When Were Pointed Bullets Invented?

[ahoyza]

So I have gone through 20 years of trial and error to come to the conclusion my 1895 chilean mauser hates pointed bullets.

See my post .284 vs .285.

This am the question popped into my mind: when did they invent (put in production) pointed bullets anyway?

I bet my rifle was designed for round nose.

Anybody else have a model 95? Will yours shoot pointies ok?

Thanks,

ahoyza

[gitano]

Finding the "Exact" date will probably generate more "heat" than "light" so I'll leave that battle for others to argue. What is incontrovertible, is that the Germans PRODUCED the "spitzer" - "pointed" - bullet and did the most research on its ballistics. If I remember correctly, it was available for the Model 1896 Mauser.

 

My Chilean Mauser shoots INCREDIBLY well using Hornady 139-grain Interlocks. It has the absolute worst bore I have EVER seen. I was going to throw the barrel away and use the action for 'something else' but decided instead to use it as a platform for my pressure sensing equipment used to develop 7x57 handloads for my other 7x57s. I was dumbstruck by how well it shot - sub MoA. I'm not kidding about the bore. It took me two hours to get the RUST, NOT cosmoline out of the bore when I received it through the mail. It is pitted, and nasty... and it shoots as good as any milsurp I own.

 

Paul

[AzRednek]

It was about or just prior to the turn of the 19th to 20th Century that it was adopted by the German militarily. I can speculate that hobbyist bullet casters probably did it for years before the military took notice. The US originally adopting a round nosed 30 cal for the 1903 Springfield followed the Germans and started using a pointed bullet in 1906 hence the caliber designation 30-06.

 

Thinking back to the 70's when shooting buds and I would combine our bux and buy large amounts of mil-surp ammo. Best I recall all the 7X57 were round nose. Been to many years to recall where it came from or what year it was manufactured.

[ahoyza]

Gitano,

Could you tell me more about the pressure sensing?

Thanks,

ahoyza

[gitano]

What would you like to know?

 

The hardware can be found here: http://www.shootings...om/pressure.htm

 

I have an older version than they are offering now. It works. The versions I got in the 'early' days were fairly klugey. "Made in a garage" would be an apt descriptor. Very poor connectors and overall construction. I'm sure they are better now.

 

The sensors simply are piezoelectric strain gauges properly spec'd to mate with an analog-to-digital converter. They are attached to the exterior of the rifle chamber with cyano-acrylate glue. They are a bit of a pain to install, but as I said, they work. They are removable without harm to the rifle, but the gauge cannot be used again. I REALLY don't like the prices RSI charges for extra gauges. Being an EE, I knew where to look, and I got my extras for one FIFTIETH (1/50) of what RSI was charging. They are now charging $85 for three strain gauges. If you know where to look, you can get 10 for $5 plus shipping. You can choose for your self the appropriate adjective to describe the behavior of a vendor when they mark up a common commodity by 1133%. (I have a few select phrases I use.) That's NOT 113%, it's more than one thousand percent. Fifty cents each direct from supplier, or $28.33 each from RSI.

 

I got the Pressure Trace to develop loads for wildcats for which there are no "factory", SAAMI or CIP specs. And, I was reloading for old milsurps, and wanted to MAKE SURE my loads were within my own pressure standards. What I did was put the sensors on an old ratty milsurp and develop the handloads there. Once I knew what RANGE of CHARGES of a specific powder produced what RANGE of PRESURES, I could move with confidence to rifles without gauges. For wildcats, I simply mounted the strain gauges when I built the rifles; worked up to pressures I was comfortable with, then completed the build and loaded accordingly, knowing where the pressure ceiling was.

 

That said, now that I have learned to use QuickLOAD effectively, I have quit using Pressure Trace. Pressure Trace is WAY too much trouble now that I can get QL to give me what I need. However, I must say that I "proofed" QL by using Pressure Trace. But... like I said, now that I know what is required to make QL give very good estimates, I don't really need Pressure Trace.

 

Paul

[gun nutty]

Just to try and answer the original topic... This article on Wikipedia seems informative:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7x57mm_Mauser

 

According to the article, Spain adopted the 7X57mm in 1893 with a 173 grain round-nose. In 1913, Spain then switched to a 139 grain spitzer bullet.

 

My guess is that barrels manufactured early enough were designed for the long, round 173 grain bullet. I'm guessing that touching the lands with a 139 grain bullet would be difficult while still allowing function with the stock magazine. Dunno, just a guess. If those bullets do have a significant jump to the lands, shorter bullets will be hit or miss.

 

The heavier bullets offer two things: more surface engagement area, and a shorter jump to the rifling. Heavy spitzers might also work as well.

 

If your rifle shoots accurately with the long, round bullets, I'd just focus on that. You can easily burn through the cost of a replacement surplus barrel with too much experimentation. Those bullets, powder, and primers add up.

[Sailormilan2]

First intruduced by France, in 1898.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spitzer_(bullet)