.45ACP leading continues - some answers, some new questions.

[Bigslug]

I fired the second set of experiments with my Lyman 452423's yesterday.

The original test was 50 rounds sized to .452 with Lyman Orange Magic on top of 5.0 grains of Unique. Smoky, and leaded the bore for an inch or so forward of the chamber.

Second test was 25 of the same bullet with the charge uppped to 5.5 grains. Pretty much the same result.

Third test was sized down to .451. I tried these with both 5.0 and 5.5 grain charges (25 each). I think these leaded the throat somehwhat less, but not so much as to be obvious.

A couple of thoughts:

Since the crimp groove on this Keith-type boolit is not being used on a .45ACP, would using it as a forward lube groove likely help?

When we smelted the range scrap used for these boolits into air-cooled ingots, the hardness was 9.75 BHN, but we water-quenched these boolits, and they are testing at about 14 BHN. Is it possible that this is slightly too hard for a low pressure round like the .45ACP, and the cause of my throat leading is that the boolit is slower to obturate?

[HangFireW8]

Bigslug,

A faster powder might help in quicker obturation, I use Bullseye with similar hardness boolits and it works fine.

Yes, lubing the first groove might help, but it may be messy if it seats outside the case mouth.

First, most obvious question... have you slugged the throat, muzzle, and all the way through the bore yet? I assumed my brand-name 45 barrel would be to spec, but it wasn't....

HF

[Echo]

Slightly too hard makes sense to me, so if I were you, I would cast up some more and NOT water-quench them. Give those a try.
Another suggestion: After sizing & loobing, give them a light coat of LLA or 45-45-10. I have had very good luck with these in the 45.

[williamwaco]

I agree with both the above.

In my experience, nothing will lead worse than a hard underside bullet.

Loose the water and size it back to .452.
9 to 10 BNH is plenty hard.

I have used Orange Magic. It is a excellent lube. I don't think lube is the problem but If you are shooting outdoors try lubing the crimp ring. If you are shooting indoors you will probably get run out of the range by a bunch of coughing handgunners.


.

[geargnasher]

Leading in the first inch, in that setup, could indicate your front band is shaving lead at the end of the chamber or at a step in the rifling origin.

Gear

[Bigslug]

I DO love the company of big brains with experience!

I think this particular gun/boolit combo just became my main self-education focus - learn a bunch there, save lots of time elsewhere. . .

I'd pretty much already decided that Unique is not the powder of choice - at least for this lube. In the scientific interests of only changing one variable at a time, however, I'm probably going to roll with it a little bit longer.

Since I've already got .452 boolits cast at 14 BHN lubed with Lyman Orange, and the sizer is still filled with it, the easiest thing to do at this point is to try the .451/.452 experiment again with the crimp groove filled with grease.

Depending on what THAT does, switching to Bullseye is probably the next easy change. I'd like to try that with the Lyman lube anyway just to see what the smoke factor is.

Next easiest will be to make more boolits and not quench them - - at least not quench ALL of them, because. . .

. . .the first batch of Ben's Red lube gets mixed up on Sunday - unless it looks like the predicted 20% chance of rain for my deer hunting area is going to come true. Gotta get out in the wet and help Dad fill his tag. Work. . .work. . .work. . .:veryconfu

I have the feeling this gun wants .451's made of softer stuff, but we'll see what the results say.

HangfireW8: I've not slugged this barrel yet, but will at the point I have some softer pills to push through. Unfortunately, with me and .45ACPs this is ultimately NOT going to be a one-gun load. Hopefully I learn enough on this gun to come up with a non-fussy solution that runs clean in most.

Gear: Appears to be a very nicely finished Springfield stainless barrel with a clean leade. It does appear to consistently leave small bits of lead in certain areas that cling more tenaciously than others - but not directly at the juncture between chamber and rifling. Most notably this was a pin-head sized deposit in one of the grooves, but no visible flaw in the barrel once this was removed.

[geargnasher]

Leading is caused by bits of lead being smeared on the bore. (No kidding, right?) The cause of the existence of those bits is often misunderstood. Most of the time, the lead deposits in the barrel were torn free of the boolit in the form of dust which was abraded by high-pressure gas leaks. Sometimes it's abrasion or shaved lead if there are rough spots or burrs that can tear it away from the boolit's surface.

So basically look for gas leaks at any point in the firing cycle. Refer to Btroj's recent thread on FIT.

Gear

[runfiverun]

you know that boolit has the same drive band set-up as the 452-400 which is a rn.
your weight really isn't all that heavy,and you have a fairly delicate rear drive band.
you might could up the load some more and help yourself out some also.
i don't know if you have pulled a loaded boolit, and seen if you have squished a boolit either, but that's worth looking at too.

[frkelly74]

Make sure that your boolit isn't being sized down when you are seating/ crimping the boolit in. Pull some and measure with a good micrometer. I had the worst leading I have ever personally seen just from this scenario in my 45. I expanded the case mouth a little more and Eased up on the crimp and problem went away.


Great minds do think alike!

[Bigslug]

Gear: Point well taken on gas leakage. It seems to be sealing fine farther down the tube. If the various upcoming attempts don't do the trick, there may be cause to do some light lapping. My last post wasn't too clear on that - there is one tiny specific spot in one specific groove that seems to resist cleaning out after the rest of the schmear has been scrubbed away.

Runfiverun: Pretty sure I'm done with the 5.0 charge at the very least. 5.5 is feeling pretty close to hardball recoil levels, so until I can chrono, I'll probably stay there. I think Hangfire's got the right idea with Bullseye to provide a swifter kick in the butt though, and now that I think it over, that experiment can be easily loaded right before and in conjunction with the extra lube effort.

frkelly: I pulled a slug to check for the issue of "sizing by seating" fairly early on in the process. We seem to have that item under control, though I may open things up a little more for the sake of overkill. I admit to being a little shy about decreasing taper crimp, due to the fact that one of the more recalcitrant batches of .45 jacketed I ever experienced was the result of a lack of it. The joys of re-learning. . .

ALSO: 160 posts and I'm a "Boolit Master"? I think we need to work on that scale. . .

[Char-Gar]

I was shooting 452423 out of 1911 autopistols long before folks though it was possible. Leading has not been a real issue. A brass brush and some good solvent always do the job. Here are my thoughts on your issues.

1. Bullets too hard. Ditch the water quenching.
2. I size to .452
3. I do lube the crimp groove
4. I seat the bullet until their is just a smidge of body showing, just enough to get a good taper crimp.
5. I have used nothing but Bullseye powder. I don't give out charge weights on such things on the Internet.

[Bigslug]

Hard, directly-transferable data on the same mold![smilie=w:

Thanks Char-Gar!

Sounds like the answer is somewhere between Bullseye and hardness.

If overhard turns out to be the issue, then I'll actually be pretty thrilled with this batch of range scrap - air cool for the ACP, the Webleys, and the light .38's, and water-drop for the magnums with no adjustments needed. SWEET!

[HangFireW8]

ALSO: 160 posts and I'm a "Boolit Master"? I think we need to work on that scale. . .

Yes, I remember feeling not quite the Master when I got to that point, too. Now, at over 1K posts, I'm still at the same rank... not sure how I feel about that, either. :???:

HF

[40Super]

If it chambers .452 easily, my question is ,will it chamber .4525 or even .453? To me it seems quite a bit like the bullet is undersize and could stand to be a little bigger to seal from the get-go without having to rely on obturation to do it . Then what powder being used isn't as big a deal ( I use several and don't really have much problems if I try a different one). I know you don't want 2 sizes, but sometimes it is just needed, or what works best. I ended up with 2 sizes myself because one .45 barrel slugged at .4535 and 2 others at .4515. I played around for a bit like you and just got tired of cleaning so I quit sizing down for that 1 barrel. I just have 2 different colored ammo boxes for the loads, it's pretty easy to keep seperate.

For that rough spot, I have taken bore mops and saturate them with a fine metal polish and work it back and forth down the whole barrel, taking a little more time at the chamber end, it slightly rounds the sharp edges so less lead gets shaved when chambering a round, plus it helped quite a bit on leading and cleanup. Once your loads are figured out, cleaning lead should be a distant memory[smilie=1:

[looseprojectile]

Been shooting bowling pins for the last several years. Weekly, Weakly.
Started out with a nearly new Para Ordnance P 14. It leaded some.

I tried most of the fixes stated here. Always used the same .452" sizer.

I have always used my own lube, a mix of beeswax, white tail fat and a dob of lanolin.
Cast boolits of all weights from 200 grain to 255 grain all with the same 6 grains of Unique. I always used a soft alloy as I thought that would work better in the pins. Heavier is better. 6 grains of Unique is more dependable.
Not much helped till I hand lapped the bore.
If I remember right it took me all of about an hour to fix this gun forever.
The bore always sparkles now. Not a speck of lead.

About the only time I really need to clean the gun is when it is time to clean the firing pin and extractor. About every two or three months.
[five or six hundred rounds].
In my opinion you can never hurt a bore by lapping it to smooth it up.
I would never use the firelapping method because it seems to take too long and is hard to control. Hand lapping is so easy and quick.


Life is good

[44man]

Gear has a handle on it but reading his posts still indicates one of two problems. He does lean that way too.
Gas cutting to be sure but the boolit might be skidding and that opens the rifling marks to cause leakage the same as a boolit too small.
The ACP does not expand farther down the bore, it will stop skidding and pressure is dropping. The little case and powder charge reaches peak pressure very fast, maybe all in the case. That is the point of max expansion. From that point on the pressure drops and can no longer "boot" a boolit up.
I will go out on a cliff about alloy hardness and say to toughen the boolit to resist skid, make it FIT first and no further expansion is needed. Softening just adds to skid and extends leading distance.
I have to apply revolver experience with the boolit jump, forcing cone and ability of the boolit to NOT skid at rifling origination by using hard lead. The big bore revolver is easier using slow powder for an extended pressure curve that can give a more gentle start.
The little guns use powder as a sledge hammer on the boolit and you can't expect it to turn when it hits the rifling.
That is why some guns use a progressive twist rate from almost nothing at the start to a faster twist. Just a skid stop!
I have always said as you shorten a barrel and lose velocity, you need a faster twist for stability but it is not done because of the leading issue, it gets worse.
I will never advocate softer when you have leading at rifling origin. There is no such thing as bump up when the boolit already fits. I do not believe in "flowing lead slump" to fill.
HEY, I came up with a new term! :mrgreen: The silly putty syndrome!

[geargnasher]

I call it "balancing the load to the alloy". Bullseye and water-quenched wheel weights never worked well for me in anything.

Gear

[40Super]

Hey give that man a beer:drinks: 44Man^^^

Thats a good way to describe it. I've always thought the 2 rules fought each other in the acp, Softer to seal, harder to grab the shallow rifling. Thats why I always try to stuff the biggest bullet that will chamber. Take care of fit and hardness doesn't come in to play very much.

[44man]

Just make the boolit turn, no more, no less.
Gear is right---BALANCE.
The revolver is the worst to work with but some things apply.
I hate softer or harder, it is finding what your gun can live with.
I lean to fit and hard enough.
The most important thing is to try stuff and never get stuck in a rut.

[340six]

I am having very good luck with soft range lead and isotope containments 06-2-2{SP?} in my 1911 at 452 and Lars Red Lube

[RobS]

Have you pulled a dummy round and measured the very edge of the base band. Surprising how often a boolit can swage down in the case especially one that is seated deeper. When the base starts in on the thicker part of the web of the brass a nice .452” boolit can easily become much smaller in diameter. Also allowing a boolit to age before loading is important as well. Case swage can be an issue and when I load the 454640 HP, originally a 260 grain solid, and it seats quite deep in the 45 ACP case so I have to make sure I use an expander die to open up the brass or I end up with a boolit that has a base of .449” and to no surprise the soft HP leads like crazy.

[MtGun44]

Unique should be fine, not experienced with Orange Magic. Whenever someone has
a problem where a lube other than NRA 50-50 is involved, I recommend trying a few with
NRA formula as the only change -this frequently does the trick, or exhonorates the lube.

I agree that the WD is a total waste and may even be contributing to the problem.

Bill

[357shooter]

Sounds like the bullet is too small. Yeah, the alloy is much harder than needed, range lead or lead/ww mixed 2/1 or 3/1 would be much better.

What is the bullet diameter as cast? Just because they were put through a .452 sizer doesn't mean they are .452. They could be .450. If they measure bigger than .452, try them unsized. Definately not water dropped. That'll indicate if it's a size problem or not. If they are dropping from the mold small, that's a problem.

[Bigslug]

Well, I loaded up the last 36 of them today. Learned a little bit more:

The boolits were .4525" after the initial run through the .452" sizer. On running a few more through my .451" sizer. . . . . .they still measured .4525". I dunno. . .two identical dies, one of them mismarked, one out of spec - whatever.

Since it seems that there is no difference in the diameter of ANYTHING I've shot thus far, I've gone with extra lube up to the crimp groove and loaded half with Unique and the other half with Bullseye. I'll shoot them tomorrow. This will be the end of the 14BHN water-cooled slugs, and then we try again with air-cooled. Science marches on.

[40Super]

Did you ever slug your barrel to know what it actually measures?

I do know that once I got my bullets to a size that they were at least .001 over my barrel's, hardness didn't matter much other than changes to group sizes, they didn't lead even with 18-20bhn slugs, though the softer were more accurate in that 1911.

[357shooter]

Couple of things, first: what do the bullets measure before sizing them?

They measure larger than .452, however are you measuing with calipers instead of a micrometer? That can be a handicap because they round the measurement.

When you size the bullets, is there any resistance or any shine to the alloy after? I ask because I had some calipers that had a problem holding zero which nearly drove me crazy. The bullets were undersize, but measure larger. Just trying to make sure the "same size" bullets are really over .452 and that they actually being sized. They just may be smaller than what you think.

Taking anything for granted when working through an issue can create havoc and running down many rabbit holes.

[MtGun44]

+1 on NEEDING a .0001" rated micrometer, NOT a caliper. Calipers are +/-.001" you
can be .002" away from where you think you are.

Enco tools has a good quality Fowler brand mic that usually sells for about $35.

Bill

[Bigslug]

.40Super - No, I haven't slugged this barrel, and won't till I've got some softer slugs.

.357shooter and MtGun44. I believe they dropped at either .454 or .455, and the driving bands are getting burnished quite nicely by the dies.

The calipers in question are a set of Lyman dials - not digitals

[Cadillo]

One of my Sig P220's shoots great with bullets sized at 0.453". At 0.452" I get some light leading, but not at 0.453". I wish all my .45 acp barrels would chamber and function with that bullet size.

[MtGun44]

Try some NRA formula lube. I suspect a boolit that is actually too small.

No caliper can measure accurately enough for this application. Fact of life +/-.001" is just
not good enough.

http://www.use-enco.com/CGI/INSRIT?PARTPG=INLMKD&PMPXNO=16720828&PMAKA=619-3106

Worth it. No kickback from Enco, just know that this is a good mic at a great price.

Bill

[HangFireW8]

+1 on NEEDING a .0001" rated micrometer, NOT a caliper. Calipers are +/-.001" you
can be .002" away from where you think you are.

Here we go again.

If you use the same instrument on both the barrel slug and the boolit, it won't matter if it's off by .001" (assuming you use good technique and know your tools.) You can still determine if a boolit is undersized or oversized compared to the bore slug.

Now, if it has +/-.001 of backlash, that's another matter, time to get it fixed or replaced... of course, I have had to compensate and use instruments with worse backlash than that, from cheap employers, but I still got my work done, and done right, it was just harder.

I regularly use inexpensive calipers for boolit measurements, and can interpolate down to less than half of .001" with repeatable accuracy. (Actually, I can do better than that, but I don't want to hear all the howling if I stated the actual numbers). Of course, I check my instruments against standards and compare them with each other, and most important, know how to use them.

Frankly, little to nothing in reloading requires finer than .001" accuracy, with the exception of trying to estimate pressure using case head expansion on new cases. (I say trying, because even if your measuring is perfect, it is still an inexact process). If you are loading large numbers of cases where .0005" mean a difference in feed, function or accuracy, you're too close to the ragged edge and it is time to develop another strategy. Cast boolits don't like to be undersized, but it is rarely a problem to add another .001" to give a little leeway to avoid it.



Enco tools has a good quality Fowler brand mic that usually sells for about $35.


I'm not too keen on cheap 1/10K tools, I suppose some may be OK. I have the Mitutoyo vernier 1/10K blade micrometer, I pretty much only use it for case head expansion, or to verify other tools. Or just to handle it, it is a lovely instrument.

HF

[Aimstraight762]

I also have had some leading problems with my 1911. I bought my first mold, a lee 6 cavity 452 230gr RN. It is a tumble lube design, using Alox. I noticed leading when I bought some 452 200gr. TC from cabelas. So in my beginners think I got a bunch of wheel weights from a friend and started casting and quenching the boolits, thinking they were too soft. I sized to .451 and lubed twice as on the directions. I now have to either lap my barrel or buy a new one, because of scratches i put in it trying to get lead out. Please help.... I started this to shoot more not destroy my guns. Please feel free to message me directly. Other stuff you might want to know.
4.5 gr. unique seated just even with driving bands. Thought 5.5 grains was too fast and burning the pb off the boolit.

[MtGun44]

For accurate measurement, the measuring tool must be at least 4 times the required
tolerance. Any caliper is +/-.001". If you have a .0001" micrometer, you can count on
getting accurate measurements to .0004", which is plenty good enough for our
purposes.

You can imagine and dream all day about what your caliper will measure to and how
you can read between the lines. Fact is that in industry where is actually has to meet
tolerance to sell, 4X tolerance is the worst allowable measuring device permitted. On
anything in our company, that .001" caliper cannot be used on anything where the
tolerance on the drawing is tighter than .004" (+/-.002"). We build precision weapons
systems parts for the government.

Anything else is wishing and hoping, not science.

Bill

[40Super]

I'm with MTGUN 44, to say a caliper is repeatable to less than .0005",I call bs. I have used Starret's, mitituyo, and Brown and Sharpe, all their top models for my work and some have better "feel" than others , even the good ones, but there is limits to them. I have made over 100 high speed 420SS pump shafts 3ft long. tolerance @75F +/- .0002, total runout and diameters. I do know how to use good tools and that my take on this.:brokenima

[Roundnoser]

I was shooting 452423 out of 1911 autopistols long before folks though it was possible. Leading has not been a real issue. A brass brush and some good solvent always do the job. Here are my thoughts on your issues.

1. Bullets too hard. Ditch the water quenching.
2. I size to .452
3. I do lube the crimp groove
4. I seat the bullet until their is just a smidge of body showing, just enough to get a good taper crimp.
5. I have used nothing but Bullseye powder. I don't give out charge weights on such things on the Internet.

This is right on the money! My boolits are an 8 BHN with a meduim target load of W231. I shoot this in three 1911's with no leading. Stick with the 452 diameter.

Also, when you apply a taper crimp, don't over do it. It only requires enough crimp to chamber properly...no more. -- I suggest removing your barrel from the pistol and using that to check for proper crimp.. Start wth no crimp (you will notice it won't chamber). Then slowly increase the crimp until the rounds are chambering consistently and reliably.

Lastly, and this is just a personal preference, I never really liked Orange Magic in pistol loads. I used it when I first started casting, and it never worked well for me. It always left a lot of foulng in my barrel. Once I switched to a lube that flows easily with slower velocity boolits (as compared to rifle boolit velocities), things improved. Just my experience.

[Bigslug]

The "hard ones" are now gone. They seemed to lead a little less with the crimp groove lubed, though that could just be down to the fact that I only had 18 left for each of the two powder types, instead of the 25 per test I'd been running.

Next up: Softer with same lube, then softer with Ben's Red. This episode will air at the conclusion of deer season.:mrgreen:

[HangFireW8]

For accurate measurement, the measuring tool must be at least 4 times the required
tolerance. Any caliper is +/-.001". If you have a .0001" micrometer, you can count on
getting accurate measurements to .0004", which is plenty good enough for our
purposes.

You can imagine and dream all day about what your caliper will measure to and how
you can read between the lines. Fact is that in industry where is actually has to meet
tolerance to sell, 4X tolerance is the worst allowable measuring device permitted. On
anything in our company, that .001" caliper cannot be used on anything where the
tolerance on the drawing is tighter than .004" (+/-.002"). We build precision weapons
systems parts for the government.

Anything else is wishing and hoping, not science.

Bill

MtGun44,

I noticed you never addressed my comment on comparative measurements and the actual need for accuracy in reloading. You comments seem to only be concerned with absolute length measurements. If I could hear your comments on that first, I'll be happy to address your comments here.

HF

[MtGun44]

Absolute measurement is the only ones that mean anything. Comparative is
just a confusion factor, IMO.

Do whatever you want in your own guns. Facts are facts, measuring tools are
what they are, and will measure what they do, regardless of your opinion about what
you can do with them. I am not going to spend any more time 'convincint' you, but
I do want to make sure the OP has the facts so he can actually measure what he
needs and what he is making.

If you actually have to make parts that are worth a bunch of money and HAVE to
fit together, you have to measure accurately. "Comparative" is not in the vocabulary
of precision measurement. If you want to do it some other way - have at it, it is a
free world. I have been designing and building high precision equipment for critical
weapons systems for more than 30 years, and know a bit about how to do proper
precision measurement.

Bill

[HangFireW8]

You and I have something in common, Bill, we work in defense and have spent a lot of time measuring. Despite all the standards bodies, procedures, ISO, etc., when management says it ships, suddenly the measurements all come out OK and it ships. Sometimes it backfires, like my previous employer, when they were banned from making parts for NASA for a decade after the FBI raided our offices and carried off the QC/QA, origin and FAR flowdown records.

Funny thing, those same metrology guys still work in QC, I guess management values their ability to ship more than their ability to measure. They still have that attitude, though- they do it the "right" way.

I was trying to carry on the conversation using terms anyone can understand, but since you refuse to even read or try to understand what I'm saying, it is pointless.

For anyone else reading, if you pull a Sierra bullet out of the box and your dial caliper measures .308" or .357" on the money, do you really need to buy a more expensive instrument to verify that measurement? If you measure a bore slug at .308" and your boolit at .309", do you really need to put away the caliper and get a 1/10K micrometer out to verify it? Or, do you know enough to procede? Answer that question for yourself.

[40Super]

The whole point is that when you slug your bore,your trying to get as true a number as possible(one of the few area that is is desireable to be accurate) , if the average caliper/user of calipers can be +/-.001(very easily) what is the point of slugging? so your calipers "say .356", well that could really be .355,-.357. Now try buying a mold or sizing die for your .356" bore (when it is really .357") spend time and money doing that, what is going to be the outcome? Another thread asking why they are getting leading. Ya it may work well enough as strictly comparing the slug right next to your bullet, but often they are buying by "true" sizes, when ,because the calipers weren't "ON" they buy too small bullets or sizing dies ect.. The other way around (reading small) they then have bullets that may work fine(likely) or too big to reliably chamber.

In this particular area, I will ALWAYS insist on using a Micrometer.


Sorry to Bugslug for this getting kind of off base, it is one of those "conflicts" that have two sides.

[gray wolf]

My dad was a machinist, his whole world was numbers. Drove me crazy till I understood what he was trying to teach me.
When I started making custom furniture I drove everyone else crazy, I was a nut case for fit-- others would just say "Ah --just use more glue, you can't see inside the joint. But Dad had rubbed of on me. He had a 1" and a 2" mic that was off limits to everyone, now I know why.
Now all I have is a caliper, and let me tell you folks, it ain't a Micrometer.
Never was, never will be. Every time I try to get one something comes up and it's a no go, seems gas, human food, dog food, cloths, and other silly things keep getting in the way.
Through the years I did manage to pick up two more calipers for almost a giveaway price at flea markets. Now I have three calipers that all measure different.
Sometimes more ain't better.

[Bigslug]

Sorry to Bigslug for this getting kind of off base, it is one of those "conflicts" that have two sides.

No problem. Pretty educational, actually. All this "need for NASA-grade measuring equipment" talk seems to strengthen the argument for jacketed bullets - or at least gas checks - when it comes to loading for multiple guns of the same caliber.

A side benefit of this chat is that my senile brain has been jogged into remembering that I actually DO have a Polish Vin 1" mic that reads to .0001 that was given to me as a giftt when the precise direction of my gun-wrenching career was still uncertain. Gunsmiths need 'em, but armorer's generally don't, so it's been a dust collector in the garage these last ten years. Now all I have to do is bribe my rifle builder into teaching me how to READ the damn thing. . .

Realistic or not, my quest - at least for .45ACP - is to find a collection of variables that works generically. For rifles and magnum handguns I'm willing to load for a specific gun, but life's too short to feed a stable of 20-yard blasters that way.

[HangFireW8]

The whole point is that when you slug your bore,your trying to get as true a number as possible(one of the few area that is is desireable to be accurate) , if the average caliper/user of calipers can be +/-.001(very easily) what is the point of slugging?

Is this addressed to me? I was never an advocate of poor technique or bad equipment. And does it really mean when the accuracy of an instrument is listed as +/- .001", that it is always that far off on every measurement? If that were really the case, I'd be the first advocate of every reloader owning 1/10K micrometers (or +/- .0001" as their first piece of equipment. A better understanding of just what +/-.001" really means is required here.



Sorry to Bugslug for this getting kind of off base, it is one of those "conflicts" that have two sides.

My only "side" is that it is not always necessary to run off and buy 1/10K micrometers just to reload cast. A better purchase would be a 1/2" standard and some instruction on how to use it, how to measure, set zero and measure backlash. At that point if your current equipment isn't up to the task, repair or upgrade.

Measuring runs in my family, too. My Grandfaster was a tool & die maker, I have his machinist's toolbox, full of micrometers, indicators, etc., and a union sticker on the side. I could get into my own background but I'm trying not to get into a pissing contest of appeal to authority here- I'm only asking that reloaders know the strengths and weaknesses of their own equipment, and how to use them, and not spend money where its not required. Many are here, after all, to make their hobby money go further, not build an impressive tool chest.

HF

[357shooter]

My $40 micrometer that measures to .0001 is used for all bullet and bore/slug measurements. I used to use calipers and found that the results were not accurate enough to be helpful. :-) :-) :-)

[HangFireW8]

My $40 micrometer that measures to .0001 is used for all bullet and bore/slug measurements. I used to use calipers and found that the results were not accurate enough to be helpful. :-) :-) :-)

Not surprising in the least.

What I've noticed in this discussion is most don't discuss checking calibration or trying to address the problems with their equipment, they just move on. The consequences of a living in a disposable consumer society, I guess.

HF

[357shooter]

Not surprising in the least.

What I've noticed in this discussion is most don't discuss checking calibration or trying to address the problems with their equipment, they just move on. The consequences of a living in a disposable consumer society, I guess.

HF

There's a way to deal with others that doesn't just rub them the wrong way, you might want to recalibrate and give it try.

[HangFireW8]

There's a way to deal with others that doesn't just rub them the wrong way, you might want to recalibrate and give it try.

OK, I hear ya, but I also hear people telling me I can't measure and do what I've done for years, there's more than a little recalibration needed on that side, too.

HF