Odd Phenomenon - 38 Special target rounds

I'm betting it's barrel heating. Even low power loads heat up the barrel by friction, nearly as much as full power loads. Mic the plated DEWC, mic the lead bullets. I am guessing that the plated are smaller, a looser fit in the barrel as it heats up.

That's my theory. Test by letting the barrel cool between groups, as was suggested.
 
Odd/unusual it is in my Speer manuals for Nitro 100. Not in manual no. 10 1979 at all. Manual no. 13 1998 appears to be only listed for 40 cal. and larger and only for cast bullets. No swaged or jacketed.
 
N100 vs. 158 gr SWC.... punch the bowling ball. Each time down the bore the ball leaves some copper behind. Cast or lead leaves a lubricitive coating over it. Once that coating is compromised we go back to leaving copper on / in the barrel. Keep repeating. As the build up gets larger, the velocities get slower.

Early full metal jacket and soft point bullets used a copper jacket. There is a reason that they added 5% zinc to the copper and thus we use guilding metal as jacket material for around 100 years.

History repeats itself. In this case, the very fast powder exasperates the issue in a repaetable linear fasion.
 
Nitro 100 NF Data

The only place I found any useful data was from Accurate's site. I had to tweak their recipes a bit to suit my purpose. Not the first time. Won't be the last. Nitro 100 NF is a new powder so there isn't much load data out there for it. If you chose to use it, you pretty much have to make it up as you go along.
 
As the build up gets larger, the velocities get slower.

Yes I'm pretty much convinced it's a barrel friction issue.

Not sure why it doesn't happen with my plated DEWC's though.

Whatever it is, it's starting to look like using plated SWC's (at least X-treme's - and they're the only ones I know of) for ICORE competition is a non-starter. That's okay. My MoBuCo soft cast lead SWC's are outstanding performers in both velocity consistency and accuracy. Just got to scrub a little lead out of the breech and cylinder throats after a match. It's not that big-o'-deal.

I use SWC's because I like the sharp, defined round hole they make. The plated ones don't cut the cardboard that great anyway - not like the lead ones. So all things collectively, I think I'm just going to scrub the project and be done with it.

I'm just going to use the remainders for 357 Mag. Put 9 grains of HS-6 under them with a mag primer and let 'em sail!
 
I do not know, but.

something like 3 CARD MONTIE, instead of shooting the first string first shuffle the firing order of the strings. Or, clean the barrel between strings. If all 30 rounds are loaded the same shoot all 30 rounds as a string instead of 3 strings of 10 rounds each.

F. Guffey
 
Easy enough to test. Now that you have seen this trend, isolate the variables.



Shoot a couple strings with problem bullets and record. Wait 24 hours WITHOUT cleaning gun or doing anything to it, and shoot a couple more strings the next day with same bullets. Did velocities go back to previous day's starting velocities or continue to decline from where you left off?

That should tell you whether it is heat, or something left behind in your gun. That is tep 1 on the flow chart. :)
 
Lightbulb Moment

So I spent some time last night pouring over my past chronograph data. Turns out, this phenomenon has showed itself before, but I missed it. I don't normally shoot long strings of the same rounds over and over, so it was hard to see, but it's there.

Back in early June, I was badmouthing (for my application) Vihtavouri N310. What I was really seeing - now that I look at the data again - was the same phenomenon.

This morning I went to the range with the chronograph. I grabbed some 148gn Rainier plated DEWC's that I already had on hand (2.9gns N100). I ran six strings of ten.

First string: 730 f/s average.
Second string: 701 f/s average.
Third string: 693 f/s average.
Fourth string: 685 f/s average.
Fifth string: 673 f/s average.
Sixth string: 649 f/s average.

Then there was a cease fire period. I could have gone further, but the data is clear. Plus, I'm tired of chronographing, frankly. It was then time to put the chrono away and just have some fun shooting.

I am now convinced that copper plating is building up in the barrel and increasing friction. Learn something every day. Very interesting. If I had to guess, lead slugs would do the same thing (probably faster) if they weren't lubricated. BTW, I use a taper crimp die with all these rounds tested, and are lightly crimped. Both these SWC's and DEWC's have a lot of bullet-to-case contact. A heavy crimp is not needed.

SHR970 said: "There is a reason that they added 5% zinc to the copper and thus we use guilding metal as jacket material for around 100 years."

Is that why this phenomenon doesn't occur with jacketed bullets? I assume - having a little bit of knowledge about plating - that copper plating on plated bullets are just that: pure copper. And that would be the difference?
 
Nick, I still think we only have half of the issue identified. If it were simply a matter of plated bullets causing this then everybody would be having the same problems and the plated bullet industry would collapse. There has got to be something else going on.
 
Yes, that's a good point Doyle. Some sort of plating breakdown is occurring. Light taper crimp, low velocity - go figure. I'm not sure how much more I want to look into this. Right now, I'm all out of ambition and don't feel like bulldogging it. I'd love to hear Unclenick's take on this. He's a pretty knowledgeable guy.
 
jmorris: I have a 357 w/ 4" bbl - Smith 686. I have three Smith 686's, actually. Not to mention a Python. ;)

Maybe I'll drag the chrono out again with a different gun.
 
As I was reading the first post I was thinking heat build up and expansion. Perhaps the cylinder/bbl. heats up with repeated firings and allows more gas blow-by due to larger cylinder throats?
 
There's a lot of good theories out there right now. I appreciate it.

Here's the rub: Even if we get to the bottom of the problem, then what? I need those bullets, operating at my design velocities, running through that specific gun. They're purposed for competition. The concern is failing to make chrono if I get called to test after there's a bunch of barrel buildup.

For ICORE, I'll just continue shooting lead. No big deal. Copper build up aside, I wasn't that impressed with the X-treme SWC anyway. I have a couple hundred of them remaining. They'll make for range fodder until gone.

IDPA will be a little different. I have about 4000 of the Rainier DEWC's :p. And they're excellent shooters (aside from the copper buildup thing). The best thing about them is that they cut extremely sharp, full-diameter circles through cardboard- they cut sharper than lead DEWC's. So I'll probably shoot them intermixed with lead DEWC's at the matches.
 
Much has been mentioned/implied here and I'm just adding to it. Bullseye and 700X are fast powders, 700X is known to be cleaner and usually a bit smaller in charge. Nitro 100 NF follows the same pattern but takes it to an extreme. HOT!
 
Last edited:
Nitro 100 (NF) has some characteristics that I really like. For starters, it runs clean. At least as clean as W231/HP-38 - most likely, cleaner. I like that.

Moreover, it "pops hard," as I phrased it earlier. Meaning, it develops strong pressure quickly with light loads. In the 38 Special target world, low pressure is the issue - the opposite concern compared to most other applications. Too often, with other propellants, the loadings are so light that insufficient pressure is developed. Which causes cylinder blow-back (where the case doesn't seal around the cylinder hole) and fouling develops to the point where the ammo won't speed load and drop into the chambers. Then there's also inconsistent burns/performance, powder fouling in general. It can get messy and crummy.

It's nice to have a propellant that develops a lot of pressure quickly. And Nitro 100 does that. It also seems to have the least amount of recoil.
 
A little off topic

The one major difference between Titegroup and Nitro 100 is that when I look up, and to my left, I see three canisters of Nitro 100 and zero of Titegroup ;)

On a more serious note, I've heard lots of good things about Titegroup. I'm not going to go out of my way to acquire some. But if I cross paths with it at my LGS, I'll grab a pound and give 'er a whirl.
 
Sorry not to be around much. Work has kept me tied up lately.

Thermal expansion of a .357 bore by raising its temperature to scalding hot will only be about 0.0002” in diameter. That’s not enough difference for a 0.0010” oversize bullet to start having gas bypass it.

The Nitro 100 NF does sound similar to Tightgroup. Nitro 100 NF (for New Formula) replaced the old Nitro 100 which Accurate could not get made any longer. The NF was wrung out in shotguns first, with an early warning by Accurate not to use it in metallic cartridge loads until they had some load testing done and published. Now they've begun to get that data together, and the FAQ says to use 10% less Nitro 100 NF than of the old Nitro 100 as a starting point. This would mean starting with starting loads 10% lower than the old Nitro 100 starting loads, and working up from there.

N310 and Hodgdon Clays are both very fast, too, and Clays is also very clean (haven’t yet tried the 2 lb bottle of N310 I have in the cellar), so I suspect you’ll find the same issue with both of them. I suspect the issue is mainly dependent on burn rate.

Normally, in a rifle or in a pistol burning slow magnum powders, when you increase barrel friction, velocity goes up. Put lubricated moly bullets in a gun and velocity goes down. This occurs because the powders involved are slow enough that the added resistance increases their rate of burn and pressure rise, increasing peak pressure and completeness of burn in the bore by making them behave like faster burning powders. (Most folks assume the relative burn rates of powders on a chart are constant, but in fact they only hold up under one set of standard conditions, and at different pressures and temperatures the order changes some.) In effect, the added resistance provides increased confinement and resistance to expansion of the volume the powder is burning in. Lubrication has the opposite effect.

But with an extremely fast, low progressivity (or even digressive burning) powders, expansion by the time the pressure peak is reached is small. That means you can’t use much charge weight without making so much gas in that still-small expanded space that pressure becomes excessive. So you make a small, fixed quantity of gas with these powders that are often done burning and at their peak pressure before the bullet base has cleared the case mouth, much less having passed through the throat. When the bullet enters the bore under this circumstance, the effect of friction turns around. It cannot increase pressure the way it would with a .357 case full of 296. Instead, with all gas pressure already made, bore friction just opposes the force generated by that pressure. Moreover, in a revolver added resistance slowing the bullet means more time for a greater percentage of the limited gas quantity to bleed down through the barrel/cylinder gap. That lowers pressure still further. So there’s an exponential drop in velocity as the bore friction increases.

With lubricated lead bullets, the lubricant limits how fast fouling builds up, but also the alloys used are more slippery against steel in the first place and are softer and squeeze through constrictions more easily, so you see a slower buildup of friction with fouling. Copper bullets won’t have that advantage.

So, what can you do about all this. Several things are possible to do. Anything you can do to reduce the rate of fouling build up will reduce the rate of velocity drop. Polishing the bore surface helps slow buildup for lead, copper, or gilding metal. Increasing either bore or bullet lubrication helps. There are several approaches to both. Firelapping by any of several variation of method will significantly smooth the bore and tend to remove constrictions or other imperfections. You could just soak three dozen cast bullets for a few days in mineral spirits so and old toothbrush can clean the lube grooves, then replace that lube with a lapping compound or even just with JB Bore paste to polish rather than actually lap much metal out. Fire them slow, as you are now. Frequent cleaning (after every cylinder full) is important to prevent fouling from masking part of the bore from the polishing action.

You can also apply lubricants to a bore that will last a good while at your pressures. Clean the barrel down to bare metal (should be done before firelapping, too; search past posts on cleaning for ways to do this) and plug the muzzle and fill it to the forcing cone with Sprinco’s Plate+ Silver. Leave it 72 hours at room temperature and put the liquid back in the bottle (it’s not measurably depleted by this application). This leave the bore with a semi-permanent lube that includes micronize acid-neutralized moly that causes rifle bullets to lose about the same velocity they do when shooting moly-plated bullets. It lasts about 1000 rounds in a rifle if you don’t refresh the application, but if you by patch application after every cleaning session, the coating is maintained.

Shooter’s Solutions has a product called Moly-fusion that will also put a long lasting coating in the bore.

You could try applying a lubricant to the bullets directly. I’ve not played with the plated bullets much, but I expect a thin application of thinned Lee Liquid Alox at these low load pressures would not create any pressure issues. You could try powder coating them with plastic resin as is described in detail in the cast bullet forum. These lubes should help the bullet swage into the forcing cone more easily despite the slight added thickness. Many revolvers seem to shoot best with bullets fattened to the full diameter of their cylinder throats anyway.
 
Back
Top