its wax lubrication, and the bullet did not show any signs of cracking or loss of the copper plating. After the hollow- point punch was used, I switched to the fl at-point punch to gently press the loaded round out from the die. After forming 100 rounds with the
hollow-point punch, I switched over to the fl at-nose punch to fl atten out the nose in an attempt to increase the initial shock upon impact. While working my way toward the right dimensions for the fl at nose, I noticed that if I pressed the bullet too much I had a heck of a time removing it from the die. Even with the die cleaned, the copper-plated bullets tend to grab the sides of the die pretty tightly. I ended up reforming the nose of the bullet just enough to make a change in diameter from 0.127 to 0.175 inch. CCI VELOCITOR ACCURACY AND TERMINAL PERFORMANCE
On the first day of testing, the
short barrel worked well with the Ve- locitor and kept both ten-shot groups under an inch, with just a few rounds that drifted up or snuck out the bottom from the main group. These fl iers were seen with the other ammunition and didn’t surprise me too much. The main groups were round in shape and the bul- lets cut through the wind predictably. Something else I noticed was the more pronounced recoil of the rifle when compared with the other ammunition. Moving to the modifi ed hollow-
point ammunition, there was little change in the accuracy. I noticed the groups were a bit more uniform in ap- pearance, but overall there was little change in the group size. Both groups measured a little larger than a half-inch. The flat-nose modification did
show a marked improvement in accu- racy, with one group just over the half- inch mark, and the second group just slightly under the half-inch mark. The fl at-nosed bullets did not drift around in the wind like the Stinger fl at-nose did, and the vertical dispersion in the groups was much improved when com- pared with the unmodifi ed round. These two modifi cations either improved or maintained the level of accuracy in the short barrel. I also want to note that I did not re-lube any of the bullets because I thought there was enough remaining factory lubrication to maintain accuracy and keep fouling under control. On the second day, with the longer
factory Anschutz match barrel installed, the groups for all tested ammunition showed a slight improvement. There were still a few fl iers present, but overall the Anschutz barrel and Velocitor am- munition just seemed to work. Of the three versions tested, the
modifi ed hollow-point bullet produced the best results, with an average right at a half-inch. For such a high-velocity and hard-hitting round, keeping bullets in a half-inch group for ten shots is about as much as any jackrabbit hunter could want. Like the other ammunition, the POI remained the same on both barrels when testing the factory and modifi ed ammunition. CCI VELOCITOR MEDIUM TESTING With the opening shot at the wax
block, I knew this was going to be an interesting test. The factory ammunition struck the wax block much harder than any of the other ammunition tested. As many hunters say, you just can’t ignore physics, and a 40-grain bullet traveling 1,400 fps sure has a lot of energy to de- liver. The factory rounds punched deep holes into the blocks, held together, and formed nice looking “mushroom” bul- lets. They had the look of a high-power rifl e bullet recovered from a deer. Loading the rifl e with a modifi ed
hollow-point, the fi rst shot exploded out the front of the block, leaving chunks of wax medium scattered around the target in a 24-inch circle. The second block was pushed back about a half-inch with the sheared-off nose of the bullet stuck mid- way through the second block. The base of the bullet continued on to nearly six inches deep inside the third block. With- out a doubt, the modifi ed hollow-point bullet was much more destructive to the wax medium than the factory offering. Saving the best for last, the fl at-
nosed Velocitor round was truly one of the most impressive modifi cations tested during this project. Shooting the fi rst block, it landed with a pronounced “thump” and pushed a deep channel through four wax blocks, coming to a stop just shy of seven inches. The bullet slowly opened up into a semi-expanded mushroom shape after traveling an inch and a half into the wax blocks. From there it continued to expand, but not enough to fold back the displaced lead from the bullet’s nose. I have a suspicion that this modifi cation would do a good job of deep penetration and destruction
of bone and vital organs on small game. CLOSING COMMENTS FOR PART 1 Unfortunately, I have to stop the
article here and continue in the next is- sue with the remaining tests and results. At this point you can see that the D-Rock bullet modifi er is quite an impressive tool, capable of transforming factory offerings into serious varmint hunting ammunition. All the data from Part 1 and Part 2 will be included in an Excel sheet at the end of Part 2.
CONTACTS
D-Rock Bullet Modifi cation System
www.thorntonrimfi
reinnovations.com
J.G. Anschutz GmbH
www.jga.anschutz-sport.com
Pacifi c Tool & Gauge Inc.
www.pacifi
ctoolandgauge.com
CCI
www.cci-ammunition.com Federal
www.federalpremium.com Eley Ltd.
www.eley.co.uk www.varminthunter.org Page 55
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204 |
Page 205 |
Page 206 |
Page 207 |
Page 208 |
Page 209 |
Page 210 |
Page 211 |
Page 212