Lube Testing

[Vaino]

All excellent points that should be adhered to if a test were being done.

What do you think of how the pressure {measured by velocity} determined by the lubricity of the patch lube, would have a greater impact on the smaller calibers VS the larger calibers?....Fred

 

[zimmerstutzen]

Pressure can also vary depending on patch weave and fit. Smaller ball, less bore bearing band around the circumference of the ball and possibly more blow by. While I agree that pressure produces velocity, sometimes velocity does not increase as much as pressure.

Does the deviation in velocity also accompany shot to shot pressure variations. Could a thicker lube seal the bore better against blow by, thereby accounting for the generally reduced velocity of the "slicker' lube.
How do we determine lubricity? Viscosity does not necessarily determine lubricity. I used stuff called pistol patch in my black powder revolvers. I believe it was merely a high temperature low viscosity lithium grease. (low as greases go, compared to water pump grease or bees wax) In my BPCR days, I had extremely good results with that red wax on Gouda cheese as a bullet lube. it was a microcrystalline wax so it had a high melting temperature and was quite stiff at room temperature.

 

[coloradoclyde]

I look forward to your future test results.... :thumbsup:

 

[azmntman]

I look forward to the time I have the time to even think about such tests

Men like Dutch are invaluable to folk like me at this point in life. :thumbsup: So again...Thank you for posting!

 

[Dr5x]

Back in High School, during Study Hall when artificial pea shooters were the dominant weapons made from a tight [a[er roll and a wet paper wad we relearned that to just blow the wad gave a certain success for the near and some intermediate ranges but for the longer range or more vicious short range shots we would not just blow, we would hold our breath to build up pressure and then suddenly release this mighty blast of compressed air which gave you greater speed , a flatter trajectory and the attention of Mary Lou four rows over.

So too with muzzle loaders. The extra resistance of the less slick patch lubricant allows a greater burst of power behind the projectile . A greater use of your powder and in my experience tighter groups.

There's an easier demonstration involving blowing into the palm of your hand and then doing it with suddenly released held breath. Maybe that's too subtle.

Dutch Excuse Typos.

 

[George]

I have to admit I’ve never been a believer in the “too slick lube” idea. It has never seemed logical for more than one reason.

It is said that the pressure pushing the ball builds to a lower peak if the lube is slicker than if it isn’t. The idea is that the friction of the lubed patch against the bore resists the ball starting to move, and that a slicker lube will allow it to start moving quicker, to sort of squirt out of the barrel before maximum pressure is achieved, so that it causes lower muzzle velocities. I’ve always thought that the proportion of resistance to movement contributed by friction is tiny when compared to that of inertia of the ball itself, but I don’t know how to figure that. It’s beside the point, anyway. For the sake of argument, say that it’s true, that reduced friction of a slicker lube causes lower pressure and therefore lower muzzle velocity...so what? So long as velocities are consistent, it matters not a fig if they are a little higher or lower. Consistent velocity equates to consistent accuracy. The simple fact that one lube reduces friction more than another would not in any way cause it to be less accurate of itself. If you used either lube for all the shots, it’s velocity would be consistent because it’s lubricity and pressure would be consistent, and so it’s accuracy would be consistent.

Many years ago this same discussion was raging in the online BP groups and people were saying “too slick lubes” were the bane of all good shooting, never to be tolerated. At the same time, the high-end target shooters were all agog over a wonderful new patching material, teflon, which worked so well because it reduced friction so well. Our shooting may, if we are very lucky, be consistent, but we certainly aren’t, almost certainly will never be.

I see the same thing all the time in discussions of the weight of balls. Although extremely minor, there are changes in trajectory from slightly changing the weight of balls. But, if you sort them into groups of balls within a narrow range of weights, the actual weight has no bearing on accuracy. As long as all balls weigh the same, whatever that may be, accuracy will not be interfered with. It’s only of you shoot balls of significantly different weights at the same target that you might see a difference. Neither lighter nor heavier balls are more accurate than the other.

And so, even if the idea that "too slick lubes" make balls squirt out at lower velocity is true, which I’m not convinced of, I believe neither slicker nor less slick lubes are inherently more or less accurate. So, "too slick lubes" are a non-problem.

Chain mail and helmet on, fire at will.

Spence

 

[Vaino]

I agree w/ most of what you posted....but, if patch lube lubricity varies w/the resultant difference in pressure yielding variations in velocity, the smaller calibers would be affected more because of lessened inertia. The larger calibers would hardly be affected at all.

The inertia of a PRB is the main restriction generating the pressure spike, not the lubricity of lube used. The larger the caliber and the resultant greater inertia, the less effect the patch lube lubricity matters......Fred

 

[BrownBear]

One factor I've noticed when comparing lubes is "consistency" of application. Pretty easy with wet lubes- just saturated the patch and squeeze out the excess. I wonder if that has anything to do with their rep for accuracy. Same applies for Dutch's "dry" lube.

Grease lubes on the other hand can be pretty variable because a "thin layer" is smeared on at the time of loading, and there's quite a range of results when I'm the one doing the smearing. I've worked out my own small ways to do it, but with the thinner grease lubes (as in warm weather use), I can apply lots more than intended. I prefer grease for my ability to shoot multiple times without bore swabbing, but I've had to learn ins and outs.

 

[Billnpatti]

My method for applying the most consistent coat of grease on a patch is to apply the grease to the patch fabric before cutting the patches. I apply it as evenly as I possibly can and use my fingers to work it into the cloth. I then fold it and put the folded and coated fabric between several layers of newsprint. Next I run over it with a warm iron to melt the grease into the fabric and make it as consistent and evenly spread as possible. Properly done, the grease is in and not on the fabric Then I either cut the patches or rip the fabric into the proper width and use the strips to cut my patches at the muzzle. I have found it very convenient to simply drape the strip of fabric over the end of my ram rod. It is very convenient when I am ready to cut a patch and load.

I'll address a question that some may have and that is whether the strip gathers dirt or other undesirable stuff while hanging on the ram rod at the muzzle. No, I have never experienced that problem and I have been using this method of carrying my patch material for quite a few years. The strip is not overly greasy, it is just more like oily cloth and not enough oil or grease to collect dirt. Give it as try and see what you think. :hatsoff:

 

[Black Hand]

Grease lubes on the other hand can be pretty variable because a "thin layer" is smeared on at the time of loading, and there's quite a range of results when I'm the one doing the smearing. I've worked out my own small ways to do it, but with the thinner grease lubes (as in warm weather use), I can apply lots more than intended. I prefer grease for my ability to shoot multiple times without bore swabbing, but I've had to learn ins and outs.

I put my cut patches in a small container made from aluminum foil, add Bear grease between patches in the stack at several points and melt the grease into the patches in a warm toaster oven. This way the grease permeates the patch...

 

[hanshi]

I sorta been thinking that I've started a "Frankenthread". Yes I tested another caliber with my normal accuracy loads and tested two different lubes, two different powders and, of course, different charge weights. I had help and advice from a knowledgeable source. Of importance to the tests were ES and SD. These are the two best indicators of a balanced, and accurate load. I will not post any more results except to note the correlation between accuracy and the two mentioned indicators.

 

[Dr5x]

Brown Bear,
The squeeze method might just let a few drops down the barrel to deaden some of your powder.
The entire purpose of the "Dry" patch System was to give you a few months to a year''s supply of patching strips that are lubricated in exactly the same way from end to end..
I developed it because while I was getting center accuracy as far as left to right hits were concerned, I was still getting vertical strings of hits. some higher, some lower. . The "Dry" patch System eliminated that forever.


If you can get any tight accuracy using a grease lubricant of any kind, stick with it. Logically it should be way too slick for tight accuracy, but if it serves you well. don't change

My vision seems to be going more rapidly and these boring lectures will soon end.

I would like to include a brief treatise on "Flyers". I didn't have a single flyer the last 2 or 3 years I was able to continue shooting. I have some strong beliefs about them annoying things that waste time, lead, powder and happiness.

Dutch

 

[Smokey Plainsman]

I just had a tremendous episode of deja vu after reading this post.

On another note, it does make sense to me that a slippier lube would cause a less consistent shot. I wonder how mink's oil fairs in "slippiness?"

 

[Vaino]

Perhaps the following factors below possibly have a miniscule affect on pressure w/ the smaller calibers, but for the .45 cals and up, the factors below have an insignificant affect on pressure because of the much greater inertia of these heavier lead balls. Irrespective of cal., the lead ball and its inertia and weight is by far the main cause of the amount of generated pressure. The initial pressure "spike" is caused by the ball's inertia and the ball's weight maintains a lower, diminishing pressure until the PRB exits the bore.

Type of patch lube and its lubricity, how it's applied to the patches, the length of time before shooting lubed patches {spit excepted}, patch mat'l, weave of patch mat'l, and fouled bore w/in reason all have minimal {smaller cals} or no affect on the larger cals.

Factors that do effect pressure are grossly varying powder charges, type of powder, TH size, PRB combos, their weight and if they either minimize or maximize gas blowby {don't think that any PRB combo totally eliminates gas blowby} and excessive fouling. The tangental groove seal of a patch is in reality a poor seal.

My super accurate squirrel LR has head hit 100s w/ the original loading and although 4 different patch lubes have been used, patch mat'l of slightly different thicknesses and brands also have been used, shooting both ,440 &,445 RBs interchangeably, and the vaying amount of reasonable bore fouling all didn't cause the sights to be readjusted. Have to admit that my only criteria that all these variances didn't cause inaccuracies that caused a failure to "hit the head".

My initial shooting experience was w/ CFs and handloaded for 4 different cals. and when I started hunting w/ a MLer, was amazed at how easy it was to achieve excellent accuracy......I apologize for this overly long post and am NOT saying that anyone should do as I do.....Fred

 

[hanshi]

Along those lines, I have tested both .440" and .445" ball in my .45 and also found no difference in velocities or accuracy. I've found out, as well, that BP is an "accuracy" powder. Some of the best groups I've fired in a .357 and a .45Colt were loaded with BP. That's also why it is difficult (for me) to find a "best load"; within reason, just about every load I've tried shot great.

 

[BrownBear]

...within reason, just about every load I've tried shot great.

Same here. There just seems to be a whole lot of latitude. In bigger calibers at least (over 50 cal), I generally don't see group changes that matter to me until I'm making changes of more than 20 grains. Certainly moving back and forth between "equivalent" loads of 2f and 3f make no difference at all.

And frankly I doubt my own ability to measure much less than 5 grains of variation with a volumetric measure unless it's pretty skinny. The brass Cash measures certainly allow it, but the fat homemade measures I make.... Meh. I've measured from them into the Cash, and 5 grains of variation is pretty common with my shaky old hands. But the guns still give stellar accuracy with those fat "hunting" measures.

 

[zimmerstutzen]

My theory has always been that with moderate loads, consistency in loading procedures is more important than amount of powder or size of the ball (assuming the patch is sufficient to seal the bore) Wind is a bigger variable than most allow Around here, the half hour before sunset and half hour afterward is usually the most calm, so I prefer shooting then. A certain level of accuracy is attainable with nearly any consistent loading practice. However, to narrow a two inch group at 100 yds to a ragged one hole group takes finessing the load to the rifle.

 

[hanshi]

I can't even begin to see that small aim point at 100 yards. A soup can is about it for me. Different story with deer. I've killed a couple at 100 yards + and - and had no problem with aim. But then, a deer is a fairly large critter.

And as Brown Bear mentioned, I'm none too accurate with powder measures; although I do surprise myself sometimes when I fill the measures and weigh them. Often I do come in at + or - 2 grains.