Ok first I will say I am not LEO or Military sniper so my shooting applications are different. I shoot NRA across the course, mid/long range prone, along with just the regular range shooting, etc. I started shooting in 2007. In late 2008 I came on to hBN after a friend of mine who is a LEO firearms insstructor who also shoots NRA matches talked about it. So for the 2009, and 2010 seasons I shot hBN in all my match firearms (.308, .30-06, .260, .280, .243) along with using it for my vintage firearms. In 2011 I quit using it and this year I have gone to molly. I just wanted to share my observations and what my thoughts are on hBN, versus naked bulelts, versus Molly. Being a physics/chemistry teacher I usually like to have numerical data to support my findings/feelings but in this case I don't have that and just going on my observations.
Feel: I can not definitely say that hBN feels slicker than naked. Before I used molly I thought they did however after having molly coated bulelts I'm not sure there is any difference. However not as slick as molly.
Seating force: I have noticed that while they feel slightly slicker hBN bullets seem to seat a little harder than naked or moly coated bullets. I have many .260 bullets 123 SMK and 142 SMK where the seating die deformed the nose of the bullet. Using the same die seating depth and brass the naked bullets slide in easier and the molly bullets even easier. The deforming wasn't noticed on the .22cal, 7mm, or .30 cal bullets. This observation leads me to think that hBN isn't reducing friction such as molly .
Pulling bullets: I have noticed that bullets that have been seated with hBN require more force to pull than naked or molly coated bullets. I was pulling some 175SMKs out of .30-40 Krag loads and the amount of force it took was substantially more. These loads had been sitting around since 2008. To just test I seated a naked 175 SMK and a moly coated 175 SMK and just like seating preasure hBN required the most to pull followed by naked and then molly.
Preasure and velocity in loaded ammo: When going to molly vs. naked I experienced the usual need to increase the powder due to the preasure decreasing because of the lower amount of friction on the bullet/barrel. If I shoot the same charge with molly as naked the chrono numbers are slower and I need more elevation. This WAS NOT observed with hBN versus naked. My zero's and my velocities remaned the same, and in some cases teh velocities may have increased. I can't substantiate this but do remember having numbers that were higher at times with hBN vs. naked but at that time I attributed it to increased temperature, although if it was we are only talking 5 degrees 10 at the most. From this observation Molly does decrease preasure however hBN seems to have no effect if not increasing it possibly due to possible higher friction.
Cleaning: Naked I do get guilding metal in the barrel and you do have to work to get it out. However the guns shoot well and I have gone awhile with leaving it in there. With hBN I didn't have much copper but I had the gray residue from the hBN cleaned out fairly simple. Molly I just have left my barrels go as it takes 10 rounds or so to settle them in from clean. The sulfuric acid fear from talking to several people who shoot it is unfounded and one person who lives in Georgia where you have high humidity says he has never had barrels ate away because of it. Overall my philosohpy on cleaning has become if it is still shooting good just let it go. After a couple of matches then I will clean it.
All of the evidence together for hBN: With all of my observations I tend to think that hBN is actually increasing friction due to what I've noticed with no velocity to slightly higher velocity readings vs. naked. Bullet deformation when seating and increased force when pulling. The barrels weren't as dirty, but if teh friction is increased then every bullet is essentially lapping the metal causing increased barrel wear and reduced life. Evidence for this is a Hart .243 barrel I had where the throat moved out to where I couldn't touch it after 700 rounds or so of mainly hBN coated bullets.
Becasue of this evidence I'm removing the hBN from all my bullets that are still coated.
Take this for what it is worth as I am not trying to pass it off as an offical scientific test, but merely trying to give what I've noticed over the past 4 years shooting and loading many 1000s of rounds of ammo.
Feel: I can not definitely say that hBN feels slicker than naked. Before I used molly I thought they did however after having molly coated bulelts I'm not sure there is any difference. However not as slick as molly.
Seating force: I have noticed that while they feel slightly slicker hBN bullets seem to seat a little harder than naked or moly coated bullets. I have many .260 bullets 123 SMK and 142 SMK where the seating die deformed the nose of the bullet. Using the same die seating depth and brass the naked bullets slide in easier and the molly bullets even easier. The deforming wasn't noticed on the .22cal, 7mm, or .30 cal bullets. This observation leads me to think that hBN isn't reducing friction such as molly .
Pulling bullets: I have noticed that bullets that have been seated with hBN require more force to pull than naked or molly coated bullets. I was pulling some 175SMKs out of .30-40 Krag loads and the amount of force it took was substantially more. These loads had been sitting around since 2008. To just test I seated a naked 175 SMK and a moly coated 175 SMK and just like seating preasure hBN required the most to pull followed by naked and then molly.
Preasure and velocity in loaded ammo: When going to molly vs. naked I experienced the usual need to increase the powder due to the preasure decreasing because of the lower amount of friction on the bullet/barrel. If I shoot the same charge with molly as naked the chrono numbers are slower and I need more elevation. This WAS NOT observed with hBN versus naked. My zero's and my velocities remaned the same, and in some cases teh velocities may have increased. I can't substantiate this but do remember having numbers that were higher at times with hBN vs. naked but at that time I attributed it to increased temperature, although if it was we are only talking 5 degrees 10 at the most. From this observation Molly does decrease preasure however hBN seems to have no effect if not increasing it possibly due to possible higher friction.
Cleaning: Naked I do get guilding metal in the barrel and you do have to work to get it out. However the guns shoot well and I have gone awhile with leaving it in there. With hBN I didn't have much copper but I had the gray residue from the hBN cleaned out fairly simple. Molly I just have left my barrels go as it takes 10 rounds or so to settle them in from clean. The sulfuric acid fear from talking to several people who shoot it is unfounded and one person who lives in Georgia where you have high humidity says he has never had barrels ate away because of it. Overall my philosohpy on cleaning has become if it is still shooting good just let it go. After a couple of matches then I will clean it.
All of the evidence together for hBN: With all of my observations I tend to think that hBN is actually increasing friction due to what I've noticed with no velocity to slightly higher velocity readings vs. naked. Bullet deformation when seating and increased force when pulling. The barrels weren't as dirty, but if teh friction is increased then every bullet is essentially lapping the metal causing increased barrel wear and reduced life. Evidence for this is a Hart .243 barrel I had where the throat moved out to where I couldn't touch it after 700 rounds or so of mainly hBN coated bullets.
Becasue of this evidence I'm removing the hBN from all my bullets that are still coated.
Take this for what it is worth as I am not trying to pass it off as an offical scientific test, but merely trying to give what I've noticed over the past 4 years shooting and loading many 1000s of rounds of ammo.
