TargetTalk

A forum to talk about Olympic style shooting, rifle or pistol, 10 meters to 50 meters, and whatever is in between. Hosted by Pilkguns.com
It is currently Thu Dec 14, 2017 1:01 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:32 pm 
...so just FYI: here's a (non-antigun-biased) review/test of Dynamic's tin-based pellets, fired through a break barrel precharged rifle on a stable stand:
http://www.airgun.co.uk/dynamic_test.htm
http://www.airgun.co.uk/dynamic_test2.htm

(Please, no flames. Just saw the review of the lead-free pellets and thought I'd pass it along.)
-Jeff
jwolverton-at-hotmail.com.48654.0


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2004 6:38 pm 
The groups look pretty crappy to me. This junk is probably fine for hunting with an airgun but lead match pellets should be a single hole group just slightly larger than the dia. of the pellet. Has your blood test come back yet?
.48657.48654


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 5:14 am 
The real problem I have with the tin pellets is that Bob was shilling them very hard on many of the airguns forms. If they were as good as they claim, no shilling would be required.
Something to note about the groups:
It's from a rest, in the field, with a "new" not particularly tested or accurate rifle compared to match rifles. So really the groups are pretty good considering the type of gun and test conditions.
In a perfect world it would be great if there were no lead pellets and only safe pellets that shot equally as well. As many have mentioned there is a LOT that you can do to limit the exposure, and I think that advice is VERY good, VERY tested, and spot on.

.48667.48654


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 6:35 am 
I'll throw a comment in edgewise here. Besides shooting ISSF handgun sports, I'm also a shotgunner who dares not run afoul of non-toxic shot regulations when hunting waterfowl. Since I don't want to destroy my fine doubles and over/under guns, I've switched from lead shot to Bismuth shot. The uniformity of the bismuth shot is excellent, as is pattern density, etc. It's not quite as "slippery" as lead though and requires some powdered lubricant to be mixed with the shot to ensure it will flow freely. Otherwise it's a form-fit-function replacement for lead.
All except for the one little down-side. Bismuth is just nicely 14 times the price of lead. I now pay about $8 CDN per tin of match pellets. I wouldn't be shooting airgun for long if I had to pay over $100 per tin for Bismuth pellets! The cheapest protection from lead ingestion remains efficient washing of hands and safe handling of the spent pellets. Use of non-toxic pellets is another case of using a 10-ton solution for a two ounce problem.

Mark.
.48671.48654


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Bismuth
PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 6:55 am 
I did a lot of research on this a couple of years go trying to produce lead free pellets. Actaully the cost of raw bismuth versus lead is not particluary significant to the cost of the product. Its the machining production variables that generate costs. In the shotgun shot the price is in the manufacturing, creating uniform round balls out of bimsuth. It just difficult apparently due to nature of bimsuth and its dendency to fracture. So creating uniform/accurate pellets out of bimuth without them turning into dust is basically impossible at this time.
: I'll throw a comment in edgewise here. Besides shooting ISSF handgun sports, I'm also a shotgunner who dares not run afoul of non-toxic shot regulations when hunting waterfowl. Since I don't want to destroy my fine doubles and over/under guns, I've switched from lead shot to Bismuth shot. The uniformity of the bismuth shot is excellent, as is pattern density, etc. It's not quite as "slippery" as lead though and requires some powdered lubricant to be mixed with the shot to ensure it will flow freely. Otherwise it's a form-fit-function replacement for lead.
: All except for the one little down-side. Bismuth is just nicely 14 times the price of lead. I now pay about $8 CDN per tin of match pellets. I wouldn't be shooting airgun for long if I had to pay over $100 per tin for Bismuth pellets! The cheapest protection from lead ingestion remains efficient washing of hands and safe handling of the spent pellets. Use of non-toxic pellets is another case of using a 10-ton solution for a two ounce problem.
:
: Mark.

.48673.48671


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bismuth
PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 7:02 am 
The difficulties you've mentioned are definitely the same problems that Bismuth shot faces if not properly alloyed. My cost comparison was based on final product cost, as I assumed the challenges facing a pellet manufacturer would be similar to those faced by round shot manufacturers. Thank you for confirming that my assumption wasn't completely off the wall.

Mark.
.48674.48673


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 8:23 am 
The prices I've found (although finding a distributor isn't easy) are a little more expensive, but not more than about %10 over match grade pellets.

: The difficulties you've mentioned are definitely the same problems that Bismuth shot faces if not properly alloyed. My cost comparison was based on final product cost, as I assumed the challenges facing a pellet manufacturer would be similar to those faced by round shot manufacturers. Thank you for confirming that my assumption wasn't completely off the wall.
:
: Mark.

jwolverton-at-hotmail.com.48681.48674


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 8:26 am 
..TCooper, and he said he's not taking it until Feb 4.

: Has your blood test come back yet?

jwolverton-at-hotmail.com.48682.48657


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 8:49 am 
: The prices I've found (although finding a distributor isn't easy) are a little more expensive, but not more than about %10 over match grade pellets.
:
: : The difficulties you've mentioned are definitely the same problems that Bismuth shot faces if not properly alloyed. My cost comparison was based on final product cost, as I assumed the challenges facing a pellet manufacturer would be similar to those faced by round shot manufacturers. Thank you for confirming that my assumption wasn't completely off the wall.
: :
: : Mark.

.48683.48681


Top
  
 
 Post subject: (Well, actually, I was
PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 9:29 am 
re: the guy above said
"I wouldn't be shooting airgun for long if I had to pay over $100 per tin for Bismuth pellets!"

.48686.48683


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 9:50 am 
Those pellets are dumb.
.48690.48654


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 11:58 am 
Don't invest in the company just yet, for two reasons:
1) It is a solution, looking for a problem (no real need); and
2) It is a crappy solution (not match grade results) to the non-existant problem.
Other than that, press on!
(oh yeah, let's all replace our freon now . . . )
Steve Swartz

: ...so just FYI: here's a (non-antigun-biased) review/test of Dynamic's tin-based pellets, fired through a break barrel precharged rifle on a stable stand:
: http://www.airgun.co.uk/dynamic_test.htm
: http://www.airgun.co.uk/dynamic_test2.htm
:
: (Please, no flames. Just saw the review of the lead-free pellets and thought I'd pass it along.)
: -Jeff

leslieswartz-at-erinet.com.48694.48654


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 11:31 pm 
Jeff,
Most of us are happy with lead pellets. If you have concerns with lead or you just want to test the tin, then give it a try. Then you can post your results here for us to see.
If tin cost more than lead pellets and appear to be equal in accuracy in some guns, I wont be buying any. I will stay with lead unless it is banned because of concerned individuals.


incrocci-at-shaw.ca.48716.48654


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2004 5:26 am 
A curiosity question...
I don't shoot high-vel air rifles, nor have ever seen them shot, so don't know how well they should group. I looked at the targets shown on the website posted by Jeff and thought they were pretty poor, but I am only comparing to groups shot from a match rifle shooting match pellets.
My question is, how well do rifles similar to the "test rifle" shoot in general? How well do they group? I ask this just to satisfy my technical curiosity, not to cast any aspersions on the pellets being tested. Like I said, I don't know anything about this class of airgun and would like to improve my knowledge.

Mark.
.48724.48654


Top
  
 
 Post subject: From what I know
PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2004 6:12 am 
I have many high velocity airguns, with various power plants.
History of the gun:
The gun used was a new gun, with a problem that has since been resolved. Many of the original guns suffered from a small leak and under power due to a configuration problem, this is sort of mentioned in the test. This was a UK sub 12 FPE gun, so it's not particularly "high power" but moreso than a match rifle.
The gun is also an interesting departure, at the time, fromt he normal PCP style guns as it used a break barrel for loading. Most PCP's use straight breach to barrel load via direct insertion or probe loading. The break barrel imparts droop issues, misalignment of the transfer port and basically has a different accuracy potential than a "normal" PCP rifle.
As well this is a "budget" gun, with all that the word "budget" entails. It doesn't have a great trigger, the barrel is pretty good, but it also has the break barrel action, and untested powerplant. Essentially BSA wanted to save money so they PCP'd a spring piston gun.
The Range:
Obviously this is outdoors, at a greater distance, which makes for a slightly different test than a match rifle would go through. The low power also would induce a bowed trajectory , moreso than a really hi-vel gun shooting at 800-900 fps or so.
The rest:
I have one of those rests, and it's pretty good but it's not great.
So we have an underpowerd gun, an unusual pellet, a not so great stand, and a decent distance.
My Thoughts
It's not a bad group, it's not a great group.
The BSA guns typically have a choke that would not be particularly friendly to the tin pellet.
Using a like economy gun, a falcon I get about the same groups using lead pellets as in the Spitfire. In doing some deep testing on the tin trashcans, I feel they have two things going against them...the actual design of the pellet body and the material that they are constructed from
The groups in the picture that the fellow has on his website are about right for that level of PCP (and entry level budget PCP) and stress field accuracy. I have many other PCP rifles that will be near "match accurate" at the same distance putting pellets in near the same hole.
They are really hybrid rifles, match rifles buitl up to a faster spec...like the LG 100, P-70, Walther Dominator. As well my FT specific guns like the Ripley, Daystate CRx or even the older 97 are much better shooters at distance.

.48727.48724


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2004 10:15 am 
A high school in the Chicago area would not let the JROTC team shoot air rifle at the school unless they used lead-free pellets. In a perfect world, the school board would have accepted educated info about lead & pellets, & dropped the ban. Unfortunately, very little is perfect, so the team has accepted the rule to use lead-free pellets. I don't know what they are using, but one JROTC shooter says the pellets are not too good. They are allowed to switch to lead (oops, maybe they switch on their own & I've just spilled the beans!) when shooting away from their range.
I coached one of the team members while they were fighting for their program to be reinstated.

: Don't invest in the company just yet, for two reasons:
: 1) It is a solution, looking for a problem (no real need); and
: 2) It is a crappy solution (not match grade results) to the non-existant problem.
: Other than that, press on!

.48740.48694


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: From what I know
PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2004 11:22 am 
Thanks for your patience in educating the uneducated (or as my wife, the teacher, says, the "uneducatable"!)
You mention a choke in BSA rifles. Once again I'll admit ignorance as I've never heard of a rifled barrel containing constriction, but most of my experience is with centrefire rifles, not air rifles. Is this common only to "faster" air rifles, or is it something one would expect to see in match rifles as well? Likewise I'm curious to know if this choking is applied to match pistols too.
As for tin pellets, I've got to think they'd be pretty hard and dry. The lubricity of lead is one of its greatest features when it comes to producing accuracy, and at low velocities its ductility makes for a perfect gas seal. I just can't see tin being able to replicate these qualities, unless made in a very fancy alloy.

Mark.
.48741.48727


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2004 12:42 pm 
Some do and some do not. In fact many have variations in the different production runs of or evolutions of the design.
Using BSA as an example, the MKI super 10 had a choke, then it didn't then it did, then it did again when the MK II came out.
It seems chokes are also popular in spring piston guns, the obvious "benefit" is the pellet will be "sized down to a near perfect fit prior to leaving the barrel. Also interesting is the fact that some will have chokes at the breach, at the muzzle, at both or a porgressive choke.
Some of the persistiently more accurate airguns in field use have choked barrels, Webly Scoot, Skan, FX, Ripley, the list goes on.
What is interesting is how the choke is imparted. Traditionally the match barrels will get their choke when their profile is cut. The stress of the cutting puts a small taper to the bore.
In many hunting gun barrels the choke is formed via a lapping process or in instances of preprofiling, then cutting the rifiling via any number of processes.
Interestingly MANY of the airguns we talk about here have a choke, the IZH 46 series, many of the guns with lothar Walther barrels. You will often see the terms "match choked" barrels on hunting rifles, now I am not sure if they mean really match choked in terms of how the choke is formed or if it's a marketing term.
Some firearms (rifles) have choked barrels, again the claim to fame being increased accuracy. I think that there is a decent benfit in a choke in an airgun barrel as the projectile is a bit more maliable v. a copper clad bullet.
Now the last thing I think is really interesting in this choke issue is that depending on how the barrel gets it's rifling, that too may be part of the "choke". Depending on how the rifling is done, the barrel may be formed differently by the rifiling process.The threorys and pratical applications are varried, I could go on but I bet it's booring.
Surfice to say many airguns have chked barrels...some of the better powder rifles do. Choked barrels seem to shine in the airgun and rimfire arean where the bullet can be "formed" by the choke in the barrel.

.48745.48741


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group