661 Oil Test 32:1 vs 40:1 vs 50:1 ?

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
And this matters how? What your trying to accomplish if to determine the pressure ceilings of a particular bullet power combo.
Hobestly, I rarely use the 43 any more as a 35p and some published data accomplishes the same thing.
You said velocity is an indication of pressure.
Some on here may not realize it only works with the same powder.
Misunderstandings with reloading can be bad.
If you get 1300 with H110 some may think you can get the same pressure when you use 231 or Bullseye to try to reach that velocity.
If velocity is an indication of pressure. Without adding "With the same powder. "
There was a LOT of work with Pressure and penetration work with the gunsmith I worked with.
That sounds weird.
Anyway. Folks may not know.
 
My Colt NF couldn't handle that pressure. You must be using a Ruger SA or Freedom Arms. Gun thread same time as a oil thread....lol.
Yeah. I worried some folks may misread what he said.
It's in Ruger. Tested in the H. P. White Labs. None better.
I got near that in the "3 screw 357" size Ruger. Like the New Vaquero.
I took an old 357 and a New Model 357 cylinder. Opens the frame window. Turned the cylinder to fit and rechambered to 45 Colt.
Just one step down from full house Ruger loads, but in that Colt size frame. There is a difference in the way they feel.

One of those New VaqueroBisleys is going to be a 5 shot 480.

Great fun.
 
vids done...

- Both saws first drained of oil and gas.
- same stihl bar oil
-same bar - maul and I both have tsumura 36's. Some debate on if use them both or just use one and switch over. Ended up using same bar and switching.
- air filter cleaned
- 1 new stihl RS chain for each saw.
- one small warm up cut in cotton wood prior to doing the 2 main cuts. Everyone involved was interested in making sure all the i's were dotted and t's crossed.


Muff modded 661 50:1 H1R went first. I was cutting.

log 1 - 22.4 sec , log 2 - 26.0 sec




bar switched to ported 661, new chain used

Ported 661 32:1 H1R - I was cutting

log 1 - 22.0 sec , log 2 - 26.0 sec



Hedgerow: Fastest time with ported 661 using 32:1 vs ported 661 using 40:1:
40:1 was 9.3% faster than 32:1 in the ported 661.


bar already on ported 661 so we decided to do back to back.

ported 661 32:1 H1R - Hedgerow cutting

log 1 - 21.4 sec , log 2 - 25.0 sec




bar switched to muff modded 661 50:1 H1R (switched back to other chain) - Hedgegrow cutting

log 1 - 22.4 sec , log 2 - 25.4 sec




Next,

Switched the ported 661 from 32:1 H1R to 40:1 H1R (performed reset)

note - this cut was done after the chain had been used for a number of cuts. Namely the cuts shown (and more) in the very next post.

19.4 sec




The saw ran 40:1 H1R for the rest of the day. About half a gallon. A few people who ran the saw throughout the day, noted that the saw seemed to get stronger as the day progressed.
 
You said velocity is an indication of pressure.
Some on here may not realize it only works with the same powder.
Misunderstandings with reloading can be bad.
If you get 1300 with H110 some may think you can get the same pressure when you use 231 or Bullseye to try to reach that velocity.
If velocity is an indication of pressure. Without adding "With the same powder. "
There was a LOT of work with Pressure and penetration work with the gunsmith I worked with.
That sounds weird.
Anyway. Folks may not know.
If someone thinks that they shouldn't be reloading.
 
Yeah. I worried some folks may misread what he said.
It's in Ruger. Tested in the H. P. White Labs. None better.
I got near that in the "3 screw 357" size Ruger. Like the New Vaquero.
I took an old 357 and a New Model 357 cylinder. Opens the frame window. Turned the cylinder to fit and rechambered to 45 Colt.
Just one step down from full house Ruger loads, but in that Colt size frame. There is a difference in the way they feel.

One of those New VaqueroBisleys is going to be a 5 shot 480.

Great fun.
I could never understand why ruger never sold the 480 in a Blackhawk Bisely.
 
after the test the guys wanted to try the 36 tsumura and RS with their saws to see how they would fair...

Hedgerow cutting - ported 064 - 19.7 sec



Hedgerow cutting -



Dexterday cutting - his mastermind 460 -



Dexterday cutting -Jrsdws Tree monkey 460 -



Fastest stock 661 (50:1) vs fastest ported 661 (40:1):
Ported 661 (40:1) was 13.3% faster than the fastest stock 661 using 50:1.
 
If someone thinks that they shouldn't be reloading.
Everyone has to learn.
And some read things differently.
Like when gunwriters said 45 Colt brass was weak because it showed a bulge. Or the 45 in a Ruger would blow up if shot to energy levels of the 44 Mag.
People read thing differently or from a poor source.
Pax.
 
Not with good oil. Kart guys run motul 800 down to 16:1 without issue. I have run 2R down to 20:1 without issue.

What issues have you observed using H1R? (This thread is so long maybe you did address this and I missed it) Were these issues across the board or only at certain ratios? Chainsaw related of course. Thanks.
 
Fastest stock 661 (50:1) vs fastest ported 661 (40:1):
Ported 661 (40:1) was 13.3% faster than the fastest stock 661 using 50:1.

I'm still not seeing the elusive 30% claims no matter how many times I run my stopwatch. ??
 
I could never understand why ruger never sold the 480 in a Blackhawk Bisely.
They load the 480 to within 2000 psi(cups?) of the 475.
Which is within the realm of error.
Ruger only did a few SRH in 5 shot 480. Then they went to the new cylinder material for the six shot 480&454.
They don't seem to wanna do a 5 shot in the BH
I rechambered a 45 to short 475. Cut the rim down.
Only gonna get about 750-800 out of it.
But a fun little gun.
480 is a great round.
 
I'm still not seeing the elusive 30% claims no matter how many times I run my stopwatch. ??
We are talking about mtronics saws here though. Reg. Carb saws have easily showed 30 to 40% gains over stock by just porting? By no way does this show that porting is a waste of time?
 
Back
Top