$150 for a round of 14.5x114mm ammo??

Brass shot glass set made of shells from Soviet heavy machine gun KPV 14.5×114mm (.57 Cal) ammo $120. https://www.etsy.com/il-en/listing/521623950/brass-shot-glass-set-made-of-bullet?ref=related-2

Here are some places that actually sell 14.5x114mm Soviet anti-tank rifle fodder:
http://www.pmulcahy.com/ammunition/heavy-caliber_small_arms_rounds.htm
14.5mm KPV: A steel-cored (or rarely, tungsten-cored) armor-piercing (AP) version of this round exists; double all prices for this round.
Weight: 207.58 kg per case of 1000 (loose or belted); Price: $9440 per case

https://www.cdvs.us/product-category/large-bore/14-5mm/ammo-14-5mm/
14.5mm Russian steel case ball ammo with 10% download and bronze projectile. Price per round. $29.95 Brass cases cost $39.

I was afraid the .586" bore size makes it a "Destructive Device" and there would be a $200 transfer tax on every round of loaded ammo. Sure, there are big bore ammo such as .577 Tyrannosaur or 8 or 4 gauge solids that are much bigger than .50 caliber, but those are for hunting rifles and I doubt the BATFE will consider old Soviet PTRD anti-tank rifles as legitimate elephant guns.
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/were-to-get-14-5x114-russian-brass.360529/

  KPV Heavy Machinegun 14.5x114mm https://youtu.be/Wl-HEFzgz3o
These guys were in Slovakia and only paid 6 Euros per round.

BS-41 cartridges at the Great Patriotic War museum in Smolensk

  PTRD-41 compilation in HD https://youtu.be/Tw7mvYn7JdQ

>>105855
None of these will ship to Canada either. I asked CDVS a while ago, they won't even ship an empty cardboard box if it has ever even looked at any of their products.

>Here are some places that actually sell 14.5x114mm Soviet anti-tank rifle fodder:
>http://www.pmulcahy.com/ammunition/heavy-caliber_small_arms_rounds.htm
That particular link is for a role playing game. pmulcahy.com even clearly states
"Q: Are you some kind of arms dealer?"

"A: Ha ha ha! No, the prices are for the game. I don’t sell anything from my site, period, and have no intention of doing so. And I have no idea whatsoever how to get virtually all of the items on my site. Did you really think I could have a B-2 Spirit bomber for sale?"

There's a south african place that makes inert solid copper projectiles, they required a shitton of paperwork and over 11 month waiting lists. Would have come up to around 50 bucks per projectile.

All the businesses I've contacted to have lathe-turned projectiles done quoted me over 70$ per individual projectile on orders less than 1000 bullets (50$ per for over 1000), or flat-out refused because it was "gun parts". I have not been able to convince anyone that it's actually legal to make this, even if I sent them legal documents outlining what was illegal. Called up a good 20 shops and 18 out of those 20 said "no it's illegal, it's super illegal totally completely illegal even if it isn't we won't do it because it's evil guns!". Hard to convince people of what's actually legal or not over decades of canadian gun-legality-indoctrination that pretty much ends in "everything is illegal even if it actually isn't".

I'd turn them myself, but the required bullet profile really is more of a CNC lathe turning job and the current workplace does not have any CNC lathe equipment. I might eventually try turning them manually at a certain point, this is well past "ridiculous".

>>105859
If you post a print of what you need it's POSSIBLE I'd be able to make some at some point. Our CNC lathe is really meant for bigger stuff, no bar feeder parts catcher etc. but I'd be willing to try it sometime.

>>105860
Email in the field, I can send you a CAD file.

>>105861
So uh, I made a program and was gonna run a test part and then discuss materials etc. with you, but then I looked up ITAR and discovered the buttfucking I'd be in for. Sorry.

>>105932
Oh fuck they actually are illegal to send up here?

Fuck me, whoops. I thought inert shit would be fine for this kind of thing.

>>105933
As far as I can tell, yeah. ITAR is really broad. I would need an export license from the DOD and end user certificates etc. This place:
http://www.reloadinginternational.com/page.php?p=international_customers
will ship to you but requires paperwork and as far as I know doesn't have anything in .588. Maybe you could use them as an intermediary? Might be cost prohibitive.

>>105934
>Maybe you could use them as an intermediary? Might be cost prohibitive.
I'll give that a go. I'm starting to care less and less about the final cost the more time goes on to a certain point.

>>105855
>I was afraid the .586" bore size makes it a "Destructive Device" and there would be a $200 transfer tax on every round of loaded ammo.

I don't think that's true. It was my understanding that the Rifle is a DD but the ammo would only be a DD if it contained more than 1/4 ounce of explosive.

Soon.

The most important question now is "what target should I perforate with this?"

>>106440
Shoot at WW2 German armored cars and halftracks, as it was intended.

- Mittlere Schützenpanzerwagen (Sd.Kfz.251/1) Ausf.C

The owners of these toys might get mad that you would use them for target practice for your Soviet PTRD anti-tank rifle, though.

>>106440
Did you end up turning it or talk someone into making them? Looks like the design is a little different from what you drew, wider driving bands for one.

Test it against an RCMP MRAPS. I mean, you'll have to use it against one eventually anyway. Might as well find out ahead of time how effective it'll be. /s

>>106447
Turning them myself by hand on an old manual lathe. It takes a few minutes and I tweaked the design to make it a bit more straightforward but as long as I keep them consistent it should be ok.

>>106441
>>106449
>in b4 I get v&
pls no

With the demise of my old Chrony, I've been looking for a new one and I've had a pretty hard time finding them up here. Also, reviews are also a little all over the place for basically all the brands except Oehler. I'd be fine buying an Oehler but I have not found a single source of any kind up here and the Oehler website appears to be out of order for the purchasing of the actual chronograph itself.

At this point I may simply buy like three different chronographs and line them up one after the other. With my PTRD ammunition project coming close to completion, getting an accurate velocity reading is starting to become an important concern. I'm literally making everything by hand, going on hearsay and QuickLOAD software data for powder charges so I'm pretty much flying completely blind. Note that the PTRD was not cheap by itself, and it's also not a firearm I want to damage; of all possible guns I could be flying blind with, this one is by far the one I least want to fly blind with.

Getting multiple chronographs to ensure I have a good and reasonably accurate velocity reading could be the difference between a safe load and a dangerous load. If one chronograph malfunctions or misses the shot, there's a high chance the other might still record something useful. Same principle applies to accuracy of the reading as they can be compared and calibrated against a well-known load in another firearm. Killing chronographs is not a very important concern of mine as I would personally shotgun a half dozen Chronys before risking anything in the PTRD.

Right now I'm looking at the Caldwell Chronographs, they seem to be in stock at least somewhere up in the frozen socialist republic shithole of Hoth.

tl;dr whar and what kind get of projectile shaku-per-fortnight measuring devices like oehler bullet speed boxes

>>106584

Have you considered something like http://mylabradar.com/ ?

It's more expensive than a chronograph, but you don't risk shooting it.
Additionally, you can set it to report velocity at different increments of distance, from muzzle to ~75 yards for large bullets. So you could measure muzzle velocity, 10y, 25y & 50y velocity at once and use it to more accurately calculate your bullet's performance.

Supposedly it's 0.1% accurate. But requires a bit more configuration (it needs to know where the muzzle is etc).

>>106585
I think if I go to to the labradar, I'll have to supplement it with at least one regular chronograph. Not sure how well it would read past the huge muzzle brake and solid copper bullet. Seeing how some shooters have had issues with the radar picking up their stuff along with how pricey they are, I'm still on the fence.

>>106587

Not sure why you think the muzzle brake would cause any issues for the lab radar.
As for registering, your bullet is bigger than most, so I suspect it's not a problem picking it up.
I obviously can't vouch for the quality of the labradar, but for your specific uses, it really seems to be the tool most suited for the job. The other alternatives have rather huge downsides.

>>106588
>Not sure why you think the muzzle brake would cause any issues for the lab radar.
I'd have to mess with the radar in person but I'm weary of the muzzle blast knocking the radar around during its operation. If the radar is getting pushed while trying to read doppler return, it could throw the velocity off quite a bit as I assume it just pings and does trig to calculate what went where and how much time that all took. If you tilt the unit during the projectile's travel, I would imagine that might fuck with whatever math is happening during the event.

Putting the radar closer to the shooter might create a shadow in the radar return from the muzzle brake's profile that could mess with the reading as well, potentially. From what I can read, the labradar needs to know where the muzzle is relative to itself, so that big brake might make this setup a little finicky. Since radar waves are waves and propagate as such, the brake's shadow area could also be a little more complicated to figure out compared to a point light source, for example.

Maybe I'm overthinking it.

Doing more research on the labradar does make me a little less hesitant to buy one as it is my top current contender since Oehler appears to manufacture their chronographs from hen's teeth and unicorn farts.

I looked at the magnetospeed as well, but I personally side with the radar for this particular use.

I've been trying VERY hard to ignore the absolutely rad as fuck aspect of the labradar being a fucking personal doppler radar but it's slowly grinding away at my resolve to stay objective and make a sensible choice with this project. For the price I'm a little bummed that it has a limited range and I've been wondering if this is the first iteration of a portable personal consumer doppler, and that another company or Labradar might release a new model soon that would be better and perhaps a little cheaper. Alas, this is quite a niche item so I may just have to bite the bullet now.

>>106590
>I'd have to mess with the radar in person but I'm weary of the muzzle blast knocking the radar around during its operation.

I'd be more weary of muzzle blast damage than of knocking it over. An aggressive brake spewing hot gas at electronics gives me pause.
The base can just be weighted down not to wiggle with sandbags or something.

>I looked at the magnetospeed as well

I think we brought that one up previously, but you thought the muzzle brake would make it hard to mount properly.

>>106594
>I'd be more weary of muzzle blast damage than of knocking it over. An aggressive brake spewing hot gas at electronics gives me pause.

That is also a concern. QuickLOAD indicates that muzzle pressure would be around 8300 PSI; considering there's around 400 grains of powder weight in gas over two ports with a surface area of 2.54 square inches each, we could guess at the energy that could bonk at the computer stuff nearby.

>The base can just be weighted down not to wiggle with sandbags or something.
If the radar can be set up a few yards away from the muzzle, it could be kept safe by way of simple distance (inverse square law), that would also hopefully prevent any wiggling despite a solid base. If the labradar has to be close to the muzzle, I could fabricate a rudimentary shield to take the brunt of the blast.

>magnetospeed fitting issue
Yep. It would be quite the hassle to return a whatever hundred dollar dingle dangle dongle for such a silly problem.

Well this has all been enlightening, I have my options laid out with more clarity, thanks man.

If anyone wants to chime in about their chronographs or whatever please do.

I just want to say I love this thread. Godspeed, you insane Canadian.

So I got my labradar, I'll be playing with it probably next weekend. In related news, got 'er some frames. Prescriptions are on the way (probably a Nikon Force XR as it has enough eye relief) so we'll have spectacled tests to help with consistency as accuracy is a bonus for the home-brewed ammo.

The offset between the bore axis and the scope axis will be taken into consideration, of course.

>>106634
Glad it's enjoyable, more to come.

>>106809
>So I got my labradar

Cool, I hope it doesn't let you down.

>pic

Oh dear lord.

>>106810
>Oh dear lord.
What's wrong? I think it'll be strong enough.

>>106811
>What's wrong? I think it'll be strong enough.

I'd imagine so.
It's just that it's a beast.

I hope all tolerances etc are correct. :)

>>106809
Did you mill that rail section or buy it from the chinese?

>>106816
Speaking of milling one, ever see the blueprint for a Picatinny rail? I never did figure out why they did the datum the way they did, but it pissed me right off when I was considering making one.

>>106816
Milled everything. It's a little funky and welded up because I didn't have much material to work with, so it was odd bits of cut-off and stuff.

>>106814
>I hope all tolerances etc are correct. :)
Made sure to have the important dimensions and locations done in one operation and have it interface with a slot/groove fit that would locate the subsequent parts so it would weld on just about as straight as could be.

>>106817
They use the box dimension -C- to locate the position of the 45 degree cuts. It's the most elegant way (blueprint-wise) to ensure the 45 degree cuts are even in size and symmetry and location relative to the rest of the features.

It's not super straightforward at first glance, but you can start by drawing the box (0.748 by 0.108) and use the corners to start your 45 degree lines and the rest of the dimensions pretty much just fall into place.

I used a double angle cutter from Ebay, just an HSS thing like this one.

https://www.ebay.ca/itm/1-90-DEGREE-INCLUDED-ANGLE-HIGH-SPEED-STEEL-DOUBLE-ANGLE-CUTTER/222108712590?hash=item33b6b5fe8e:g:ApkAAOSwRH5XK6S9

Mine was 3/4" instead of 1" but it's pretty much the same tool, it would work fine for making a 1913 rail. Ran about 3k spindle feed of something like 50"/min.

I made the grooves with a 3/16ths HSS 2 flute slotting full depth (.118") at 9k spindle and 50"/min feed with a second pass for the width of .206" for recoil grooves. Rest of the mount was done pretty much all with a 3 flute carbide 1/2" cutter at 10k spindle 260"/min feed 20% radial 1" axial, kinda slow but I tend to baby the tool when it's borrowed from work tooling and there's no spares.

Wasn't ideal tooling but it's what I had on hand that I could throw together during my lunch break.

Engraved "action" and "muzzle" on the rings to identify them as the barrel has a slight taper. To match it, the rings had to be fit (cutter comp) and labeled so they didn't get mixed up.

Other side on the mount, showing the block I used to align the parts.

Everything was hit with some scotch-brite deburring and stuff, but I'm probably going to sandblast it and throw it into the "to get anodized" pile at work.

>>106820
You used Allens and not Robertsons?

What kind of Canadian are you!?

>>106825
One that understands fastener availability is more important than driver elitism?

A pretty poor excuse for a Canadian?

hopefully

>>106817
The fact that Pic rail specs are still published in imperial units makes my brain ache.

>>106827
Wave your unit standard feelings somewhere else please, lest you derail this thread with mindless cockwaving over what numbers you like best. We're already on the verge of derailing it with fasteners, and both fasteners and units have been beaten to death so hard even the stick used to purée the long-dead horse corpse was broken and so was its replacement and so was the next about fifteen fucking times.

This entire post is not a comparison or discussion of the "worth" of respective unit standards, with that said, if you can't ascend above the unit standard war by learning both it's not that complicated, like if you know what a fraction is you basically have pretty much all the important imperial stuff down, your life will be pretty miserable. Even up here, there's actually MORE imperial unit use than metric use even if canuckland is "metric standard" and has been since 1970. Supposedly. 75% of all the parts I do here for the canuck market all day every day are imperial parts using imperial tools from imperial blueprints on an imperial machine from imperial material. 15% are imperial parts that were dimensioned in metric (all the dimensions are written in metric but are all converted imperial fractions or round numbers). 10% are actually metric things with no imperial threads with round metric numbers that don't make an imperial fraction when converted or anything like that.

FORTY

EIGHT

FUCKING

YEARS

of metric "standardization" and the majority of it basically lip-service. All the engineers I've dealt with basically don't care either, so it's not just shopfags like me. I was surprised by my electrical engineer uncle a few years ago when asking him about calculating something, he just said "don't care" and punched numbers into his RPN calculator when I was saying stuff like meters per second, pounds per square inch, and grains of weight.

Found a scope that will work, pics soon.

>>106828
Hmmm.

Reading it after a night's sleep, that post might've been a little on the diatribe side of things... Apologies, I've had a long week.

>cheap shit scope comments incoming
Should be fun.

Sight picture looks fine on this Bushnell Trophy 2-6x pistol scope. Eye relief is good, and it looks comically tiny and cheap on this setup.

Will the scope stand up to the beating it'll receive?

>>106837
Maybe? Not much of value will be lost if it doesn't. To be fair, it's a pistol scope, so I would hope to assume it's built fairly sturdy. The relatively sharp recoil of a handgun or revolver should be, from what I understand of recoil, probably more brutal on a scope than a big and relatively slow push of the 14.5x114. The firearm is 38lbs, the bullet takes a while to get up to speed in the 51" long barrel, and there's a rather meaty muzzle brake to soften things up.

Comparing a 44 Magnum to the PTRD, the recoil energy in the latter is an order of magnitude larger considering its 22000ft-lbs, but the velocity of the recoiling firearm is actually slower than the comparatively puny revolver, and that's not even considering the muzzle brake.

Only experimentation will tell if these speculations end up anywhere close to the reality of a Trophy-tier scope on an anti-materiel rifle.

>>106838

Yes, the difference in recoil energy is why I asked. I'd suspect that pistol recoil is sharper and quicker, but 14.5 would be heavier (though the weight of the gun & the brake may mitigate that). However, a handgun has "give" in the hands and arms that are holding it, especially with the super big magnums. Your shoulder when prone is going to move way less.

>>106841
The PTRD has 3" of stock travel for recoil mitigation and to cam the bolt handle as to start extraction so that should have a similar effect.

It's also why long eye relief is important.

WEBM related. Quite a simple way to get this single-shot to help the shooter extract a case. Since the cartridge is so large, having a stuck case would be problematic as the force required to unstick it might be quite high. Having the bolt handle kicked up by a ramped surface is a good way to unstick a case and it doubles as a way to dampen felt recoil. The spring in the stock is pretty stiff, but if you're in a shooting position you can compress it without too much effort just by pulling the gun in your shoulder with both arms.

We can tell that hard extraction was a concern, as the PTRD-41 cocks on closing like an Enfield. This reduces the force required to open the bolt as the shooter doesn't have to cock the firing pin on opening. When throwing a new cartridge in there, the shooter can take a running start and throw the bolt into battery; the bolt will cock on closing mostly under inertia of the bolt's forward movement as the shooter pushes it closed. Couple this with the bolt handle ramp, and we can see that the PTRD was designed with care for the user in many respects.

It's quite fast and easy and it is a well thought-out system.

>>106843

I knew of the travel, but I always assumed it was merely a "starter" for the unlocking. Certainly not past an inch.

Neat to see your webm.

With all that in place, I'd expect the scope to hold up fine.

>>106848
Depending on the shooter, his position, and the ammo, the bolt can get enough inertia to open completely and kick the empty case out but that happening is basically a bonus. Most of the time the shooter will simply sweep his right hand back to grab the handle where ever it could be to ensure the bolt is open and the empty is out so a new round can be shoved in.

Having said that, I will say that it is pretty cool when it does run open by itself and you feel/hear the case ding-dong'ing on the ground so you chuck a new round in there while grabbing the bolt handle so you can throw it home and close it in a fastsmooth motion.