What do yall think of the Paco tool? - Page 2 - RimfireCentral.com Forums

Go Back   RimfireCentral.com Forums > >

Notices

Join Team RFC to remove these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 11-28-2005, 12:58 PM
Bucks Owin

Join Date: 
Mar 2004
Posts: 
936
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)


Log in to see fewer ads
Other than vmaxx, I've never heard a negative comment about the accurizer that I remember. Guess I'll have to get one too once it get a "round tuit"....

Dennis
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-29-2005, 03:34 AM
Crete

Join Date: 
Apr 2002
Location: 
Palan isi lena (also known as Europe in vernacular Polynesian)
Posts: 
2,655
TPC Rating: 
100% (1)
Thumbs up Dingelfutz,

Indeed, tapping the mallet once or twice on a surface next to the ready-to-acu'rize Paco tool gives me a sense of the light force required for optimal results. It is like dry-firing before a match; it stores in the brain the sequence that lets off the trigger. With the Paco tool less is more; light but consistent, nevertheless. Then, test. See what happens. If not happy with thye results tap harder or lighter still. We are not all built the same. The key word with Paco's tool is: experiment. There are no short-cuts other that one own's experience with a set of rimfires and ammo they like (or dislike, to make things more interesting).

In fact I use the Paco with all the half empty LR/S/L boxes and try to make them shoot from the rifle they dislike, namely the very finicky Browning Trombone that only likes SK Z Longs. Using the tool, the little slide action rifle from 1938 shoots everything under the Sun just as if they came from an SK Z Long box.

That's what I like about this tool.

Paco is aware of my experiments and he has sent me every tool configuration imaginable with a variety of punch rods. Write to him and he will reply with ideas and suggestions to any question you may have. Trust me, he is a very nice person to deal with and experienced match shooter who understands everything we talk about here at RFC.

Finally, using the Nastinose straight on the factory Hollow Points may or may not be the best way of milking accuracy out of that particular round, but don't take my word on this, simply experiment. In my testing a light tap with the Acu'rzr (flat-dish) punch rod on the Hollo Point helps aligning the bullet inside the tool, before the Nastinose (the Paco version of a HollowPointer), is used with another light tap (or two, depending on the hardness of the bullet's lead).

Of course, those who are perfectly contended with their rimfire/ammo combos don't need the Paco tool for accuracy, but they may use it for enhanced lethality in hunting situations with cheaper ammo and high or hyper velocity fodder, in which case the Paco tool opens an entirely new chapter for discussion, some of which has been covered in RFC's Hunting section (rather than in the Ammunition section) of this Forum.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-29-2005, 11:45 AM
Bucks Owin

Join Date: 
Mar 2004
Posts: 
936
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Crete,

Would you say that once a person has the right "touch" for using this tool (accurizer) that it can give Wolf M/T accuracy from the "bulk" rounds. I've always been under the impression that the secret to accurate rimfire ammo lies in the priming process. Jim Carmichel once visited the Eley factory and was shown all the various steps in creating Tenex match ammo EXCEPT the priming process and he says that is kept "top secret" and that the doors to that part of the factory are kept locked. I've chronographed thousands of various rimfire rounds and have found that those with the widest velocity variation also tended to be the least accurate. Wolf M/T velocity is very uniform and obviously has something to do with it's accuracy. The Paco tool obviously does nothing to help the consistency of the priming or powder charge. (Although powder charge uniformity isn't all that critical to accuracy I've found. At least with centerfire ammo) How much accuracy improvement can one expect using the tool on ammo that shows widely varying velocity? I would suppose that a better bullet "fit" might help by giving a better seal in the bore and perhaps help the velocity uniformity that way?

I guess bottom line is just how well will "crappy" ammo shoot after being accurized?

Thanks for the good info,

Dennis
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-29-2005, 06:23 PM
Crete

Join Date: 
Apr 2002
Location: 
Palan isi lena (also known as Europe in vernacular Polynesian)
Posts: 
2,655
TPC Rating: 
100% (1)
Dennis,

My understanding coinsides with yours, when you say: I would suppose that a better bullet "fit" might help by giving a better seal in the bore and perhaps help the velocity uniformity that way?

That's about it with Paco's contraption. Eley's secret is just that; uniform velocity. We pay dearly for their secrets and Paco's idea is practical and self-evident when we can resize with his tool cheap no-uniform velocity .22 LRs and get decent results.

I am certain that Wolf M/T or SK Standard Plus and SK Pistol Match are nearly as good as the best kept Eley secret for a fraction of the cost. Now add some reforming with the Acu'rzr and you may very well surpass Eley's locked doors and secret closets.

In matches that I participate the SK Standard Plus appears to win more matches than the Tenex EPS, hands down. Maybe more shooters use SK S+, but those of Tenex persuasion will have it no other way. It may be a marketing ploy, but SK ammo was not widely advertised as the most accurate .22 LR around, yet users love it and its reputation has spread from word of mouth. There are some flyers present here and there and they tend to spoil a perfect score from time to time.

Run the SK S+ through a Paco Acu'rzr routine and the flyers are gone.

That alone tells me that Paco's tool works.

As for "crappy" ammo, my opinion is that there is always hope as long as one knows / learns to use the Paco tool correctly.

I have yet to find a type of cheap / good-for-nothing LR brand that could not be improved with some expert Paco'ing, including Colibris, RWS .22 CB Cap Floberts, S&B .22 Flobert Bosquettes, as well as...Remington (sic) Long Rifles! Now that's saying something...

Best,
Crete
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-29-2005, 07:37 PM
Bucks Owin

Join Date: 
Mar 2004
Posts: 
936
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Helps REMINGTON!?! Hey that's enough proof for me! LOL

Thanks again amigo, good post.

Dennis
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 11-29-2005, 08:18 PM
Dingelfutz's Avatar
Dingelfutz
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Feb 2004
Location: 
Buffalo, NY
Posts: 
217
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
I agree with Crete...again! The Paco tool can "improve" Remington ammo.

In my experience, however, all Remington ammo is not created equal.

I will go along with the common contention that Thunderbolts are probably a lost cause in terms of trying to "improve" them. They have too many "too-s", i.e. dirty, inconsistent, prone to FTFs. and,all too often, inaccurate. I realize that some folks seem to like them. Being the nice guy I am, I will offer these folks my share of Remington Thunderbolts.

"Golden bullet" HVs can be equines of an alternate hue if one is willing to "mess" with them, a bit. Yes, they, too, can be dirty and their tendency for FTFs can also be a bit exasperating. They also can vary a good bit in terms of cartridge weight and velocity and bullet diameter. Why bother with them, then? THEY ARE CHEAP! They also can be made to shoot well by (1) weighing the ammo and separating the cartridges into .1-.2 grain lots and (2) Paco-ing the bullets into a consistent diameter. For all I know, separating the cartridges further by rim thickness might help, too. Then, shoot the "light" cartridges for plinking and informal practice. (These cartridges seem to have the largest variations in velocity and they tend to have the most FTFs). "Light" cartridges can also be generously given to fellow shooters who have "run dry" and/or just want "blasting ammo". Shoot the "heavier" cartridges for more "serious" purposes. It really works, with the "heavier: rounds very often shooting as well as all but the best match ammo, in my experience. Is all of this bother worth it? It seems to depend on how much "sweat equity" that one is willing to invest in the interests of economy and "creative experimentation".

Much the same things can be said about Remington's "green box" SV "target" ammo and similar results can be achieved with the techniques described above. In my experience, however, I have found that "messed with" SVs don't seem to shoot much, if any, better than "messed with" HVs. Your results may vary.

Where things really get interesting is when one uses Remington's sub-sonic ammo. This ammo seems to be about the only Remington ammo that many readers of this site seem to like. For some reason, this ammo seems to be a lot more consistent, accurate and reliable "out of the box" than other Remington rimfire ammo usually is and "messing" with it only seems to make it better. Of course, there is still the presence of "Remington dirt" but one cannot have everything, I guess.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-30-2005, 06:21 AM
Crete

Join Date: 
Apr 2002
Location: 
Palan isi lena (also known as Europe in vernacular Polynesian)
Posts: 
2,655
TPC Rating: 
100% (1)
Thanks to Mr. Kelly

The Remington Subsonics can vary as much as two (2) whole grains -- in total weight -- in a box of fifty.

Although the ammo is branded subsonic, some Remington SUB22HP rounds go supersonic and hit in the next ZIP Code area...

Then, go through the trouble of taking them in a Paco Acu'rzr/Nastinose trip and they stay subsonic to the last one in a box of fifty!

Now, that's more like it...Thank you Mr. Kelly
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-30-2005, 07:36 AM
Dingelfutz's Avatar
Dingelfutz
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Feb 2004
Location: 
Buffalo, NY
Posts: 
217
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Hm! I've never had Remington Subsonics vary THAT much! I guess I have just been lucky! (Or, is it possible that Remington ships its "seconds" [scary thought!] to Europe?)

Now, did the offending cartridges vary "high" or "low"?

Also, I never considered that changing bullet obturation would keep velocities LOW. Interesting!
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-30-2005, 08:32 AM
Crete

Join Date: 
Apr 2002
Location: 
Palan isi lena (also known as Europe in vernacular Polynesian)
Posts: 
2,655
TPC Rating: 
100% (1)
If memory serves me well

They varied in every way possible. Rim thickness was all over the place (Neil Jones 22 RF Gauge used); weight was ~2 grains above-&-below the middle figure with a wide spread (twos'n'threes, couldn't get a set of five or ten for a magazineful). All this is from memory, as I am not at home at the moment to look up the exact measurements. The bottom line is that the Paco admonishment sorted them Rem rascals just fine
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-30-2005, 09:06 AM
Dingelfutz's Avatar
Dingelfutz
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Feb 2004
Location: 
Buffalo, NY
Posts: 
217
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Again, that's great!

Two more quick questions: Since you have had success with Wolf MT cartridges when you both Paco-ed and weighed them did you try the same thing with Remington Subsonics? Also, since these rounds' rim thicknesses varied so much, do you think that sorting them on that basis, too, would help performance significantly?
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 11-30-2005, 10:24 AM
JJB

Join Date: 
Aug 2004
Posts: 
1,530
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
what kind of a mallet are you useing to strike the paco tool properly? i'm thinkin my old hammer isn't what i should use.... should i get a little interchangable faced brass mallet of some sort?




LIFE IS SHORT................
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 11-30-2005, 10:57 AM
knitepoet's Avatar
knitepoet
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Dec 2002
Location: 
T'town Alabama
Posts: 
2,843
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Send a message via Yahoo to knitepoet
Quote:
Originally Posted by j.r. guerra in s. texas
My main interest in it was kindled when someone wrote that the 60 grain Aquila round was used with some success after the tool had been used on them.
That might have been me. I've had two of them, One that was for LR only and it would modify the Aguila 60 grainers. The one I have now supposedlyworks on S, L and LR, the downside of that is that now if I try to modify one of them, it just drives the bullet over the case mouth, ruining the round
Using cheap ammo, I did experience an increase in accuracy with it and noticed harder impacts on vermin.
Paul
edited to add:
OOPS, I got it backward. The one I have now is the LR only.
Sorry about that

Last edited by knitepoet; 11-30-2005 at 06:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 11-30-2005, 10:59 AM
knitepoet's Avatar
knitepoet
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Dec 2002
Location: 
T'town Alabama
Posts: 
2,843
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Send a message via Yahoo to knitepoet
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJB
what kind of a mallet are you useing to strike the paco tool properly? i'm thinkin my old hammer isn't what i should use.... should i get a little interchangable faced brass mallet of some sort?
I use a 20oz rubber mallet
Paul
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 11-30-2005, 11:29 AM
JJB

Join Date: 
Aug 2004
Posts: 
1,530
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
20 OZ?? does it take that much weight to form the hollow point?? i'm getting a paco tool for christmas from my youngest son... i just hope we have the right address..............
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 11-30-2005, 11:52 AM
McBendy_Elbow's Avatar
McBendy_Elbow
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Jul 2002
Location: 
maine
Posts: 
1,820
TPC Rating: 
100% (14)
Send a message via ICQ to McBendy_Elbow Send a message via Yahoo to McBendy_Elbow
Viewing all the positive posts regarding the "Frank Tool", I realize the feeling David must have felt when entering the lions den ?

I experimented with the device all one summer using a varity of ammunition, comparing "stock" against the "modified" rounds ...

After reviewing targets and chronograph figures, I found the velocity, spread, SD, thus accuracy unchanged ...

The only change the "Paco Tool" makes is to the bullet, all other componants remains the same ...

The above testimonials don't share my conclusions

Last edited by McBendy_Elbow; 11-30-2005 at 12:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:55 PM.

Privacy Policy

DMCA Notice

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2000-2018 RimfireCentral.com
x