45idaho wrote:Another thing I have noticed with Rooster is pieces of lube stuck on my chronograph and sometimes there are lube pieces stuck to the target 50 yards down range. I have also seen lube in part of the bullet lube grooves on recovered bullets. How much of an effect do you think lube flying off one side of the bullet has on accuracy from an off balance bullet? It seems to me the ideal thing would be for the lube to all fly out right after leaving the barrel.
That is a classic cast bullet campfire debate.
I have yet to observe lube on my chronograph or on my target, unless you count the smear around the bullet hole. I have indeed found lube on recovered bullets -- even soft lubes, like the NRA formula. Not all the time, but once in a while. Most of the time the lube is abraded off when the bullet hits the dirt. I've had best luck recovering undamaged bullets by shooting into a large drift of snow, and then recovering the bullets after the snow melts....... another one of those experiments that is on my list of things to do ........ someday.
That gunwriter from SW Idaho -- Brian Somebody ???? -- once published an article showing a cast wheelgun bullet recovered from an elk, or from the dirt after passing through an elk, I can't remember which. Anyway, his recovered bullet was chock full of what appeared to be NRA lube.
Guns and Ammo magazine used to do a a lot of high speed photography showing the bullet leaving the muzzle. One time they showed a cast LBT bullet leaving the barrel of a 4" 44 mag. It appeared to show the lube being slung off the bullet as it exited the muzzle.
So there seems to be conflicting data on what happens to the lube after the bullet leaves the barrel.
It makes you wonder. If the grooves are still full of lube when the bullet exits the barrel, then why does it matter how much lube the bullet holds, since most of the lube is never "utilized" ???? Yet you often hear people complain that they need deeper grooves because their bullet is "running out of lube."
I guess the bottom line is that we don't know for sure how lube works or what happens to it, but we try different things and go with whatever works best. Where people go wrong is instead of doing scientific tests, they jump to conclusions based on one group or maybe three groups. It takes a lot of groups to prove statistical significance.
I don't like the throat design on revolvers, with the big funnel in front of the chamber. Whether it is a big 5 degree funnel or a big 30 degree funnel, it's still a big funnel (0.479" in your case) when it should start out just a few thou over bullet diameter. I suspect that revolver chambers would be better served by rifle-type throats. If I ever win the lottery, maybe I'll have a custom revolver made to test that theory.
Been there, done that, on sizing front bands to snugly fit in the chamber. Even for target shooting, it is a nuisance to have to push the cartridges in, with some of them not wanting to chamber easily because of fouling or residual lube or normal tolerances. And never mind reloading while pursuing a wounded animal. The tight fit may actually hurt accuracy if some cartridges don't chamber easily --- imagine a situation where some cartridges seat all the way, while some cartridges still have a few thou sticking out, and some of those cartridges that stick out are going to move when the hammer hits them, which isn't going to help consistent ignition.
I like my wheelgun cartridges to drop right in. That's why I use a TC nose with the front band length chosen so that it stops just short of the narrow part of the funnel. Since the bullet has to "jump" only a few thou until it is supported in the throat, accuracy is still good, yet no fancy sizing or tolerances are required. For longer noses, you can accomplish the same thing by putting a step on the nose.
But thanks for sharing. I am enjoying hearing about what you are learning.