PDA

View Full Version : Alloy Question - Lyman #2 versus wheelweights



snowwolfe
11-25-2005, 07:22 PM
Bear in mind I know little about casting. That being said let me make a few comments before I ask a question. For years and years I read that Lyman #2 was probably the best alloy to use in magnum handguns. I remember numerous articles stating how well it cast and it had a nice hardness to it that usually stopped the bullets from expanding when used on game animals (this is what I am after). I don't know where you folks live but I have never been lucky enough to get free wheel weights. Either the tire shops simply say no, they sell them, or they hold them for special customers. Even if I could get them for free I dont have the time required to clean and mold them into ignots. I don't mind paying the $1.25 ( approx price) to buy "store bought" alloys.
I plan on casting for my 44 mags (bullet weights about 250gr) and for my S&W 500 (bullet weight about 400 gr).
Lately all the information seems to state that Lyman #2 just doesnt make a suitable alloy and that wheel weights are the perferred alloy. Has something caused Lyman #2 to fall out of favor after being so great to use for 40-50 years?
I already have a 250 pound supply of Lyman #2 and will switch to another alloy if it will give me better results. Comments are appreciated.

nighthunter
11-25-2005, 07:59 PM
Lyman #2 is an excellent alloy to cast bullets. Its just that so many of us shoot a large amount or are really cheap or a combination of the two. WW do cast a very good bullet. Go ahead and cast with the #2. Don't be afraid to someday try WW and see how they work for you if you come across some.
Nighthunter

Bass Ackward
11-25-2005, 08:09 PM
Has something caused Lyman #2 to fall out of favor after being so great to use for 40-50 years?

I already have a 250 pound supply of Lyman #2 and will switch to another alloy if it will give me better results. Comments are appreciated.



Snowwolfe,

Lyman #2 became popular at a time when tin was cheap. It was an idiot proof way to get everyone on the same casting page so pressures were all relative and success could be promoted. And Lyman dominated the cast game generating manuals every few years. Lyman #2 was a success because it was not only tough enough to work in everything, but tin content equaled antimony content. That must happen in order to maintain ductility with harder mixes. So the bottom line was that it worked on game too.

Remember that when this standard came into play, wheel weights were about 9% antimony. While really hard, WW was brittle upon impact. Then in the 70s, the percentage of antimony started coming down because of cost. Many WW manufacturers merged, down to two manufacturers that pretty much standardized WW as a mix in this country. So people now had a common standard that was less brittle that could be hardened by water dropping or heat treating. At the same time, Lyman started to lose it's hold on casting. Some might say that casting declined as a percentage of shooters.

Now the teacher (Lyman) has lost control of the class all together. The internet has taken this away. So much so, that Lyman now recommends this site, from theirs, for cast bullet information.

SharpsShooter
11-25-2005, 08:14 PM
I agree Lyman #2 is a fine choice for your handguns and many rifle calibers also. In my case it boils down to the volume I shoot and resulting cost. If you cast many of those 400gr boolits for the 500 S&W, your 250lbs of alloy will be gone quick. I cast 450gr 45-70 boolits and am lucky to get 13-14 per pound of alloy. A normal range session often consumes 40-60 of them at a whack. I'm lucky to have several free sources for WW, so you can see the cost benefit to shooting ratio easily enough.

Keep hunting, the WW are out there. You just have to knock on doors enough at the tire shop.

snowwolfe
11-25-2005, 08:19 PM
I was told that using Lyman #2 for my S&W 500's would most likely result in poor bullets. Whats the opinion on that here?

Bass Ackward
11-25-2005, 08:38 PM
I was told that using Lyman #2 for my S&W 500's would most likely result in poor bullets. Whats the opinion on that here?


Yes. And no.

Remember that when Lyman was king in casting, small bores and short pistol bullets dominated sales. Laddle casting was king too. Tin was needed for running cooler pots and for fill out at these temperatures. With bottom pours, your face doesn't care how hot you go.

You can adjust any casting technique to work with any mix. What the general gist is to high tin mixes and big bullets is that big bullets heat blocks up quick. This causes high tin mixes to shrink in unpredictable locations after heavy frosting. Some have refered to this as shrunken bullet syndrom. You can run a cooler mix and cast slower. But with bottom pours dominating casting today, everyone wants speed. "With speed", higher keeper rates will be with lower tin mixes.

Just remember to get your mold cut for WW. Tin mixes will always throw a larger diameter. You can always size down in diameter. Someday later, you can go to WW and still have your diameter you NEED.

The Nyack Kid
11-25-2005, 09:59 PM
for me WW alloy is easy to abtain and it is very versitile . what other alloy can easly run the brinel scale from 6 to 40 bn . it casts hot and fast and did i mention that it is cheap ? there are 437.5 grs to an ounce . so its easy to see where a 500 anything would be lead hungry. its amazing what a little beer bribe will get you .

drinks
11-25-2005, 10:44 PM
SW;
I have no problem getting all the wws I need, I just ask when I am having a new set of tires or a rotation and oil change being done at the local tire and lube shop. Timing is everything and stay away from chain store type places unless you are willing to butterup the manager with a $10 or so, also, if you can find a manager that loads, offer some bullets in return.
Plenty of ways to score some.

snowwolfe
11-25-2005, 10:53 PM
I didnt mean to turn the thread into how to obtain wheel weights. That is simply not an option where I live. Shops simply do not or will not not give them away. I live close to a city of 350,000 and getting them for free is a dead issue.

9.3X62AL
11-26-2005, 12:29 AM
The simple answer as to why Lyman #2 is in decline is the price to tin--$7.50 per pound and higher. It certainly is a fine alloy for boolitmaking--if you can afford to use it.

Frank46
11-26-2005, 04:21 AM
DeputyAl, remember when tin in 1lb bars was $2.00 a bar. Going through some ancient stuff the other day and found three one pound ingots with the stickon price tags still on them. Must be close to 30 years old. We used to go in the dump where I worked and scrounge cable sheathing to make sinkers. Well I made boolits for my trapdoor and my buddy made sinkers. In the dump we used to find small pieces of 40-60 solder bars that the splicers threw away cause they were too small to use when the did their joints. Still have a bunch left. Ah the good old days. Frank

nighthunter
11-26-2005, 08:16 AM
Snowwolfe, where are you located that WW are so hard to get? Maybe someone here is located near you and can point you in the right direction. That 250 pounds of alloy you have would sure stretch some WW into some real good bullets.
Nighthunter

snowwolfe
11-26-2005, 02:59 PM
Anchorage Alaska. I suspect the local commerical casters have all the wheel weights spoken for, if the stores give them away at all.
How would adding one pound of lead to 9 pounds of Lyman#2 work out?

snowtigger
11-27-2005, 02:56 PM
Probably sell them to sinker casters. If you get up around Fairbanks, try K&K recycling. They sell them at 20 cents a lb, last time I checked. If you contact me before you come up, I will try to locate some.