More on Carteach0 and Old Mil-Sec Bullets

Carteach0 has had a recurring series of posts on old .30 caliber ammo. Recently he was given a quantity of pulled and tumbled bullets to use for reloading and was generous enough to share some with me. I have seen a preview of an upcoming post on his experiments research fiddling around with them and the pictures he has of them split and disassembled saved me from similar activities.

In the bag he sent me was 130 bullets. I discarded one for having a damaged base. Then I weighed the rest of them. Almost all of them were 163 to 164 grains. Here’s the distribution.

My plan is to load the best looking of the bullets in the 163/164 gr. pile this evening and take them to the range tomorrow. They do not look like Sierra Match Kings. There are marks from the tool that pulled them, lots of small impact dimples, and most significant, many of the tips are misshapen to some degree. Here’s a sampling.


And here’s one in detail.

If I had the bullet pointing tool that benchrest shooters use to prep their bullets I would be tempted to clean up the ends before I loaded them, but I do not. Chucking them in a drill and spinning them while No, no, no. The purpose of this is to shoot them as they are. I have a friend that has most of a 5 gallon bucket of pulled .30 cal ball ammo bullets and if these samples shoot okay, a inexpensive source of bullets may be locally available. A range report on the results to follow in the coming days.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “More on Carteach0 and Old Mil-Sec Bullets

  1. Ever been to “The Box O' Truth”? This reminded me of a post I read there a year or so ago, and I went and found it for you. Short version: damaging the front of a bullet in many ways had much less effect on accuracy than damaging the back.

    All of these tests were done with .30 cal, 150 gr. Hornady soft points. The points were flattened with a hammer, bent over, or clipped off. The ugliest group came from digging a groove in the boat tail.

Comments are closed.