Sizing for tumble lube

I

Inthebeech

New Member
I have everything dialed in to get excellent accuracy and zero leading with my S&W Model 14. For grins I would like to try out some 45-45-10 tumble lube. Here's my dilemma. Throats measure .3570-.3578 (because all I have are zz minus pins so I can't provide more accurate data) and I've been sizing with a die that leaves my BHN 8 bullets (Lyman 358212) at .3580-.3582. With a groove of .356 this all gives 2 1/4 inch fifty yard Ransom rest groups. Now, isn't this system of dimensions just going to result in the tumble lube on the driving bands getting wiped off in the throat which is an interference fit? If true, and I don't want to open up the throats (I'd sooner leave well enough alone and not change anything), would going down in sized diameter be the first thing to do if I wanted to continue to explore tumble lube? It would be a thin line as I wouldn't want to go below throat diameter more than a couple of tenths I think. Thanks for the help.
 
J

Jeff H

NW Ohio
I've been using that very lube for twelve or thirteen years now - so thin that I have to SMELL bullets to see if they've been lubed.

I do not think that it "rubs off" quite as easily as what seems intuitive, based on our long experiences with traditional lubes. It is some tenacious stuff and will survive the trip down the bore just fine. I've found a lot (most) of my bullets in my back stop after years of lying in the weather with no oxidation on them at all. They seem to still be fully coated, even after the traumatic ride through the throats and forcing cone, only to be further abused by getting squished in the bore. I'm shooting air-cooled wheel weights to 1840 fps, with this lube and an aluminum gas check with NO leading and excellent accuracy in .224", .308" and .358" rifles. In revolvers, and not necessarily with perfect dimensions, to probably 1200 fps with NO leading and excellent accuracy.

Regardless of what seems to make sense, I'd just try some and see.

I'm not saying it's a panacea of bullet lube or cure-all for leading, but I think it's pretty versatile and much better than most of us would allow ourselves to believe, based on what we think makes sense. I do still shoot some ole, greasy NRA formula in my 44 Special, just because I LIKE the smoke and the mess on a single-action.

I also do not believe that the lube grooves need to be filled with this stuff. I don't think it "flows" at ALL. FIlling lube grooves with it wastes time and lube. Only the surface contacting the bore really seems to matter. I shoot a lot of bullets with wide and deep traditional lube grooves and none of the lube ever makes it down into the grooves, but they still shoot very accurately and without leading.
 
bruce381

bruce381

Active Member
I do not use it so probably wrong on this but, I would think the thin film will rub off on the bore grove and forcing cone.
It is a interference fit and the lube will give before the alloy will, anyway the lube like most lubes will season and coat the bore so each shot will replenish what get scuffed off that is all you need at low speed with a correct sized bullet I think? so someone school me Ian?
 
M

MW65

Wetside, Oregon
That combo, as well as what your planned sizing should be just fine... .358 or .359 should be just fine with a softer alloy. I wouldn't change a thing in your process if you're getting the results ya need. I still use tumble lube, because it's easy to use. And when dry works great!!! Pistol/rifle/etc... enjoy!!
 
JonB

JonB

Halcyon member
bruce381 said:
I do not use it so probably wrong on this but, I would think the thin film will rub off on the bore grove and forcing cone.
It is a interference fit and the lube will give before the alloy will, anyway the lube like most lubes will season and coat the bore so each shot will replenish what get scuffed off that is all you need at low speed with a correct sized bullet I think? so someone school me Ian?
Click to expand...
I agree with Bruce, not that he is probably wrong, LOL
BUT, each shot lubes the bore for the next shot.
 
fiver

fiver

Well-Known Member
here's the story.
45-45 lube was initially a lube meant to fill the lube grooves, only it had a bunch of beeswax in the mix.
i was using it to swirl into the lube grooves by melting it and putting it in a cup then swirling the bullets around to fill the grooves on a traditional lube groove bullet.
once they were full and everything cooled down the lube went about rock hard, but still worked like nobody's business.
all that so i could save 35$ on a new size die and avoid squeezing a bullet down .001 or so.

about that Time JD and i got to talking in the Boolits chat room and he explained the problems he was having trying to work with JPW and Alox.

simple simple solution and i gave him the basic recipe i was using and we bantered back and forth in some PM's till we got the basic routine and recipe down pat. [only without the B-wax, which i still add to mine]
he made a Batch [his first] and took pictures and explained the whole process we worked out and 45-45-10 was born.

what it does is basically work like a floor polish like you'd see in a store.
it completely covers the entire bullet then dries like a hard shell.
when you fire the bullet the 'lube' isn't really a lube it acts like a barrier between the bullet and the barrel and heat or friction-heat will make the lube slightly melt and become even more efficient. [you know like in the corners]
by the time it can transfer any real amount of wax or alox to the barrel the bullets gone and you've just shined up [buffed] a coat of polish.
 
J

Jeff H

NW Ohio
fiver said:
here's the story...
Click to expand...

I don't believe I ever got the full story, but came along after the name "45/45/10" was established. I had been secretly using LEE's little bottles "neat," no dilution, pollution, alchemy or cooking, for years, but it was messy and it could take a very long time to ALMOST dry. It worked well as far as shooting went, but was a pain, nastying ammo boxes, collecting fuzz and dust, etc.

Never fully understood the mechanics of how it did what it did, but the results were better than perfect. All I wanted was to take care of the tacky problem, and more quickly. Now, the little bottles last forever, bullets are dry (and dry very quickly) and I think it even works better than full-strength. I also get a kick out of having to convince someone to "just shoot them, I swear they're lubed!"

As far as sizing is concerned, I've been able to shoot groove-diameter bullets, all the way up to .004" OVER-groove, in rifles, with no leading, and such minor accuracy differences that they are likely differences I would see using the same diameter across several groups. In revolvers, I've stuck to minding the throat and shooting JUST under throat diameter (-.0005") to just over (+.001") with no noticeable distinction. BUT, with my revolvers, it that there is more "individual personality" at play than anything I've decided to attribute to my own personal intellectual prowess.

So, like @Bret4207 said, "You're never going to know unless you try it."

My approach to this is not nearly as scientific as many here apply and is not meant to be a manifestation of some Supremely Higher Intellectual Thought. Being too scientific about it (at least to some point) is too much like "work." I work to pay my bills and do this to have fun, so take MY contributions with a grain of salt and don't ask me to "prove it.";)
 
Ian

Ian

Notorious member
.001" of polymer paint doesn't seem like much of a "lube", either, but it holds out through 26" of barrel at 3100 fps and a quarter million rpm with ordinary wheelwight metal. We'd never know it worked if somebody hadn't tried it.
 
P

Petrol & Powder

Well-Known Member
Hello

Welcome!

Going all the way back to the first post, I must say that when I read Throat and Barrel dimensions expressed to the fourth decimal; I get a little doubtful of the usefulness of those numbers. I’ll give you .3570” verses .3575” but when we start talking about .3580” verses .3582” , my eyes start to glaze over a bit. I’m not saying anything is wrong, but that amount of precision may be getting over the top. YMMV, nothing I’m saying is Holy Writ.

As handloaders and bullet casters, we tend to seek out the finest details in our hobby, maybe to varying degrees of pragmatism.

I’m not convinced the bullet lube on the outside of the driving band is as critical as the lube in the lube groove is, even in tumble lube applications. Can’t prove that statement but it seems the totality of the lubed surface may be the critical factor. I also think the bullet lube deposited in the bore is more important than the lube on any given bullet. Externally lubed bullets like a heeled .22 rimfire bullet come to mind. It’s the condition of the bore that’s really important. The bullet is essentially lubricating the bore for the NEXT bullet.

In any event, results matter. If you’re getting good results, then all is well.
 
I

Inthebeech

New Member
Petrol & Powder said:
Hello

Welcome!

Going all the way back to the first post, I must say that when I read Throat and Barrel dimensions expressed to the fourth decimal; I get a little doubtful of the usefulness of those numbers. I’ll give you .3570” verses .3575” but when we start talking about .3580” verses .3582” , my eyes start to glaze over a bit. I’m not saying anything is wrong, but that amount of precision may be getting over the top.
Click to expand...
Mechanical Engineers can’t help it. I wish I could turn it off.
 
J

Jeff H

NW Ohio
Inthebeech said:
Mechanical Engineers can’t help it. I wish I could turn it off.
Click to expand...

Now, don't go and spoil it. ;)

Half the entertainment in this is hearing out the various hypotheses and comparing them to our own, marrying what makes sense about someone else's hypothesis with the more believable parts of our own, and eventually just shooting and figuring out that all the figuring out was an academic exercise in tail-chasing. A fair bit of my exercise (walking back and forth tot he target) is invested in this method and I need all the exercise I can get.

If someone figures it all out, many of us will be stuck finding something else to postulate about.:p
 
Ian

Ian

Notorious member
I can't turn it off either. I've been educated and employed as both an engineer and mechanic. Something in the DNA and it spills over into every endeavor, together with an insatiable compulsion to tinker. My only regrets are not having spent a year as a residential electrician's helper and not having ever really had a great knack for the equations of inorganic chemistry. But, in those times I need that sort of experience and knowledge, there's the "phone a friend" option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.