AriM

I think what is closer to what I said, is that I noticed an unacceptable decrease in accuracy after only 6000 rounds of WWB through this specific barrel (and also a lack of definition between lands and grooves)....to the point that I felt it necessary to change the barrel....if that is due to other factors (possible deforming of the barrel bottom lugs) I am willing to entertain that notion....I have, however, NOT had the same issue with un-jacketed bullets, after exponentially more rounds through various guns..... this all stems from our friendly debate on the other thread, that there is NO benefit that I can see, to jacketed bullets in uncompensated guns (making less than 1700fps)

The poll is not meant to define a "last word" type result....It is a generalization.....in the background of this poll, I am running my own personal experiment...the term "better" is ALWAYS subjective and a generalization.....there are very specific reasons that the poll questions are worded in the way that they are....I tried to word them in the most common language I see by retailers and shooters about the subject....VERY FEW people go beyond the generalization and look for more factual evidence in either direction....the way I look at it....I have a "factory" on my loading bench....so even that term can be twisted to meet ones own mental needs.....no right or wrong answer here, it's just a general opinion poll.....thanks to those that have participated...please keep it going....I am fascinated by the results, and fascinated by the replies....

Sadly, it seems that marketing is driven by the premise that you are inferior, and can only be fulfilled by buying XYZ brand blah blah blah.....this is a researched mental tactic....just as the "power tie" or "game face" is.....it's a ploy to intimidate the weak and vulnerable...we all have our weaknesses, an advertiser figures that he/she will alienate a certain percentage of viewers/listeners, but enchant and provoke a larger percentage....the hired actor in the Ad. isn't to blame, it's the statistical and market research guys.....don't kill the messenger.... I think that the real culprits are the marketing teachers in universities, who recklessly teach our youth to follow practices, that they themselves have never tested or felt the repercussions of....teaching without responsibility....the machine that is the university and schooling system drives this.....compete, you have to be the best, if you aren't the best you are worthless....I would like to think that our society has evolved beyond simple Darwinian notions, but sadly, it hasn't

1. no, you have essentially ruined that part....can't ever put the metal you took off back.... 2. Yes, not on a Taurus, but there are many nice GS replacements out there....don't bother with the drop-in parts.....I like the Ed Brown, and it's not very difficult to fit properly.... if you are going to buy a replacement GS, I would consider just leaving your stock GS alone, that way if you want to switch back (for re-sale or other reasons) you still have an intact part.... just MHO EDIT : I just noticed that you have already cut it....so too late for what I wrote above....good luck with your mod

AM talk radio isn't so bad....you can hear different hosts talk about the same 3 topics for 18 hours straight....then the next day, you at least know what you have to look forward to..... 1. Obama being a socialist/marxist 2. illegal immigration being the number one problem in national security 3. global warming is a scam, and man has no effect what so ever on global temperatures it's nice and consistent....who cares if it's true or false....the callers crack me up enjoy!!!

Dec. 17 2009 Spent the last few days building ammo and re-doing my gun. I am not going to be going to the indoor range as often. I can see that it's just a waste of ammunition, and that it's not going to help me much in USPSA/IDPA. Just shooting at stationary targets and not moving, seems to have me doing nothing more than trying to change my technique.....just to keep from getting bored. Hell I can be bored sitting at home doing nothing. Being bored at $0.15 a shot seems pretty foolish. Ordered some more powder and primers (yes you can find primers easily, and they are under $25/1000).....got a decent price on the powder also ($96 for 8 pounds). I was considering going to a different powder, but what I have been using seems to work great, and at the level I am at, I can't see the point in spending more....maybe when I get on a course I will go back to some 231 or something a little slower than American Select... Been doing some dry fire practice....considering getting an airsoft setup.....I would love to run some mock stages in the backyard, only trouble is that I am in Kalifornia.....my neighbors will probably call the cops on me. grrrrrrrrrrrr. More than just the dryfire, I have been doing some mental conditioning. Trying to understand stage breakdowns and all the correct terms. Watching videos. Learning to slow down and just relax during my dry fire. Why make this hard? It's just for fun. For me to go out and try to prove something, would just be stupid and childish. So new goals have been set. 1. Have Fun!!! 2. Contemplate my movements before making them and make them with a goal in mind 3. No more burning up ammo at the range 4. Dry fire everyday, just to get comfortable with my trigger and breathing 5. Consider what i am getting myself into, and is this something that even makes sense 6. Stop blindly trying new things. If there is a problem, address it. If there is no problem, let it go. 7. Have Fun!!! 8. Contact my SC AGAIN!! He is either not getting emails from me (could be going to spam folder) or he is busy. I need to call him directly. 9. Go shooting with some friends. I can't forget to include other people in my life. I think I am going to call up some buddies from my tactical training classes and see if they want to go shoot with me. It would be nice to see how they are doing and what kind of drills they have been practicing. 10. Have Fun!!!

and how close to the margin is that ? on a hot day would that not make major?

"Why wouldn't that other someone want to start the thread themselves....that seems just a bit odd. Please don't take any offense, but you've been on the forum a couple of days and now folks here are coming to you to ask you to start threads? Why won't they do so themselves? All of that is pretty peculiar ph34r.gif " well maybe it's common around here, but I take someone questioning my integrity and suggesting that I am being less than honest, as a bit offensive.... maybe I am not used to the way folks around here talk though....so as stated....I have no animosity towards anyone....but def. don't like being called less than honest... And I edited my initial reply when someone explained what happened. I just said it was peculiar, which it would be most of the time. I didn't call you a bad name, and was careful to say I wasn't trying to offend you. I didn't question your integrity or say you were being less than honest, I was saying it didn't seem to make sense...which it didn't. You're experience is tricking you, and the whole thing about no scientific analysis, etc means you're running off incomplete information....that's the issue. Not that anybody truly has all of the information when it comes to ballistics, but there's a lot more to it than what you're suggesting above and there really isn't much "debate" on this topic any longer. While you're more than free to ask the question, it's a question that can't really be answered properly....essentially, it's a trick question even though you didn't intend it to be (and I'm not saying that as a wisecrack) Certainly, a gun shooting lead bullets with mild charges at low velocity will have a barrel that lasts for a long time. It isn't because it's a lead bullet rather than a jacketed bullet. It's because you're not forcing large quantities of burning powder down it each time you pull the trigger. Why do .22LR barrels last so long? Because aside from the priming compound there is very, very little powder and it's going down the same size bore as that of a .223/5.56. There simply isn't enough to wear the bore considerably and it has almost nothing to do with the bullet involved. Again, we're dealing with facts, not opinions or beliefs. Wear isn't caused by the bullets (not the significant part anyway), but the kind of bullet can cause us to do other things (like use a bunch more powder) which will cause the wear. The primary, significant, cause remains burning gunpowder, not the bullet. Now, I wasn't attacking you in this thread and I didn't in the other thread. I pointed out that you were making an irrational statement in both of them. I'm not saying that you haven't seen your barrels wear out faster doing zyx with them. I'm saying the cause isn't what you think it is. You're looking at anecdotal evidence, not factual root causes behind it. R, I would have to say that there IS a debate on it Bart....just look at the poll....it's not a trick question....it's a generalization....generalizations exist everywhere you look.....I am not asking people to give anything more than an answer to an opinion poll....if you shoot jacketed bullets, does your barrel wear faster? that's really the only question....there is no concern or need to go beyond that....this is not a scientific debate....if it was I would have started by posting thorough, in depth analysis on BOTH sides of the debate.... I am very aware of the abx method of testing and analysis (part of my job is EE and proprietary development)....I have conducted numerous abx type test on various auditory and spatial hearing/psychoacoustics scenarios....I am well versed in the method......but this is a simple poll.....and it remains my truth, and the truth of the majority of poll takers here....that shooting jacketed bullets, will wear a barrel faster....would you agree on that? did you vote? if you did tell me which option you picked.....thanks for your interest

honestly , this is a debate of semantics....i dunno Bart....I really have nothing against you man....nothing at all....but you are arguing about wording...better is, itself a subjective subject....if it makes you happy, and makes you feel like you won some battle for me to say that changing "better" to "more accurate" is a valid observation, on your part, then so be it....but everyone else seems to have understood the intent of my OP....dunno why you want to take it to where it has gone.....at the end of the debate, we both hold the same truth....and we both reload....that has to say something....spin it however you want...I am not here to be petty

thanks for participating guys....someone brought up the point to me....that "better" is an incorrect word to describe our hand loads....maybe the better phrase would be.....our handloads are better for our specific needs, than any factory ammunition we can get off the shelf....it was proposed to me, that if we were to send our gun, with out specific needs and shooting conditions, to a professional ammunition manufacturer.....the results would best ANY of our best efforts....and I just can't argue with that....but for most of us....I would have to say that what we build at home is more tuned to our specific needs than a case of WWB....thanks for all the comments and voting....

maybe a shotgun would be best for his specific needs...fits the budget as well.... he could get that for his immediate use....then a nice pistol down the road?

I only had mine in for a few trips....it was a wilson (which I understand is not a fantastic design)....it did show some "wear", but I didn't have it in long enough...or didn't have any problems.... would you mind maybe telling me how often you replace yours? what kind (color/durometer)? have you ever had one cause any kind of malfunction or "short-stroke" the slide? thanks.....I am curious to maybe try one again....

I have used them in the past (for no more than a few hundred rounds)....then someone, who's opinion I respect, told me they were "un-necessary"....I got to thinking about it....and I suppose they could "short-stroke" the slide.....but I don't know....i suppose a light load with a heavy spring would also do the same? eh, either way....I can't see any benefit to using one...if the gun is set-up properly....there shouldn't be any damage to anything, w/o a Shok-Buff....maybe I should give them a try again at some point....the poll show's quite a few folks using them....hmmm

finally found your post

Rob....900 rounds!!!!!! what does a round of .408 cost....loaded MATCH? (I know you posted the links, but it's more of a statement) and what is the ballistic data on that? very impressive!! I am not much of a rifle shooter....just don't have the $$$ right now....but I can respect what you guys are doing....!!!!!! *thumbs up*

do you think that the same thing could be true in 1911 style pistols....maybe the bottom lugs being deformed by an improperly cut recoil surface (frame) would have more of an effect on accuracy than barrel wear?

"Why wouldn't that other someone want to start the thread themselves....that seems just a bit odd. Please don't take any offense, but you've been on the forum a couple of days and now folks here are coming to you to ask you to start threads? Why won't they do so themselves? All of that is pretty peculiar ph34r.gif " well maybe it's common around here, but I take someone questioning my integrity and suggesting that I am being less than honest, as a bit offensive.... maybe I am not used to the way folks around here talk though....so as stated....I have no animosity towards anyone....but def. don't like being called less than honest... wow that is really odd Jim, so what do you think the reasons are for that? If Bart is right....then it's directly related to powder charge....which would hold up in your scenario yet the opinion poll says otherwise....I just don't get it it has been my experience, that jacketed bullets will wear barrels faster, I have no scientific analysis to show why that is, but it's an observation....and remains my truth....until someone can convince me otherwise.....seems to be a debate as old as any of the others.... Ari

well I felt attacked in the last 2 or 3 threads g-man has responded to (not just this one)....I certainly have no animosity to anyone on this forum...but I feel some towards me....like somehow me being new here makes my opinions less valid....just because I am new here and don't shoot competition yet, doesn't mean that I may or may not have years of experience under my belt in other firearms related subjects.... do you think that maybe the poly rifling in Glocks and HK's could lead to less barrel wear with jacketed projectiles? I am not able to comment either way, because I have zero experience with those types of guns (other than shooting them) thanks for any info.

great point....I use copper or "plastic" brushes.....do you think they would result in the same problem??

Precision Bullets, recommends American Select with their 200 grain SWC....I have found it to be excellent and clean burning....#12 on the burn rate chart...please explain to me some more about the fireworks....do you feel AS is too fast a burn? I would tend to agree that 231 is a "better" powder.....but it's significantly more expensive....do you feel American Select is inappropriate for a 200gn. SWC...5 gn. is an average-high velocity of 800-820 fps.

You're missing the point. The fact that you can tune a load to your gun to get better accuracy doesn't make it "better" ammo. You and I can't make ammo as consistently and perfectlyu as they can. The only thing we can do is tune it to our gun. So, our ammo might shoot better in our gun, but it's not "better" ammo. The machines we use simply aren't capable of building ammo as precisely as a factory can. Think about any single operation and they have a machine and system that can do it better, time after time, than what we use. Our dies and presses are toys in comparison. Like I said earlier, send your gun to a factory and tell them to come up with the absolute best combo they can and it's going ot outperform anything you can come up with because they have relatively unlimited time, people, historical data, testing equipment and resources to work on it....you and I don't. R, I understand that...but the point is that, since none of us have the luxury, of having a factory tailor ammunition to the ever changing needs of our guns....we can build better ammunition than ANY available factory load....I even started a poll to see what others think....I mean if you want to get caught up in semantics....then yes "better" is a incorrect word for me to use.....but that's what your basis is, semantics... let me correct my laymen term I can build better ammunition for my gun, than any factory ammunition I can acquire....because I do not have the luxury of having a factory (with precision instrumentation, and measurement methods) build ammunition for my specific needs....

You sure about that? Why wouldn't that other someone want to start the thread themselves....that seems just a bit odd. Please don't take any offense, but you've been on the forum a couple of days and now folks here are coming to you to ask you to start threads? Why won't they do so themselves? All of that is pretty peculiar Regardless, back on topic. Bullets don't wear out barrels, burning gunpowder wears out barrels. The friction caused by the bullet is an extremely small percentage of wear. The difference in wear we see between lead and copper jacketed (if any) isn't about the bullet material, but the amount of powder required to push said bullets to the desired velocity. Jacketed require more powder for the same velocity which causes more wear due to flame cutting. Jacketed don't seal/obturate quite as quickly or perfectly as lead so there's a bit more flame passing the bullet before it obturates....so that's another factor that enters into it....not huge, but it's there. There is also an element of powder volume to bore diameter that comes into play, but that's getting pretty far into the weeds for what we talk about here. In rifle cases the worst offenders are the cases with the largest case capacity relative to their bore size....which is why the .220 Swift with it's .458 Win Mag parent case is probably the all-time leader in bore wear rate. The last thing that occurs to me is that a huge factor is how you treat the barrel. Bullseye shooters don't get the barrel really hot because they're shooting powder puff loads and a very slow rate of fire. Everything there is conducive to long barrel life. We shoot relatively hot loads at very high rates of fire, so the barrels get hot and when metal get's hot, it wears more quickly. R, Yes, someone asked me to start the thread....believe me or don't....makes no difference to me....because I am new to the forum....does that somehow make my opinion less valid? does it mean that I should be treated with dis-respect? as far as the rest of your post goes....it's an opinion poll....all answers are a matter of opinion...you can choose to dis-agree with me or agree with me....it doesn't make either one of us a jerk....no reason to dis-respect me or my opinions...as I don't dis-respect yours...I don't agree with them, however....neither does the poll....just trying to keep us all honest... you don't have to be hostile towards me...you have been in your last 2 replies to me...I see no reason for it....we can be friendly you know.... on that note....you are saying that shooting jacketed bullets will wear out a barrel faster than shooting lead bullets right? regardless of the reasons for that happening?

Just an opinion poll....Would like to know what everyone else thinks....I already have an idea about what works for me....I still want to know what you guys think....Thanks to everyone around BE's forums who is polite and open-minded

Any time I see people say stuff like that I think that the person saying it needs to look for other sources of ammo or they've got some really oddball gun It generally isn't possible for the home hobbyist, even a serious one with the best equipment and years of experience, to load ammo that touches the quality (from an absolute sense) of what the factories are capable of producing. The only thing we can do "better" is tune the load to our gun and/or our purpose. If we sent our gun to them, and let them do their thing, they'd be able to come up with a better performing load than we could. A lot of that is in the actual machinery we use and the limitations involved with it...and progressive presses are about the worst in that regard. Factory ammo loaded on a machine that has a fixed station for each function is going to be more precise than even a single stage press. I recently loaded up some 9mm to the most exacting precision I can get without going crazy. Loaded on my turret press using a Redding Competition Seating die, same lot brass, same lot bullets I still get a couple thousandths OAL variation (like .002+/-). I grabbed a box of Atlanta Arms 9mm and measured about twenty of them....not even a thousandth variation. Now, that particular ammo may not prove the most accurate in any one particular gun, but that goes back to tuning, not actual quality. That's a pretty high number really. Even if somebody jumps in and buys a pretty expensive press like a 650 ($800 for everything) they can get all the other stuff required to load and cast and still be at $2500 or less....and a lot less if they're reasonably careful. R, has not been my experience....even what I load on my progressive is better than anything I can get (or have tried) from any factory....the ammo is tuned to my specific needs, for my specific gun set-up and my specific weather conditions....I can't find ANY factory ammo that shoots as well as what I can build....I have tried everything I can get my hands on.... I have noticed that if I load on my single stage and trickle by hand on a beam scale....and pay very close attention to OAL....I can even do better than the progressive....I thought it was just common knowledge that you can load better ammo your self....should I start a poll on that topic?? by the time you get a single stage, and a collet style bullet puller and a micrometer adjust metering insert and a good scale and a tumbler and a media sifter stuck case puller good calipers and this and that and blah blah blah....plus your first order of primers/powder/projectiles/brass.....you will be at that $2500 number....especially if you buy a Dillon add to that casting gear and all the tools to verify your bullets and some lead I budgeted $900 for my first loading setup....by the time I was producing ammo that I thought was good...and had all the tools to measure and verify it....plus some case prep tools....$2000, and I am not counting my first order of supplies....so I think $2500-$3000 is pretty fair, for gear....you could def. do it for less....but to really build some nice ammo...and have the supplies to justify your purchase.... I mean if a guy is only going to load 50 rounds here and there, on less than accurate equipment, with no way of measuring his end result...what's the point of doing it at all?? P.S. oh add a chrono. in there to verify velocity as well....you get my point right?? not trying to argue, but sooner or later...that's what you will wind up spending....

hmmmm.....all very interesting.... as far as bedding jobs....I am talking pistols here....what I have noticed....is that with moly "fouling", if you let it cool/harden...you start to lose accuracy...that is just my perception/experience....I haven't done enough ransome rest shooting to be able to qualify that observation.... what I have noticed though is this....if I keep shooting my pistol....and don't let the moly cool/harden...it maintains accuracy....but as soon as I set it down and go have a smoke or chat with someone at the range....the moly hardens and accuracy seems to decrease.... I think somewhere I had read that powder, when trapped by grease, actually has lubricity....but I can totally believe how hardened powder fouling in a bore could cause problems.... sigh* I guess I just have to go with my gut, since it's an ongoing debate....you think someone would have been able to scientifically prove all of this stuff by now....maybe they have and I just don't know where to look.... thanks for your tips and the information....I am going to spray out powder fouling from my barrel before I leave the range, from now on....it can't hurt....that's for sure...as far as the moly fouling...well I think i am done with moly for a while, too much trouble....no real benefit