Boolit shrinkage ??

[stana]

A few years ago, (1978 to 1993), I was sucessfully using Lyman 429244 in my Redhawk and 444 Marlin. I stopped using the 444 and started using plan base boolits in the Redhawk. Recently I cast a batch using that mold, but found I could not seat the gas checks without great force and without damageing the base of the boolit. Same box of gas checks. The lead alloy was in both cases hard, but not nessersarlly the same. I droped these last boolits in water as I cast. I assume these boolits are not shrinking as much as the earlier ones, but I don't know why. It worked great in the 444, seated and crimped over the frist driving band. It was accrute with iorn sights and killed a spike elk for me and five bucks with the Redhawk. . I'd like to get it up and running again. Thanks for any help.

[leadhead 500]

As for the dia. I think the mix may be diff. than before.Also I think that the dwell time on the mold as you are casting has alot to do with size and weight.

[454PB]

Welcome to the forum!

The more antimony in the alloy, the larger the boolit will cast. If you are using some percentage of linotype for instance, raising that percentage will increase the as cast diameter.

Some casters claim the quenching boolits changes the diameter, but I've never seen it happen.

I WANT the gas checks to fit tightly. With my Lyman lubrisizers, I lay the die retaining nut removal wrench across the top of the nut and then use the nose punch to seat the check before sizing. If yours are so tight they damage the boolit base, you might want to use an appropriate size ball bearing to slightly spread the check open first.

[44man]

I agree with 454, I WANT the checks tight.

[stana]

Thanks for the input. I think I'll heat up the lead pot tommorow and cast using stright ww, it's the only other alloy on hand. I'll drop some in water and some on a pad and see if theres any differences in the way the gas checks fit. stan