Lee Martin
Active member
A good bullet spinner, while not absolutely necessary, is another nice tool to have:
-Lee
www.singleactions.com
-Lee
www.singleactions.com
Bullet making?
- Thread starter TrxR
- Start date
A good bullet spinner, while not absolutely necessary, is another nice tool to have:
-Lee
www.singleactions.com
Ill have to look into them. What brand is that one?
A good bullet spinner, while not absolutely necessary, is another nice tool to have:
-Lee
www.singleactions.com
Wow! So that's what they look like.
Lee Martin
Active member
I'm not sure who made it. I bought that spinner from a fellow BR shooter a few years ago.
-Lee
www.singleactions.com
BillBrawand
New member
charlie mkes great cores of any weightand saves time .
I looked into that but he wont/cant ship to Canada.
BillBrawand
New member
is the bullet in reverseda good bullet spinner, while not absolutely necessary, is another nice tool to have:
-lee
www.singleactions.com
jackie schmidt
New member
A good bullet spinner, while not absolutely necessary, is another nice tool to have:
-Lee
www.singleactions.com
Lee, several years back, I had access to a Vern Juenke machine. We spun a lot of custom BENCHREST bullets on it, and surprisingly, the vast majority only moved a few lines of deviation.
Now, just what those lines represented has always been up for debate, as well as how many lines of deviation would disqualify a bullet.
One thing we did find was any of the “semi custom” bullets, such as Berger and Sierra Match Kings showed considerable lines of deviation from bullet to bullet. Certainly much more than any true custom ballet.
And, for what it is worth, the absolute “best” bullet we tested was the BIB 30 caliber 112.
I would like to have one of those now, or something similar,....,,,,,even though I don’t really know what t is exactly telling me.
Last edited:
Lee Martin
Active member
Jackie - I have a friend who owns a Juenke. I may play with it out of curiousity. Like you, I can't definitively say what it measures. But if I had to guess, it asseses the runout between the inner jacket wall and the core. But that's just a guess.
Also, a friend called and told me my bullet spinner was made by Hart way back when.
-Lee
www.singleactions.com
Also, a friend called and told me my bullet spinner was made by Hart way back when.
-Lee
www.singleactions.com
R.G. Robinett
"That'll never work."
I believe that the Juenkie device simply measures exterior geometry/geography. Via blind testing, guinea pigs, who owned Juenke devices, were absolutely unable to sort bullets according to wall thickness, and/or/ variation thereof.
Twenty plus years ago, I sent samples of bullets featuring various amounts of jacket-wall variation, ranging from near ZERO, to as much a 0.0015", to several individuals who sorted their long range bullets using Juenke instruments: the samples were enclosed in baggies, with five-six samples of each thickness & variation per bag.
The bags were marked A,B,C . . .
I do not recall how many variations were sent, but it was several sets(5-6) to each of a half dozen of so people: there was no correlation in their sorting. There was not a single accurate sort - in fact, every single bullet from the "test" examples (all from a single point-up die) sorted into their "match"/"record" specification. So, what does that indicate?
Another interesting attribute regarding our anal nature: all of the guinea pigs had various, but similar sort ranges for "qualifying" bullets - as I recall, <5 untits was a match bullet: then, > than that, up to, say <10 were sighters and practice; then, > than their last number were fire-form/cull bullets.
When every one of my 30 Cal., 187gr FB bullets sorted to less than 5 units, most people tightened the sort parameters . . . of course, all of the bullets they purchased featured excellent jacket quality - extremely uniform and almost non-existent wall-thickness variation - however, per above, they weren't quantifying that . . .
Many years ago, in response to a request to make a bullet spinner, [the late] Ferris Pendell advised a pal of mine, "the best bullet spinner is a good barrel." The only time to check is when they don't work . . . otherwise, one may just be polluting one's own mind with distracting negativism . . . RG
Twenty plus years ago, I sent samples of bullets featuring various amounts of jacket-wall variation, ranging from near ZERO, to as much a 0.0015", to several individuals who sorted their long range bullets using Juenke instruments: the samples were enclosed in baggies, with five-six samples of each thickness & variation per bag.
The bags were marked A,B,C . . .
I do not recall how many variations were sent, but it was several sets(5-6) to each of a half dozen of so people: there was no correlation in their sorting. There was not a single accurate sort - in fact, every single bullet from the "test" examples (all from a single point-up die) sorted into their "match"/"record" specification. So, what does that indicate?
Another interesting attribute regarding our anal nature: all of the guinea pigs had various, but similar sort ranges for "qualifying" bullets - as I recall, <5 untits was a match bullet: then, > than that, up to, say <10 were sighters and practice; then, > than their last number were fire-form/cull bullets.
When every one of my 30 Cal., 187gr FB bullets sorted to less than 5 units, most people tightened the sort parameters . . . of course, all of the bullets they purchased featured excellent jacket quality - extremely uniform and almost non-existent wall-thickness variation - however, per above, they weren't quantifying that . . .
Many years ago, in response to a request to make a bullet spinner, [the late] Ferris Pendell advised a pal of mine, "the best bullet spinner is a good barrel." The only time to check is when they don't work . . . otherwise, one may just be polluting one's own mind with distracting negativism . . . RG
Last edited:
jackie schmidt
New member
I believe that the Juenkie device simply measures exterior geometry/geography. Via blind testing, guinea pigs, who owned Juenke devices, were absolutely unablr to sort bullets according to wall thickness, and/or/ variation thereof.
Twenty plus years ago, I sent samples of bullets featuring various amounts of jacket-wall variation, ranging from near ZERO, to as much a 0.0015", to several individuals who sorted their long range bullets using Juenke instruments: the samples were enclosed in baggies, with five-six samples of each thickness & variation per bag.
The bags were marked A,B,C . . .
I do not recall how many variations were sent, but it was several sets(5-6) to each of a half dozen of so people: there was no correlation in their sorting. There was not a single accurate sort - in fact, every single bullet from the "test" examples (all from a single point-up die) sorted into their "match"/"record" specification. So, what does that indicate?
Another interesting attribute regarding our anal nature: all of the guinea pigs had various, but similar sort ranges for "qualifying" bullets - as I recall, <5 untis was a match bullet: then, > than that, up to, say <10 were sighters and practice; then, > than their last number were fire-form/cull bullets.
When every one of my 30 Cal., 187gr FB bullets sorted to less than 5 units, most people tightened the sort parameters . . . of course, all of the bullets they purchased featured excellent jacket quality - extremely uniform and almost non-existent wall-thickness variation - however, per above, they weren't quantifying that . . .
Many years ago, in response to a request to make a bullet spinner, [the late] Ferris Pendell advised a pal of mine, "the best bullet spinner is a good barrel." The only time to check is when they don't work . . . otherwise, one may just be polluting one's own mind with distracting negativism . . . RG
Yeh, but keep in mind Randy, these devices keep us waking up at 2:AM in a cold sweat, worrying about things we can’t do anything about.
I believe that the Juenkie device simply measures exterior geometry/geography. Via blind testing, guinea pigs, who owned Juenke devices, were absolutely unablr to sort bullets according to wall thickness, and/or/ variation thereof.
Twenty plus years ago, I sent samples of bullets featuring various amounts of jacket-wall variation, ranging from near ZERO, to as much a 0.0015", to several individuals who sorted their long range bullets using Juenke instruments: the samples were enclosed in baggies, with five-six samples of each thickness & variation per bag.
The bags were marked A,B,C . . .
I do not recall how many variations were sent, but it was several sets(5-6) to each of a half dozen of so people: there was no correlation in their sorting. There was not a single accurate sort - in fact, every single bullet from the "test" examples (all from a single point-up die) sorted into their "match"/"record" specification. So, what does that indicate?
Another interesting attribute regarding our anal nature: all of the guinea pigs had various, but similar sort ranges for "qualifying" bullets - as I recall, <5 untis was a match bullet: then, > than that, up to, say <10 were sighters and practice; then, > than their last number were fire-form/cull bullets.
When every one of my 30 Cal., 187gr FB bullets sorted to less than 5 units, most people tightened the sort parameters . . . of course, all of the bullets they purchased featured excellent jacket quality - extremely uniform and almost non-existent wall-thickness variation - however, per above, they weren't quantifying that . . .
Many years ago, in response to a request to make a bullet spinner, [the late] Ferris Pendell advised a pal of mine, "the best bullet spinner is a good barrel." The only time to check is when they don't work . . . otherwise, one may just be polluting one's own mind with distracting negativism . . . RG
Yea! Lowell told me don't worry about the points. Just shoot them.
Like I typed before Lowell shot the culls/rejects.....
Ever hear the story where Lowell shot 99 bullets and still won a 2 gun....
Happened summer before I met Lowell. Kenny confirmed it.
Here's the rifle.
Attachments
Last edited:
BillBrawand
New member
some yrs ago doc. Maretzocame to me and want o xray my bullets along with others some time later he told me out of all the bulles he xyrayed mine were the only ones thatwere best but he couldnt believe all the bleed by he had found they still shot i have fond best to put small radiuson core seating punches.
Lee Martin
Active member
I couldn't agree more Randy. The paper is the ultimate measuring tool. My bullet spinner is a neat gizmo, but I haven't used it in a long time. Same reason I've never bought a used Juenke.
-Lee
www.singleactions.com
BillBrawand
New member
i had th. Botail s ordered when i got to range fellow asked if i brough them i said there in my car in back seatton floor later he tooled he spun them they werent any good the next day shot 2 ze4ros.
Dennis L Martin
Member
Spinning bullets
I remember asking Larry Baggett several years ago if he spun his bullets. He said " of course! I spin every bullet I make... Right down the barrell!"
I remember asking Larry Baggett several years ago if he spun his bullets. He said " of course! I spin every bullet I make... Right down the barrell!"
BillBrawand
New member
after he left them back on car floor he spent a lot time for othing .
BillBrawand
New member
50 yrs ago i heard sierra lubed there cpreswhen making .30 cal. Br bullets, i started out 'etching' the cores in hot water and cascade dish washing powder.
Then tried rinsing the cores in acetone and they shot just as well as the 'etched' cores.
As an experiment, i lightly lubed some cores with marvel mystery oil. The bullets shot just as well.
While i'm not advocating intentionally lubing cores, nor did i continue that practice, there is a point where clean enough is clean enough.
An assortment of properly fitting core seat punches (juggled with different jacket lots and core antimony percentages) that would produce a perfectly concentric 'bleed-by ring' of .005-.006, with adequate seating pressure, was the most critical single step with my set up.
Making bullets that myself and others used to win registered ibs/nbrsa tournaments was one of the most satisfying things i did in benchrest.
Good shootin'.