Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Yondering

Classified
  • Content Count

    175
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Yondering

  • Rank
    Looks for Target

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Sedro Woolley, WA
  • Real Name
    Dan Bethea

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It's not a waste of time; I've found significant accuracy improvements with some loads. Others shoot well at any OAL that fits. You don't know till you try it.
  2. Depends on the load and the gun, but yeah, sometimes changing OAL can make a big difference in accuracy. Other times the difference is pretty small. You won't know till you try it, but don't assume a certain length in another gun is best in your gun.
  3. It should make sense because as I explained above, some of those variables do affect OAL. Case length is not one of them, so I'm not sure why you are confusing that with sorting by headstamp. Sorting by headstamp does not mean you made case lengths more consistent, and your comment I replied to above was misleading to others reading this. You didn't fix OAL issues by making case length consistent, you fixed it by sorting by headstamp.
  4. If someone tells you a .355" coated bullet works better with less recoil, that's a pretty good sign not to believe anything else they say. What country are you in that is so hard to find .357" bullets? The advice to look for 357 Mag or 38 Special bullets is good; not all of them work but if you find the right nose profile, they should be the larger diameter that you want.
  5. Think about that for a minute. At zero yards (the muzzle) the bullet is low by the amount of the sight height over the bore; about 0.6". From there, how would a round go 4" low at 5 yards if it's back to zero at some further distance? It would have to drop and then rise again; that's not how it works. If that's what you're seeing on target, you're doing something different with trigger control; that's not a change in trajectory, that's a change in aim. If you're going to play with a ballistics calculator, you have to give it all the right inputs, otherwise the info is useless. Did you enter 0.6" for sight height?
  6. Yeah. I think most people are still wet tumbling with it, just without pins, but it does work well to just soak the brass in it without tumbling, it just takes longer. I think I soaked my last batch for about an hour, then rinsed; cases came out shiny and clean. It's pretty simple, and I was very impressed with the results after using a citric acid soak for a number of years. You can drain off the Brass Juice solution and re-use it too.
  7. Glad to help. Nothing wrong with asking the question and learning about it; I respect that, unlike the guys who make up their mind without doing either one. One example of loose headspace that works OK is when firing 40 S&W in a 10mm Glock. (Glock ONLY, but that's a different topic) When doing this, the extractor itself controls headspace, not the chamber, but it works flawlessly. The exception is when doing the same in a 1911 or Tanfoglio, when the round falls in front of the extractor; in that case the extreme headspace causes the case head to slam into the breech face and can be a problem, but we still don't normally see case head separations from it. The main effect of excess headspace in a straight wall pistol cartridge is that fired primers can appear more flattened than if the same load were fired with the correct headspace. This happens because the primer is pushed back against the breech face when it ignites and the case is pushed forward, but then the case moves backwards against the breech face under pressure. The small amount of primer protrusion from the case during that time allows it to bulge slightly, resulting in a flatter appearance when pressure forces the case back over it.
  8. Easiest would be Brass Juice with no pins. You can even just soak the brass in a bucket if you don't have a large enough tumbler. I do 3,000-5,000 cases at a time in a 2.5 gal bucket this way normally, but it would be easy to scale up to a 5 gal bucket for larger quantities. I was using a citric acid soak but recently switched to Brass Juice, it does the same job but better.
  9. You should be able to tighten the screws fairly snug so they don't come loose, just don't go gorilla tight. If tightening the screws enough to not loosen causes the slide to stick, you've probably already bulged the tube base around the holes, and should address that so you can assemble it correctly. The other possible cause is just not having everything clean; flakes of powder stuck in the slide can cause sticking too. I've never needed to use Loctite on my Dillon, but if you do, blue #243 is the way to go. It does the same job as blue #242, but is also tolerant of oil. Just a drop on each screw would be plenty.
  10. This comment seems pretty vague, but it sounds like you made one change (sorting by headstamp) but are attributing the improvement to something else (case length). Maybe I misunderstood that, but if so, why did you say that in response to noylj's question on case length? Sorting by headstamp can improve OAL consistency by making powder column height and neck tension more consistent; that has nothing to do with case length. If case length is the cause of OAL issues, you'd have to be doing a couple things very wrong - both seating/crimping in the same step AND crimping way too much.
  11. If you're spending $400-$600 to have a Glock slide milled, you got hosed. $75-$125 is about right, depending who does it and how. The cost of milling is very comparable to the MOS upgrade cost. Milled slides hold the optic more securely and can handle more abuse. The MOS system gives you flexibility in optics choices if you're someone who wants to buy several red dots and try them out, but most of the time when I've seen that it's guys trying to buy cheap optics, and they end up spending more in the long run than just starting with an RMR or DPP.
  12. With some loads, particularly the high speed stuff, a 50 yard zero does match a 15 yard zero pretty closely. With slower loads, the near zero changes to somewhere around 5 yards. I'm not sure which charts you're referring to. The numbers I mentioned above are from ballistic charts, backed up by my own shooting to confirm. Maybe you're looking at drop tables, instead of trajectory tables that take sight/bore height into account? You also have to consider error in the zero, which is magnified when you zero at closer ranges. It's more accurate to zero (or at least confirm trajectory) at the longest distance you plan to shoot. If we "zero" at 10 yards but are actually off by 1", that error is magnified to 5" at 50 yards. If we zero at 50 yards and are off by 1", that error at 10 yards is only 0.2". The same applies for shooting a 5.56 AR15 with the common 36/300 yard zero - if we zero at 36 yards, any error is magnified nearly 10 times at 300 yards and our POI can be way off. If we zero at 300 yards, any error at that range will be very small at closer ranges.
  13. No, rowdyb is right. Even with the slowest 147gr loads, a 50 yard zero puts the round slightly high at intermediate distances, not low, and the max offset is about 1" high between 20-35 yards. POI is not lower than POA except closer than 5 yards, where it's pretty much a point blank shot and only a couple tenths of an inch low at most, or farther than 50 yards. The numbers change slightly if we're using a red dot instead of irons, but not enough to change the point he's making. With any load between the slowest 9mm minor and fastest 9mm major for iron sighted pistols, when using a 50 yard zero the POI should not deviate from POA by more than about 1.25". The big deviations you'll see are when using a close zero, like 10 yards. I think it's safe to say that very few of us are accurate enough shooting offhand for that ~1" offset to really matter.
  14. I dry brass in the oven at 250°. Usually 30 minutes is enough for pistol cases, sometimes I'll let it go longer for 223. Edit - a pizza pan with holes in it dries faster than a solid pan.
  15. With all stock internals, even a 13 lb spring might be a little light; it definitely is too light in my 34. I wouldn't even consider using an 11 lb spring without also using a very light striker spring.
×
×
  • Create New...