Rooster Zambini vs. Rooster HVR

User avatar
mtngun
Site Admin
Posts: 1632
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 5:45 pm
Location: Where the Salmon joins the Snake

Rooster Zambini vs. Rooster HVR

Postby mtngun » Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:56 pm

from the old forum, some formating issues with this post but it should be working in a few months:

Since Rooster HVR lube has worked so well I was curious to try Rooster Zambini. HVR is recommended for rifles and Zambini is recommended for pistols. It seems to me that any lube that works well in rifles should work well in pistols, too, but not necessarily the other way around.

Both are hard and red. At first, they appear to be identical. However, HVR is tacky, but Zambini is not tacky. HVR is tough and elastic, but Zambini is somewhat brittle. Zambini reminds me of Ballisticast lube, which is extremely hard and waxy but not tough and tacky. Ballisticast lube performs superbly in a 357 revolver but is pathetic in a 30-06 rifle.

Anyway, I eventually will test Zambini in the 357 revolver and 30-06 rifle. Today it was tested in the 1894 357 rifle with the usual load -- 180 gr. GC, 16.2 gr. Lil Gun, Fed #200 primer. 15 shots were fired with each lube.
[table]
[mrow] [col] Zambini [col] HVR
[row] Avg. Velocity [col] 1760 [col] 1781
[row] std. dev [col] 1.6% [col] 1.3%
[row] Best 5 shot group @ 100 yds. [col]3.2" [col] 3.4"
[/table]
I screwed up the Zambini accuracy tests by shooting an extra shot into one target so I can't compare its average accuracy to HVR. Neither was anything to brag about.

HVR produced higher velocity and lower deviation, just like it always does, however, the difference was not statistically significant.

So far I can't see any point in buying Zambini. It is probably cheaper to manufacture Zambini but it sells for the same price as HVR so why not use HVR?

User avatar
mtngun
Site Admin
Posts: 1632
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 5:45 pm
Location: Where the Salmon joins the Snake

Re: Rooster Zambini vs. Rooster HVR

Postby mtngun » Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:48 pm

Today I tried Zambini in the Ruger 357 Speed Six snub nose, using it's usual pet load. I'm not going to state the powder charge until I've done more pressure testing, but it was WW296 with a 160 gr. PB bullet. Normally this load averages just under 5" at 50 yards (if I practice, which I don't) and about 1300 fps. The usual three 5-shot strings.
[table]
[mrow] [col] Zambini [col] HVR [col] EL #3
[row] avg. fps [col] 1363 [col] 1330 [col] 1315
[row] std. dev. [col] 1.45% [col] 1.55% [col] 2.50%
[row] avg. group @ 50 yards [col] 6.13" [col] 6.35" [col] 5.03"
[row] cleanliness [col] streaks at muzzle [col] clean [col] clean
[/table]
The EL #3 cartridges were loaded in a different session, and the powder was dispensed directly from the measure, so there may be minor differences in the powder charge, crimp, etc.. As a result, the EL #3 velocity cannot be compared directly to the Rooster velocities.

Wow :D , Zambini did seem to boost velocities slightly. However, it also left some light streaks of lead on one side of the barrel near the muzzle. HVR and EL #3 did not leave any visible streaks.

The differences in accuracy should be taken with a grain of salt. I hadn't shot a handgun for three months, and the snubby is always a challenge to shoot consistently.

Next time, I'll try to test Zambini in the '06. Higher velocities will seperate the real lubes from the wannabe's.

User avatar
mtngun
Site Admin
Posts: 1632
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 5:45 pm
Location: Where the Salmon joins the Snake

Re: Rooster Zambini vs. Rooster HVR

Postby mtngun » Sun Feb 17, 2008 4:58 pm

Zambini in the 30-06 -- this was an attempt to combine a lube comparison with ongoing load development. I hadn't shot the 30-06 since May. At that time, sometimes it would do 2 MOA with WW760 powder, but sometimes it wouldn't. Also, the pressure had been a little too high and there were some questions about the optimal nose diameter.

To deal with the pressure, I dropped the powder charge half a grain. However, I also had to switch to a new jug of powder. :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

I sized the noses in a tapered nose die so that the top band was 0.308" and the band below that was 0.309". This created a very snug fit in the freebore cone. However, despite carefully nose-sizing each bullet, a few rounds were very difficult to chamber at the range. :x

Two shots were fired with the validation load to make sure the strain gage was working OK. Pressure was a little lower than loadbook, but so was velocity, so the strain gage got a passing grade.
Image

Here\'s the traces for felix lube. 180 gr. loverin, 0.314", HTWW, 55.2 gr. WW760, 2.935" COL. Pressures and velocities were much higher than expected. At every shot, the felix lube created a huge cloud of smoke that obliterated the range. It was kind of embarrassing.
Image

Here's the traces for Zambini. There was no unusual amount of smoke. On T5, the funny looking trace, the bolt had to be pounded closed with my fist because the bullet was a too-tight fit in the throat. However, that 5-shot string turned in the best group of the day, 2.1".
Image

Here's HVR. Again, no unusual amount of smoke. I'm not sure what caused the dud. The dud was not included in the statistics, but I left it in the trace because it's interesting.
Image

Here's a summary of the data. There are only 10 shots for each lube, which isn't enough to prove anything. I had loaded 15 rounds but only used 10 because a couple of rounds refused to chamber.
[table]
[mrow]lube [col] avg. fps [col] fps SD [col] avg ksi [col] ksi SD [col] 5 shot MOA
[row] felix [col]2762 [col] 0.69% [col] 67.3 [col] 2.09% [col] 5.95
[row] zambini [col]2770 [col] 0.14% [col] 65.7 [col] 3.60% [col] 4.40
[row] hvr [col]2773 [col] 0.50% [col] 67.1 [col] 2.94% [col] 2.90
[/table]
For the benefit of those who think Quickload always errs on the conservative side, QL predicted 2696 fps and 54.5 ksi for this load. I like Quickload, but I like my chronograph and strain gage more.

For the benefit of those who think they can judge whether a load is safe by looking for so-called pressure signs, take note that there were absolutely no pressures signs -- primers were rounded and the bolt opened with one finger.

Next time I'll drop the powder charge and hopefully get the pressure right. Then I'll do the lube tests all over again. So far it doesn't appear that lube makes a hoot of difference with this load, except that felix lube smokes a lot. I'm guessing the loverin bullet with its many lube grooves and long bearing length creates a superior gas seal that does not depend on the lube to form a gas seal. That's good -- that's the way it should be.

Also I will either size the noses a little more or else seat the bullets a little deeper, so they will chamber reliably. Maybe try it both ways.

All in all, I felt OK about today's results. After all, if a cast bullet will do 2 - 3 MOA at 67,000 psi, it might do better at sane pressures. :mrgreen:


Return to “lubes”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron