Paco Kelly - Acu'rzr - application jig- (quite long)

P95Carry – Sorry, I was away for a while. You kinda’ sent me off on a tangent, which I haven’t quite returned from yet. OAL vs. Weight vs. OAL of processed rounds. Still working on that one.

Those are much better results. If we were thinking a little better, that’s how we would have done it to begin with. I agree, the increased surface area is accounting for the tightening of the OAL. You can only squeeze the lead so much.

I’ve been shopping around for Fed Champion ammo, but haven’t located any. You seem to think highly of it and I thought I’d give it a try. I guess I’ll have to wait until the next gun show in the area. Is that pretty good ammo? I’ve never used it.

And, instead of rapping the round out of the die, I’ve adopted the method of pushing it out on a block of hardwood, rather than using my hand. Haven’t seen any difference in the round but, at least, it puts my mind at ease.

It’s been raining here all week so I haven’t been able to get to the range for further testing. I’m thinking of using the indoor range just to keep this project moving.

One question I was able to answer – what’s accounting for the difference in the OAL of the rounds? Why is one round longer than another? I weighted several hundred rounds of which I knew the OAL of and on average, the longer rounds weighed more than the shorter rounds. I say “On Average”. Because, there is always going to be a round or two that is short but heavy, or long and light. But on average, the extra weight seems to be in the bullet.

Hoping to have some range testing done by the end of the week. I’ll keep you posted. Let me know the results of your range test.

harley

Gewehr98 - thanks for the info. Looks interesting. I think that using one of those tuners could turn into a whole project by itself. But the results are promising. Thanks

harley

Don't forget the other variable in rimfire ammo...

Rim Thickness.

Variations in rim thickness are more pronounced in the cheaper grades of ammo, like those cardboard cartons one buys at WalMart. Ammo with more attentive QC, like Lapua, RWS, Eley, and so forth have less rim thickness variation, but then you pay for the extra details. Some fixes are out there to offset these variations. You can take care of some of the "slop" in a target-modded 10/22 by milling the bolt face down to about 0.042" above the cartridge head recess.

There are several rim thickness gauges for sale out there, or you can make your own. You wouldn't believe what a difference sorting ammo by rim thickness does for your group sizes - A cheap carton of Dynapoints all of a sudden settles down with groups closer to something like Scoremaster. Take that variable, in conjunction with OAL, and bullet diameter, and you are on your way to tighter groups. Or just buy an Anschutz and a lifetime supply of Eley Tenex.

No, I agree you're headed in the right direction...

By making a uniform diameter bullet with your top punch swager (which, in effect, is what it is). You're making a more consistent round of ammo, regardless of how cheap the ammo was to start. Now take the extra few seconds/minutes, and sort them by rim thickness before heading to the range. Trust me.

New Can Of Worms....

Gewehr98 - Over the years, I think I have tried most/all of the commerically available models of rim thickness gauges, and have found little improvement in accuracy. I think Herter's or Sports,Inc sold a very simple one years ago that consisted of a narrow metal bar with holes drilled in it, that you dropped the rounds into and if they were flush, the you knew the rim thickness. And, that many years ago, it did seem to make an improvement in accuracy.

Having recently tried some of the newer gauges, though they are very accurate in what they do, there doesn't seem to be any improvement in accuracy. I'm wondering why this is. Is it because the ammunition made today is so much inferior to that made back in the 70's? Or, is it because the ammunition made today is actually superior to that made in the 70's? I dunno.

Anywho, I came across several hundred rounds of matched rim thickness ammo from earlier trials (last year) and will include some of that in conjunction with the ACU'RZR testing. This ACU'RZR tool does seem to deliver on the promise of turning bargain basement ammo into match quality stuff. Whereas, IMHO, the rim thickness gauges don't seem to live up to the hype.

It did seem to work many years ago, and today it dosen't. I don't get it? Maybe, I'm using the wrong brand of rimfire. I have read some good comments in the forums regarding the Dynapoints and was hoping to include them in testing, but I haven't had any luck in finding them locally.

I'll keep y'all posted on results.

harley

Cartridge Photos

I’m thinking that a big part of the equation in this tool’s effectiveness is making the overall length of the cartridges uniform. Each bullet would have the same length to jump to the rifling and a better chance of having the same time up the barrel. So, one of the questions in the back of my mind regarding the use of this tool was, “does the over all length of the cartridge affect the finished product?”

I started with cartridges from .965 to .972 in overall length. I ran them through the tool, all at the same dial indicator reading of .060 from zero. And, as you can see from photo A, they all pretty much ended up the same length at .917. The only cartridges out of range were the first and last cartridges, which were short and long, but not by much. Is that enough to affect accuracy? I dunno!

To correct earlier photos: Photo B shows the finished OAL when starting with cartridges of the same over all length. In this case the starting length was .968. Dial indicator readings are on the bottom and the finished over all length is on the top. Fairly even finished OAL.

Gewehr98 - RIM THICKNESS

Trying to put worms back in the can…. and, eating crow at the same time. I have to agree with Gewehr98 regarding the rim thickness. Earlier tests showed no promise, but since I had some rounds all ready grouped by headspace, I thought I’d give it another try.

I was shooting at an outdoor range and the wind was steady with strong gust. The gust became so strong I eventually stopped shooting at around 40-60 mph. If you look at the CCI Mini Mag target, you can see the poor results I was getting. What surprised me were the CCI factory groups in 1 & 2. I never thought to highly of CCI ammo. Guess I’ll have to revise that opinion.

Also, in shooting the matched headspace Rem groups, it was only the last 2 or 3 shots in the two groups that opened them up considerably. I was really excited with the first seven or eight rounds in the group. Whether that was due to my poor shooting or the wind conditions, I dunno, but I think from now on I’m going to be separating my rounds by headspace. Thanks, Gewehr98, for putting me back straight on the path.

As a side comment, Dynapoint by Winchester: I read by someone in one of the forums that Dynapoint was good, cheap ammo, ($9.00, I think, for bulk 500). I bought a box, fired one ten shot group that measured .330 at 25 yds. They were showing some promise there so I decided to measure the rim thickness on them, and lo and behold, I only got two rim thickness’ (.038 & .039) over half way through the box. Maybe that’s the reason they shoot pretty well for cheap ammo.

Catch y’all later,

harley

Dynapoint - Rim Thickness

I just completed grading a bulk box of 500 Dynapoint .22 long rifle ammo from Kmart for rim thickness. Thought some of you might find the results interesting if you’re into rim fires.

The first 20 or so out of the box were all .038 and I thought my gage was stuck. “This can’t be right; I’m doing something wrong.” So, I check the rim fire gauge using some other cheap ammo, just to make sure the gauge was working okay. It was working okay. Here are the results:

.037 – 44
.038 – 267
.039 –163
Under .037 and over .039 totaled 29

I’ve never seen that consistency in rim thickness from standard or bulk .22’s. Pretty good stuff.

For comparison, I checked the rims on some Dynamit Nobel Target Rifle and the box of 50 came in at between .039 - .040. Considering the box of Nobel Target cost .11 cents per round and the Dynapoint cost less than 2 cents each, I don’t mind spending the time grading the bulk stuff.

Can’t wait to run some of these through the Acu’rzr and see how they do.

Now, get to the range and put some holes in paper. The proof is in the pudding.

harley

Interesting data spread.

A rim-thickness variation as slim as what Harley's finding on the Dynapoint ammo is actually encouraging. It used to be only the high-dollar premium target rimfire would exhibit uniform rim thickness measurements. Perhaps somebody is paying attention to the target rimfire shooters out there, and producing an economical round with better consistency.

Looks like I'll be busy soon. I just got a brick of Golden Eagle fodder, now where did I put that gauge?

I tried to post here the other day, but my computer ate it. In short I shot for me a really good round of Bullseye practice with my marvel conversion and 100 rounds of Win Wildcat. I would say that for that particular gun the Wildcat shoots as well as CCI green tag or Wolf club ammo. Maybe like the dyna-point rim thickness has something to do with it? I have shot no other cheap fodder near as good as the Winchester.

Comparative Test?

P95Carry, you know, I’ve looked high and low (actually, I’ve only looked low) for some of the Fed Champion ammo and still haven’t found none yet. I’m hopin’ for a gun show in town this weekend and I know I’ll find some there. Really want to try some. ‘Course, if you’re gonna be checking a batch for rim thickness, you could let us all know how they turn out, couldn’tcha?

What’s the latest on the Mk II gravity drop jig? I think everyone would be interested in hearing the latest.

I was thinking that once you decide on the ideal drop height, you could shorten the guides to that point or put a stop at that location and it should speed up the process somewhat, and make the drops very consistent. Maybe, a top piece that fits over the two vertical rods at the top held with setscrews, so it’s adjustable, and would act as a fixed reference point for the drop. I mean, there has to be a range in the drop that is most useful and you would slide the drop piece to the stop each time for the drop.

I’ve been thinking of building one of your Mk II jigs but incorporating some sort of triggering mechanism to release the drop weight. I’m thinking an on/off magnetic switch of some sort, similar to a magnetic base switch, which turns on and off, so you can set it up where ever. I wouldn’t trust myself to release the drop weight uniformly enough, especially after doing it a jillion times. (Does the light really go off in the frige?)

Or, another idea, I don’t know if you’ve ever seen the drill press vises that use a cam lever to close and lock. They do have interchangeable face jaws, which would make it easy to adapt to the Acu’rzr tool. Possibly even incorporate the top punch into one side of the jaws. And, of course, attach a dial indicator in there somewhere. Keep it accurate. I’m not sure they have enough levering force for the job, though. IIRC, Boeing Surplus had some large size cam vises last time I was there. Let you know what I come up with, if anything.

Comparative Test? I’ll give you comparative test!!! Actually, I don’t think there’d be much difference in accuracy between the three rim thicknesses. Just trying to eliminate the flat ends of the bell curve. The Dynamit Nobel Target ammo had a spread of one- thousandth, (.039-040) and it’s very accurate (and expensive) ammo. So, lumping the Dynapoint .038 and .039 together, I don’t think would be heresy. If some anomaly shows up there, good or bad, I’ll post it here first.

Let us know how the Mk II ‘s coming along will ya’?

Ciao
harley

Golden Eagle Fodder

Gewehr98 – you’re going to let us in on how the Golden Eagle fodder turns out, right? Haven’t had much luck with the blue boxes marked “Target”. Beginning to think that’s just a marketing scheme. Even my Martini’s don’t group well with the Golden Eagle Target, which is unusual. Do you think that’s pistol or rifle ammo? Be interesting to learn your results, if you care to share. You being somewhat responsible for this can of worms. (TIC)

I’m thinking rim fire ammo has improved over the years, compared to some of the stuff they used to put out as bulk, plinking ammo. You could usually count on half dozen or so duds per 100. Probably, they’ve incorporated computers in the manufacturing process, with neural nets, fuzzy logic, etc., because there does seem to be a definite improvement in quality, those Dynapoints being a good example. I wonder if there are any more sleepers out there? That would be an interesting thread. Cheap ammo that shoot great w/ targets.

Haven't ordered a barrel tuner yet, but it's on the list. Speaking of which, I saw a shooter at the range awhile ago with a couple of scope rings on the end of his barrel, with the scope base hanging from it and a brass weight that would slide fore and aft on the base. I asked what that was all about, and he said it was a barrel tuner. Judging from the targets he was shooting (as clandestinely spyed thru my spotting scope) I couldn't poke fun of how ugly his rifle was with that thing that looked like some sort bayonet wannabe. I think I'll try that someday.

harley

Shut up and shoot

NavyJoe - I like that motto; wish I had thought of that.

I didn't know they were still making Wildcat ammo. Haven't seen any of that around lately. Did you buy that recently? I'm curious how they might compare with the Dynapoint, also put out by Winchester. I'll have to put those on the list and keep an eye out for them.

What gun do you have the Marvel mounted on? How do you like it?

harley

harley,
I have the Marvel mounted on a stock Series 70 Mk IV. I absolutely love the Marvel unit. I'm building a lower for it, the SR70 is one I want to maintain stock and the trigger and ergonomics are not ideal for what I want to do.

I bought the Wildcat about a month ago, a brick for $12, I have 50 rounds left and need to buy more.

My motto, not original to me, just kind of popular if you get around enough range lawyer, whiny competition shooters.

Any updates?

Just wondering if anyone had any updates on this project. Is Paco Kelly still in business? I see that his web site is still working but that doesn't always mean anything. So is it worth the time and money to reform the bullets as suggested? Most of my .22 rimfire usage is for jackrabbit hunting. I'm mostly interested in feeding consistency. I use the Ruger 10/22 most often. Some of the economy ammo doesn't feed as well as one would hope. Stopping ability is also important. Sounds like the modified profile helps in that area.

Thanks in advance for any replies.

Paul