Shooters Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Toward the bottom of p.4 of leverguns forum a writer mentions reading something by Paco on the .375 win and the .38-55. Anyone know where I can find this? Also, how long does it take to receive an order of cast bullets once ordered from Beartooth. I heard a lot of orders are being backorderd.
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
1,184 Posts
Try this link for some of Pacos back issue articles:

http://www.sixgunner.com/backissues/default.htm


As far as the wait for bullets, check this link:

http://beartoothbullets.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard/topic.cgi?forum=1&topic=265


Regards,

:cool:
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
Arizonian,

Upon reading Mr. Kelley's piece on loading the .375 and .38-55, you will come across a number of questionable practices. But the most egregious one, the one most likely to cause you potential harm, is Paco's suggestion to clip the end off of Speer's 235-grain bullet. Doing so in no way diminishes the risk of a chainfire magazine detonation. The "customized" nose of a loaded round is still quite a bit smaller than the primer ahead of it. Under heavy recoil a disaster could well be the result. Caveat emptor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Dear Mr. Lester,

I am a regular reader of this forum and enjoy it immensely, gleaning what bits of wisdom here and there where I can.  This will be my first posting to this site and greatly appreciate the opportunity to do so.

In my readings here I have noticed a pattern which you have set Mr. Lester in that you pass no opportunity to disparage Mr. "Paco" Kelly.  Now, I am in no way associated with Mr.  Kelly and know him no further than his writings.  Having said such I must admit to you that some of Mr. Kelly’s reloading practices are interesting.

Just recently I finished re-reading Mr. Kelly’s articles on reloading the 375 Winchester.  Reading your posting to Arizonian concerning such I was intrigued by your response.  You state that among a number of questionable practices by Mr. Kelly, the most "egregious" being that of clipping the tips off of Speer 235gr semi-spitzer bullets for the purpose of facilitating them in a tubular magazine.  I could not recall having read this admonition and returned again to the articles above described and could find no such thing written.  Interesting.  What I could find was the short statement by Mr. Kelly that he employs the practice of blunting the tips of the same bullet described with a small hammer for the purpose of facilitating their use in a tubular magazine.

You go on to say that this customization still yet leaves a bullet tip, "quite a bit smaller than the primer ahead of it."  If you were to apply this statement to your statement which you attribute to Mr. Kelly of clipping the bullet tips, well yes it does.  Having a supply of Speer 235gr semi-spitzer bullets I blunted the tips of two in the manner in which Mr. Kelly speaks.  The results are nice mushroomed bullet tips which are larger than the diameter of a large rifle primer.  At the mouth of this bullet jacket the measurement is .19".  The diameter of a large rifle primer is almost .21".  Blunting the tips of said bullets, it was no trick at all to develop a mushroom to easily cover an entire primer face, and more.

Taking this one step further we find various blunt tipped bullets, custom and production, with tips smaller than the primers which they will rest against in a tubular magazine.  A fine example of this would be the 180 and 220gr Speer flat-point bullets which I load in my 35 Remington.  That portion of the bullet tip resting against the primer of both these bullets is approximately .15", again compared to a diameter of almost .21" for a large rifle primer.  I have never heard of any danger nor cautions in using these two bullets for the purpose in which they were designed.

Having compared Mr. Kelly’s loading data with the sources given in the articles there were no questionable "practices" or information given there either.  Perhaps Mr. Lester in your zeal to yet again portray Mr. Kelly in a poor light you merely got carried away with your statements.  Guard your integrity fiercely Mr. Lester.  

"Ignorance is a steep hill….."  Quite so.

Sincerely,
Allen Wilson
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
Mr. Wilson,

Thank you for pointing out my error in this particular instance. However if you would refer to any number of Mr. Kelly's articles available at Sixgunner.com, you will see what I posted is emphatically correct. He most certainly has said "clip," not blunt, in most pieces pertaining to hotrodded lever action loads. Recently he has watched his wording, true enough. But go back into the Sixgunner archives. This is particularly true of his many sub-.35 caliber wildcats. It is there without question. For further reading, may I suggest a recent and drawn-out debate on this subject at the Marlin message board?

While you infer I have some personal vendetta against Francis Kelly this could be no further from the truth. I do not disparage him. I do question many of his "facts." Some of his writings have useful information, particularly those pertaining to cast bullet use in rifles. However far too many of his suggestions fly in the face of sane or practical handloading. "Blunting" of bullets is a classic example. Even if they shot as flat and retained velocity as well as Kelly implies, the terminal ballistics on game are ruined. Don't believe me? Then why have there been so many protected point bullet designs over the years, particularly those intended for heavy-recoiling arms? Why have the likes of Pete Capstick, John Taylor, and Finn Agaard all suggested rotating out rounds from the bottom of dangerous game rifle magazines if they have experienced the recoil of several shots?  

You now have some hammered Speer 235's, splayed out like a portabella. Fine. Load them and unmodified projectiles with the same powder charge and test them at 200 yards or more. Do you have a chronograph? If so, please run these comparative loads at the range your targets are posted. You will see that trajectory and retained velocity will be dramatically reduced with the blunt-nose loads. It is simple aerodynamics, something that any bullet engineer from Speer or other comapnies will confirm.

Furthermore, if you have a .30-caliber rifle compare some 150-grain spire points with the same bullets blunted. And just for kicks, use the same-weight roundnose, all loaded with like charges. I would hazard that the old fashioned roundnose will shoot as flat, retain as much velocity, and would provide better terminal effects on game than hammered projectiles. Possibly the trajectory and velocity will also be better than with the hammered slugs.

So why does Mr. Kelly do it? I think it is to utilize lighter bullets than are commonly available in roundnose or flantnose configuration. That way velocities go up and Paco is a handloading hero once again. But Mr. Wilson, you and too many others do not read between the lines. That is where the potential for danger arises. I don't really blame you, I didn't at first either. Then I started shooting what Mr. Kelly suggested. Facts speak louder than my or his words. Try Kelly's saner suggestions, like the experiment I detailed above, and you, like me, will begin to question his articles. Until then, sir, your slings and arrows have missed the mark.
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
Mr. Wilson,

I had just enough time to make a quick trip to Sixgunner.com.  If you would read Mr. Kelly's article "7.62X51R Revisited," under the heading ".30-30 Again" you will find the following quote:


Speer makes a 110 grain spire point .308... I clip
(my emphasis) the nose on this bullet for the tube... doesn't change it's BC of .273.

Beyond the fact that the statement on ballistic coefficient is flatout wrong- contact the good folk at Speer if you don't believe me- this is just one example, found in 30 seconds of reading, that reinforces my original post as true. It is far from the only article by Mr. Kelly that does so.

(Edited by Bill Lester at 8:26 am on July 4, 2001)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Mr. Lester,

Thank you for your reply.  Mr. Lester, your error, "in this particular instance", is all that I was pointing out to you.  I am aware that Mr. Kelly has in other articles suggested clipping bullet tips.  I have read Mr. Kelly’s current and archived articles fully.

As a moderator of this forum it is a measure of your responsibility to point out questionable or dangerous items/thoughts/suggestions as they arise, and to do so as accurately as your knowledge will allow.  You do this well and I have never before seen or felt that anything you have said has been incorrect or misspoken.  But, "in this particular instance", it was your own information which was incorrect, and misleading. You are obviously well read in Mr. Kelly’s articles and therefore to misrepresent the information given in the particular articles concerned, whether intentional or not, was irresponsible.

Mr. Lester, please, these are not rocks of slings nor arrows and no harm from these words are meant to you.  Obviously we do not know one another on a more personal level where you would know this to be true.  You are obviously a man able to admit a mistake, and therefore to be indignant of such in any manner is unnecessary.

As for Mr. Kelly, his reloading practices for lever-guns, and some other firearms as well, do push the envelope if not leave it tattered here and there.  I agree.  But this was not the point of my original post either.

Now, you have brought up questions as to the why’s or why-nots of blunted bullets.  In Mr. Kelly’s case it obviously is to gain something that is not available for a lever-gun.  As to their performance on game in their  altered condition I do not know for this particular bullet.  I do know from first hand experience though that .308 150gr Winchester Power-points, factory loaded, with their tips cut off flush with the bullet jacket, still perform without fail on deer and antelope out to approximately 175 yards.  Yep, fifteen years old and thinking I was "improving" these factory loads to make them "real" killers.  And so did I adjust the sights of my trusty Savage 99 to compensate for the tremendous ballistic damage I had inflicted on these bullets?  Of course not.  I knew no better.  Did I in fact damage the B.C. of those bullets.  Surely.  And they still shot without discernible variance to the sights set with undamaged bullets.

Several years ago, I believe it was Wayne Van Zwoll who wrote an article for, and I am guessing, Rifle Shooter magazine on this very topic.  Altered and unaltered bullets were fired in the manner suggested by yourself to me.  The altered spitzer bullets still out-performed round-nose bullets of comparable weight and loading.  At long distance they were still within minor inches or fractions of their undamaged counterparts.  

In Mr. Kelly’s case, altering and using these modified bullets still gives him something he feels he cannot get by other available means.  Even Ken Waters, a true Dean on the topic of reloading, is on record (Handloader, No. 181) for filing the tips flat on Hornady .458 350gr round-nosed bullets for the purpose of their use in a tubular magazine, loaded in the 45-70gov.  Should he be admonished for altering the ballistic performance of this bullet for gaining a measure of comfort in the knowledge that he has a flattened bullet tip against a primer?  And again, should he be admonished for theoretically ruining the terminal performance of this bullet by altering it to a flat-point?  Hornady does in fact make a 350gr flat-point bullet, but it did not give Mr. Waters the result that he wanted. If Mr. Kelly, or Mr. Waters, or anyone else modifies a bullet within prudent limits so as not to cause harm to himself or others, and is successful in achieving the desired results from such modifications, where is the harm in that?

As for rotating rounds in heavy recoiling dangerous game rifles and in the scenarios which the men of which you list are speaking;  this is done not so much to preserve bullet tips from being altered by being slammed forward in the magazine box under full recoil as it is to avoid possible bullet set-back within the cartridge itself thus increasing chamber pressure to such a degree as to cause a seized case within the rifles chamber upon firing.  These men were using these rifles under conditions of high heat and/or humidity where this could be a real problem.  And should this problem occur in the "heat" of a situation the results  could be very dangerous.  You are correct in pointing out that some bullets offered by various manufacturers have evolved with a more protected point to counter the effects of recoil damage within a box magazine, the Speer Grand Slam series being a great example.

Mr. Lester, thank you again for your reply.

Sincerely,
Allen Wilson
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
Mr. Wilson,

I'm happy to hear that your bullet experiments in your teenage years did not lead to any wounded game. However I think your shots under 175 yards helped that area. Not enough velocity had been shed to create a deleterious situation in terminmal ballistics. I would also caution your belief that trajectory was not affected to a serious degree. Just about any sub-40 caliber centerfire rifle will shoot a largely "flat" trajectory to 150-175. It is beyond, to the 300+ yards Mr. Kelly has suggested such modified loads are capable, where the ballistic damage will rear its ugly head. That is why I suggested testing clipped, hammered, or otherwise modified bullets to least 200 yards.

I have already contacted several of the bullet amnufacturers today to get their opinion on this subject. As it filters back to me I will post it here. I think it should prove to be interesting.

Oh, I almost forgot. Your point of Ken Waters' modifications is valid on the surface, but under closer examination I think we will both agree that the Hornady .45's thus modified will still show a significant amount of exposed lead. After all, we are talking about a true big bore bullet with plenty to spare!  Combining  the .45-70's rather low velocity even when pushed hard with its realistic 200 yard effective range I think shows such loads are "apples" to Mr. Kelly's modified spire point small bore "oranges" used beyond 300 yards as he has often implied.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Mr. Lester,

With the skill of a master politician you have steered the topic of discussion of my original posting of your disseminating false, inaccurate, and misleading information concerning the loading practices of another writer into a discussion of physical ballistics in defense of your doing so.  Incredible.  Wrong is wrong.  Period.  And so now you are consulting with bullet manufacturers to get their opinions on the flight characteristics of modified bullets.  I can only hope that the obvious answers that they will give you will be the vindication you seem to be searching for.

As for the Hornady 350gr round-nose bullet, is it possible that you are not familiar with the design of it?  Filing the tip of this bullet flat to the jacket certainly will not expose a significant amount of  more lead.  It was your contention Mr. Lester that in bullet modifications:

"Even if they shot as flat and retained velocity as well as [Mr.] Kelly implies, the terminal ballistics on game are ruined."

Your criteria for ruined terminal ballistics were only modifications.  You gave no qualifying criteria along with that statement such as effective range or velocity or even bullet diameter.  Only modifications.  But now that you have I would suppose that it would be okay to let Mr. Waters off the hook.  And so I would ask you again.  If Mr. Kelly, or Mr. Waters, or anyone else modifies a bullet within prudent limits so as not to cause harm to himself or others, and is successful in achieving the [their] desired results from such modifications, where is the harm in that?  

Oh, I almost forgot.  Not even the British would consider the .375 caliber a "small-bore".

Mr. Lester the floor is yours to stump and spew forth at will.  I have grown weary of your maneuverings and justifications as such.  At the end of my first post to you I gave the advice to guard you integrity fiercely.  I should have included character also.

Sincerely,
Allen Wilson
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
MR Wilson, Just thought I'd jump in here and say the reason ken Waters filed the tops of the 350 gr Hornady bullets was because it made him nervous to use them in the marlins with heavy loads and hornady didn't make there flat nose 350gr bullets yet, that  came out with the 450 marlin!
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
Mr. Wilson,

It is most obvious that you cannot understand how discussion works. At no turn have I avoided any point you have made, let alone "with the skill of a master politician." This is obvious to anyone who has read this topic.

You seem most interested in attacking me for defending my position. Fair enough, but to do so this way makes you appear foolish. To continue this banter with a fool is pointless. If anyone's integrity is in question, it is yours not mine. Continue your hero worship and fare thee well.




(Edited by Bill Lester at 8:18 pm on July 7, 2001)




(Edited by Bill Lester at 6:20 am on July 8, 2001)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Mr. Anderson,

My mistake!  And you are absolutely correct.  I was thinking of the 300gr FP.  Thank you for jumping in with the correction.

Sincerely,
Allen Wilson
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
2,141 Posts
Hey, where is James when we need him? Somebody needs to yell "PUNT"!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,375 Posts
As many of you who frequent this forum know, I've been absent here for some time dealing with some rather serious health issues, and it both concerns and saddens me to see the tone of this thread.

This forum is the excellent exchange of information that it has evolved to become for many reasons.  First is the excellent diversity and depth of experience represented here, second is the articulate manner in which that experience is shared so freely.  But mainly, it has developed into its current level through a civility and politeness encountered few other places on the internet!

Factual reporting of information is our goal, done so with authority and confidence that comes from knowledge gleaned from years of experience and compilation of published material tempered with generous portions of common sense.  It is a good thing to have checks and balances amongst the users of this forum to make sure that the information shared here is both responsible and factual, it creats an accountability factor unequalled in any other venue.

However, when that system of user accountability begins splitting hairs for the sake of arguement and contention, the civility of this forum becomes disrupted, and the entire tone and climate of this platform of exchange changes... for the worse!

Gentlemen, this spitting match is over, (Thankfully) but I appeal to everyone who reads this thread to recognise that the tone of this exchange, while refraining from defamation of character, is dangerously close to crossing the lines of hostile exchange, and as such, a tension and uneasiness is percieved while reading this thread.  A tension that can be avoided.  Let's endeavor to keep this forum a civil and pleasant place to both seek and give information.

The information shared on this thread was both factual and informative, it's just too bad that it had to be colored with the negative emotion it contains!  I appreciate the information both Mr. Lester and Mr Wilson have shared, and value their participation on this forum.  We have placed great trust in Mr. Lester in both his judgement and reason in asking him to be a moderator on this forum, that position has been earned through his participation on this forum.  We appreciate and respect his contributions in this venue.  We (the management of Beartooth Bullets) would appreciate that if there are further personal griefs, complaints or conflicts that they be handled via our messenger system if they must be addressed, but don't adversely color the atmosphere of exchange on what has historically been a very civil place to share information on this forum.  

We appreciate all who come here both to glean and to share information.  Please protect the very special tone and environment that we currently enjoy.

God Bless,

Marshall Stanton
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top