? I would imagine just from the way that the TMZ is shaped that it might "take" to a reduction better. The science associated with what you are doing is pretty straight forward(start with Youngs Modulus and go from there), but as you know more than anyone there is a huge difference between what works in a book versus the real world of applied engineering. I would imagine that an all copper bullet will behave substantially different than a copper jacketed. I just don't know the extent that all copper bullets will want to spring back towards original.

I just know that someone else will want to know when/if XFB/XPBs are on your long list of things to try. For some of us, the idea of a barnes bullet shaped like the XFB (not even necessarily like the XPB) in a true .450 is very appealing.

Thanks again to everyone sharing their knowledge - I just have to figure out a way to shoot more to apply what all of you are teaching!

 

[RBinAR]

Re: Question on resized barnes

RB,

Will you also be looking at giving any of the XPB or XFBs a squeeze? I would imagine just from the way that the TMZ is shaped that it might "take" to a reduction better. The science associated with what you are doing is pretty straight forward(start with Youngs Modulus and go from there), but as you know more than anyone there is a huge difference between what works in a book versus the real world of applied engineering. I would imagine that an all copper bullet will behave substantially different than a copper jacketed. I just don't know the extent that all copper bullets will want to spring back towards original.

I just know that someone else will want to know when/if XFB/XPBs are on your long list of things to try. For some of us, the idea of a barnes bullet shaped like the XFB (not even necessarily like the XPB) in a true .450 is very appealing.

Thanks again to everyone sharing their knowledge - I just have to figure out a way to shoot more to apply what all of you are teaching!

I'm doing it even as this is written I have the Knight clone of the Barnes bullet. I haven't gotten them sized perfectly yet but that should not be terribly hard.