so waht ya doin today?
- Thread starter fiver
- Start date
Pistolero
Well-Known Member
I found that moving pix from my PC to an iPad was a real pain, and email is
WAY too limited to drop off 100 or 200 high res photos for a Russian friend.
Apple's approach is my way or the highway.
EVENTUALLY figured out that if I would make a subdirectory that looked
exactly like a camera subdirectory on the SD card, I could fool the iPad into
grabbing the pix and putting them exactly where IT wanted to.
Screw you if you have them in a different kind of subdir or if you have the
bizarre notion of wanting to move files from a location and to a location of
YOUR OWN choosing.
Not only "NO!", but "Not a chance in hell, you are far too stiupid to be
trusted with such complex tasks as moving files, you moron."
Of course the SD card connection required a separate bulky adaptor
to be plugged into the iPad.
Did I say I didn't like Apple's approach?
If you are doing a task that Apple wants you to be able to do, and doing it
in the WAY Apple wants you to do it, things are very nice, easy, and automatic.
Just don't try do something that is not allowed or 'unusual'. And guess who defines
normal and unusual? Wonderful systems if you are comfortable with that
approach.
I mean what kind of a weirdo MAKES their own bullets out of old wheelweights?
Probably has all sort of other strange ideas, like moving his own files!
WAY too limited to drop off 100 or 200 high res photos for a Russian friend.
Apple's approach is my way or the highway.
EVENTUALLY figured out that if I would make a subdirectory that looked
exactly like a camera subdirectory on the SD card, I could fool the iPad into
grabbing the pix and putting them exactly where IT wanted to.
Screw you if you have them in a different kind of subdir or if you have the
bizarre notion of wanting to move files from a location and to a location of
YOUR OWN choosing.
Not only "NO!", but "Not a chance in hell, you are far too stiupid to be
trusted with such complex tasks as moving files, you moron."
Of course the SD card connection required a separate bulky adaptor
to be plugged into the iPad.
Did I say I didn't like Apple's approach?
If you are doing a task that Apple wants you to be able to do, and doing it
in the WAY Apple wants you to do it, things are very nice, easy, and automatic.
Just don't try do something that is not allowed or 'unusual'. And guess who defines
normal and unusual? Wonderful systems if you are comfortable with that
approach.
I mean what kind of a weirdo MAKES their own bullets out of old wheelweights?
Probably has all sort of other strange ideas, like moving his own files!
Last edited:
smokeywolf
Well-Known Member
First time I wanted to transfer a jpeg from the computer (Windows PC) to my iPhone and Apple wanted me to send it through iTunes, I was left with a bad taste in my mouth regarding Apple. I don't utilize "cloud storage" to store or route any of my data.
We use iPhones and iPads, but I sure do miss my Blackberry Torch.
We use iPhones and iPads, but I sure do miss my Blackberry Torch.
462
California's Central Coast Amid The Insanity
Funny!!
I'd be happy with sub-MOA at 50-yards.
A few months ago, the local gun store had a one-pound container of H414 and I came very close to buying it specifically for the Swede and the Chileno. If it's still there, I buy it.
About two years ago, cast bullet accuracy really went South. I noticed the crown had a small nick, so did the round headed brass screw and lapping compound shade tree gunsmithing trick . . . no more nick.
I'd be happy with sub-MOA at 50-yards.
A few months ago, the local gun store had a one-pound container of H414 and I came very close to buying it specifically for the Swede and the Chileno. If it's still there, I buy it.
About two years ago, cast bullet accuracy really went South. I noticed the crown had a small nick, so did the round headed brass screw and lapping compound shade tree gunsmithing trick . . . no more nick.
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Relodr 22 has been the ticket for me in the 6.5x55 with 140's. But that's with a Mauser 98 actioned job, not a Swede. Had been using 4320 IIRC but the R22 boosted speeds, accuracy and cut felt recoil- the only time I've seen that happen.
Gray morn here. Oldest boy got home yesterday from 3 weeks outta town. Younger kids have day off before finals. Hope to get a little bit done on fence. My 20ish year old Stihl weed whacker decided to have the string head unattach itself from the rest of the machine. Not even going to try to mess with it, too much else to do so it'll get dropped at the dealers.
Still looking at rain over the next week. Getting very concerning feed wise.
Tried the aspirin for the knee. Not sure, but it might be working. Had very little pain last evening and early in the night. Started waking up about 1AM with it. 4 or 5 more days should give me an idea if it works. 2 cheap little aspirin seemed to do more than 2 big, relatively expensive Naproxin. I can hope! As someone mentioned, the aspirin is definitely harder on the stomach though.
Gray morn here. Oldest boy got home yesterday from 3 weeks outta town. Younger kids have day off before finals. Hope to get a little bit done on fence. My 20ish year old Stihl weed whacker decided to have the string head unattach itself from the rest of the machine. Not even going to try to mess with it, too much else to do so it'll get dropped at the dealers.
Still looking at rain over the next week. Getting very concerning feed wise.
Tried the aspirin for the knee. Not sure, but it might be working. Had very little pain last evening and early in the night. Started waking up about 1AM with it. 4 or 5 more days should give me an idea if it works. 2 cheap little aspirin seemed to do more than 2 big, relatively expensive Naproxin. I can hope! As someone mentioned, the aspirin is definitely harder on the stomach though.
Already got a bunched sized .451+. They will likely have to wait to be fired, have lots to get done before I head out of town Thursday.
Will be looking at a lighter charge of TG. Looking at some data it seems I had better groups with 4.2 gr of Red Dot than with slightly more. Will try 4.5 gr of TG instead of 4.8 to see what happens.
Will be looking at a lighter charge of TG. Looking at some data it seems I had better groups with 4.2 gr of Red Dot than with slightly more. Will try 4.5 gr of TG instead of 4.8 to see what happens.
Pistolero
Well-Known Member
I've tried .451 and 452 several times, checking to see if there was any accy gain to be had.
I couldn't see any, and it seemed like .452 was probably a touch better, but unless you shot
100 rd groups from a Ransom Rest several times, I think the difference it so small as to make
it almost impossible to reliably detect.
Multiple .45 ACP bbls over the years have slugged at .4515, amazingly repeatable. So, seems that
.451 or .452 is within .0005 of the groove diam, so "close enough".
I never used 4.5TG, but I THINK that 4.2 under a 452460 shoots a bit better than the 4.8TG under
a commercial or self-cast H&G 68, clones or actually from H&G molds. I like to imagine that my
own real H&G 68s are better.....but that might just be pretty hard to prove. May be true, but may
just be a conceit.
I imagine that the gun mag five 5-shot groups" is likely a good test, but I have never gotten that
precise and official. Usually a couple of 10 shot rested groups and look at them.
Bill
I couldn't see any, and it seemed like .452 was probably a touch better, but unless you shot
100 rd groups from a Ransom Rest several times, I think the difference it so small as to make
it almost impossible to reliably detect.
Multiple .45 ACP bbls over the years have slugged at .4515, amazingly repeatable. So, seems that
.451 or .452 is within .0005 of the groove diam, so "close enough".
I never used 4.5TG, but I THINK that 4.2 under a 452460 shoots a bit better than the 4.8TG under
a commercial or self-cast H&G 68, clones or actually from H&G molds. I like to imagine that my
own real H&G 68s are better.....but that might just be pretty hard to prove. May be true, but may
just be a conceit.
I imagine that the gun mag five 5-shot groups" is likely a good test, but I have never gotten that
precise and official. Usually a couple of 10 shot rested groups and look at them.
Bill
Last edited:
Ian
Notorious member
Good to know, Bill. These are powder-coated and Brad has been sorting out what difference (if any) the size makes for the coated ones, particularly with regard to leading due to throat shaving from tighter than normal throats. So far it looks like we've both ended up seeing not a lot of difference in groups but maybe a little better at .451+ a few tenths and we're definitely seeing the leading go away and a lot more "fits all" functionality from the smaller size.
The coating allows you to go ever so slightly under normal sized and not get leading.
Big question Ian is this, does the same hold true for revolvers? Can I go .001 under in a revolver and not get leading? That is something I intend to test. I would rather go under than over with PC as over just means the coating is getting scraped off.
Big question Ian is this, does the same hold true for revolvers? Can I go .001 under in a revolver and not get leading? That is something I intend to test. I would rather go under than over with PC as over just means the coating is getting scraped off.
Ian
Notorious member
The bullet still needs to seal as well as it can, that means the same snug push-through fit in the cylinder, otherwise you get gas cutting. You can't get away with going smaller than groove diameter even by a smidgen with the coated bullets either. I'd wager that a revolver can actually tolerate LARGER than normal bullets when coated, with no ill effects. I wouldn't be afraid to go a thousandth fat at all and try it, who knows, it might work even better unless the cylinder throats are rough as a cob.
Going .451" in a pistol with a bang-on SAAMI-spec .452" throat entrance reduces the chances of the bullet getting its coating peeled off as it goes in. If the chamber transition to throat is razor sharp (typically is because there's no chamfer angle called for) it can peel lead or copper too and cause lumpy deposits of bullet or jacket material to be smeared down the bore.
Going .451" in a pistol with a bang-on SAAMI-spec .452" throat entrance reduces the chances of the bullet getting its coating peeled off as it goes in. If the chamber transition to throat is razor sharp (typically is because there's no chamfer angle called for) it can peel lead or copper too and cause lumpy deposits of bullet or jacket material to be smeared down the bore.
Pistolero
Well-Known Member
Most revolvers have a nice smooth taper from the front of the chamber to the throat dimension, so it
would seem that this should help ease the coated bullets in without shaving off the coating. BUT,
until you try it, it's just a theory. Some revolvers have sharp shoulders at the end of the chamber.
My old Colt 1917 absolutely will NOT chamber anything even 0.001 larger than the front of the
throat in the cylinder. Most S&Ws have a visible smooth taper from the end of the chamber.
The 1917 Colt was intended to shoot .45 ACP ball, and had to work without clips, too, so they
had a reason to have the best corner there on the end of the chamber. That is an oddball, a
rimless revolver chamber.
Bill
would seem that this should help ease the coated bullets in without shaving off the coating. BUT,
until you try it, it's just a theory. Some revolvers have sharp shoulders at the end of the chamber.
My old Colt 1917 absolutely will NOT chamber anything even 0.001 larger than the front of the
throat in the cylinder. Most S&Ws have a visible smooth taper from the end of the chamber.
The 1917 Colt was intended to shoot .45 ACP ball, and had to work without clips, too, so they
had a reason to have the best corner there on the end of the chamber. That is an oddball, a
rimless revolver chamber.
Bill
Last edited:
Pistolero
Well-Known Member
Well the Colt has about .455 throats, but I wanted to shoot the same as my S&W 1917, .456 diam
and they will NOT chamber in the Colt 1917.
And frankly, neither pistol is particularly accurate with Mil Ball. The S&W does the best with .454 or larger
H&G 68s loaded as hot as you dare. Moderate loads hit 6" left and level at 25 yds. As you crank it
up they smoothly move in until at 6.5 gr Unique (my personal limit) they hit at level and 1-2" left of
POA. The Colt 1917......well not so much. I still need to figure it out, haven't gotten a really solid, good
accurate load for it.
i never understood why the 1917 revolvers didn't have .452 throats. The ammo was going to be ALL
military ball with a .451 Jacketed RN. Why make the throats .455-456ish? Other than to screw with
use collectors for the next century.
and they will NOT chamber in the Colt 1917.
And frankly, neither pistol is particularly accurate with Mil Ball. The S&W does the best with .454 or larger
H&G 68s loaded as hot as you dare. Moderate loads hit 6" left and level at 25 yds. As you crank it
up they smoothly move in until at 6.5 gr Unique (my personal limit) they hit at level and 1-2" left of
POA. The Colt 1917......well not so much. I still need to figure it out, haven't gotten a really solid, good
accurate load for it.
i never understood why the 1917 revolvers didn't have .452 throats. The ammo was going to be ALL
military ball with a .451 Jacketed RN. Why make the throats .455-456ish? Other than to screw with
use collectors for the next century.
Last edited:
Pistolero
Well-Known Member
My Colt 1917 has a definite chamber and throat is far smaller. Case is about
.470, so chamber must be .473-.475, have not measured, but the throat is .455,
will not accept a .456 bullet.
I have seen very old Colts with straight cylinders, but they were .38 cal and were for
the central fire which came JUST after the rimfire .38s, and still had the heeled
bullet, externally lubed and bullet diam the same as the case OD, like the only
remaining example.....the .22 RF.
.470, so chamber must be .473-.475, have not measured, but the throat is .455,
will not accept a .456 bullet.
I have seen very old Colts with straight cylinders, but they were .38 cal and were for
the central fire which came JUST after the rimfire .38s, and still had the heeled
bullet, externally lubed and bullet diam the same as the case OD, like the only
remaining example.....the .22 RF.