hardness suggestions for light 44 special loads?

[tommag]

I bought a Lee 200 rnfp for my bulldog and plan on using universal clays or unique to load in the neighborhood of 750 to 850 fps.
I'm thinking pb with 3% tin. My thinking is soft would slug up better with light loads. Do you think I'm on the right track, or should I go harder, as in ww?

[takasaki]

50/50 soft and ww with 1% tin is good as well as 75 soft to 25 ww with a little tin.

[Lloyd Smale]

good recommendation. I have about a ton of alloy just like that for 44 spec and 38spec
50/50 soft and ww with 1% tin is good as well as 75 soft to 25 ww with a little tin.

[mdi]

My light revolver loads run about 10 BHN...

[Outpost75]

You are loading a blackpowder cartridge with smokeless powder, not to exceed its original blackpowder velocity.

Factory black powder loads were typically either pure lead, or only minimally hardened, typical 1:75 or 1:50 tin/lead, about 6 BHN.

I use 1:40 tin/lead from Roto Metals in my .38 Special, .44 Special, .44-40 and .45 Colt smokeless loads which approximate original blackpowder velocity. My .44-40 loads with 200-215-grain bullets run about 1000 fps from a revolver, 1300 from a 20" and 1400 fps from a 24" rifle barrel. I have no problems with leading. Bullets expand and stay together, being effective on deer in the rifle. They "rivet" and deform a bit, but without mushrooming from the revolver. Gelatin penetration is 36-40" from the revolver and 20-30" from the rifle.

What's not to like?

162594162595162596

[Cowboy_Dan]

I've noticed something strange (to me) going to a softer alloy in my Bulldog. I started by loading "Hard Cast" (that's what the box said) 200 gr semi wadcutters over Unique and the recoil had a bit of a snap to it. Later, I loaded some of the Mihec 433-640 Light boolits over about the same charge of Unique with the same loading techniques down to ammount of crimp. They were cast of 50/50 CW/Pb and weighed in at ahout 225 gr if memory serves. The strange thing is that the snappiness of the recoil was reduced considerably, almost gone. I had always thought that heavier boolits lead to more felt recoil, but there is apparantly more to the equation than that.

[tommag]

I had something like that happen with a m70 featherweight 30 06 I used to own. With factory loads, the 150 seemed harsher than the 180's.

I've noticed something strange (to me) going to a softer alloy in my Bulldog. I started by loading "Hard Cast" (that's what the box said) 200 gr semi wadcutters over Unique and the recoil had a bit of a snap to it. Later, I loaded some of the Mihec 433-640 Light boolits over about the same charge of Unique with the same loading techniques down to ammount of crimp. They were cast of 50/50 CW/Pb and weighed in at ahout 225 gr if memory serves. The strange thing is that the snappiness of the recoil was reduced considerably, almost gone. I had always thought that heavier boolits lead to more felt recoil, but there is apparantly more to the equation than that.

[tommag]

Thanks, guys. You've convinced me to try. 50/50 and pb sn.I'll let the revolver do the choosing.

[Outpost75]

Thanks, guys. You've convinced me to try. 50/50 and pb sn.I'll let the revolver do the choosing.

You can do lots worse than that. About 1% tin is fine if needed to improve casting quality. No more is needed.

You are looking for something which approximates 98-1-1 to 96-2-2 Pb-Sb-Sn.

A mix which works well in this regard is 1 pound of linotype to 10 pounds of soft plumber's lead.

Casts beautifully and about 6-8 BHN, depending upon how pure to composition your sources are.

[runfiverun]

I think that the 3% tin would work pretty well it would be a bit more Tin than 40-1 would have.

I wouldn't rely on 'bump up' to work, I'd start with a larger diameter to begin with.

[stu1ritter]

From the reloading manuals take the pressure of the load you are using and divide by 1440. The answer is the approx BHn required for the load. I read it somewhere :~)

Stu

[Handgunr]

Tommag,
It isn't velocity that destroys a lead bullet, it's pressure. Some will argue that they are one in the same......they are not. If you multiply a "known" lead brinell hardness number (BHN) by 1466, you will end up with the maximum "elastic" pressure number (PSI) in which that alloy can operate without it's accuracy being destroyed. If you check some of your manuals, you will see a column for pressure of a given load. Those pressure numbers may indicate "CUP" (Copper Units of Pressure), or some (few) I've seen show "PSI". Due to variations in piezo testing equipment measuring CUP, if you drop those numbers by roughly 5-10%, you will be in the realm of a PSI equivalent.....a safe zone.

As an example........if you take a WW BHN of 9 multiplied by 1466, it equals 13,194 PSI,.......or Lintoype at 21 BHN x 1466 = 30,786 PSI....meaning that that particular BHN you have will work up to within 5% of those CUP numbers without distorting to a point that destroys accuracy. If you pick a load that shows a CUP of 25,000 for instance, subtracting 5-10% (1250-2500 PSI) to give you PSI maximums, you should have at least a 15-16 BHN alloy to work with that load/pressure. In a way, it's kinda like the standard practice of picking a load and working up. If you pay strict attention to pressures (as well as sizing) when using cast bullets, you can push them well beyond what most have thought possible for many years.

Hope this helps......
Bob

PS.......I stand corrected btw........the equation was "1422" times the BHN........

[stu1ritter]

From the LASC pages by Rick Kelter:
By multiplying the BHN number of your alloy by 1440 you can get a solid idea of whether or not you need to heat treat your alloy and to what "starting" hardness. Its a fairly common misconception that the 1440 formula is a maximum BHN for the load and this is incorrect, we need to know at what pressure the alloy starts to deform (obturate) and seal the bore. This formula WILL NOT tell you what the max pressure that will cause leading is as some believe, it is an approximation of a starting point.

Stu

[Handgunr]

Well Stu........I respectfully disagree with his consensus.
First off I stand corrected, the standard formula was BHN times 1422 (not 1466), and not 1440, and it's not a "starting" number at all, it's listed as a formula for a bullet's "ultimate compressive strength" (Richard Lee) . Lead has an "elastic", or sometimes referred to as a "plastic" quality to it, where it will swell or expand to a given level and return to somewhat the same state depending on alloy hardness and pressure applied. If the bullet is pushed past that given point, it can't recover, and accuracy is reduced, or greatly diminished. Knowing where the bullet "starts" to compress doesn't seem as important as where the bullet's accuracy is destroyed or diminished based on it's hardness. Somewhere along the way I'm sure the bullet will definitely swell or obturate.

With no disrespect to your source, I've used this formula for many, many years since it was realized and written about, and it has worked flawlessly for me. If I exceed it, even in small amounts at times, the ill result is very apparent.

Bob

[Handgunr]

Stu, and all.......
Other than posting it here as it's quite lengthy........look online for an article "Low Pressure & High Velocity with Cast Bullets written by Andy Moe", as well as chapter 10 of the 2nd Edition of "Modern Reloading" by Richard Lee. Those articles explain the whole thought process behind the formula. I have the article from Andy Moe on hard drive and it's very well done from an average guy's perspective. It's a very entertaining read as how he came to his conclusions.

I could post it here, but like I said, it's quite lengthy.

Bob

[44man]

I shot a lot of the 50-50 mix but was driving them to 1630 fps and they shot fine but I had fliers but no leading. GC's made them more accurate so I oven hardened them to 18-20 BHN. That improved accuracy a great deal.
However, at that velocity they tore deer to smithereens. It seems the ductile properties were not harmed. I never did recover a boolit so I don't know what they looked like.

[Handgunr]

44man,
Just guessing, but if the 50/50 mix is pure lead and WW's, (pure lead being 5-6 BHN, and WW's being 9-10), that would put you in the 7-8 BHN range maybe ?......
In my .44 Mag I use a water quenched gas check 265gr. Lyman HP over 2400 to approx. 1445 fps. No leading and excellent accuracy out of my Super BH Hunter at 50 yds. with a 2x scope. The BHN on the bullet was 14-15, and like you said......gas checks make a big difference.

[runfiverun]

here's how I figure it.
that stupid number means absolutely nothing.
otherwise I wouldn't be pushing anything over 1900 fps or so.
the boolits design and starting diameters and the guns diameters have about 2,000% more to do with what works than a stupid random number that means nothing.

one other thing about the 44 special, it is pretty much the 45 acp in a longer case with a smaller diameter boolit.
if something works in one it works in the other.

[44man]

Yes, that is right. I figure you can make a million alloys at a BHN no. I also hate it but what else can we use?
I don't even like air cooled WW boolits in my .44 mag. I get fliers that go away with WD but I did find out how--Anneal the GC's. Don't know why other then they might grip better. I never tried them with WD because it is an extra step, someday!
Friend is here casting pure RB's for his Old Army. He has about run a whole pot and every ball is perfect. A few minutes to show him and he might be the best behind a ladle yet to be here. A duck to water! I made a hundred or so before he came so we are set.

[Handgunr]

lol....wow.......okay fiverun.....if you say so.

[runfiverun]

well hangunr how do you explain the ability to shoot my 223 rifles at 2800 fps?
my load is in the 50-k range.
so times my alloys BHN number by 1422 [my manipulated ww and soft alloy mixed together for about 10 bhn] and I get 14220 or the pressure I use in my USFA 45 colt revolvers.[with the exact same alloy BTW]

HMMM....well that ain't supposed to work,,,,, so I should probably stop doing that.
I shouldn't be pushing that same alloy to 2400 fps in my 30 cal rifles either cause they don't fit the LEE modular numbers.
we dispelled that number thing so long ago it should be the new 'old wives tale' by now.

[Handgunr]

Well fiverun lol......

I guess in the world of "I can do whatever I want", it's all good them.....lmao. I mean, I can fire a fresh turd down a section of water pipe with enough air pressure, but I can't guarantee it's gonna hit where I aim....get me ?

How do I explain it ?......I can probably put 10 lbs of stuff in a 5 lb bag if I sort it just right, but I've never tried. I obviously can't explain your findings now can I ? All I can say is (based on your comments) something ain't kosher, and if I used my hardness testers and chronograph, I think we'd see a whole different conclusion.
First off, your running right up against .223 max. pressure......."in jacketed loads". If you're actually pushing a "measured" 10bhn bullet out at 50k without them turning to blue smoke, or patterning like buckshot I gotta see that. Or, are your hardness numbers "guesstimates", or rule of thumb scratch ?".........a chronograph as well ?.......or are your speeds based on book numbers, or assumption ?

The fact that they'd hit the target would be magical in itself considering that the jackets on jacketed bullets are 40bhn, (with 5 bhn cores) and can withstand that pressure...depending on jacket style/thickness. I guess that gaschecks are optional here as well ?......lol. Also, I'm thinking that any of Lyman's writings (years & years) on the subject don't matter either ?.......and the fact that they use Lyman #2 alloy at 16-18bhn, and linotype at 21-22bhn for their results, but maxing their velocities for those numbers at 2200-2300 fps max ?....that doesn't matter either ?......why not just use pure lead, or your magical 10bhn number ?
It's kind of ironic that you mentioned 2800 fps though.....although that "is" an achievable maximum for a cast bullet, it is possible........with the right pressures and hardness.

Btw, when you say "that stupid number means absolutely nothing", and "the boolits design and starting diameters and the guns diameters have about 2,000% more to do with what works than a stupid random number that means nothing"........well, those comments in themselves speak volumes.........So, with that logic.....if underwear came with pockets we wouldn't need pants ?.......right ?.....lol. I will say that "many factors" contribute to lead bullet accuracy, not just one, or the other........including those stupid numbers.

This is fruitless, I just chimed in to help someone out if I could.......not to get in a debate. It's nice to see after many years away, it's still all warm & fuzzy over here........lol......no offense intended.

[44man]

I water drop about everything, mostly WW boolits that reach 22 BHN. I also add stereo lead to many batches and it is rich in antimony and tin. Now that mix is SOFTER but they shoot better groups. The numbers don't explain the structure of the lead.
I don't think the numbers are relevant to what a boolit can withstand, same as 50-50 does not work for me unless GC'd even oven hardened to 20 BHN. They also expand violently when straight WW does nothing with the same hardness.
It is another thing that only shooting will show anything.

[Lloyd Smale]

I agree with 44man in that harder usually shoots better but will say that you need to fit alloy to a gun just like you do with bullets, power (type and charge) and primer and change one thing and it may like a totally different alloy. I used to fool with this stuff endlessly but anymore just cast my bullets at 16-18bhn air cooled buy alloying. I don't water drop much unless its for rifle shooting. Maybe someday when my lino stash is gone ill have to start water dropping ww but that will be a few years yet.

[runfiverun]

yeah not arguing.

just showing what is possible and that the 1422 thing is old school thinking.
pushing the AR rifle to near jacketed speeds with alloys not in the realm of pure tin is very possible and holding accuracy [commiserate to the rifles ability] is possible also.
I have shot the 223 in front of witnesses more than once [some from this website]
over their or my chrono and on paper of their choosing.
i'll bring that or the 308 or the 358 down to my local range anytime you wanna see it done or you can shoot them yourself, none of them much care who is behind the trigger.
we can have a nice discussion on the different types of fitment and how alloys behave under pressure and on lubes and stuff.

I have a week off every two weeks so we can muck about and work on a few things and get in plenty of range time.

[Handgunr]

Hey Lloyd.........long time no see......many years since the other site.....lol. I saw CBRick was here too......cool.

Bob

[Handgunr]

44man,

I can't get my WW's to get anywhere near those numbers after water quenching. I sort, soak and clean the weights, then batch melt & flux them into ingots, then when they get to the pot I chemically flux them before casting. My air cooled rounds are 9-10 bhn, and my water quenched rounds hit 14-15.

163356

You might be able to make it out in this pic of me using the tester........these ended up just under 15 bhn after a few days following water quenching.

Bob

[44man]

44man,

I can't get my WW's to get anywhere near those numbers after water quenching. I sort, soak and clean the weights, then batch melt & flux them into ingots, then when they get to the pot I chemically flux them before casting. My air cooled rounds are 9-10 bhn, and my water quenched rounds hit 14-15.

163356

You might be able to make it out in this pic of me using the tester........these ended up just under 15 bhn after a few days following water quenching.

Bob
WW's have changed, I still have old ones. The problem is all the SO's that get cycled now. Some are pure and many are zinc. The WW's are mixed too much with no set alloy. Soon they will be pure junk.

[Handgunr]

Possibly so.......most of my supply has been collected in past years so I can't attest to it. Makes sense though. I still have several hundred pounds to melt down into ingots....maybe 4-5 hundred pounds yet.
Everything locally now has gone to lead free WW's, so a trip to the junk yard in hopes of getting old one's will have to happen soon. The zinc weights will lay on the top of the mix while the regular lead WW's will melt first. As it's always been said, zinc will ruin or contaminate regular WW's if allowed to reach a temp where they melt. Awful hard stuff......brittle too.

The way the green movement is going, lead will be about impossible to get in the near future........I can see it. I can see us turning to super scroungers just to support our hobby.....sucks.

[Wolfer]

Back at the opening post. A 44 spl at 750/850 fps can use a very wide range of alloys. His lead / tin will work just fine.
If there are leading issues the problem will be with fit not the alloy.

[Lloyd Smale]

most of the wws ive water dropped through the years came in at about 18bhn. Air cooled around 10bhn. It varies some because I don't sort very good and pretty much melt everything. I haven't even picked up wws in a couple years. I know toward the end of when I did they were getting more and more full of stick ons and zinc.

[44man]

Things got worse when the lead mine was closed. Most now comes from Mexico.
What worries me is when old weights go to be made into new ones, do they smelt and separate metals or do they just all go in the furnace? I suspect they remove the zinc.

[Forrest r]

The us still produces lead, they just don't recycle/remelt it anymore. Common metals found in silver mines is lead and zinc. You mine 1 and you get the others.

I've owned/used/shot bulldogs for decades and still own/carry 1 to this day. I've always used a simple formula for the 44spl/38spl/45acp.

The velocity \ 100:
850fps ='s 8.5bhn
900fps ='s 9bhn
1000fps ='s 10bhn

An article from 1953 about the use of hp's in the 44spl. They show alloys and at what speeds those alloys perform their best at.

http://www.goodrichfamilyassoc.org/44_Special_Articles/44%20spl%20-%20may%201953%20american%20rifleman.pdf

Why look at hp's???
If a hp can't expand what makes you think the bullets body will obturate in the bbl???
If a hp blows up what makes you think the bullet would not skid/strip from the velocity/pressure of the load.
When a lead hp performs as it should, the bhn is correct for the pressure speeds of the load.

40 to 1 ='s 8bhn
30 to 1 ='s 9bhn
20 to 1 ='s 10bhn
16 to 1 ='s 11bhn
10 to 1 ='s 12bhn

99% of the cast/lead bullets I use/shoot in the 45acp/38spl/44spl are 8bhn to 9bhn.

It's probably just me but every time I look at that 1422 x xyz ='s #$% I look at that # as being the max bhn to use for that pressure.

850 x 1422 ='s 12bhn. There's nothing that says 9bhn wouldn't work but it is telling me I might have a problem with a 14bhn alloy.

Just something to think about. I bought my 1st bulldog back in 1985 and have been reloading the 44spl ever since. Never had a problem with an alloy around 8/9bhn.

[Handgunr]

Forrest r,

From what I've read over the years, the 1422 x bhn result was the maximum working pressure for that hardness. Whether it's max bhn for that pressure, or visa versa, I think we're all talking the same language. I'm on the same page of music as you are for the most part........I use standard WW's for most shooting as they are much more plentiful (for me) than even pure lead is.
They shoot fine from the slowest velocities that I load, right on up to 1100-1200 fps. using wadcutters and plain base bullets. Adding pure lead to make them softer is an option I guess, but they are usually just target rounds and I see no reason to waste the harder to get pure lead. Once I exceed those velocities for maybe heavier hunting magnum loads, I opt for water quenched WW's and gas checks.........and usually HP's as a preference (if I have the mold)....

[W.R.Buchanan]

Wow,,, I was going to put in my .02 but it really needs to be more like .50 to fit in.

I use Strait Wheel Weights in my .44's and .45's. The boolits are short and fat and fill out just fine. For the revolvers I do H&G 503 and never have leading with Specials or Mags at low to midrange velocities.

For Magnum loads I use 429244 with a Gas Check, again with strait WW and drive these up to 1800 fps in my 1894 CB Rifle. Best accuracy seemed to be at 1600 fps for that gun. Obviously no leading due to the check.

I have been doing the same thing with my .45-70 although I have sometimes added some tin.

All of the strait WW AC boolits I cast are 12-13 Bhn and I derive those numbers with a Lee Penetrator set up to be at full pen when the press goes over center and waiting the 30 seconds with the press over center so as not to introduce variables. It does the same thing everytime and the boolits tested reflect that exactly. I am measuring on my Optical Comparator with a digital readout. IE Very accurate. So some of the hardness numbers quoted above seem a little low to me. With the Comparator I can measure a dimple to a Tenth and Interpolate the Lee Chart to within .1 of a Bhn. This only means something if the test can be repeated multiple times,,, and it does everytime.

How are you guys calibrating or checking the calibration of your hardness testers? You do know they change form time to time,,, Right? All instruments have to be checked for accuracy from time to time.

I have chose to keep this a little more simple than many here. Plain Based boolits for below 1000fps, and Gas Checks for everything above.

This way any lack of "Metallurgical Understanding" on my part doesn't adversely affect my shooting.

Randy

[Handgunr]

My old LBT tester is ancient........I bought it back when Veral Smith first started making & selling them. Actually it's 1st gen........he came up with a 2nd gen later on......improved version. Anyway, I bought a Saeco tester years later just to cross check & compare......a different type of course, but just to check consistency.
With the LBT, you have to zero the tester before each test and then press the compression bar to an indicated point.......hold it for several seconds, then release it slowly. The scale needle rises and gives you your BHN. Obviously I repeat the test several times per bullet, as well as throughout the batch. The Saeco obviously also works on compression, but I use it to cross check the LBT's results.

I think 44Mag mentioned awhile back that the wide differences in BHN readings on the site are more due to the variations in WW alloy than they are the testers themselves.........I almost have to agree with his consensus. I have an older supply based on years of collecting......The last batch I collected was probably 8-10 years ago and I still have 4-5 hundred pounds to melt into ingots yet.

I'm sure a lot has changed since then.......and I know of late it surely has.

[44man]

I love the LBT tester. But one thing I agree with is you don't have the lead I do and I don't have what you use.
The quandary is I have a pile of sticks of 50-50 lead/tin. 10 to 1 is supposed to be hard at 12 BHN, correct? I measure 50-50 and get 8.5 BHN. One spot on a few did not reach 5!
I have pure tin and get to 6 BHN anywhere and 20 to 1 reads 7 BHN.
I checked known pure and got 5 and my WD boolits still read 21 to 22.
So you see, no numbers can be counted on. If 50-50 lead tin is softer then 30 to 1. Where am I?

[Handgunr]

44mag,

Yep......Veral makes good stuff. Cool old fella to talk to as I remember too.

All I can say is what I've read and studied over the years.........pure lead has always been listed as 5-6 bhn, and I although I know adding tin will harden it a bit, it's main purpose was mostly mold fill out. From what I remember, as hard as it was to get or how costly it was, most didn't use tin for that purpose. I guess knowing what pure tin would measure at as far as hardness, I could come up with a reasonable guesstimate, but I've never tested it to be able to say.

If you have tin and tested it, I would think that 50/50 would find a middle ground somewhere regarding hardness.......yeah, up from 5 bhn.......but since I have no common reference on the hardness of pure tin, I can't say. Guessing though.....somewhere 10-12 bhn should be a realistic guess. Maybe tin reacts to water quenching differently and gives you those higher numbers. There isn't a lot of tin in regular WW's, so maybe that's the reason.....

[44man]

WD will not change a tin/lead alloy at all. You need antimony and a trace of arsenic, Why? I don't know what arsenic does.
Tin does not add much hardness but it does alter the lead structure. To think adding more tin make boolits harder just increases cost with no advantage.
I measured stereo type at 21 to 22, charts show 23, close enough. It is 6% tin, 14% antimony and 80% lead. I add to WW metal for no BHN gain, actually less. Lack of arsenic?

[Handgunr]

Yeah 44,
Although tin does add "some" hardness to WW's, like I said.....it's not enough to make it worth it. Antimony is the real ticket of course. To be honest, I use alloys like stepping stones......pure lead to cover certain needs, maybe up to ACWW's, then from there.....I use the WW's either air cooled, or water quenched, then up to lino, etc., etc.......I might have to add something to cover the gap between the water dropped WW's and lino, but it's never been that critical.

Like I said previously, WW's in one fashion or another, cover the vast majority of my shooting. I've very rarely ever seen stereotype.......never had a chunk to test though. I do have a few bars of babbit though.......that stuff is fairly hard and is good for mixing.

[runfiverun]

higher tin amounts retard water quenching.
tin/lead alloys soften over time and will give false readings on the alloy [bhn] but true to it's make-up time frame.
WW's have been getting less and less antimony added to them since the 40's it seemed like about every 20 years they got softer and softer until the 80's 90's when things settled down for a while at about 3.5-4% then things started accelerating.
in the last 10-15 years or so everything got recycled as was, where was and the stick-ons got harder and the clip-on's got softer.
I'd say anything fairly new or from china/india is probably closer to 2-2.5% than the 4% antimony we all remember
the tin may be 1 or .1 and there is more junk in there like iron/calcium/indium whatever.
they still seem to work about the same as the old 4% antimony ww's do.

[David2011]

IMO, anything harder than pure pb and Win 231. It burns really clean with moderate loads.

David

[Petrol & Powder]

I'm with runfiverun on this one. A BHn rating is a guide but actual performance is the goal.

My father has a degree in electrical engineering and a degree in business, both of which contribute to how annoying he can be at times :o.

He would put a volt meter and a load tester on a car battery and say the battery produced X volts and Y amps and therefore was "good". I would ask if the battery would start the car and he would reply no, but the battery is good....?

The reading on the meter is not the goal, starting the engine is the goal.

A BHn rating is a useful tool to compare hardness but the number itself is not the goal. Now, the BHn number is a pretty good yardstick to get you in the ballpark but the goal is bullet performance (no leading, no slipping past the rifling, desired terminal performance, etc.)


With all of that being said, I don't think the 44 Special needs super hard bullets. I like to cast mine out of 20:1 lead/tin (BHN 10) and that's probably way more tin than I really need.

[Handgunr]

Yep.........there's a bunch of factors that contribute to accuracy as well as functionality in a gun.......not to mention the gun itself. Hardness is only one of them.

[GoodAlloy]

The softer check material obutrates and seals the bore better than a hard check. Makes a better gas seal.
Same effect as using softer alloy to get better seal in some cases.



Yes, that is right. I figure you can make a million alloys at a BHN no. I also hate it but what else can we use?
I don't even like air cooled WW boolits in my .44 mag. I get fliers that go away with WD but I did find out how--Anneal the GC's. Don't know why other then they might grip better. I never tried them with WD because it is an extra step, someday!
Friend is here casting pure RB's for his Old Army. He has about run a whole pot and every ball is perfect. A few minutes to show him and he might be the best behind a ladle yet to be here. A duck to water! I made a hundred or so before he came so we are set.

[6bg6ga]

I've cast for 40 years and I don't think I agree that bullets have to be so hard. I've used my Cabine Tree Hardness Tester and run a number of bullets thru it and separated them according to hardness. I've shot bullets with a hardness of 6-7 in my 45acp and my 45 LC up to 900+ in the 45acp and over 1000fps in my LC with absolutely no leading. Want to run them in excess of 1000fps then I highly suggest gas checks on them. My experience indicates that my results are best with a bullet .0015-.002 over the bore size. Less than .001 will result in leading in my case no matter what I shoot them in and no matter what the hardness is. Just my .02

[William Yanda]

Outpost:
" Gelatin penetration is 36-40" from the revolver and 20-30" from the rifle."
I would expect the opposite, any explanation for the results?
Bill

[imashooter2]

He stated the revolver doesn't expand, so it would have less resistance in the gelatin.

[44man]

I agree with fiver, BHN does not mean much if your gun is accurate with it. I HAVE made softer shoot well with fiddling but they MUST fit first. Bump up does not work.
One point everyone misses is where peak occurs and fast powders even with a lower total pressure will damage a boolit. Extend peak into the bore and a boolit will fare better. Either way you do not want the boolit to slump and change shape.
Guys talk 13,000 cup as nothing but it IS something if slammed into soft lead all at once.
Consider my potato gun can shoot a black walnut over 300 yards with 100# of air.
Formulas don't work well because every powder pushes different. Where peak is and how a powder keeps burning in the bore is not figured in.
The old tale of all powder being consumed in an inch no matter the caliber has a big hole in the bucket. If it was true you should get the same velocity from a 2" barrel that you get from 18" with the same load.
Even using too much BP in a cartridge has had chunks leave the muzzle to burn in the grass.
The Minie' ball was made to expand to fit fouled barrels so they could be pushed down through the crud. All my friends that shot them could not hit a 4X4 sheet of cardboard at 50 yards. I lapped many molds so it took a hard thump push to start them. We could then ring the 200 meter gong.
Bump up does not solve a poor fit and should be dropped from conversations.
Look at what all of you say every day! Fit the boolit to the throats or ream the throats to fit your boolits. I don't see anyone shooting .427" boolits from a .430 groove. Just make them dead soft, amazing! Lead is silly putty.
Gas checks are not understood. They stop skid at the base to keep a seal, THAT IS IT, period. Someone always says it keeps the base from melting.
I have shot PB at over 55,000 cup too many times with extreme accuracy and no leading by adjusting the alloy. I see what happens by recovering and examining thousands of boolits.