Top or bottom pour?

[Hunter]

I used my Lee production 10 pound bottom pour pot tonight for the first time and casted several pounds of ingots.
I usually use my Lyman top pour pot for 2 months now.
The bottom pour pot was faster and a little easier to use than the the top pour but I do believe I like the ladle better, it just seemed right. Any real drawbacks to keeping with the ladle?

[Phil]

As far as I'm concerned there isn't. I started out in the fifties with a cast iron lead pot on the kitchen stove and a Lyman ladle. Many years later I got a Lyman electric bottom pour pot, and then an RCBS bottom pour just because it held more metal. They all make good bullets, I think its all in what you get used to. I just like the convenience of the bottom pour.

Cheers,

Phil

[BruceB]

At this late date, I would hate going back to ladling lead alloys.

Speed counts for a lot in my alleged mind, and since I can cast excellent boolits using my present system, I'm not about to change.

I see no drawbacks except speed for staying with the ladle, however. If you prefer that method, it's absolutely your decision to make.

Enjoy!

[Ricochet]

With bottom pour, you can either ignore a moderate accumulation of oxidized dross on top or cover the metal with a "mulch" (my term, I don't think flux is appropriate) of something like sawdust or kitty litter to keep it down. Won't work if you're dipping from the top, you've got to frequently flux and skim to keep it pristine. With bottom pour, you can conveniently cast right down to the bottom of the pot. Gets tricky dipping when the level's low in the pot.

I HATE the constant dribbling from the valve in my Lee pot, though. I can catch and return most of it, but it's amazing how far small droplets of lead will bounce and get all over everything!

[NVcurmudgeon]

Hunter, you have hit upon one of the most controversial, and perennial, subjects on the board! This one comes up very often and never convinces anyone to change his mind. I started with a ladle in the early sixties, then "progressed" through a Lyman and two Lee bottom pour furnaces, and finally back to the ladle. With the bottom pour I can make more boolits per hour, but with the ladle I can make more boolits that are up to my standards per hour. Fluxing and skimming the ladle pot are a minor interruption, but one that I have gotten used to, and can synchronize with my casting rhythm. OTOH, I very much dislike the nearly constant dribble from some bottom pour pots, and I find the occasional clogged bottom pour nozzle maddening. I guess it boils down to which irritants are the least irritating to each individual caster. In the words of the madam at the house of ill repute,"ya pays yer money and ya takes yer choice."

[Hunter]

The only trouble I had from my Lee bottom pour pot was it did drip some and the nozzle clogged once. I do like to flux and skim while casting and the bottom pour pot is harder to flux and skim for me.
I think I will stick with the ladle for now and use my bottom pour when I am in a hurry.
Thanks yall

[Paul B]

Most of my molds fill out just fine from a bottom pour pot, but there are tqwo or three in my collection that absolutely refuse to give good bullet from the bottom pour pot. For those, the ladle gets the nod and I get good bullets.
Sometimes, I think the mold determines the method.
Paul B.

[GP100man]

hunter i switched in sept & ive cast the most consistently i ever have
from 38 140gr. to 44310gr.

[versifier]

Sometimes, I think the mold determines the method.
Paul B.

A wise man.
We accumulate the moulds that work best with our chosen methods and alloys and sell those that won't to peoplle that try other ways, and they keep the ones that work for them. Some moulds may change hands dozens of times before running into the right person who can use them effectively. You never know with a new-to-you mould until you cast some with it and shoot them to find out if it's got anything more than theoretical potential. Kind of like with women, though fortunately you can have hundreds of moulds and not have to listen to them one little bit. The analogy breaks right around when my patience does. Moulds don't argue with each other, either.....

[mooman76]

I've been using the top pour for over 30 years and don't see any sence in changing. Nothing wrong with the other way, I'm just used to they way I do it in fact I still have an unused lee electric pot because I keep using the stove!

[montana_charlie]

I started in the 60's making .440 round ball and .45 Maxi-Balls for a TC Hawken...using a Lyman pot and dipper...on a hotplate scrounged from somebody's trash pile before the truck came by to haul it off.
Did OK, but always thought a bottom pour pot would be the neat trick.

During a time when muzzleloading wasn't part of the equation, I happened on a Lyman Mould Master (bottom pour) in an electrical repair shop, and snatched it up.
Had to see if it worked, so I melted all of my old chunks and hunks of scrap lead and poured Lyman (backward N) ingots, thinking I was really uptown.

As the years passed, and my location kept changing, I never got to messing with molten lead. I even gave away the old pot and ladle to a guy who wanted to give cast bullets a try.

Then retirement happened, and BPCR caught my interest. It took a while, but I found the old Mould Master and those ancient ingots. I got a mould before finding a rifle (I didn't know any better, then). I fired up the pot and added some tin to my lead...and tried everything I could think of (other than casting naked) but couldn't make a bullet that I could stand to look at.

Eventually bought a replacement for the Lyman dipper, and (finally) started making stuff that I'm not embarrassed to shoot.

Yeah...I've tried the bottom spout several times since then. And, I give it a try with each new mould I get. Never have been able to 'pour' a bullet as good as the ones I can 'dip'.

Now, the bottom spout only gets used when I drain the pot for cleaning.
CM

[Lloyd Smale]

switched to bottom pour years ago and have never looked back!

[powderburnerr]

it has just occured to me, who makes a top pour furnace.... inquiring minds need to know...............Dean

[robertbank]

They all do but they are only sold in the southern hemisphere. You can however import them and install them upside down.:mrgreen:

Take Care

Bob

[9.3X62AL]

Looks like too much "face time" with Carpetman, Bob. Medical science may yet yield a cure in our lifetime.

[357maximum]

DEPENDS


I started casting large fishing sinkers when I started chasing devilfish seriously in the early 80's...I used an old cast iron pan on a coleman stove with a large ladle...I was hooked on the lead biz....over time i started making roundballs, jigheads and shotgun slugs..still using the ol coleman and a better ladle ....when I finally started casting for 38/357's quite regularly I went to an old 10lb lee bottom pour...I never had issues with it..in fact i liked it mo better...but then i tried making slugs again..it did not go well.. cause the bottom pour just would not get it done very well (not enough lead flow, me thinks)..so I used the ladle for slugs...good results immediately....awhile back my old 10 lb lee took a crap on me and I bought a new pro 4 20...now I can do both big slugs and smaller stuff with that unit...higher lead flow....

I must have gotten thee best one lee ever made...I never have the problems I read about so frequently...sure it will drip a drop or three while warming up once and awhile ...but once it is warm...no dribbles, and no issues...but my lead is surgical clean in ingot form and kept in mostly airtight plastic cabelas ammo boxes...I love my lee,,,whether I am making lil boolits/big boolits /slugs/or wasting perfectly good boolit lead to throw in the river...

Michael

[Hunter]

it has just occured to me, who makes a top pour furnace.... inquiring minds need to know...............Dean

I am sorry for any confusion. I know 2 folks who cast and have been a while now with mainly the ladle and I have heard them speak of the ladle as a top pour.
I reckon because you are pouring with the ladle through the top of the pot

[Bass Ackward]

Stuff up to 500 grains uses the bottom pour method. Stuff over that, gets laddled.

[MT Chambers]

My experience has been that short fat bullets are o.k with bottom pour and long heavy bullets are better with the ladle.

[floodgate]

Hunter:

I think those "top pour" folks are the same ones who "load xx grains of yyyy powder OVER a zzz-grain boolit."

floodgate

PS: Thanks for the offer on the Lyman booklet, but you'd better hang onto it for now. I have coppies of most of the older Ideal Handbooks (Xerox copies, mostly) - and they are a real gold-mine of information.

[SharpsShooter]

I started with #10 Lee bottom pour and it was fine after a bit of work to stop the drip issue. Since most of the rifle stuff that I cast is 500gr+ I spent a good bit of time adding alloy and waiting for the temp to recover. I have since begun using a Lee 20 pounder bottom pour and wouldn't bother with a ladle unless pressed to use one. I have not a bit of trouble getting 530gr boolits to fill out nicely and weight within .5 grain average variation. Most of the fuss about getting good boolits that weigh over 500grs boils down to technique and temperature control.

SS

[montana_charlie]

Most of the fuss about getting good boolits that weigh over 500grs boils down to technique and temperature control.
I suspect that you are more correct than I like to admit.

A recent thread had a caster checking the temperature down at the bottom of the pot with a thermocouple. And, down in the depths, the temperature is quite a bit cooler than up on top.
Some (many?) who use the bottom spout admit to running their pots at, or near, the maximum setting. Perhaps that is the only way to get alloy (located down near the spout) up to a proper temperature for good quality bullets.

I am still (most of the time) complying with the 'do's and don'ts that I 'learned' early in my casting career. One of those was...
Don't run your melt hotter than necessary or you'll 'burn off too much tin'.

I have modified my thinking on that subject, but have not (yet) changed my practices. I also have not done any casting since reading that other thread.
I'm not too old to learn something new...but old enough to be resistant to change.
CM

[Ricochet]

I do best with my bottom pour Lee pot running wide open all the time. I cast pretty fast and run the mould hot, too, just letting the sprue solidify and "cloud over" a couple of seconds before cutting the sprue off and dropping the boolit.

[SharpsShooter]

Montana Charlie,

I use a Lyman thermometer that does reach to the bottom of the melt. It is not a scientific grade device, but gives me a reasonably accurate (I think) standard of measure. My Lee 20 pound pot if left wide open will easily top 950*. Admittedly, I have not cast at that temperature, as I see no need to use more heat than is needed to get proper fill out. Usually I run mine set on 7 (750*-775*) from a possible of 10. I like to see a slight frost and for me at least get more consistant weights than un-frosted. FWIW, the frost polishes right off and they look like their shiny cousins. If I ran mine wide open, I would have to cool the mould with damp rags. I'm sure it works once you figure out the method, but I don't cast for that kind of volume.

As you are well aware, each mould is somewhat of a law unto itself. Most of the techniques we all have learned will start us in the right direction. I will tinker with temperature and flow rates to see what works with the least fuss. It will happen eventually, but so far I have been able to get the moulds I currently have to work just fine.


SS