Lube Testing

[hanshi]

I've been shooting a .490" ball and .025" denim patches lubed with mink oil. Now, this is a Rice, round bottom barrel with the muzzle untouched. Loads very snug but seats easily with the wood ramrod. Wiping was not needed and load after load was fired without problems.

A .40 X 38" "B" weight barrel with square cut rifling was tested yesterday. I had smoothed the crown pretty well on this rifle. Previous velocities with a .390" ball, and mattress ticking patches measuring .022" lubed with Hoppes have given the following: 40 grains 3F = 1700 fps & 60 grains = 1930 fps; accuracy has been extremely good with these loads.

The .40 was tested with .390" ball, .025" denim and .022" mattress ticking; all lubed with mink oil. Accuracy was not checked, only velocities. The denim patches loaded with too much resistance to continue using the wood ramrod. Wiping between shots was required and a metal range rod still had to be used. Compare this with the .50 Rice barrel which loaded shot after shot without wiping and using the wood ramrod.

Denim & mink oil gave the following: 60 grains of 3F gave average velocities of 2145 fps.

Mattress ticking & mink oil: 60 grains 3F chronographed 2137 fps. This load was snug, but required no wiping shot after shot. Seating resistance was a little harder than with Hoppes but still easily accomplished with the wood ramrod. This was unexpected and exciting; lube only was changed and that was all!

Trying 40 grains 3F and .022" mattress ticking lubed with mink oil also surprised us, but not in the same way. Average velocity with 40grns gave 1658 fps; actually below the 1700 fps velocity using Hoppes, but the extreme spread was only 31 fps.

More testing will be done with this rifle and with others. Mink oil has been my hunting lube but the promise it shows with denim and mattress ticking makes it a natural for the range as well. I've also crowned two other rifles, a .36 and a .45; we'll see how they like mink oil.

I have no explanation for these higher, and lower, velocities; but I do have a theory based on a bit of speculation.

 

[necchi]

Accuracy was not checked, only velocities.

Uhm? Is that part kind of the point of shooting a gun? :idunno:

 

[Black Hand]

Accuracy was not checked, only velocities.

Uhm? Is that part kind of the point of shooting a gun? :idunno:

I'm with Necchi on this one.
You could accelerate the ball to light-speed, but if you can't hit the broad side of a barn from the inside with your load combo, then it is pointless....

 

[necchi]

Right, it's the old "point of diminishing returns" theory.
It's real.
Most rifles have more then one combination that will lend that rifle it's best accuracy.
But there's only been one rifle in my life that's been the most accurate at the highest speed I could push it too.
I got 4200fps out of that Browning A-bolt 223WSSM, gotta tell ya that load was way over even the QuickLoad max! I could only get 3-4 shot's out of a case before the shoulder would show a hairline crack.
But every ML I have or have had is most accurate considerably under it's fastest load.

 

[fishmusic]

Odd that you should mention the broad side of a barn and light speed. In nuclear physics a barn is a unit of measure of the area of an atom's nucleus.

That term was named by scientists because they were trying to hit that small nucleus with another particle. Those scientists were from ... Indiana!!

Those particles were going near the speed of light and they eventually hit the broadside of a barn.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

I just learned something new and fun...THANKS :grin:

LD

 

[Toomuch51]

Accuracy was not checked, only velocities.

\
I too must agree with Necchi.
Accuracy would be of prime importance and velocities quite insignificant, if not completely irrelevant.
Too many of us vainly try to apply modern (smokeless) ballistics to our black powder weapons, which is by nature completely incompatable.

 

[coloradoclyde]

Next time actually aim at a target through the chronograph so that you have some comparable data.

Also what was the goal of your testing?...

 

[stubshaft]

Thank you for the trivia lesson. I'll use it to dazzle my buddies the next time I hear them use that phrase.

 

[George]

Well, hansi, I have to say that was a very productive testing session. I learned more from it than just about any session I can recall, and I am indebted to you. I learned that:

testing anything but accuracy is a waste of time
testing for velocity is useless, it is totally irrelevant
there is no need for high velocities, they destroy accuracy, always
physics does not apply to BP shooting
and of course, that physicists can hit a barn

Who would have thought a simple lube test would yield so much unquestionable data? A man can get a real education hanging around this place. Good job.

Spence

 

[Black Hand]

Denim & mink oil gave the following: 60 grains of 3F gave average velocities of 2145 fps.

Mattress ticking & mink oil: 60 grains 3F chronographed 2137 fps.

Statistically speaking, 2145 and 2137 fpm are unlikely to be significantly different. I wouldn't assign any significance to the minor difference...

 

[coloradoclyde]

Statistically speaking, 2145 and 2137 fpm are unlikely to be significantly different. I wouldn't assign any significance to the minor difference...

Correct!...Which is why I asked for comparative accuracy data.

IMO...Velocity is a poor way to evaluate lube properties.

Not criticizing, just trying to help. :v

 

[necchi]

From a "Notebook" I learned a great deal from;

It is instantly obvious from this that there is excellent reason for us to work hard to achieve consistent procedures in our loading.
Nothing that happens inside the barrel during firing is of any importance except the speed at which the ball is traveling when it exits the muzzle. Nothing.
So, anything we can do to guarantee that the muzzle velocity is the same from shot to shot is critical. Otherwise, we have moved along the trajectory and the shape will be different there, causing us to shoot less accurately.

So knowing velocity can be important,, yet consistent conditions are much more relevant.
Experimenting with lube conditions and patch material and/or thickness is also very important to find the best conditions relative to the rifle, as we all know each one is unique to it's own point.
Finding velocity first(?) While disregarding accuracy,, kinda seems the long away around for me.
Given the case that the lube used is paste Mink Oil, how can we know application was delivered the same in each case? We're presented with raw chrono data as only one of the variables of the experiment.
It's kind of neat,, but the series of variables lead to no reasonable conclusion.

 

[hanshi]

Accuracy was not checked, only velocities.

Uhm? Is that part kind of the point of shooting a gun? :idunno:

Not when one is working on velocity and nothing else. :idunno:

 

[Black Hand]

As previously mentioned, maximizing velocity isn't nearly as significant as maximizing accuracy. Faster doesn't mean better...

 

[hanshi]

Accuracy was not checked, only velocities.

Uhm? Is that part kind of the point of shooting a gun? :idunno:

I'm with Necchi on this one.
You could accelerate the ball to light-speed, but if you can't hit the broad side of a barn from the inside with your load combo, then it is pointless....

:hmm: So why in the world was I simply trying to find the velocity of a load I already use with only a lube change?? :v

 

[Black Hand]

And how did the change in velocity (with the lube change) affect your accuracy with a known load? Was faster better or did your accuracy go to pot? You did not present enough information to truly assess the effect...and try as I might, I've never been able to read minds.

The only thing you told us was the balls went faster - which is only part of the equation and not the most interesting or significant part...

 

[hanshi]

It seems every one needs to REALLY read the post. The accuracy of the load WAS ALREADY ESTABLISHED and was under 4" at 100 yards. I did use a target at 50 yards to focus on so I would put the ball in the right place and not hit the sky screens; about 3-34" without trying to shoot for group which I'd done many times before. In other words: I wanted to see if a change in lube made any difference in the velocity, which I wasn't expecting and therefore surprised. Many of you obviously aren't interested to know the ballistics of their guns and loads; I am. When I work up a load I try to get around to chronographing it but will sometimes not get around to it for, well, years; but I try. I'm sorry some of you found my load to be inaccurate simply philosophising from an armchair. O well, c'est la vie.

Notice the modest speeds of the load before trying mink oil? NO. Well it sure doesn't look like a QUEST for lightening speed, does it? I mean, the same load!! What changed? Just the lube; that's all.

I admit to finding it very irritating to post some interesting data and then being criticized for not doing a totally different trial that was already history. I mistakingly hoped for theories on how lube affects velocity; we already know it sometimes affects accuracy. So, then, no one (with the knowledge to do so, apparently) wants to speculate. I will, of course, continue the investigation but will refrain from posting any results.

 

[Black Hand]

Yes, I understood that is was for a pre-established load. You also stated clearly your parameter was velocity rather than accuracy. It was also clear that changing the lube changed velocity. You haven't really told us something that is earth-shattering - we know that changing a variable in a load sequence changes the outcome (accuracy, precision, velocity, ft-pounds on target, other).

All that said, it would have been helpful to know the effect of increased velocity and how it translated into something useful - ACCURACY & PRECISION. Yes, you may have squeezed more FPS out of a load, but if the result was to spray balls all over the target without any consistency, then the gain was useless.

In summary, the effect may be interesting but not anything earth-shattering or even unexpected. The results could have indicated a decrease in velocity, in which case we might not/would not be having this conversation....

 

[coloradoclyde]

I'll admit, your post was confusing.....I think that accounts for all the seemingly negative replies...

All in all, it's still interesting....