Page 2 of 2
Posted: Mon Sep 12, 2011 7:00 am
by David Levene
MFR wrote:In which aspects "must" the rapid fire be harder with a revolver? With right technic I even think it might be easier, but again it might be very individual.
The main problem is that you have to either use a double action trigger or disturb your stance/grip between shots.
My question would be why semi-auto precision scores should be worse than those with a revolver. I certainly never found using a semi-auto to be detrimental to my scores.
MFR wrote:I also find it good for the shooting development not to have "hundreds" of adjusting possibillities, for instance, changing the trigger position and so on...
You will very rarely see top shooters playing with the available adjustments. Once they are set you leave them alone.
Posted: Mon Sep 12, 2011 7:30 am
by MFR
mika wrote:MFR wrote:
Maybee managing the recoil is easier with the .32?
//MFR
It's lower, although I guess it is more significant in sports like the CISM rapid fire, where you fire multiple shots in a row. Actually, recoil is one thing I've been wondering about in .32. It's a really low power round, and firing it from a revolver, it doesn't feel much different from a .22. But in autos the difference is quite noticeable. I wonder if it is the lighter (than the whole gun) mass of the slide accelerated to a significant speed and then suddenly stopped by the frame somehow feeling different from the whole gun recoiling together during the whole process. Or like a shotgun fired fired with its butt an inch forward of your shoulder hurting while held against the shoulder it doesn't feel like much, although the total amount of moving masses is the same.
Mika
Mike, in CISM Rapid and ISSF Standard pistol as well, there is of cource another aspect of recoil. What is important for me, as a CF shooter is the presicion per each single shot.
I think you are right about the theory slide in the autos. Using stronger springs (both recoil and hammer spring), might be advisable.
Another ascpet is the barrel lenght. Some says you have to put in more powder in a reovlver with 6" barrel, for instance 1,5gr, but I'm not sure about that. I will do some tests comparing Vo between my Pardini HP and Manurhin.
//MFR
Posted: Mon Sep 12, 2011 1:23 pm
by MFR
Tonights rapid fire practise, 22 rounds, and 11 of them inner tens.
Posted: Mon Sep 12, 2011 1:27 pm
by A74BEDLM
A club member reloads for me - and he uses about 1.3gr for his Pardini (I use same loads in my MG4) and we both have Manurhin MR32s - he loads higher 1.4+ for these.
Because you don't have to use some energy to rack the slide and load the next round you'd think you'd use less powder and considering some people have tested MG4 down to 1gr why not the same in a revolver?
Posted: Mon Sep 12, 2011 2:16 pm
by mika
MFR wrote:Tonights rapid fire practise, 22 rounds, and 11 of them inner tens.
There is no revolver or pistol that would give that kind of results in my hands. I'm working on it, but it's a long way to go before I'm even close.
Mika
Posted: Mon Sep 12, 2011 2:19 pm
by MFR
A74BEDLM wrote:A club member reloads for me - and he uses about 1.3gr for his Pardini (I use same loads in my MG4) and we both have Manurhin MR32s - he loads higher 1.4+ for these.
Because you don't have to use some energy to rack the slide and load the next round you'd think you'd use less powder and considering some people have tested MG4 down to 1gr why not the same in a revolver?
I don't know, but I will test both stronger (1,5gr) and weaker (down to 1,0gr), and measure in both cronograph and ransom rest.
The problem is when going down to as weak as 1,0gr its starting to become very sensitive regarding accuracy, especially when using an "automatic" press like I do.
A guy on last weekend competion, also Manurhin 32wc shooter told me that "-because it has longer barrel it needs more powder, so I put in 1,5gr".
I don't know if that is a common conception among pistol shooters?
If the sun shows up this weekend I will test some different loads in the cronograph. I think about 200m/s will be a good guideline.
//MFR
Posted: Tue Sep 13, 2011 3:49 am
by David M
After lots of testing and developing over many years, the best repeatable precision group has been from a .38 Manurhin Match revolver, which from a machine rest will shoot a 10 shot group into a 19mm hole. That is just two bullet diameters big.
Over a 100 round group the hole grew to just 22mm.
The .32 will just not do it. The best may match it for 10 rounds but in 100 rounds the .32 will throw a flyer 40-50mm out of the group.
The closest auto to the revolver was the Hammerli P240 (.38 special), again the heavier, bigger bullet with a thicker case.
The duelling problem with the revolver is both the single action and the high barrel line. You have to cock, reset and regrip ever shot.
Posted: Tue Sep 13, 2011 4:19 am
by David Levene
David M wrote:The .32 will just not do it. The best may match it for 10 rounds but in 100 rounds the .32 will throw a flyer 40-50mm out of the group.
I'm sorry David but I cannot agree.
I will admit that I wasn't using a machine rest but I can assure you that, back in the days when I was shooting well and averaging about 10k rounds of .32 a year, if I had a shot that far from where I called it they would have put me on suicide watch.
50mm out is 2 rings for goodness sake. If a top shooter (who has the ability to call shots) cannot call his shots to within half a ring then he needs to be looking at his equipment.
Posted: Tue Sep 13, 2011 5:49 am
by David M
Hi Dave
The .32 will throw a flyer mainly due to case neck release tension, the wall thickness is thinner than the .38 case and will work harden sooner.
To help eliminate this in competition either use new cases, reload once fired only, shoot factory rounds or neck anneal for each reload.
.32 cases do not last as long (less reloads) and are prone to neck splitting sooner than thicker cases.
Not only have we been reloading the .32 for a long time but when you shoot it at 50yds in our unrestricted service match we use a lot of ammo and reload often.
The 50yd match really push's the round to its limits.
Posted: Tue Sep 13, 2011 6:34 am
by David Levene
David M wrote:Hi Dave
The .32 will throw a flyer mainly due to case neck release tension, the wall thickness is thinner than the .38 case and will work harden sooner.
........
Not only have we been reloading the .32 for a long time but when you shoot it at 50yds in our unrestricted service match we use a lot of ammo and reload often.
The 50yd match really push's the round to its limits.
I would agree that this can be a problem but I overcame it by using a roll crimp, certainly never using taper. Using Geco cases I could easily get over 5 reloads before any splitting started.
I reloaded in batches of 1000 (less lost/squashed cases) and had 5 sets of cases which I used consecutively.
I never used them at anything over 25m. I know that they reached that far without tumbling but might have been dancing all over the place after that.
I still maintain that, for the ISSF CF match, a decent .32 gun/ammunition combination easily has all the accuracy you need. It's only the shooter's lack of ability/performance that prevents 300/30X in the precision stage.
Posted: Tue Sep 13, 2011 11:39 pm
by MFR
David M wrote:Hi Dave
The .32 will throw a flyer mainly due to case neck release tension, the wall thickness is thinner than the .38 case and will work harden sooner.
To help eliminate this in competition either use new cases, reload once fired only, shoot factory rounds or neck anneal for each reload.
.32 cases do not last as long (less reloads) and are prone to neck splitting sooner than thicker cases.
Not only have we been reloading the .32 for a long time but when you shoot it at 50yds in our unrestricted service match we use a lot of ammo and reload often.
The 50yd match really push's the round to its limits.
I'm happy just hanging around at 25m, and I very seldom find any splitted case.
Does anyone know about reconndition the (empty) cases in the owen for a specific time and temperature? Will that make them soften again, perhaps like new ones? After some googling it looks lile tha brass need about 425-650*C for a "longer time", and then slow cool down.
Another tips was to put them on a baking sheet, half of the case under water, and burn with a butan burner until the case get a specific temperature (color), I guess about 425-650.
//MFR
Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2011 2:17 am
by mika
MFR wrote:
Does anyone know about reconndition the (empty) cases in the owen for a specific time and temperature? Will that make them soften again, perhaps like new ones? After some googling it looks lile tha brass need about 425-650*C for a "longer time", and then slow cool down.
Another tips was to put them on a baking sheet, half of the case under water, and burn with a butan burner until the case get a specific temperature (color), I guess about 425-650.
//MFR
I've never done it with pistol cases, but have neck annealed some rifle cases. Never in the oven, as that would also affect the head area of the case. The water method works, and I have heated them until they first turn bluish and then the few millimeters around the mouth get grey. You get all kinds of interesting colors but that's the main scheme. It doesn't seem to be extremely sensitive, cases with the blue color only work just as well as those that have the grey extend all the way to the shoulder. I guess in a straight-walled pistol case it would be even less sensitive, as a split case is so much less trouble.
I have to admit that I can't honestly say annealing has done a great deal to my cases. They last pretty long anyway, and the more important aspect is trimming the length. You do notice it when trimming, though. At some point after a number of reloads, turning the manual trimmer feels a bit rough. Cases that have been annealed a couple of times during their life feel much smoother. Maybe it has something to do with the crystal structure starting to change and cause small fractures that make it rough. At some point that could cause the neck to crack visibly.
Mika
Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2011 11:14 am
by MFR
Did some velocity tests tonight, and here are the results.
1) Fiocchi 313 bullet, fiocchi ledless primer, VVN310 1,35gr and very much different label on the brass (speed in m/s):
220 Lapua
215 Lapua
222 Lapua
216 Lapua
216 Lapua
223 Fiocchi
213 Fiocchi
211 Fiocchi
215 Fiocchi
213 Fiocchi
215 Old Norma
219 Old Norma
220 Old Norma
211 Magtech
211 Old Lapua
215 Old Lapua
221 Old Lapua
2) Factory made Norma:
235
240
235
(just wanted to offer three of them just to confirm they are a little speedier)
Now the Next test will be to beat this using HN314 100gr greased bullet, cci primer, and only once shot Lapua brass.
//MFR
Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2011 9:04 pm
by kankn
David M wrote:I have shot both the Manurhin .32 and the .38 side by side for a number of years and the .38 is the better cartridge. It is easier to load for than the .32 and is more fogiving to load variations. Every now and then the .32 will throw a flyer 40 to 50 mm out of the group.
I have also shot a number of auto's against the revolvers and while the techniques vary slightly, the total scores did not, only a couple of points in it.
Generally the precision score from the revolver will be a few points higher than the auto, but the rapidfire scores from the auto are easier to shoot a higher score.
You need to train a lot more to get the revolver rapidfire scores up to the auto scores.
Having said that, there is little you can do to bring the auto's precision scores up to the revolvers score.
coach factory outlet|
coach outlet|
Coach handBags|
Coach Bags|
cheap coach purses
The revolver will win if the rapidfire is highly trained and the auto is always trying to catch up in rapidfire.
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2011 2:12 am
by MFR
First test with following cartridge:
Lapua brass
cci primer
HN314 100gr greased bullet
VVN310 1,1gr
In chronograph (m/s):
201
204
203
Looks quite accurate, but needs to be tested in large scale of cource.
//MFR
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 1:08 am
by MFR
Hi,
I was asking the Dillon company about the dimension of the Square Deal powder funnel (for 32WC) and got following answer:
".....Our powder funnels are .312” in diameter. For the wadcutter bullets you would need the “SW” powder funnel, but as I said it is for .312” diameter.
For the 32 caliber, the nominal diameter is typically .312”, I’m not familiar with a weapon that utilizes a .314” bore, by US standards, that’s a little oversized. Unfortunately, we do not over a funnel in .314”......"
Unfortuntely they don't have any alternative for the .313/.314, that is common in Europe. I will buy a bullet hammer and check how much my loads are affected by using thier .312 original funnels.
In another thread in this forum, a guy says there should be a "Lee .002 oversized" tools available. Does anybody know more about that?
If I buy that tool set, I can simply use a Lee single press preparing the brass for 314 (sizing, and expand), and after that use my Square Deal as usual for the rest of the moments.
//MFR
undersized 32WC bullets when seated
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 2:03 pm
by MFR
Hello,
Recently I did some tests regarding the dimensions of my 32 reloads. I used a bullet hammer to investigate what exact size my HN314 really becomes after seated.
I use a Dillon SD and have two different case resizing tools. One original and one oversized (that I made from an orginal by using abrasive compound).
The results was really an eye opener, and must be a concern for Dillon users that are reloding rounds in the upper size scope, for instance 313-314.
The bullets were slinged out from Lapua brass.
1) With the original resize tool the slinged bullet was about 7,91, that is about 310-311 if I'm not wrong.
2) With my oversize tool I get about 7,95 wich is about 313 and just still a little undersize for my Manurhin that is said to need about 314.
//MFR