Practice question
- Thread starter mobertok
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Rick Richard
Well-Known Member
You don't. You have to have visual confirmation
By using Wipe-Out. If there's no color on the patch, there's no fouling in the barrel.
But the $99.00 Teslong Bore Scope I bought was money well spent.
Ive always heard with pistols if you shoot enough hardcast or lead only then thoroughly clean the barrel before switching back to jacketed bullets. But you can switch -to- lead only all you want.
If true, seems like it would be the same for rifles.... no worry switching to jacketed bullets, but clean first before switching to all copper monos.
Ive also heard all copper bullets prefer a bare metal clean barrel.
IMO borescopes are essential regardless.
If true, seems like it would be the same for rifles.... no worry switching to jacketed bullets, but clean first before switching to all copper monos.
Ive also heard all copper bullets prefer a bare metal clean barrel.
IMO borescopes are essential regardless.
crkckr
Well-Known Member
Forget all the advice from u tube... let your rifle tell what it likes or doesn't! All the advice from others goes right out the window if your particular rifle needs to be completely clean before it will shoot good groups with different bullets. To be honest, most rifles will shoot better after a few fouling shots. There is only one way to determine this: take the rifle out and shoot it! With different bullet types if you need to switch. There are several barrel chemicals that work well for getting it down to bare metal but I will agree with koda and marc, Wipe Out is a good indicator but a scope will definitely tell the tale!
Cheers,
crkckr
Cheers,
crkckr
Lionel Boyd Johnson
Well-Known Member
If you live in a non lead area, how can you get away with shooting lead core bullets "for practice"? After all, the idea of "non lead" is to stop polluting the environment. That seems to apply year round.
RegionRat
Well-Known Member
Here in CA, the legislation and courts do not ban lead for defensive and practice purposes. The claim was to protect the California Condor from lead poisoning when they scavenged gut piles or escapes. (For the record, the capture studies show the lead ammo ban has shown no benefit to their lead levels, but we got the ban anyway.)
Although there were some factions who wanted to push a universal lead ban too, they were blocked on constitutional grounds. So for example, shotgun target loads are still lead, even though waterfowl/upland loads are no-lead and have been so in some places since '87.
I have had rifle barrels that definitely showed the problem switching between Barnes and regular bullets, but I have also had ones that didn't.
I won't offer the proof because that work was done long before scanners, cell phone cameras, e-targets, etc., were common and those targets were kindling long ago. Some good wild pig hunting areas were in "The Condor Zones" where they initiated the lead ban long before it went state wide. So, some of us had reasons to experiment with Barnes no-lead bullets long before the ban went state wide.
Back in the 80's - 90's, I was in the habit of shooting silhouette with the same rigs I used for hunting. I did this just for practice and to force myself to load and shoot those rigs year round. While we didn't need those rigs to shoot as tight as some other types of competition, we were still looking for them to stay well inside of 1 MOA for 80 to 90 rounds since matches were 40 record shots plus sighters.
I share this to say we were always testing our hunting rigs, loads, and cleaning regimens on paper out to 600 yards, and since we were in the defense world we understood statistics and external ballistics as well as the issues with barrel fouling/cleaning. So, these observations were not just mine, but those of several co-workers and club members. The tests were repeated by many folks, not just a handful, all of whom were typically Master and High Master and knew the scientific rigor and what statistical significance meant.
Groups fired from the majority of cross contaminated rigs were out of control and would require us to clean to recover. A few with custom barrels did not show the problem to the degree of most and would overcome the issue after a few sighters. We learned to test the gun for that type of bullet switch, and clean if necessary. After all, it isn't extraordinary to have to clean a gun in normal use.
The OP will just have to test his own barrel and see what comes, but shouldn't be surprised if the problem shows up (or does not).
BTW, I was in the habit of using the Barnes CR-10 or Sweet's 7.62 for cleaning after no-lead bullets, but I have found that KG-12 is more effective and as a bonus does not use ammonia. YMMV
I don't know why but we can practice with non lead but not hunt with it.
Probably because the whole pollution was a smoke screen bs.
All of my weapons, rifles or handguns, will pass any military inspection. Then they're lubricated lightly. Old soldier habits never die.
Thanks for taking the time to share all that.
