paulg
.375 Atomic
Posts: 2,420
|
Post by paulg on Jun 16, 2014 16:03:41 GMT -5
I was reading some of Elmer Keith's old reloading stuff last night and he advised strongly against gas checks in revolver ammunition. He said high velocity gas checks will just about eat a bore up at around 5000 rounds and will accelerate gas cutting of the top strap. Does this still hold up today or was that more of an issue during his time?
|
|
|
Post by subsonic on Jun 16, 2014 16:07:56 GMT -5
Think about it.
What does logic dictate when comparing a tiny piece of copper that has less width than a driving band vs a copper jacket?
|
|
paulg
.375 Atomic
Posts: 2,420
|
Post by paulg on Jun 16, 2014 16:40:38 GMT -5
I was able to comprehend his conclusions. The reason I ask is because I see a lot of folks here talk about using gas checks. I was just wondering if there are or were changes made over the years that make it a more viable option today versus Elmer Keith's day. In his writing he said a fully jacketed bullet is a better option than a gas check and that gas checks were fine in auto and rifle ammunition for obvious reasons. LINK: www.elmerkeithshoot.org/GA/1982_01_Part_1_Sixgun_Reloading.pdf
|
|
|
Post by bulasteve on Jun 17, 2014 8:53:13 GMT -5
I never understood why it might be good for autos and rifles, "for obvious reasons", yet no good in a revolver. Our John Taffin has a different opinion with enough usage for me to respect that opinion. I'll add that I've yet to use them. With the new Marlin 1894 here, I am considering using them on some Ranch Dog bullets in the future.
|
|
Paden
.375 Atomic
Lower Goldstream Creek
Posts: 1,132
|
Post by Paden on Jun 17, 2014 10:41:05 GMT -5
I use them, because I have a revolver with a bore, which for whatever reason, is finicky about leading. Gas checks resolved the problem. In my gun, I see zero evidence to support Elmer's claim that gas checks are hard on the bore or contribute to gas cutting. Nor do I understand the logic behind the claim.
I think gas checks provide some advantages in regard to neck tension consistency, aid in prevention of lead shaving when seating, etc. too, but that's an entirely different subject for conversation.
|
|
|
Post by tek4260 on Jun 17, 2014 23:02:00 GMT -5
Maybe he thought the curved corner of the base of the gas check directed the gas towards the topstrap more than the flat base and square shoulder of a regular bullet?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2014 12:11:49 GMT -5
I think Elmer just didn't like screwing with them. They are a pain...
|
|
|
Post by subsonic on Jun 18, 2014 20:32:24 GMT -5
I think Elmer just didn't like screwing with them. They are a pain... I can see the logic in that.
|
|
paulg
.375 Atomic
Posts: 2,420
|
Post by paulg on Jun 18, 2014 21:01:34 GMT -5
I think Elmer just didn't like screwing with them. They are a pain... I can see the logic in that. So there's no logic in anything else Keith wrote in this article concerning gas checks for revolver bullets?
|
|
dmize
.401 Bobcat
Posts: 2,825
|
Post by dmize on Jun 18, 2014 22:08:49 GMT -5
I don't mind using gas checks other than the ridiculous price. I can run a softer alloy with accuracy just as good as harder non gas checked bullets. I just went out and looked at one of my GC'd Lee 45-310's compared to a Hornady 45 300 grain XTP. I really camnot see much difference between the base shapes of the two. I am not saying this to be disrespectful or mean but I grew up in a family of cantankerous,stubborn,opinionated hard headed Germans and I am married to a Scot/Irish girl whose family share the EXACT same traits. Once they have their minds set on something there is no changing it.
|
|
|
Post by boxhead on Jun 19, 2014 7:53:47 GMT -5
There is more than folks are willing to admit that he had wrong, gas checks being just one.
|
|
|
Post by hoover on Jun 19, 2014 23:00:33 GMT -5
Ross Seyfriend said it best in regards to Elmer and gas checks. "One of the few times the master was wrong..."
|
|
|
Post by seancass on Jun 20, 2014 6:23:18 GMT -5
Anybody know what led Keith to his conclusion? Seems unlikely that he would claim they were damaging to just avoid using them or promote his own plain base bullets. I'd think he had, or heard of, a bad experience at some point that led him to this belief.
|
|
|
Post by subsonic on Jun 21, 2014 7:07:21 GMT -5
Keith did a bunch for our sport and I don't want to take anything away from him. That being said, like all men, he was imperfect and things have come a long way since he was writing.
|
|
|
Post by 2 Dogs on Jun 23, 2014 9:40:47 GMT -5
I shoot whatever my sixguns shoot best. Besides, how bout actually shooting FIVE THOUSAND ROUNDS through one sixgun!
|
|