Moly gone away?

[Andrew]

I have been watching the "moly" bullet craze with some interest over the last 10 years and have noted that a lot of moly items are being discontinued. I received a sale notice today noting the large number of moly models that have been discontinued by Berger Bullets. I think in a few years it will be remembered as a fad. ~Andrew

 

http://www.lockstock.com/default.asp

[JohnGalway]

As long as Hornady keep making them I don't mind, just started using the flipping things lol.

[Andrew]

As long as Hornady keep making them I don't mind, just started using the flipping things lol.

 

Too Bad! Buy them while you can! Moly products are fading off the shelves here.~Andrew

[JohnGalway]

Must see the bank manage about a small loan Monday so lol

[onehole]

Good riddance I say with regard to moly,absolute waste of time.dont bother!.have seen increased throat wear with a walther barrel 6r norma and most recently a 6.5/55 swede totally messed up with dual use of copper and moly heads being used at the same time! If your gonna use it stick with it but to be honest its just another thorn in your side when searching for your best in any given calibre and those in the know could do without another variable I am certain of that.look out for the flak now I suppose!!Onehole.

[Andrew]

Good riddance I say with regard to moly,absolute waste of time.dont bother!.have seen increased throat wear with a walther barrel 6r norma and most recently a 6.5/55 swede totally messed up with dual use of copper and moly heads being used at the same time! If your gonna use it stick with it but to be honest its just another thorn in your side when searching for your best in any given calibre and those in the know could do without another variable I am certain of that.look out for the flak now I suppose!!Onehole.

 

It was really something to watch competition shooters flocking the the Moly a decade or so back. Now the same shooters have figured out that it did zip for them except complicate the loading process and foul their barrels, making it hard to shoot non-moly bullets. One Hi Power shooter friend of mine has a very fine comp-grade barrel for his match AR-15 that sits in the corner of his shop unused because it was shot with moly and won't shoot anymore. I know better than to even mention "moly" around him! ~Andrew

[Ronin]

Only use moly in one barrel - which was started out with coated bullets.

 

The other rifles are shot with naked bullets.

[John MH]

It was really something to watch competition shooters flocking the the Moly a decade or so back. Now the same shooters have figured out that it did zip for them except complicate the loading process and foul their barrels, making it hard to shoot non-moly bullets. One Hi Power shooter friend of mine has a very fine comp-grade barrel for his match AR-15 that sits in the corner of his shop unused because it was shot with moly and won't shoot anymore. I know better than to even mention "moly" around him! ~Andrew

 

Who is he then; I don't know of many AR-15 shooters using moly for Highpower at the moment but it's is best not to try and chop and change between moly and bare. A good clean with JB bore paste will remove any unwanted moly from an AR-15 barrel. I still use coated bullets in 6XC with no problems at all, also have some boron nitrate to try. Why do I use moly? simply to allow me to shoot up to 200 rounds without the need to clean the barrel to reduce the effects of copper fouling on accuracy.

[Andrew]

Two hundred rounds? Well, to each his own. He won't shoot moly and won't use abrasive paste on his barrels, I guess. I don't know. It's his gun. I told him he was crazy to invest all the time and money in the moly process in the first place.~Andrew

[ejg223]

OK, moly was not the hit. But one should try to find a better

jacket material, which I think is possible. That's up to the bullet maker.

Maybe a new barrel material matched to a new jacket material is needed.

 

We could piddle around with coatings and maybe find some improvement.

Wouldn't harm to have a bit less friction and less fouling.

 

edi

[Andrew]

I think that a lot of different jacket material has been tried already. Copper is not only relatively easy to draw, but has a certain lubricity under pressure when exerted against steel. The the fouling found in most barrels seems a small price to pay. I doubt if there is any jacket material that will not foul a barrel to some extent.

 

I was not poking fun at moly in itself, but rather poking fun at the shooting public who seem to want to jump on the band wagon for every new shooting kink. I remember that .22 Match shooters of the 50's got into a thing of dipping the noses of their .22 bullets into Hoppes #9 bore solvent before chambering them because a fellow who won the Palma match did so one year. Suddenly it was the rage. Then, as I recall, the fellow who started it all developed a ring in his barrel ahead of the chamber and quit the practice long before the fad had run it's course with everyone else.

 

We are a fickle lot. ~Andrew

[ejg223]

Andrew I know copper isn't the worst to get out of a barrel but

improvements are welcome. Cars used to die after 100000 miles

and do 2-3 times that now not because of software but because

of material developement and oil additives.

For the last twenty years we are searching for abrasive resistent

steels in an application at work. Up to now all improvements where

maybe in the 10 - 50% range until Bohler Udeholm sent us an experimental

steel that lasted about 4 times. If one looks at the composition it doesn't even

look too special, but it works. I would be tempted to make a barrel out of that.

 

edi

[Andrew]

Agreed that improvements are welcome but at what expense in time and treasure? Maybe I just don't fret over copper fouling too much? I clean it when it needs to be cleaned and otherwise don't worry about it unless it becomes a problem. I had a fast twist 22-250 that had a very rough barrel that would visibly foul in just a few rounds. I gave it away and good riddance. I certainly worry about throat erosion more then bullet wear/fouling. Which is again, an odd quirk with many shooters: They try to ride the ragged edge of maximum pressures which certainly takes a toll on their throats and accuracy life-span (to a greater or lesser degree per cartridge); and then spent an inordinate amount of time clucking about the detriments of copper fouling. Like I said, we are a fickle lot.

 

I am currently playing with a bullet in my 308 that leaves no jacket fouling whatsoever: A paper-patched 190 grain cast bullet that shoots about MOA at 2400 ft/sec....

 

But that may not be hi-tech enough for the readers here. ~Andrew

[Ronin]

Andrew

 

it may not be "high tech", but sometimes the tortoise beats the hare.

 

 

I for one would be very interested to hear how things go with this, just because its interesting

[Andrew]

It works out very well. As I said, it's a 190 at 2400 which is within 100 fps of maximum. The paper is onionskin wrapped around a .301" cylindrical bullet to a finished diameter of .310 inches. Bullet (the paper jacket) is then waterproofed in melted beeswax ala 450/577 Martini. It will drop deer like a Nosler Partition, if not better. Best of all, the bullets are free for the making once you have a mold. Bullets for my .303's are made with a .309" regular cast bullet wrapped with the same paper to a diameter of .316. They shoot as well as jacketed bullets.

 

And in reality, these are jacketed bullets. The jacket is just made of paper.~Andrew

 

PS: As a foot note: The National Rifle Assn. conducted many tests with paper jacketed bullets in the 1960's and 1970's. In one test (1966) they were firing 160 grain paper jacketed bullets at 3000 ft/sec from a 300 Winchester Magnum and exceeding factory ammunition accuracy from that rifle. Interestingly, the test conditions were in winds that peaked at 25MPH yet their average of 10, five shot groups was 1.47" at 100 yards.

[John MH]

It works out very well. As I said, it's a 190 at 2400 which is within 100 fps of maximum. The paper is onionskin wrapped around a .301" cylindrical bullet to a finished diameter of .310 inches. Bullet (the paper jacket) is then waterproofed in melted beeswax ala 450/577 Martini. It will drop deer like a Nosler Partition, if not better. Best of all, the bullets are free for the making once you have a mold. Bullets for my .303's are made with a .309" regular cast bullet wrapped with the same paper to a diameter of .316. They shoot as well as jacketed bullets.

 

And in reality, these are jacketed bullets. The jacket is just made of paper.~Andrew

 

PS: As a foot note: The National Rifle Assn. conducted many tests with paper jacketed bullets in the 1960's and 1970's. In one test (1966) they were firing 160 grain paper jacketed bullets at 3000 ft/sec from a 300 Winchester Magnum and exceeding factory ammunition accuracy from that rifle. Interestingly, the test conditions were in winds that peaked at 25MPH yet their average of 10, five shot groups was 1.47" at 100 yards.

 

 

Andrew

 

Did not realise you were States based so I probably don't know your Highpower shooter. I do know most of the UK Highpower shooters and most don't bother with molycoated bullets in their .223s although I do know of one who uses moly because of pressure problems with is staight pull AR, moly allows him to get near the velocity he wants and still be able to manually operate the bolt. David Tubb has been a longtime fan of moly but is now moving towards Boron Nitrate as an alternative and offers a BN coating service to you guys State side.

 

John MH

[eldon]

Panther, Nikasil's not so much a base material but usually a coating.

They use Nikasil coatings alot in off road motorcross bike cylinders. High rpm , lots of heat.

Main reason is to cut down on friction and be hard wearing as generally these bikes only use one piston ring.

Any problems, seizures etc the coating can be replaced by an engineering works.

 

Whether it is suitable for rifles....maybe? replacing the coating could be cheaper than rebarreling.

 

Aren't certain mil spec rifles chrome plated bores anyway?

 

Is this worth the extra money, hassle etc ?

[Andrew]

For some reason 3000fps for a 160gr from a .300win mag sounds strangely low....

Were the velocities measured @ 100 yrds ? Or muzzle ?

 

1.47in at 100 ? That dont get any braggin rights....That just plain sucks.

Thats yer avg. huntin rifle accuracy....

Yeah I understand a 25mph full value wind is gonna get a 3.25 in drift at 100 yrds.

 

Did they shoot out any farther than 100 yrds usin this paper patchin ?

Reason I am askin is...

Many shooters using the 175gr SMK from a .308win noted that in alot of cases that it takes up to

300 yrds for it to stabilize in its flight.

 

So...

 

 

308Panther

 

Well. I can tell you have little experience with cast bullets in a rifle. The common prevailing wisdom that persists (incorrectly) is that 2000 ft/sec is the upper limits of velocity with lead alloy bullets so to hit 3000 feet per second is quite revolutionary. As to accuracy, the cast bullet accuracy exceeded that of factory ammunition fired from that rifle. (In a gale, no less!) What more could you ask? Average hunting accuracy?? Does your 308 do better under those conditions? What's wrong with 1.47" on deer or elk??

Nothing whatsoever. ~Andrew

[Andrew]

S'Ok. Been there and done that insomnia thing. I shoot cap and ball... what you don't kill with the ball you can asphyxiate with the smoke cloud

 

As I said, the velocity "limit" isn't correct. Velocity of lead bullets is limited by pressure., not velocity. I have a .222 that I shoot 58 grain lead bullets from at 2750 ft/sec and get under MOA. If that 2K figure was correct I'd never get there! ~Andrew

[Andrew]

No. It was scoped. You have the NRA all wrong (at least the way they used to operate) if you think that they would use a hi-dollar custom rig for tests like this. They performed tests with stock, factory rifles so that their results were something that every one could relate to.

 

I think the important things to look at is that in this instance is that they exceeded factory ammo performance and they did it with a bullet that cost about a penny, if that. They also proved -which was the focus of the tests- that a paper jacketed bullet could be driven that fast with good accuracy.

 

The accuracy they had was good, and still is. I know you think it sucks (in general) but how much accuracy do you need for deer? I think a person who has a rifle that would smack a golf ball off of a tee at 100 yards every shot is amply set for deer and elk hunting, don't you?? Hell. If you total up all the game animals killed since the invention of the gun you'd find that the majority of them were killed with 3-4 MOA rifles! ~Andrew

 

PS: This isn't an isolated test, by the way. They performed a series of tests with high velocity paper-jacketed and non jacketed cast bullets in the 60's. (Back when they weren't humping the legs of the bullet makers...)