"Jim Wilkins" <muratlanne@gmail.com> writes:

> "Richard Smith" wrote in message news:lyilf2pipj.fsf@void.com...
>
> Yes 7018 is massively tough compared to 6013.
> But sometimes you can tear-out the plate-surface with a good 6013
> fillet, so there is {sometimes} no call for vastly more toughness and
> ductility.
> --------------------
>
> This suggests that 6013 is acceptable in the UK for many critical
> applications:
> ...

I will comment this:

If some does a temporary weld with 7018 you are cursing.
eg. crane lifting lugs from heavy channel can end up any shape you
like by the time you've got them off the installed plates, no matter
how much you work at them with an angle-grinder (without gashing the
plates you've just installed)

Given the readiness of breaking temporary welds in 6013, you'd
be surprised at that 7018 wasn't specified for structural welds.

I think that's enough to say.

Under a microscope the 6013 weld metal is very characteristic and
totally different from high-performing weld metals - like 7018.
There are inclusions which look the size of dinner-plates at high-mag
under an optical microscope.
The compensate, you have to lower the strength of the 6013 weld metal.
Problem though - the "acicular ferrite" microstructure of
high-performing weld metals is both strong and *tough*. Due to their
very fine randomly oriented microstructure. So in this case when you
deliberately limit the strength you also lose the toughness.

(the general context which doesn't guide here is that for heat-treated
steels - carbon-steels and alloy-steels - there is in general a
"see-saw" inverse relationship between strength and toughness -
strength-^ toughness-v; toughness-^ strength-v)

However - go with the perception formed by meeting temporary lifting
lugs which should be welded on with 6013 but have been welded on with
7018 to see in all the multi-dimensional reality of the electrode
types.

"Richard Smith" wrote in message news:ly5yaz8zjc.fsf@void.com...

"Jim Wilkins" <muratlanne@gmail.com> writes:
> This suggests that 6013 is acceptable in the UK for many critical
> applications:
> ...

I will comment this:

If some does a temporary weld with 7018 you are cursing.
eg. crane lifting lugs from heavy channel can end up any shape you
like by the time you've got them off the installed plates, no matter
how much you work at them with an angle-grinder (without gashing the
plates you've just installed)

Given the readiness of breaking temporary welds in 6013, you'd
be surprised at that 7018 wasn't specified for structural welds.

I think that's enough to say.

Under a microscope the 6013 weld metal is very characteristic and
totally different from high-performing weld metals - like 7018.
There are inclusions which look the size of dinner-plates at high-mag
under an optical microscope.
The compensate, you have to lower the strength of the 6013 weld metal.
Problem though - the "acicular ferrite" microstructure of
high-performing weld metals is both strong and *tough*. Due to their
very fine randomly oriented microstructure. So in this case when you
deliberately limit the strength you also lose the toughness.

(the general context which doesn't guide here is that for heat-treated
steels - carbon-steels and alloy-steels - there is in general a
"see-saw" inverse relationship between strength and toughness -
strength-^ toughness-v; toughness-^ strength-v)

However - go with the perception formed by meeting temporary lifting
lugs which should be welded on with 6013 but have been welded on with
7018 to see in all the multi-dimensional reality of the electrode
types.

--------------------------------

Does that mean that we non-professionals who don't care about high
production rate or removing temporary lifting lugs and make welds on unknown
steel that failed in service should use only 7018 if we can?

Regarding toughness, I could fold my successful 7018 butt welds of 3/16"
coupons over double, 180 degrees, in the 50 ton press without cracking. I
also bent a 1/4" Grade 8 bolt shank into a U without a crack. The rolled
threads were more brittle and snapped off with little deformation.

On 3/16/2023 3:30 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> "Snag"  wrote in message news:tuvl47$1gvhd$1@dont-email.me...
>
> You should see the cobbled
> cable bracket I'm making to mount an Edelbrock carb on the truck .
>
> -------------------------
>
> I've been advised to elevate such things to "hand-crafted".
>
> Much of what I own is slowly becoming "hand-crafted" and "unique", as
> though saying that would increase its value.
>
> I can do stuff the farm way too. I tied down Grandpa's corrugated corn
> crib roof in Alabama with hay wire through 0.22" holes.

One day I was troubleshooting some noise on an 82A 6 channel analog
carrier running on open wire with my boss (its not rated for open wire)
we came across a tree branch growing into the wire. My boss decided it
was a possible cause of the problem, but it was mid span. Climbing gear
wouldn't help, and even if it would we didn't have a suitable saw.
There was no way I wanted to dangle out in that space trying to hack it
off with a drywall saw. We were also never allowed to cut down whole
trees. Just branches that grew into the wire. My boss studied on it
for a few minutes then retrieved his shotgun from the truck and
proceeded to chew that branch in two with successive rounds of bird shot.

--
Bob La Londe
Proffessional Hack, Hobbyist, Wannabe, Shade Tree, Button Pushing, Not a
real machinist

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

On 3/17/2023 3:04 AM, Richard Smith wrote:
> "Jim Wilkins" <muratlanne@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> "Richard Smith" wrote in message news:lyilf2pipj.fsf@void.com...
>>
>> Yes 7018 is massively tough compared to 6013.
>> But sometimes you can tear-out the plate-surface with a good 6013
>> fillet, so there is {sometimes} no call for vastly more toughness and
>> ductility.
>> --------------------
>>
>> This suggests that 6013 is acceptable in the UK for many critical
>> applications:
>> ...
>
> I will comment this:
>
> If some does a temporary weld with 7018 you are cursing.
> eg. crane lifting lugs from heavy channel can end up any shape you
> like by the time you've got them off the installed plates, no matter
> how much you work at them with an angle-grinder (without gashing the
> plates you've just installed)
>
> Given the readiness of breaking temporary welds in 6013, you'd
> be surprised at that 7018 wasn't specified for structural welds.
>
> I think that's enough to say.
>
> Under a microscope the 6013 weld metal is very characteristic and
> totally different from high-performing weld metals - like 7018.
> There are inclusions which look the size of dinner-plates at high-mag
> under an optical microscope.
> The compensate, you have to lower the strength of the 6013 weld metal.
> Problem though - the "acicular ferrite" microstructure of
> high-performing weld metals is both strong and *tough*. Due to their
> very fine randomly oriented microstructure. So in this case when you
> deliberately limit the strength you also lose the toughness.
>
> (the general context which doesn't guide here is that for heat-treated
> steels - carbon-steels and alloy-steels - there is in general a
> "see-saw" inverse relationship between strength and toughness -
> strength-^ toughness-v; toughness-^ strength-v)
>
> However - go with the perception formed by meeting temporary lifting
> lugs which should be welded on with 6013 but have been welded on with
> 7018 to see in all the multi-dimensional reality of the electrode
> types.

An anecdote of which there may be no utility. Your removable lifting
lugs reminded me of this.

Many years ago (30 +) Mike Mendiola (a friend I have not seen in nearly
as many years) told me of when he worked high rise construction. They
did a "temporary" weld. They would take a piece of heavy angle, and
tack it to a vertical beam in two or three places, but only at the top
edge. Then they would use it as a step. Often for days. When they
were done they would lift the bottom leg used as the step and it would
break off easily leaving just a bit of the tacks to be ground smooth.
He said the hardest part was dealing with inspectors who couldn't
comprehend the concept of a weld that was INTENDED to break.

--
Bob La Londe
Professional Hack, Hobbyist, Wannabe, Shade Tree, Button Pushing, Not a
real machinist

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

On 3/17/2023 9:42 AM, Bob La Londe wrote:
> On 3/16/2023 3:30 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
>> "Snag"  wrote in message news:tuvl47$1gvhd$1@dont-email.me...
>>
>> You should see the cobbled
>> cable bracket I'm making to mount an Edelbrock carb on the truck .
>>
>> -------------------------
>>
>> I've been advised to elevate such things to "hand-crafted".
>>
>> Much of what I own is slowly becoming "hand-crafted" and "unique", as
>> though saying that would increase its value.
>>
>> I can do stuff the farm way too. I tied down Grandpa's corrugated corn
>> crib roof in Alabama with hay wire through 0.22" holes.
>
>
> One day I was troubleshooting some noise on an 82A 6 channel analog
> carrier running on open wire with my boss (its not rated for open wire)
> we came across a tree branch growing into the wire.  My boss decided it
> was a possible cause of the problem, but it was mid span.  Climbing gear
> wouldn't help, and even if it would we didn't have a suitable saw. There
> was no way I wanted to dangle out in that space trying to hack it off
> with a drywall saw.  We were also never allowed to cut down whole
> trees.  Just branches that grew into the wire.  My boss studied on it
> for a few minutes then retrieved his shotgun from the truck and
> proceeded to chew that branch in two with successive rounds of bird shot.
>

That same boss once added a hole to his climbing belt (working on that
same line actually) after he had lost some weight with a .22 magnum
revolver.

--
Bob La Londe
Proffessional Hack, Hobbyist, Wannabe, Shade Tree, Button Pushing, Not a
real machinist

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

> ...
> They did a "temporary" weld. They would take a piece
> of heavy angle, ...

Yes - strong in the load direction; can snap it off by hand in the
"removal" direction from which no load could plausibly come.

Can be used for a lot of lugs and the like used to pull-up steels.

"Jim Wilkins" <muratlanne@gmail.com> writes:

> "Richard Smith" wrote in message news:ly5yaz8zjc.fsf@void.com...
>
> "Jim Wilkins" <muratlanne@gmail.com> writes:
>> This suggests that 6013 is acceptable in the UK for many critical
>> applications:
>> ...
>
> I will comment this:
>
> If some does a temporary weld with 7018 you are cursing.
> eg. crane lifting lugs from heavy channel can end up any shape you
> like by the time you've got them off the installed plates, no matter
> how much you work at them with an angle-grinder (without gashing the
> plates you've just installed)
>
> Given the readiness of breaking temporary welds in 6013, you'd
> be surprised at that 7018 wasn't specified for structural welds.
>
> I think that's enough to say.
>
> Under a microscope the 6013 weld metal is very characteristic and
> totally different from high-performing weld metals - like 7018.
> There are inclusions which look the size of dinner-plates at high-mag
> under an optical microscope.
> The compensate, you have to lower the strength of the 6013 weld metal.
> Problem though - the "acicular ferrite" microstructure of
> high-performing weld metals is both strong and *tough*. Due to their
> very fine randomly oriented microstructure. So in this case when you
> deliberately limit the strength you also lose the toughness.
>
> (the general context which doesn't guide here is that for heat-treated
> steels - carbon-steels and alloy-steels - there is in general a
> "see-saw" inverse relationship between strength and toughness -
> strength-^ toughness-v; toughness-^ strength-v)
>
> However - go with the perception formed by meeting temporary lifting
> lugs which should be welded on with 6013 but have been welded on with
> 7018 to see in all the multi-dimensional reality of the electrode
> types.
>
> --------------------------------
>
> Does that mean that we non-professionals who don't care about high
> production rate or removing temporary lifting lugs and make welds on
> unknown steel that failed in service should use only 7018 if we can?
>
> Regarding toughness, I could fold my successful 7018 butt welds of
> 3/16" coupons over double, 180 degrees, in the 50 ton press without
> cracking. I also bent a 1/4" Grade 8 bolt shank into a U without a
> crack. The rolled threads were more brittle and snapped off with
> little deformation.

I wish more experienced folk could step in.

No it's not that simple.
How do I start?!

7018's need a very stable exact "burn" which fairly much means only
well-prepared joints with exact fit-up and full-length burn of the
rods. All of this plus starts / restarts are very specific with 7018.

6013 - essentially it will tolerate all the things you do to keep it
running on a very variable job - waving the rod around, varying
arc-length, extinguishing the arc and restriking heat is building up
too much, etc.

Is that enough to convey - there is no simple rule?

Rich Smith

On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 09:56:10 -0700
Bob La Londe <none@none.com99> wrote:

<snip>
>That same boss once added a hole to his climbing belt (working on that
>same line actually) after he had lost some weight with a .22 magnum
>revolver.

Be a good job for a wadcutter round but never saw any of those in .22
WMR😏

--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI

On 3/17/2023 10:57 AM, Leon Fisk wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 09:56:10 -0700
> Bob La Londe <none@none.com99> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>> That same boss once added a hole to his climbing belt (working on that
>> same line actually) after he had lost some weight with a .22 magnum
>> revolver.
>
> Be a good job for a wadcutter round but never saw any of those in .22
> WMR😏
>

I spent several minutes trying to make a hole with a scratch awl and a
hammer. Whatever that belt was made of it was tough. I seem to recall
he took two shots to get a hole he was happy with. What really got my
attention though was how much unburnt powder there was in the hole. .22
WMR is more powerful than LR even in a hand gun, but its really intended
to be used in a rifle.

--
Bob La Londe
Proffessional Hack, Hobbyist, Wannabe, Shade Tree, Button Pushing, Not a
real machinist

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

On 3/17/2023 10:12 AM, Richard Smith wrote:
> "Jim Wilkins" <muratlanne@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> "Richard Smith" wrote in message news:ly5yaz8zjc.fsf@void.com...
>>
>> "Jim Wilkins" <muratlanne@gmail.com> writes:
>>> This suggests that 6013 is acceptable in the UK for many critical
>>> applications:
>>> ...
>>
>> I will comment this:
>>
>> If some does a temporary weld with 7018 you are cursing.
>> eg. crane lifting lugs from heavy channel can end up any shape you
>> like by the time you've got them off the installed plates, no matter
>> how much you work at them with an angle-grinder (without gashing the
>> plates you've just installed)
>>
>> Given the readiness of breaking temporary welds in 6013, you'd
>> be surprised at that 7018 wasn't specified for structural welds.
>>
>> I think that's enough to say.
>>
>> Under a microscope the 6013 weld metal is very characteristic and
>> totally different from high-performing weld metals - like 7018.
>> There are inclusions which look the size of dinner-plates at high-mag
>> under an optical microscope.
>> The compensate, you have to lower the strength of the 6013 weld metal.
>> Problem though - the "acicular ferrite" microstructure of
>> high-performing weld metals is both strong and *tough*. Due to their
>> very fine randomly oriented microstructure. So in this case when you
>> deliberately limit the strength you also lose the toughness.
>>
>> (the general context which doesn't guide here is that for heat-treated
>> steels - carbon-steels and alloy-steels - there is in general a
>> "see-saw" inverse relationship between strength and toughness -
>> strength-^ toughness-v; toughness-^ strength-v)
>>
>> However - go with the perception formed by meeting temporary lifting
>> lugs which should be welded on with 6013 but have been welded on with
>> 7018 to see in all the multi-dimensional reality of the electrode
>> types.
>>
>> --------------------------------
>>
>> Does that mean that we non-professionals who don't care about high
>> production rate or removing temporary lifting lugs and make welds on
>> unknown steel that failed in service should use only 7018 if we can?
>>
>> Regarding toughness, I could fold my successful 7018 butt welds of
>> 3/16" coupons over double, 180 degrees, in the 50 ton press without
>> cracking. I also bent a 1/4" Grade 8 bolt shank into a U without a
>> crack. The rolled threads were more brittle and snapped off with
>> little deformation.
>
> I wish more experienced folk could step in.
>
> No it's not that simple.
> How do I start?!
>
> 7018's need a very stable exact "burn" which fairly much means only
> well-prepared joints with exact fit-up and full-length burn of the
> rods. All of this plus starts / restarts are very specific with 7018.
>
> 6013 - essentially it will tolerate all the things you do to keep it
> running on a very variable job - waving the rod around, varying
> arc-length, extinguishing the arc and restriking heat is building up
> too much, etc.
>
> Is that enough to convey - there is no simple rule?
>
> Rich Smith

Okay how about some basic guidelines for 7018. Constant arc length?
Dealing with starts and stops, etc.

Here is where I am confused. I've used 6013 and 7018 for mild steel,
and generally thought 7018 was much easier to run. I haven't found any
stick to be easy at my skill level, but 7018 was easier. Particularly
on DC, but also on AC to some degree. Is it misleading? I've used 7018
to weld around well casings. That's probably my most difficult stick
weld. Were all those welds just held together with the slag I knocked
off? I'm not trying to be a smartass (or a dumbass). I'm just trying
to get a feel for what I see and hear.

You talked about water practically pouring off the rod, and still using
it, but every academic bit I've read says it must be dry dry dry.

I have read, heard, viewed various welding pundit say 6013 is the rod
that can weld the world, but I just haven't found it to be as easy to run.

As to getting pros to weigh in, maybe try some of the more specific
welding forums like Miller Welds. Honestly though I see more practical
education there than technical education.

--
Bob La Londe
Proffessional Hack, Hobbyist, Wannabe, Shade Tree, Button Pushing, Not a
real machinist

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 11:27:33 -0700
Bob La Londe <none@none.com99> wrote:

>I spent several minutes trying to make a hole with a scratch awl and a
>hammer. Whatever that belt was made of it was tough. I seem to recall
>he took two shots to get a hole he was happy with. What really got my
>attention though was how much unburnt powder there was in the hole. .22
>WMR is more powerful than LR even in a hand gun, but its really intended
>to be used in a rifle.

There's the Kel-Tec PM30 that's been around for awhile but hard to find
(or was) in stock and usually over priced...

Walther just came out with a model WMP.

https://waltherarms.com/wmp

Quite a few youtube videos of both these in action with awesome muzzle
flash. There are a couple loads available with short barrel pistols in
mind but still some flash.

It's a round I like a lot. Have had a rifle in WMR around since I was a
teen :) A whole lot more ammo choices for them nowadays...

--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI

On 3/17/2023 11:55 AM, Leon Fisk wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 11:27:33 -0700
> Bob La Londe <none@none.com99> wrote:
>
>> I spent several minutes trying to make a hole with a scratch awl and a
>> hammer. Whatever that belt was made of it was tough. I seem to recall
>> he took two shots to get a hole he was happy with. What really got my
>> attention though was how much unburnt powder there was in the hole. .22
>> WMR is more powerful than LR even in a hand gun, but its really intended
>> to be used in a rifle.
>
> There's the Kel-Tec PM30 that's been around for awhile but hard to find
> (or was) in stock and usually over priced...
>
> Walther just came out with a model WMP.
>
> https://waltherarms.com/wmp
>
> Quite a few youtube videos of both these in action with awesome muzzle
> flash. There are a couple loads available with short barrel pistols in
> mind but still some flash.
>
> It's a round I like a lot. Have had a rifle in WMR around since I was a
> teen :) A whole lot more ammo choices for them nowadays...
>

Paul Harris, Buffalo Outdoors and a few others have evaluated various
ammos on their YouTube channels, and I have to be honest. I was not all
that impressed with their results with made for hand gun .22WMR.
Honestly I think the old heavy weight .22 WMR that was all we could get
back int eh 70s and early 80s was as good as you can get from a handgun,
and I like the new lighter faster rounds for the rifle.
--
Bob La Londe
Proffessional Hack, Hobbyist, Wannabe, Shade Tree, Button Pushing, Not a
real machinist

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 12:42:18 -0700
Bob La Londe <none@none.com99> wrote:

>Paul Harris, Buffalo Outdoors and a few others have evaluated various
>ammos on their YouTube channels, and I have to be honest. I was not all
>that impressed with their results with made for hand gun .22WMR.
>Honestly I think the old heavy weight .22 WMR that was all we could get
>back int eh 70s and early 80s was as good as you can get from a handgun,
>and I like the new lighter faster rounds for the rifle.

My preference was for FMJ. Used mainly for small game. Hollow point
noses where prone to get damaged (tube magazine). Shot placement is way
more important than hoping a hollow point would make a bad shot good
anyway...

Even if the new rounds suck... all that was available when I was still
shooting powder burners was CCI or Winchester Super-X in FMJ or Hollow
point. Always wanted to try some target ammo, see what kind of groups
it made. That's what I finally did with .22 Long Rifle for hunting. Old
Remington Green Box target. Worked GOOD! Those hot rounds suck at
making good groups at ~50 yards ;-)

I'll have to run down some of those videos when I get the urge. Thanks!

--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI

On 3/17/2023 1:01 PM, Leon Fisk wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 12:42:18 -0700
> Bob La Londe <none@none.com99> wrote:
>
>> Paul Harris, Buffalo Outdoors and a few others have evaluated various
>> ammos on their YouTube channels, and I have to be honest. I was not all
>> that impressed with their results with made for hand gun .22WMR.
>> Honestly I think the old heavy weight .22 WMR that was all we could get
>> back int eh 70s and early 80s was as good as you can get from a handgun,
>> and I like the new lighter faster rounds for the rifle.
>
> My preference was for FMJ. Used mainly for small game. Hollow point
> noses where prone to get damaged (tube magazine). Shot placement is way
> more important than hoping a hollow point would make a bad shot good
> anyway...
>
> Even if the new rounds suck... all that was available when I was still
> shooting powder burners was CCI or Winchester Super-X in FMJ or Hollow
> point. Always wanted to try some target ammo, see what kind of groups
> it made. That's what I finally did with .22 Long Rifle for hunting. Old
> Remington Green Box target. Worked GOOD! Those hot rounds suck at
> making good groups at ~50 yards ;-)
>
> I'll have to run down some of those videos when I get the urge. Thanks!
>

My son and I have shoot a bit of .22LR the last few years. Just at the
range. Due to various shortages and political conditions we now have an
eclectic selection of ammo on hand. LOL. I've found some rounds tend
to be better than others, but also some rounds tend to be better in some
guns. We also have an eclectic collection of iron. Both long and short.
Its funny though. I never really did the careful study of
weight/velocity/accuracy as I did with my airguns. I've got a really
nice chronograph and I've never put a powder round over it. Maybe
someday I'll take some time to do that. Mostly we just go to the range
and burn up ammo. Occasionally we will play tic tac toe or battleships
with some targets I run off on the printer.

--
Bob La Londe
Proffessional Hack, Hobbyist, Wannabe, Shade Tree, Button Pushing, Not a
real machinist

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 13:21:34 -0700
Bob La Londe <none@none.com99> wrote:

<snip>
>Its funny though. I never really did the careful study of
>weight/velocity/accuracy as I did with my airguns. I've got a really
>nice chronograph and I've never put a powder round over it. Maybe
>someday I'll take some time to do that. Mostly we just go to the range
>and burn up ammo. Occasionally we will play tic tac toe or battleships
>with some targets I run off on the printer.

I've never "plinked" with a powder burner. Either checking the sights
and getting the "feel" to shooting a particular gun before season or
hunting. Mostly because plinking would tell me nothing useful about
where the shot went precisely. A squirrel head at ~30 yards needs
precision. I put a ton of BB's and a few pellets through a Crosman 760
as a teen. Learned a lot from that gun plinking away...

Those UK guys have all sorts of targets and games they play with
airguns ;-) Wouldn't be hard to make heftier versions for powder
burners like the .22's.

A lot more Chrono choices nowadays too. That LAB Radar unit would be
really nice if you use one a lot. FX has a radar barrel mount now too
(mixed reviews) but only for airguns...

--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI

On 3/17/2023 1:52 PM, Leon Fisk wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 13:21:34 -0700
> Bob La Londe <none@none.com99> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>> Its funny though. I never really did the careful study of
>> weight/velocity/accuracy as I did with my airguns. I've got a really
>> nice chronograph and I've never put a powder round over it. Maybe
>> someday I'll take some time to do that. Mostly we just go to the range
>> and burn up ammo. Occasionally we will play tic tac toe or battleships
>> with some targets I run off on the printer.
>
> I've never "plinked" with a powder burner. Either checking the sights
> and getting the "feel" to shooting a particular gun before season or
> hunting. Mostly because plinking would tell me nothing useful about
> where the shot went precisely. A squirrel head at ~30 yards needs
> precision. I put a ton of BB's and a few pellets through a Crosman 760
> as a teen. Learned a lot from that gun plinking away...
>
> Those UK guys have all sorts of targets and games they play with
> airguns ;-) Wouldn't be hard to make heftier versions for powder
> burners like the .22's.
>
> A lot more Chrono choices nowadays too. That LAB Radar unit would be
> really nice if you use one a lot. FX has a radar barrel mount now too
> (mixed reviews) but only for airguns...
>

I had two Chrony chronographs, and both were turds. The first one was
free so I wasn't surprised when it wouldn't work at all. The other I
purchased brand new. It opened up to wires sticking up above the top
surface. That might have been an issue, but it wouldn't even pick up a
projectile unless it was less than half an inch above the sensors. I'm
sure you can guess how long it survived that. I clipped and repaired
the wires a few times and actually hit the Chrony twice before it
totally died. The company never responded to any request for help or
guidance.

I replaced it with a ProChrono which works amazingly well with no issues.

I do almost all my small pest control work with my .25 Marauder PCP
airgun. It easily kills small pests with body shots. After setting it
to its current tune of 900-920 FPS with 25.4 grain domes (roughly 46
FPE) I once took a shot at a gopher about 68 yards away after guessing
elevation. It poked its head up, and then laid down. I took the shot
and thought I had missed when a geyser of dirt shot up behind him. When
I walked over to check I found that the pellet had transversed almost
the entire length of the body after entering through the head. The UK
guys would face some serious consequences to be in possession of an
airgun like that. I like the Marauder over a powder burner because it
incredibly quiet without having to buy a tax stamp. My neighbors don't
even know I've taken a shot unless they happen to be out on the canal
bank and see me. I've taken pests at upto 94 yards with my .177
Marauder, but that was as much luck as skill and it does not make for
clean kills at that range. I also hunt small game and collared dove
with the .25 Marauder.

I have not hunted with a .22 powder burner since I could buy a box of
Super X lead round nose for 89¢ and a box of hollow points was $1.59. I
used to hunt certain types of burrowing vermin for the 50¢ bounty from
the irrigation district.

Range shooting is one of the things my son and I still do together once
in a while. Well, besides work on his car. He'll be 29 this year.

--
Bob La Londe
CNC Molds N Stuff

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 14:25:07 -0700
Bob La Londe <none@none.com99> wrote:

<snip>
>I have not hunted with a .22 powder burner since I could buy a box of
>Super X lead round nose for 89¢ and a box of hollow points was $1.59. I
>used to hunt certain types of burrowing vermin for the 50¢ bounty from
>the irrigation district.

I hear yah! Been using my springers the past several years to take
vermin...

Airgun World for Feb you might enjoy perusing:

https://forum.mobilism.org/viewtopic.php?f=123&t=5086304&hilit=air+gunner

A lot of new stuff of late. Jim Chapman article too, he's here in the
US.

--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI

"Richard Smith" wrote in message news:ly5yaz715k.fsf@void.com...

"Jim Wilkins" <muratlanne@gmail.com> writes:
> Does that mean that we non-professionals who don't care about high
> production rate or removing temporary lifting lugs and make welds on
> unknown steel that failed in service should use only 7018 if we can?
>

I wish more experienced folk could step in.

No it's not that simple.
How do I start?!

7018's need a very stable exact "burn" which fairly much means only
well-prepared joints with exact fit-up and full-length burn of the
rods. All of this plus starts / restarts are very specific with 7018.

6013 - essentially it will tolerate all the things you do to keep it
running on a very variable job - waving the rod around, varying
arc-length, extinguishing the arc and restriking heat is building up
too much, etc.

Is that enough to convey - there is no simple rule?

Rich Smith

---------------------------------

Actually I preferred 7014 over 6013 before the night class instructor
convinced me to learn 7018. I have enough portable hoisting equipment to
position all stick welds horizontal, enough in fact to lift and move small
buildings and two ton oak logs.

On 3/17/2023 4:44 PM, Leon Fisk wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 14:25:07 -0700
> Bob La Londe <none@none.com99> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>> I have not hunted with a .22 powder burner since I could buy a box of
>> Super X lead round nose for 89¢ and a box of hollow points was $1.59. I
>> used to hunt certain types of burrowing vermin for the 50¢ bounty from
>> the irrigation district.
>
> I hear yah! Been using my springers the past several years to take
> vermin...
>
> Airgun World for Feb you might enjoy perusing:
>
> https://forum.mobilism.org/viewtopic.php?f=123&t=5086304&hilit=air+gunner
>
> A lot of new stuff of late. Jim Chapman article too, he's here in the
> US.
>

Alright , you guys are into some serious airgunning . I'm a piker ,
got a Daisy Powerline 880 which is OK I guess for an entry level
beginner . What I need , because my eyes are as old as the rest of me ,
is a decent 3-9x scope for less than an arm and a leg . I've got a POS 5
bucks at a yard sale scope on it now . Won't focus on the target and the
parallax is ridiculous . The main task of this unit is to kill cowbirds
before they can foul the nests of the pretty birds with their eggs - and
to control a couple of species that think my bees are there for their
snacks . I currently have 1" rings on the rifle .
--
Snag
"You can lead a dummy to facts
but you can't make him think."

On 3/17/2023 4:16 PM, Snag wrote:
> On 3/17/2023 4:44 PM, Leon Fisk wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 14:25:07 -0700
>> Bob La Londe <none@none.com99> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>> I have not hunted with a .22 powder burner since I could buy a box of
>>> Super X lead round nose for 89¢ and a box of hollow points was $1.59.  I
>>> used to hunt certain types of burrowing vermin for the 50¢ bounty from
>>> the irrigation district.
>>
>> I hear yah! Been using my springers the past several years to take
>> vermin...
>>
>> Airgun World for Feb you might enjoy perusing:
>>
>> https://forum.mobilism.org/viewtopic.php?f=123&t=5086304&hilit=air+gunner
>>
>> A lot of new stuff of late. Jim Chapman article too, he's here in the
>> US.
>>
>
>   Alright , you guys are into some serious airgunning . I'm a piker ,
> got a Daisy Powerline 880 which is OK I guess for an entry level
> beginner . What I need , because my eyes are as old as the rest of me ,
> is a decent 3-9x scope for less than an arm and a leg . I've got a POS 5
> bucks at a yard sale scope on it now . Won't focus on the target and the
> parallax is ridiculous . The main task of this unit is to kill cowbirds
> before they can foul the nests of the pretty birds with their eggs - and
> to control a couple of species that think my bees are there for their
> snacks .   I currently have 1" rings on the rifle .

My first "decent" airgun was a Daisy 880. The 880 is a smooth bore, but
mine came with a rifled tube. When I sent it to Daisy to be resealed
back in the day they didn't reseal it. They sent me a different gun. I
was not happy. The 881 was the version with a rifled bore. Round nose
shuttle cock style pellets tend to be the most accurate, but rifling
still makes a big difference unless you destroy the rifling by shooting
copper washed steel BBS. The flat nose (diablo style) pellets aren't
bad at short range, but you get much past 7 yards and that goes away.

I killed a lot of vermin raiding the grain shed with my 880 before my
dad finally patched the holes in it. I still have one, but I don't use
it much.

I did just (several months ago) reseal my Crosman Model 1 1st variant,
but I haven't finished putting it back together.

--
Bob La Londe
CNC Molds N Stuff

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

Bob La Londe <none@none.com99> writes:

> On 3/17/2023 10:12 AM, Richard Smith wrote:
>> "Jim Wilkins" <muratlanne@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> "Richard Smith" wrote in message news:ly5yaz8zjc.fsf@void.com...
>>>
>>> "Jim Wilkins" <muratlanne@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> This suggests that 6013 is acceptable in the UK for many critical
>>>> applications:
>>>> ...
>>>
>>> I will comment this:
>>>
>>> If some does a temporary weld with 7018 you are cursing.
>>> eg. crane lifting lugs from heavy channel can end up any shape you
>>> like by the time you've got them off the installed plates, no matter
>>> how much you work at them with an angle-grinder (without gashing the
>>> plates you've just installed)
>>>
>>> Given the readiness of breaking temporary welds in 6013, you'd
>>> be surprised at that 7018 wasn't specified for structural welds.
>>>
>>> I think that's enough to say.
>>>
>>> Under a microscope the 6013 weld metal is very characteristic and
>>> totally different from high-performing weld metals - like 7018.
>>> There are inclusions which look the size of dinner-plates at high-mag
>>> under an optical microscope.
>>> The compensate, you have to lower the strength of the 6013 weld metal.
>>> Problem though - the "acicular ferrite" microstructure of
>>> high-performing weld metals is both strong and *tough*. Due to their
>>> very fine randomly oriented microstructure. So in this case when you
>>> deliberately limit the strength you also lose the toughness.
>>>
>>> (the general context which doesn't guide here is that for heat-treated
>>> steels - carbon-steels and alloy-steels - there is in general a
>>> "see-saw" inverse relationship between strength and toughness -
>>> strength-^ toughness-v; toughness-^ strength-v)
>>>
>>> However - go with the perception formed by meeting temporary lifting
>>> lugs which should be welded on with 6013 but have been welded on with
>>> 7018 to see in all the multi-dimensional reality of the electrode
>>> types.
>>>
>>> --------------------------------
>>>
>>> Does that mean that we non-professionals who don't care about high
>>> production rate or removing temporary lifting lugs and make welds on
>>> unknown steel that failed in service should use only 7018 if we can?
>>>
>>> Regarding toughness, I could fold my successful 7018 butt welds of
>>> 3/16" coupons over double, 180 degrees, in the 50 ton press without
>>> cracking. I also bent a 1/4" Grade 8 bolt shank into a U without a
>>> crack. The rolled threads were more brittle and snapped off with
>>> little deformation.
>>
>> I wish more experienced folk could step in.
>>
>> No it's not that simple.
>> How do I start?!
>>
>> 7018's need a very stable exact "burn" which fairly much means only
>> well-prepared joints with exact fit-up and full-length burn of the
>> rods. All of this plus starts / restarts are very specific with 7018.
>>
>> 6013 - essentially it will tolerate all the things you do to keep it
>> running on a very variable job - waving the rod around, varying
>> arc-length, extinguishing the arc and restriking heat is building up
>> too much, etc.
>>
>> Is that enough to convey - there is no simple rule?
>>
>> Rich Smith
>
>
> Okay how about some basic guidelines for 7018. Constant arc length?
> Dealing with starts and stops, etc.
>
> Here is where I am confused. I've used 6013 and 7018 for mild steel,
> and generally thought 7018 was much easier to run. I haven't found
> any stick to be easy at my skill level, but 7018 was easier.
> Particularly on DC, but also on AC to some degree. Is it misleading?
> I've used 7018 to weld around well casings. That's probably my most
> difficult stick weld. Were all those welds just held together with
> the slag I knocked off? I'm not trying to be a smartass (or a
> dumbass). I'm just trying to get a feel for what I see and hear.
>
> You talked about water practically pouring off the rod, and still
> using it, but every academic bit I've read says it must be dry dry
> dry.
>
> I have read, heard, viewed various welding pundit say 6013 is the rod
> that can weld the world, but I just haven't found it to be as easy to
> run.
>
> As to getting pros to weigh in, maybe try some of the more specific
> welding forums like Miller Welds. Honestly though I see more
> practical education there than technical education.
>
>
> --
> Bob La Londe
> Proffessional Hack, Hobbyist, Wannabe, Shade Tree, Button Pushing, Not
> a real machinist

I like 7018's and in general prefer them.
Short arc yes. The only shield they have is the CO2 from the CaCO3
decomposing in the arc.
Well apart from water vapour if there is water in the coating...

"Well casings" - sounds inherently "very 7018" to me.
7018's assertively fuse - they are not deeply penetrative like 6010,
but they certainly flow in well.
Only itemise one of many of the reasons 7018's to me are possibly the
nicest to use.

> but every academic bit I've read says it must be dry dry
> dry.

* academic...
* if you read the Standard(s) for hydrogen in welds and apply the
charts / graphs and numbers you'd see the point about inappropriate
prioritisation when it's medium or better quality weldable
structural steel and the thickness is not more than 12mm (1/2").

Welding is "on the backburner" for me at the moment. But "MIller
forum" hint is good and appreciated.

Thanks for the rounds conversation.
I've never met or heard of 22 WMR.
But got through loads of 22 LR. Side arms USA, rifles UK. Pennies a
shot. Good for getting the basics in-order. Stating the obvious.

"Richard Smith" wrote in message news:lya60aykag.fsf@void.com...

Thanks for the rounds conversation.
I've never met or heard of 22 WMR.
But got through loads of 22 LR. Side arms USA, rifles UK. Pennies a
shot. Good for getting the basics in-order. Stating the obvious.

--------------------------

I had to check if the .22 was included in "African Rifles and Cartridges",
written by a famous elephant hunter who favored the huge double rifles.

Surprise!, it is, and he mentions another hunter taking up to zebra with it.
"I would happily undertake to walk thru from Cape Town to Cairo armed with
nothing but a scope-sighted .22 Rim-Fire and a powerful hand gun, and I am
quite confident I would not go hungry."

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/bella-twin-little-woman-little-gun-big-bear-cold-front/

On 3/17/2023 6:28 PM, Bob La Londe wrote:
> On 3/17/2023 4:16 PM, Snag wrote:
>> On 3/17/2023 4:44 PM, Leon Fisk wrote:
>>> On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 14:25:07 -0700
>>> Bob La Londe <none@none.com99> wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>> I have not hunted with a .22 powder burner since I could buy a box of
>>>> Super X lead round nose for 89¢ and a box of hollow points was
>>>> $1.59.  I
>>>> used to hunt certain types of burrowing vermin for the 50¢ bounty from
>>>> the irrigation district.
>>>
>>> I hear yah! Been using my springers the past several years to take
>>> vermin...
>>>
>>> Airgun World for Feb you might enjoy perusing:
>>>
>>> https://forum.mobilism.org/viewtopic.php?f=123&t=5086304&hilit=air+gunner
>>>
>>>
>>> A lot of new stuff of late. Jim Chapman article too, he's here in the
>>> US.
>>>
>>
>>    Alright , you guys are into some serious airgunning . I'm a piker ,
>> got a Daisy Powerline 880 which is OK I guess for an entry level
>> beginner . What I need , because my eyes are as old as the rest of me
>> , is a decent 3-9x scope for less than an arm and a leg . I've got a
>> POS 5 bucks at a yard sale scope on it now . Won't focus on the target
>> and the parallax is ridiculous . The main task of this unit is to kill
>> cowbirds before they can foul the nests of the pretty birds with their
>> eggs - and to control a couple of species that think my bees are there
>> for their snacks .   I currently have 1" rings on the rifle .
>
>
> My first "decent" airgun was a Daisy 880.  The 880 is a smooth bore, but
> mine came with a rifled tube.  When I sent it to Daisy to be resealed
> back in the day they didn't reseal it.  They sent me a different gun.  I
> was not happy.  The 881 was the version with a rifled bore.  Round nose
> shuttle cock style pellets tend to be the most accurate, but rifling
> still makes a big difference unless you destroy the rifling by shooting
> copper washed steel BBS.  The flat nose (diablo style) pellets aren't
> bad at short range, but you get much past 7 yards and that goes away.
>
> I killed a lot of vermin raiding the grain shed with my 880 before my
> dad finally patched the holes in it.  I still have one, but I don't use
> it much.
>
> I did just (several months ago) reseal my Crosman Model 1 1st variant,
> but I haven't finished putting it back together.
>
>

This one has a rifled bore ... I think it's capable of much better
accuracy than I'm seeing if I had better optics on it .
Interesting story , when our oldest was 12 we got him one just like
this one . While out in the back yard shooting it he managed to shoot
the window out of a car parked across the fence . So he shot 2 more out
just to make sure it was him ...
--
Snag
"You can lead a dummy to facts
but you can't make him think."

On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 18:16:11 -0500
Snag <Snag_one@msn.com> wrote:

>Alright , you guys are into some serious airgunning . I'm a piker ,
>got a Daisy Powerline 880 which is OK I guess for an entry level
>beginner . What I need , because my eyes are as old as the rest of me ,
>is a decent 3-9x scope for less than an arm and a leg . I've got a POS 5
>bucks at a yard sale scope on it now . Won't focus on the target and the
>parallax is ridiculous . The main task of this unit is to kill cowbirds
>before they can foul the nests of the pretty birds with their eggs - and
>to control a couple of species that think my bees are there for their
>snacks . I currently have 1" rings on the rifle .

I have one of these BSA Optics AR39X40AO Rifle Scopes I bought a few
years ago. Haven't gotten around to putting in on anything yet:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/265962181021

When it arrived I looked it over, seemed to be decent enough for the
price. Adjustable parallax is nice for airgun distances. That's about
the least expensive scope I've seen with AO and I would take a chance
on. There are some similar models for around the same price:

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_nkw=BSA+3-9X40AO+Scope&_odkw=+BSA+AR39X40AO+Scope

I've an old Tasco 4x40 with AO on the Diana 48 Springer and a
Leapers 4x32AO on the big Hatsan 155 Torpedo. I don't like the Leapers.
It works okay, nice mil-dot reticule but the eye relief and optic edges
aren't so good. The BSA was going to replace it but it will probably go
on a new Cometa Fusion Premier Star I picked up...

--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI