Author Topic: Lubed Wad vs Cookie  (Read 1137 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rodwha

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 913
Lubed Wad vs Cookie
« on: July 25, 2017, 07:53:54 PM »
I'm curious what the differences are, especially in a carbine barrel. To my thinking it would seem a wad would exude a little lube over a good length whereas I wonder if a cookie deposits quite a bit for a short time and runs thin to nonexistent near the end depending on thickness (let's say 1/8" like a wad).

As I typically load components loosely vs a cartridge I also wonder how a cookie handles carrying afield and being handled while loading. A wad has no issues here.

I know @omnivore has done quite a bit of testing and so I hope you'll chime in, but I'd certainly appreciate anyone else's input as well.

Ultimately I'm working on a bullet design that takes up all of the remaining chamber space (my NMA loves 30 grns measured no matter what projectile but I need a carbine too and wonder about these or just increasing the lube groove width which would use more than necessary for my pistols (I hate wasting stuff, but then it seems to my logic that adding a bit to the lube groove keeps the lube in the grooves and not blown out).
« Last Edit: July 25, 2017, 08:22:48 PM by rodwha »
"Were I to leave where else would I go? Your words of life and of truth You hold." - Third Day

Offline Omnivore

  • Ultimate Forum Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 2412
Re: Lubed Wad vs Cookie
« Reply #1 on: July 27, 2017, 02:18:18 PM »
Here's the thing about having a big lube groove, capable of supplying enough lube for an 18" barrel on a percussion revolver; it'll make a MUCH longer bullet for a given weight, thus reducing powder capacity for those times (or guns) when you don't need so much lube.

A lube cookie will supply far more lube than even the typical "Big Lube", huge grease groove bullet (by "cookie" I now mean a thin card, a lube pill in the middle, and another card on top).  Recovered cookies show that they dispense most of the lube into the bore, behind the bullet, where it can do the most good in fouling mitigation.  They tend to come out intact, but very depleted, lenticular in shape, with only a little bit of the lube remaining between the two cards.

X amount of lube will take up as much powder space regardless whether it's in a bullet groove or in a pill or cookie behind the bullet.  HOWEVER; a smaller bullet groove gives you the OPTION of using less lube and more powder.  There is no use for a lot of lube, or any lube at all for that matter, unless you're firing more than six shots or so.  The type of hunt will dictate the latter.

You can always slab some lube over the bullet, to increase the total lube per shot (unless you're shooting full-on wadcutters seated to the cylinder face).

Lube in a bullet groove, or applied over the top of the bullet, will tend more to be carried out and away from the bore, where it will do no good.  that doesn't mean it's worthless, just that it is worth less than lube under the bullet.

I wouldn't consider using wads.  Someone would have to make the case for them, given rodwha's parameters.  If they happen to make for a more accurate load, then OK, you're losing more powder space I'd think, for a given amount of lube.  This begs for some testing, I suppose.

If it's all about getting a lot of lube, AND a lot of powder in a chamber of limited space, then for sure you want a cookie, or you could even leave out the cards, go with a naked lube pill, and gain about .040" of chamber length - cookies and pills both work.

Pills and cookies can be made of different lengths, depending on preference and experience.

Temperature and humidity will ahve a HUGE impact on both the need for, and the performace of, the lube.  For example, that deer I shot last fall?  The lube was still in the bullet groove after passing through the animal AND flattening out on the far side leg.  The temperature was a little bit below freezing.  The lube was GF1.

That's all I have for you.
But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.   James 1:25 (KJV)

So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.   James 2:12. (KJV)

Offline mazo kid

  • Ultimate Forum Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 6239
Re: Lubed Wad vs Cookie
« Reply #2 on: July 27, 2017, 04:13:32 PM »
I would assume you are compressing the powder when loading. I would think you would need, at the least, a disc of wax paper over the powder and under the bullet with the cookie in between.

Offline Omnivore

  • Ultimate Forum Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 2412
Re: Lubed Wad vs Cookie
« Reply #3 on: July 27, 2017, 05:18:42 PM »
Quote
I would think you would need, at the least, a disc of wax paper over the powder and under the bullet with the cookie in between.

One might think so, but on the other hand I have fired hundreds of loads with the lube pill directly on the powder and they all worked fine.  And yes; I'm stuffing the loads in pretty tight.  Also, I don't believe that a greased felt wad is any different in that regard, assuming the same lube is used either way.  Either way you're jamming the lube onto the powder with a lot of force.

I guess the way to go is to try it, i.e. don't knock it 'till you've tried it, even if the idea seems counterintuative.

I do, now, always use a card between powder and lube, just out of principle (and I've stored those loads as cartridges for months at a time), but hundreds of rounds fired without the card tell a pretty convincing story.

On the other hand, the "peanalty" of taking up 20 thousandths or thereabouts of chamber length with a card is pretty light peanalty in terms of chamber volume.

I'm not advocating for one method over another but I AM saying that lube under the bullet is more useful than lube in a bullet groove or lube over the bullet.

And again I don't see a use for a felt wad unless for some reason they end up improving accuracy with your chosen combo of bullet and powder.  As a way to carry lube, I just don't see a felt wad as being space efficient.

Oh, and rodwha asked about the handling of lube pills in the field as loose components verses lubed felt.  Loose lube pills are OK.  GF1 or SPG pills will stick together in warm weather.  Rather than trying to pry them apart, it is far easier to sheer them apart, i.e. push one way on one pill while pushing the opposite direction on the other pill.  They slide right apart with hardly any deformation.  Trying to pry them apart is fiddley, you get lube under your fingernails and it mucks up the pills.

Man; now I remember loading with loose ammunition while on the move.  What a pain; you have your bag of bullets, your powder flask, your bag of wads or pills, all in your pockets, and you have to pull out each bag in succession, try to open it with cold fingers, fiddle fiddle fiddle... Blech.

No, Young Grasshopper; assemble your loads, all ready to go in tidy paper cartridges, then pick one out of your cartridge box, slip it in a chamber and seat.
BTW; in, let's say an on-the-move pig hunting situation, it is easy to do a "tactical reload" with cartridges.  If you've fired one or two shots and you want to keep going with a full cylinder, you just pluck out a cartridge and reload that chamber-- You don't have get out all your loose component bags just to load one or two chambers.  You don't even have to stop walking.  Yes a spare cylinder can serve that purpose, but hey; cartridges.
(Yeah I know; I’m proselytizing)
« Last Edit: July 27, 2017, 05:23:06 PM by Omnivore »
But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.   James 1:25 (KJV)

So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.   James 2:12. (KJV)

Offline rodwha

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 913
Re: Lubed Wad vs Cookie
« Reply #4 on: July 28, 2017, 09:36:22 AM »
Omnivore:

Was it the 200 S you used on that deer? It's what I seem to recall. I'm curious how the 225 L works with those very small lube grooves.

How thick do you make your lube pills?

One day I was casting up my shorty 170 grn boolits when my neighbor stopped by and asked why we hadn't been to the range in a while. So I grabbed up what I had and left with him assuming I had replaced the block of GF1 lube I keep in my box (I pour it into a soap mold and cut it into 6 blocks for hand lubing). When I got there I realized I had not and fired them as is. They keyholed at 15 yds. With lube they do just fine and there are some up in Alaska where a fella is testing them curious if they'll destabilize by 50 yds as he's a match shooter.

With my current boolits dropping at 0.456" I've used the lube groove to help secure the boolit in the paper cartridges I've made. Shaves that portion off but I don't see how it mattered.

Hmmm... cold fingers can be difficult to work with when fiddling with small things. You make a good point there. And I do enjoy making cartridges which easily allows one to weigh charges for more consistent powder charges...

I also bought some rubbery reloading tubes from Winchester Suttler. They are staticy and hold on to powder but I've been told how to mitigate that. Not sure how they do with a lube groove though. Seems the idea was to use a ball as a stopper. I have them for my rifle too. Still not as simple as a paper cartridge.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2017, 09:41:54 AM by rodwha »
"Were I to leave where else would I go? Your words of life and of truth You hold." - Third Day

Offline Omnivore

  • Ultimate Forum Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 2412
Re: Lubed Wad vs Cookie
« Reply #5 on: July 28, 2017, 05:44:40 PM »
Quote
Was it the 200 S you used on that deer?

Yes; Accurate Molds 45-200S

Quote
I'm curious how the 225 L works with those very small lube grooves.

The 45-225L, in preliminary tests, shows the potential to be the most accurate bullet, with 45 to 50 grains of O.E. 3F behind it in my Walker, so far.  More testing is required.

As for the capacity of the lube grooves; I care not a whit.  Less is more in that department, as far as I am concerned.  I can get all the lube I want behind the bullet.  Round balls don't have any lube groves and they seem to work OK.

I have fired a number of the 200S bullets with only a card behind it, but WITH lube in the groove.  That works as well, accuracy-wise, for six shots anyway, as with a cookie behind it.  I have not tested it that way for any more than six shots, for I never saw a point to it.  If I'm going to fire a lot of shots, I'll bring cartridges loaded with lube cookies.  I just wanted to test the "semi-dry" performance for a possible hunting load with no cookie and more powder.  No problem.  I have never fired any conical bullet totally dry, at least not that I can remember.

The lube pills I've been using for the last several years are just a tad under one eighth inch thick, both in 36 and 44.  The cards add a little bit more.

Quote
With my current boolits dropping at 0.456" I've used the lube groove to help secure the boolit in the paper cartridges I've made. Shaves that portion off but I don't see how it mattered.

It's not important, but I find that it's a little more convenient and pleasant to load when no shaving takes place.

Quote
I also bought some rubbery reloading tubes from Winchester Suttler. They are staticy and hold on to powder but I've been told how to mitigate that. Not sure how they do with a lube groove though. Seems the idea was to use a ball as a stopper. I have them for my rifle too. Still not as simple as a paper cartridge.

I use a load tube for my muzzle loading rifle while hunting.  This one has a separate chamber for the bullet or patched ball, and functions as a (not very good) short starter.  The powder chamber has a plastic shaft, which fits tight into the ball chamber, so you align the ball end over the muzzle and smack the top of the powder chamber to start the ball, then you open the powder chamber, and, Oops!  You've just dry-balled the gun.  That's how it works if you're me and you really need that follow-up load.  All kidding aside, the loading tubes can be very handy, for a rifle, when you plan to fire only a few shots.  That’s my go-to system for rifle hunting.

I tried using a plastic tube to carry greased bullets for the revolvers, but I never got as far as getting them out to shoot.  I decided that a paper cartridge is better.  Anyway, separate tubes for measured powder charges and greased bullets would be OK, I'd think, but even though it may be less fiddling than separate bags, that's still a lot more fiddling in the field than when using carts.

I always loaded directly from a repro pistol flask, before going to carts (not as accurate, but not bad either), and that seemed OK, though it would give the typical range safety Nazi a case of the vapors (I avoid organized shooting ranges).  It's when trying wads, pills, cards, a grease tub, different projectiles and such that it gets to be too much to load loose ammo in the field, unless you're into the process as much as the actual shooting.  Some people enjoy loading all the loose bits very much, and I can't say they're wrong in what they enjoy.
But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.   James 1:25 (KJV)

So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.   James 2:12. (KJV)

Offline rodwha

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 913
Re: Lubed Wad vs Cookie
« Reply #6 on: July 29, 2017, 02:56:12 PM »
I don't care much for having to clear shaved rings. I always figured any projectile should be oversized. And I'm still thinking I'd have Tom create mine 0.001" over my largest (ROA) as there are parameters to his machining. Having chamfered mouths would keep the rings at bay.
"Were I to leave where else would I go? Your words of life and of truth You hold." - Third Day