Paper patching in movie "Shooter"


PDA






Monkeyleg
December 26, 2009, 06:40 PM
I did some searching for threads about the paper patching incident in the movie "Shooter." All of the posts I found discussed paper patching as it is/was used in black powder guns.

I watched the movie again last night, and I thought about paper patching again. Wouldn't putting paper around the bullet degrade accuracy? I'd think that if the bullet wasn't making contact directly with the rifling it wouldn't have as correct a spin.

Comments from the experts here are much appreciated.

If you enjoyed reading about "Paper patching in movie "Shooter"" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Gunfighter123
December 26, 2009, 06:49 PM
I will have to watch that part of Shooter again ---- I Think --- it was Hollywood BS.

Gotta just LOVE good old Levon Helms as he was talking to Wallberg about it !!!

Brimic
December 26, 2009, 07:51 PM
Never saw the movie. Wasn't Marky-Mark in that one? Probably good enough reason for me to not see it.

If it was using a jacketed bullet as I'm getting out of the context of the previous posts, its pure hollyweird BS.

Paper patching is used as a form of 'jacketing' for lead slugs. With shooting lead bullets, there's a direct correlation between how hard a bullet if and how fast you can drive it (especially if you are talking about smokeless powder) without badly leading the barrel and damaging the bullet (putting discussion of using the correct lube aside). The downside to hard bullets is that they don't mushroom when they hit critters, they more shatter/spall/fragment which isn't very useful. You can drive a soft lead slug to higher velocities by casting it undersize to the bore and using paper patching as a 'jacket' to protect the slug which will still mushroom nicely. A modern jacketed bullet is the same thing- pure soft lead with a copper alloy jacket instead of paper. The modern jacketing has a lot of advantages over paper, not least of which, paper patching wears down the rifling much faster.
Which is why I'm calling the idea of using paper jacketed bullets to be complete BS.

happygeek
December 26, 2009, 09:35 PM
That, and the whole thing assumes that the bad guys recovered a completely undamaged bullet that Mark Wahlberg had fired which they could then reload. I'm very new to guns, but I've never seen an undamaged round that'd been fired into anything. Maybe if he'd shot ballistic gel?

Is it even possible for a bullet to be completely undamaged after having been fired into anything at over 2800 ft/s?

taliv
December 26, 2009, 09:41 PM
i think it's theoretically possible, considering they were talking about solids turned on a lathe, not a jacketed bullet with lead core.

the difficult part would be hitting a target from a mile away with a bullet that had been previously fired.

goon
December 26, 2009, 10:09 PM
Yeah, I also have a hard time seeing a bullet that has been fired into something being refired with any accuracy.

atlanticfire
December 26, 2009, 10:11 PM
They where discussing a round from a 408. Cheytac from an M200. The shot was approximately 1800 yards and it was not the same bullet from his gun. They had recovered the bullet from a test firing at a can of soup the week earlier and used the metal as evidence. AS they stated the bullet was unmatchable they where however about get a metallurgical match from it (it was never actually refired) . Other than the paper patch part, which I think was more of a distraction to the plot anyway I don’t see how the rest of this would be impossible, as the movie was based on government corruption. :rolleyes: And and yeah, I've watched the whole movie about 26 times.

Shadow Man
December 26, 2009, 10:23 PM
The paper patching bit was from the book Point Of Impact by Steven Hunter. In the book, it was explained much more clearly, and, in fact, they did use a pre-fired bullet Bob Lee Swagger had fired a week or so before. Never seen the movie, but I would bet a fair bit of money that the book is far better, and more accurate. The amount of work a good author goes through to get his work plausible is simply incredible. Works of fiction especially, because you have to make them seem true enough that they are believeable.

So, read the book, and if that leaves any questions to ask...I can't think of a better place to get them answered than right here.

Dr.Mall Ninja
December 26, 2009, 11:56 PM
"I dont think you get it, those boy's killed my dog"

Kenpo
December 27, 2009, 01:22 AM
Mall Ninja, that's the best line in the movie! :)

mljdeckard
December 27, 2009, 01:25 AM
shadow man, it's the only book in many years I have bothered to read more than once. And yes, it goes into a LOT more detail.

The thing that really left a bad taste in my mouth was that they used Wahlberg at all. He's an admitted felon, if not a convicted felon, he's VERY anti-gun, when he met Charleton Heston in filming the Planet of the Apes remake, he said; "It's very disturbing to meet you."

svaz
December 27, 2009, 03:41 AM
Darn pity to hear that about Walhberg, I thought he played the part well. Yes, the book was better (almost always is, though, isn't it?) but the movie wasn't too bad.

To think that I almost paid retail to get a copy. No way I'm putting $ into Walhberg's pocket. Guess I'll have to look for a used DVD.

Float Pilot
December 27, 2009, 04:10 AM
In the original book, the hero leaves many projectiles in a long range target backstop because the bad guys con him into shooting at various target to prove what can be done.
One of the bullets is recovered intact and is later re-fired intact via paper patching from a tricked out 300 H&H M70s with a slightly over-sized bore. The point being to set up the hero when the rifling matches up to his rifle.
While it would work in theory, the chances of it being accurate enough to hit a body past 300 yards is a bit of a stretch.

Yeap nothing like an admitted racist, thief and thug to star as a military vet.

RedAlert
December 27, 2009, 11:10 AM
I have no doubt that an expert could successfully accomplish the shot using a previously fired round. Paper patching is in essence a form of Sabot. I think it would be best accomplished if the patched bullet was fired from a larger caliber weapon. This way, the paper would be able to engage the rifling and not mess up the grooves already on the used bullet. Just suppose you decided to use a sabot. Fire it out of a rifled bore and you could achieve acceptable accuracy.

Peter M. Eick
December 27, 2009, 12:05 PM
If you want to learn about paper patching go to a black powder shoot. Another good source of information is Naramore's "Handloading Manual" 1939. He goes into a nice long discussion of the technique and the pro's and con's of paper patching. Naramore points out that they used to even have 4 different thicknesses of special paper for patching. He comments it was similar to the linen paper used in currency.


Also in the earliest Handloader issues, their was a back page section written by Donaldson and he commonly talked about paper patching and how it was used for schutzen (spelling?) shooting.

Suffice it to say, it was a technique used by expert shooters to wring the best accuracy out of the equipment they had at the time. While I am not sure of what could be done today, I would not dismiss it "out of hand" without some serious testing.

redneckdan
December 27, 2009, 12:25 PM
Paper patching actually wears a bore less than jacketed bullets. Its possible to push a patched bullet faster than a jacketed bullet given the same weight and cartridge. Patched bullet have a lower friction and thus a reduced pressure, allowing a little more powder before reaching maximum pressure.

The book stated that a sabot was used not a paper patch.

The rifle was a weatherby 'black king' in .338 winchester. The book reiterates several times that this was the '10th black king that had been missing for years'.


This is a 320gr patched bullet. The rifle is a CZ-550 is .375 H&H. The load was 65.0 gr of IMR 4064, good for just over 2500FPS. Group was shot at 50yds from the sitting position. The lower 2 holes were with the initial sight setting. The upper 3 holes were after dialing in some elevation to bring it to a calculated 150yds zero.

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b77/redneckdan/IMGP3921.jpg

Palehorseman
December 27, 2009, 02:17 PM
Many do not know that properly patched cast boolits can be driven at jacketed velocities with excellent accuracy.

Check out the patched boolit section on this forum: http://castboolits.gunloads.com/

Cast boolits for both handgun and rifles offer much more than some would think possible. I have been casting for decades and very seldom fire jacketed pills. With several hundred pounds of wheel weights and a selection of boolit molds, the cost of jacketed bullets does not enter into the equation.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y92/TANSTAAFL-2/P1010001-7.jpg

Walkalong
December 27, 2009, 04:50 PM
You really should get some more molds there Palehorseman. :D

Paper patching has always sounded interesting to me, but it is one of the few things I have not tried.

ReadyontheRight
December 27, 2009, 07:09 PM
Never seen the movie, but I would bet a fair bit of money that the book is far better, and more accurate.

You have sure got that right! And a young Clint Eastwood starred in the book (at least in my head).

Shadow Man
December 27, 2009, 10:16 PM
Paper patching actually wears a bore less than jacketed bullets. Its possible to push a patched bullet faster than a jacketed bullet given the same weight and cartridge. Patched bullet have a lower friction and thus a reduced pressure, allowing a little more powder before reaching maximum pressure.

The book stated that a sabot was used not a paper patch.

The rifle was a weatherby 'black king' in .338 winchester. The book reiterates several times that this was the '10th black king that had been missing for years'.


Hate to nitpick, but it was a Winchester pre-64 Model 70 Target Grade in .300 H&H Magnum (I just checked my copy of the book). However, I cannot argue with the fact that paper patching and sabots are very fast, accurate loads. The author delved into the Kennedy assasination, with his theory of a shooter farther away than Oswald using a hotloaded round pushing three of Oswald's pre-fired bullets. That's the only part of the book that lost me, a good idea, but off-topic a bit.

taliv
December 27, 2009, 10:28 PM
sabots are generally considered very inaccurate in hand-held rifles.

Shadow Man
December 27, 2009, 10:30 PM
sabots are generally considered very inaccurate in hand-held rifles.

Really? I don't want to argue with you, but I seem to remember some M82A1's in .50BMG shooting sabots with far better accuracy then they could get out of the standard loads.

svaz
December 27, 2009, 11:12 PM
You have sure got that right! And a young Clint Eastwood starred in the book (at least in my head).

I always got the impression that the story happened long after Viet Nam. I imagined either Tom Lee Jones or Sam Elliot.

Ohio Gun Guy
December 27, 2009, 11:20 PM
I dont really know but it sounds like a good one for the mythbusters

Likely a Plausible but unlikely situation. I'll bet that you have to get into very non-standard territory for this to work. In the movie they were using a conventional rifle.........

Utah1
December 28, 2009, 03:16 AM
I always got the impression that the story happened long after Viet Nam. I imagined either Tom Lee Jones or Sam Elliot.
They got the casting wrong for the movie, it should have been someone older and a little rougher. Sam Elliot would have been great.

Roughneck08
December 28, 2009, 03:30 AM
If anyone has the movie, watch the special features of the movie, Mark Walhberg goes out to Gunsite to practice and get instruction on how to actually fire all the weapons and the correct way to do it all. I do believe he hit the 1200 yard target, by himself with M24 or M40 either one. Pretty neat for a hollywood actor.

Palehorseman
December 28, 2009, 03:00 PM
[Walkalong
Member

"You really should get some more molds there Palehorseman."]

If SHTF, one cannot have too many molds, wheel weights, primers, or, too much powder.:)

For the future, invest in precious metals:

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/photos/uncategorized/2009/01/13/ammo1.jpg

Shadow Man
December 28, 2009, 04:02 PM
Mark Walhberg goes out to Gunsite to practice and get instruction on how to actually fire all the weapons and the correct way to do it all. I do believe he hit the 1200 yard target, by himself with M24 or M40 either one. Pretty neat for a hollywood actor.

But he is still a felon, and shouldn't, in theory, have been allowed anywhere near those weapons. I could think of dozens of other actors who would have done a better job than he, and are not felons to boot.

navyretired 1
December 28, 2009, 04:07 PM
I agree type casting for Bob Lee Swagger was waaay off ,but he (Wahlberg) did a pretty good job in the role he just didn't fit the mold from the book too well. I've read all the Hunter books about Bob Lee and his dad and there are not many technical mistakes on fire arms.
Now on paper patching, It's primarily for lead rifle bullets but the theory is compatable to jacketed. Paper patching is the poor mans Sabot, Sabots leave you a projectile untouched/damaged by rifling so it is airodynamically perfect. In lead the paper also protects the base from melting and becoming unstable, negates the need for lubing, prevents leading of barrel, and detaches just like Sabot as soon as leaving barrel by air pressure and centrifical force. Paper patching has gone out of style because its a lot of work with specialized molds, not because it's; inaccurate, hard on bores, or is only for hollywood. The only thing I've ever heard or read that it wasn't real good with was the old Pope gain-pitch barrels as they tended to rip off paper in bore as the bullet spin accelerated in bore.
I have actually fired recover 5.56 mm bullets from range berm to show they could be accurate and they were. When recovered after second firing you could not feel and could barely see the origanal engraved marks from rifling. Not paper patched just reloaded

redneckdan
January 3, 2010, 01:44 PM
No need for specialized moulds. You can take a standard cast bullet, size it down .006 inch and wrap it. It just so happens that lee makes .452 push through sizers that work dandy for sizing patching bullets for .45-70 Other calibers you will have to order a custom die, they run about $30.

If you enjoyed reading about "Paper patching in movie "Shooter"" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!