Saubier.com  



Go Back   Saubier.com > Saubier.com Forums > Bullet Making

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 09-15-2014, 12:43 AM
Randy Robinett Randy Robinett is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 101
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by george ulrich View Post
even zero hard alum would be harder than could be used, cores must be malleable to form and bond to jacket bismuth is going to be best alternative at this point...other than making a lighter bullet and the "core" not holding together on impact it is reasonably good maybe a small steel ball to create a secondary missle can be formed under the bismuth...just thinking out loud
George - done the ball-bearing trick both ahead of, and between the lead cores. Amazingly, they shot GREAT, but performance on game was a disaster:the balls lack weight, and didn't add anything to the "killing power". The ball-bearing bullets resulted in very POOR penetration - the balls did exacerbate, "explosiveness"! But, didn't try behind the core. RG

Last edited by Randy Robinett; 09-15-2014 at 01:08 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-15-2014, 01:09 AM
Randy Robinett Randy Robinett is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 101
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by george ulrich View Post
A thick jacket might be .028 thick a core lets say in 22 cal. is .190 its not so easy to upset I'm not saying you can't anything can be with enough force. Then you come into carbide dies that do not do well with internal force ie they will rupture. Then you come to specific gravity of alum compared to lead meaning you would be shooting lets say a 53 gr lead cored bullet with a .705 long jacket as compared to a 20 gr. alum cored bullet with a .705 jacket. Won't work you lost all b,c and kept sec. density. Theres a reason lead has been used for this long..
Along with the sectional density "problem", comes the specific gravity issue which George points out - an aluminum bullet of the same geometry (form) as my [current] .204 Cal., 40 Gr. BT (G. Ulrich dies) Gr.would require a 5.1 twist barrel . . oh, and the projectile would weigh a whopping 9.0 Gr, with a G1 ballistic co-efficient of 0.071! Not much of a long range proposition . . . run that through your favorite exterior ballistics calculator. It may render a 204 almost suitable for rats at the local dump!

Almost forgot - for comparison, the current [Ulrich] 40 Gr. BT, BC .290 (G1) works quite well via most 1:12" twist barrels, and is ideally suited to 1:11", which produces 1.5 Sg.

I hope my weird sense of humor comes trhough- I'm not intending to be a wise-ass - just to support George's argument for mass. RG
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-15-2014, 02:54 AM
george ulrich george ulrich is offline
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ill.
Posts: 293
Default

Randy, maybe if we switched to carbide balls they would have more mass..
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-15-2014, 01:24 PM
Randy Robinett Randy Robinett is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 101
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by george ulrich View Post
Randy, maybe if we switched to carbide balls they would have more mass..
Yes: I believe they'd still be to small to make a difference. I tried them (SS bearings) thinking that they may impede expansion: they did just the opposite.

I don't recall the weight/diameter, of the bearing I used in the thirty Cal. bullets, but the sectional density didn't/doesn't accommodate penetration. A .45 Cal. round-ball is about the bottom end for something the size of a deer - as I recall, .32 Cal. constitutes a squirrel gun.

Remember, the jacketed tungsten-carbide [cored] bullets? Though, due to mass, they had fantastic BC, they lacked the precision for tournament shooting - even for High Power. The military messed with them extensively - and, may still use some. Bill Neimi used to tell the horror stories of the broken dies and PRESSES - yes, presses - when the tungsten-carbide cores were in vogue with Uncle Sugar. RG
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-15-2014, 01:54 PM
george ulrich george ulrich is offline
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ill.
Posts: 293
Default

Yep still have some around here the cores make great tips for rest feet...
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-15-2014, 07:19 PM
hemiallen hemiallen is offline
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,239
Default

A better core material is D38, or Depleted Uranium. D38 is actually an alloy, 92 percent DU and 8 percent molybdenum.

The military has been using it as a penetrator for quite some time, we designed some impressive warheads where I used to work.

Allen
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-15-2014, 07:29 PM
TinMan TinMan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,800
Default

And there were also trials of an artillery projectile alloy made of ~90% tungsten with lesser amounts of copper and nickel. It was designed to be counterbalances for aircraft. One of the big commercial ammo producers experimented with both tungsten (not tungsten carbide) and molybdenum at one time. Both were way too expensive.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-15-2014, 08:46 PM
george ulrich george ulrich is offline
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ill.
Posts: 293
Default

yep I guess that would one way to disarm the public
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-17-2014, 01:12 PM
Randy Robinett Randy Robinett is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 101
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TinMan View Post
And there were also trials of an artillery projectile alloy made of ~90% tungsten with lesser amounts of copper and nickel. It was designed to be counterbalances for aircraft. One of the big commercial ammo producers experimented with both tungsten (not tungsten carbide) and molybdenum at one time. Both were way too expensive.
I stand properly corrected - as opposed to tungsten-carbide, as my poor memory recalled, I believe those "heavy" cores were either tungsten-molybdenum, or, similar to this(red). They made for high BC, but the lacked precision potential of jacketed lead-core bullets. RG
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.