Gas check testing

[L Ross]

Reading the gas check swap post in buy, sell, trade, got me thinking about checks. Have any of you done head to head tests of Hornady's crimp on checks compared to Gator checks, or home made aluminum checks, or the old Lyman slip ons for that matter?

Then I see Gator offers tall or short checks. The comment was made that the tall checks are for rifles. What about you guys that only lube the space in front of the check? Tall or short?

A few years ago I thought I had a life time supply of .30 cal checks. Looks like I'll need to be ordering sooner than I thought. 35 bucks a thousand just annoys me. Heck, they are not nearly as complex as primers Hornady.

 

[Rick H]

I have Hornady and gator aluminum checks in 44 cal. I use them interchangably on a NOE 235g FP bullet. The aluminum checks are lighter but I don't see any difference at all shooting them out of a 22" rifle bbl. I powder coat and then apply the checks via Lee push through sizer opened to .431"
I use these as practice fodder at 1670 fps. I use them interchangably and they all go into the same 2 1/2" +/- group at 100 yds.
I like the copper Hornady's better but I can't see paying twice as much for them.
I am using copper Gators on the 7mm Soup Cans in my 7x30 waters but don't have others to compare with. They seem to work fine for my purposes.

 

[CWLONGSHOT]

I have bought and used Aluminum. I have read the neg comments and the praises.

I only have them in 30 as a friend I know requests alum checks on the bullets I make for him. He sends me target with small groups and he is nothing but pleased. I do like the tall 303 Saves for my fat 30's. But cannot say I ever see a accuracy difference.

Last night I found a bunch of tiny and med size holes in my target @ 50 yards. Tommy suspects the gas checks. Its possible but I only fired two bullets with a GC last night. Guess it is enough...
Another friend said Hornady warned against re sizing there jacketed pistol bullets then firing them at rifle velocities. Bullet was a 180 XTP @ 2200 fps. Designed to be OK @ 1850+ as per papers in that box of bullets. So who knows.

I prefer Gator Checks if I have a choice. But truth told probably have used as many Hornady and Fewer Lymans.
CW

 

[Spindrift]

I have done side-to-side comparison of .30 cal Hornady vs home-made aluminium, and 6,5 cal Sage's Copper vs home-made aluminium. I found no difference in accuracy potential. Size/crimping the aluminum checks requires noticably less force.

I have found, however, that home-made alu checks cling better than Sage's alu. My .30-cal Sage's alu checks sometimes fell off when powder coating. I think the little wrinkles and burrs om my home-made checks actually helps with grip.

 

[S Mac]

Haven't tested it myself, for one thing I don't have a crony, but a past discussion here some stated that aluminum checks would have a slightly higher velocity than copper with the same load. Less resistance in the bore.

 

[RBHarter]

Having used , oh , 8-900 checks in 13 years of this madness I can say I shucked more aluminum than copper checks . I've recovered copper checks , all Hornady mesh reenforced corner boxes to 2016 made , in steel backed traps and found a few 35 cal aluminum close enough to the bench have been Chrony terminal . I think the aluminum stay stuck better when they are seated and sized base first . I had some that weren't from Sage's and I think those were probably the ones that were troublesome . I have about an equal number of Al vs Cu on the shelf . In 27,28,&30 for hunting grade sub MOA desires I don't really see any difference . If I had known how much easier it made shooting groups to have checked bullets I'd have probably spent the money for them 8-9 years sooner . Then I wouldn't have had to learn about alloys , powder curves , bearing length vs surface , and paper patch , all of which made me a better shooter .

Side by side I haven't but there were a few write ups over there where it was done and I believe presented facts alone . The results were a dead heat 50/50 of better groups with one or the other and velocity gains with one or the other . Early on during my discovery of copper wash fueling lead fouling I asked "if we have to get the copper all out the reduce or prevent leading why don't copper gas checks cause a problem ?" . Most of the answers related to soldering in my mechanics mind and were reasonable to me . So when the Al O2 questions were posed , relative to GC use I applied the same thinking , disregarding the grinding wheel argument with if the bore is wiped down it ain't growing enough oxides to matter .

The only way to really evaluate differences would of course be to shoot them alternately into 2 targets over a chronograph in large groups of 10-20 , 1 Cu , 1 Al to prevent the different gun/day changes in a short term test or 1000 of ea alternately early and late 10 each for 50 days in a long test there by negating atmosphere and hot/cold barrel in the test .

" It matters when it does " , "try stuff , run/shoot/drive/fly it and see what happens" , perhaps the 2 most accurate statements ever made not only in arms but probably life .

 

[Tomme boy]

I had a 308win that was a shilen select match barrel. I would the Hornady checks gave me about 1/4" better groups. The aluminum checks I had for this and still do were made by a guy here in Iowa. I traded a bunch of brass for about 10K of them. I loaded with what ever one I happened to grab off the shelf when sizing. When I really turned up the velocity 2400+ aluminum were not used at all. The groups would go from 2" to 12"+.

My Mosin does not care one bit. It is the same. I tried to use some Gator aluminum for my 350 Legend but I could not get them to go on straight. Tried base first and nose first. Then when they were straight they would fall off when powder coating them. Hornady and Gator copper I do not see any difference other than price. And they both stay on and check no problem.

Pretty sure it just depends on your shank diameter and the quality of your barrel that will show a difference.

 

[Ian]

I have done side-to-side comparison of .30 cal Hornady vs home-made aluminium, and 6,5 cal Sage's Copper vs home-made aluminium. I found no difference in accuracy potential. Size/crimping the aluminum checks requires noticably less force.

I have done exactly this in 30-caliber with powder-coated bullets and found no difference in performance from 2,200-2,450 fps. I still prefer Hornady but in reality Amerimax cups cut and formed in one shot did just as well.

 

[S Mac]

On the subject of checks, I guess Josh, the member here that sold checks has dropped off the horizon. I did some trading with him a few years ago, ended up with several k different denominations, decent aluminum checks. Whatever happened to Josh?

 

[shuz]

Bending this thread a wee bit...have any of you found that you can shoot powder coated boolits as accurately without the gas check?

 

[waco]

Bending this thread a wee bit...have any of you found that you can shoot powder coated boolits as accurately without the gas check?

My only experience doing this was with a 165gr RD bullet in my Savage 340 30-30 using small charges of Redot. Shot very well.
These were subsonic of coarse.

 

[Mitty38]

Bending this thread a wee bit...have any of you found that you can shoot powder coated boolits as accurately without the gas check?

^^^^^^^ Same here mid weight 30 caliber, light charge, red dot, subsonic.

 

[Kevin Stenberg]

Mr. Ross I had the same problem. My first 30cal. GC maker made what i thought would be a life time supply of checks. Since i had a life time supply why should i not sell my checkmaker and use the money for other important things. Well i now have a second checkmaker and i need to order another roll of aluminum. Which will be my third just for 30 cal bullets.

 

[L Ross]

I guess my biggest concern is that Hornady checks crimp on and I'm not sure if any others do.I believe Hornady has a small "burr" for lack of a better term, to lock them onto the shank. They are a known factor to me, I trust them, but hate the cost. It's not even that they are not affordable. It just strikes me as a little ridiculous to charge 3.5 cents per piece.

 

[462]

Gator/Sage checks do not crimp on, and if a bullet needs to be pulled may times the check and the powder remain in the case.
My innate frugalness caused me to buy some Sage checks, but when they are gone I'll be going back to Hornady. Some brands of things just perform better than other brands and are, therefore, better values.

 

[Mitty38]

How about thicknesses on those far out there, sub MOA loads?
Is the thickness difference on different types,brands; of checks, enough to require powder, or oal adjustment?

 

[Mitty38]

Also, if I were to make my own gas checks or half jackets. Say for a custom bullet. How would I figure out minimum, and maximum thickness???
Or would that even be necessary??
Sorry for the questions, I know the don't fit the conversation well, but....you guys just got my brain spinnin'.

 

[fiver]

you have different thicknesses of material for the different diameter bullets.
off the top of my head a 30 cal shank is 284 diameter.
to get a check to touch the sides of a 310 size die [never mind a 313 or 316] and the shank
the check has to be .0013 thick, to get some squish on the shank it has to be .0014
which just happens to be the average thickness of most 30 cal checks.

to touch a size die any larger the shank has to be some larger to hold the check out further to get the squish.
then the issue becomes one of flair or crimp ring etc.

 

[Spindrift]

@Mitty38 , maybe this chart is helpful


@shuz ;I have some very limited experience with checkless PC bullets in the 30-06 and .223. I have not yet explored the full spectrum of loads. But I have found excellent accuracy with loads similar to accuracy loads with gas checked bullets with regular lube. But I have only tried checkless PC with bullets that retain a good bearing surface even without the check.

 

[Mitty38]

@Mitty38 , maybe this chart is helpful
View attachment 17020

@shuz ;I have some very limited experience with checkless PC bullets in the 30-06 and .223. I have not yet explored the full spectrum of loads. But I have found excellent accuracy with loads similar to accuracy loads with gas checked bullets with regular lube. But I have only tried checkless PC with bullets that retain a good bearing surface even without the check.

Yep, that puts things into perspective. Betcha there has to be a formula to plug the #s into, of course it would not be hard to come up with one using the chart. Definitely printing it out.