Bass, BASS, hard VS softer lead.

[44man]

OK, I shot today with my .44 using the RCBS 245 semi wad cutter PB. I started at 25 yards with 22 BHN boolits and 10 gr of Unique and 7 gr of 231.
I then went to 50 yards and lost my 5 shots with 231 because they went over the boolit trap but I got the Unique loads.
Now I PM'd you about the boolits being too small at .430" for my .4324" throats and .430" bore. You said BIG trouble with hard lead! [smilie=1: Now remember these dimensions, really bad are they?
Targets as good as I could hold.

[44man]

Now let us move on to 30 BHN boolits of the SAME diameter of .430". Same loads at 25 and 50 yards.
I also show a patch run through the bore with the tiny bit of lead.
HOLY SMOKES, my 50 yard groups are SMALLER then the 25 yard groups with softer lead. I DO NOT LIKE SEMI WAD CUTTERS but this is the only PB I have.
Now what would I get if I made boolits softer, like 12 BHN, with fast powder?
I have said over and over that the faster the powder, the harder the boolit. I talk to smoke or something.
Here I am shooting under size boolits, way too hard for everyone here and making them shoot good with no leading.
Yes, it is amazing that my velocity is also way far from what the twist needs for perfect accuracy.
I have proven this too many times and all the softer boolit advocates just make me laugh. You will not believe what this boolit will do with slow powder at the proper velocity for the twist EVEN THOUGH IT DOES NOT FIT THE THROATS.
If you think bump up by making it softer improves accuracy, please show me.

[Bass Ackward]

If you think bump up by making it softer improves accuracy, please show me.


Interesting. Lots of contradictions here huh? Did you think about what you saw before you wrote it? I don't think so because you slammed yourself several times. :grin: If you got a chin strap on that hat, you better fasten it cause a tornadie is a commin.

If you didn't see smoke. If you didn't have leading, then you obturated up to seal. Any other possibility? The larger the throats the more bullet deformation that has to occur and by your own admission, this isn't supposed to be accurate. I use lino with the 358156 in 38 Special too with 6 grains of Unique, but I size .3595. Do I have to? I have low rifling height and it works, so why not? My 45 AR is all over the map with hardness, but most of those designs are shot hard too. That's 22k psi tops. But I am not expanding up either.

What I don't understand is how does this differ from what I said? I said that you need to have both phases. Lead soft enough to expand if you size small and hard enough to hold the pressure with the lube you are using. And second, that you must hold the rifling for the velocity that is generated so that you get a good exit in THAT gun. Congratulations, you did that. What would you have done if you leaded? Increase diameter or soften your slug or raised pressure right?

Remember, you are on the record for 18 BHN being the king for your accuracy with HV loads. Supposedly, this is 50/50 WW and lino and the mix that you use. I would think that HV loads have to be tougher on bullet lube and metal. So have you decided to go to truly hard with bullets for your HV stuff based upon these results? Or are you going to stay where you are at with those "softer" slugs? :grin:

Also, Keith bullets won't shoot? Here is where your twist rate theory loses some luster. A 245 grain bullet isn't as long as your heavies. It has a smaller meplat and the weight is back on the rear where it REQUIRES LESS twist rate to stabilize. Or said another way, it should stabilize equally at a lower velocity. I'd say it did OK if you are realistic. If you shoot 10 bullet designs or 1,000,000 loads, one will shoot best and one will be the crappiest. Wonder what those bullets would have done accuracy wise had you sized them like you do your other slugs?

Before you etch this in stone though, that 10 grains of Unique is 26.500 and @1200 fps just so you know. Not quite the 900 fps of a cowboy load. The 7 grains of 231 probably shot high cause of increased barrel time. Too bad you lost those as it should have been 950 fps or so at 16k.

I try everything eventually, just sometimes my results are different from yours. I have stated this before. And Professor Target trumps all theory as the final grader no matter who offers the advise.

Tell me what you think now that the storm has passed? :grin:

[44man]

Interesting. Lots of contradictions here huh? Did you think about what you saw before you wrote it? I don't think so because you slammed yourself several times. :grin: If you got a chin strap on that hat, you better fasten it cause a tornadie is a commin.

If you didn't see smoke. If you didn't have leading, then you obturated up to seal. Any other possibility? The larger the throats the more bullet deformation that has to occur and by your own admission, this isn't supposed to be accurate. I use lino with the 358156 in 38 Special too with 6 grains of Unique, but I size .3595. Do I have to? I have low rifling height and it works, so why not? My 45 AR is all over the map with hardness, but most of those designs are shot hard too. That's 22k psi tops. But I am not expanding up either.

What I don't understand is how does this differ from what I said? I said that you need to have both phases. Lead soft enough to expand if you size small and hard enough to hold the pressure with the lube you are using. And second, that you must hold the rifling for the velocity that is generated so that you get a good exit in THAT gun. Congratulations, you did that. What would you have done if you leaded? Increase diameter or soften your slug or raised pressure right?

Remember, you are on the record for 18 BHN being the king for your accuracy with HV loads. Supposedly, this is 50/50 WW and lino and the mix that you use. I would think that HV loads have to be tougher on bullet lube and metal. So have you decided to go to truly hard with bullets for your HV stuff based upon these results? Or are you going to stay where you are at with those "softer" slugs? :grin:

Also, Keith bullets won't shoot? Here is where your twist rate theory loses some luster. A 245 grain bullet isn't as long as your heavies. It has a smaller meplat and the weight is back on the rear where it REQUIRES LESS twist rate to stabilize. Or said another way, it should stabilize equally at a lower velocity. I'd say it did OK if you are realistic. If you shoot 10 bullet designs or 1,000,000 loads, one will shoot best and one will be the crappiest. Wonder what those bullets would have done accuracy wise had you sized them like you do your other slugs?

Before you etch this in stone though, that 10 grains of Unique is 26.500 and @1200 fps just so you know. Not quite the 900 fps of a cowboy load. The 7 grains of 231 probably shot high cause of increased barrel time. Too bad you lost those as it should have been 950 fps or so at 16k.

I try everything eventually, just sometimes my results are different from yours. I have stated this before. And Professor Target trumps all theory as the final grader no matter who offers the advise.

Tell me what you think now that the storm has passed? :grin:
No, I am not on record for 18 BHN. My normal shooting loads use 22 BHN and my target loads are 30 to 32 BHN.
Even my 50-50 WW and pure are heat treated to 22 BHN.
Then you confuse expanding with obturation which only means to seal. So you say my 30 BHN boolit expanded more then the 22 BHN???? And if the 22 BHN did expand, why was accuracy so poor?
No, I got no expansion, all I had was a bore size boolit from the start and it stayed that way from the brass to the muzzle.
If it leads, I would make the boolit larger, NEVER softer.
I also would not raise pressure, I would extend the pressure peak farther down the bore.
And it is true about the semi wadcutter. Those groups are as good as I ever get with them and I can cut groups more then half with LBT noses.
Remember a 22 BHN RD 265 gr gave me a 1/4" group at 50 yards. (Water dropped WW's.)
Bass, one of your posts explained pressure peak too soon while the boolit hardly moved from the case and I agreed with you as that has been what I have always said. Then you contradict all that good thinking in following posts.
I said a soft boolit is RUINED by peak pressure too soon and that seems to be what you were saying, then you turn around and say softer is better!!!!!! I am confused every time you post.

[runfiverun]

the softer part was in conjunction with larger.
to start the seal without bumping up the base at all, and the only sizing is just like it being done in a sizer.
it also will engage the rifling just fine,especially with a powder[pressure] pushing it down the bbl.
the reason so many like the 2400 powder it starts out soft and keeps pressure on the boolit for quite a ways.
or as bass would put it ,it's in the launch.
it also has to do with not deforming the boolit so it doesn't have to relax.
it don't have to obturate either.

[243winxb]

Another 44 mag thread, interesting. Shot with Unique 10.2 gr. Fed155 mag primer. Click for larger photo. http://i338.photobucket.com/albums/n420/joe1944usa/th_IMG_3306B.jpg (http://i338.photobucket.com/albums/n420/joe1944usa/IMG_3306B.jpg)

[Bass Ackward]

I said a soft boolit is RUINED by peak pressure too soon and that seems to be what you were saying, then you turn around and say softer is better!!!!!! I am confused every time you post.


I know you are. And it drives you nuts. What you really can't understand is why I don't embrace an absolute. The answer is cause you don't believe it yourself. Why stop at 22 BHN if you can mold 30? Then it gets confusing because I will hear you claim no leading like that is an absolute too. Some of my best loads lead.

Personally, I believe that you have been a closet rocker all this time and you're just coming out. :grin: 50/50 lino-WW. Shame shame.

History is full of examples of soft lead with fast powders. Black is as fast as it gets. So please tell me why going to a slower powder than black (which is what you are advocating) causes poor accuracy? Where do you draw the line? It can cause more or different problems that we must address or WE or the gun or both cause the poor accuracy. Not the slug.

I had my computer dump when I upgraded to Vista that they only recourse was to wipe the drive and start over. Lost my address book, everything. So as I get pictures with soft stuff, I will send you some. Two new Whelans demanding the time right now. Not going to start with rocks for them either. That's why I built slow twisters. But you like fast twists don't ya? :grin:

[Bret4207]

Not to butt in on someone elses discussion, but I have to agree with Bass on not sticking to absolutes. There is no one perfect alloy for all of us and all our uses. Yeah, we can go harder. I've used WQWW+ enrichment alloy and brought my boolit samples over 30- IIRC they ran around 32 Bhn. I sized them .359 and ran them up to the 1400 fps range in a M27. The groups were no better than with the far simpler straight WW. I had a lead wash, not real leading, but more than I got with WW. I ran the same boolits (358156) up over 2K in my Whelen. The Whelen likes a fatter boolit and the hard boolit leaded me up and gave typical undersized boolit groups. I used some of the boolits in as cast diameter, .360+, and the leading went away. The groups were much better, but nothing to write home about. Using WQWW I can approach 2K with that boolit and far better grouping. I can't quite pass 2K FPS and have good grouping for long, but is 100 fps a real difference? It was an experiment, and for me the exotic hard alloys are a waste of time in 35 cal, at least with that boolit.

Now if we get into the smaller bores and higher speeds I'd certainly give a harder alloy a try. Maybe if I spent a lot of time playing with the hard alloys I'd be move impressed with them. But I don't have time or money enough to play with the exotic stuff. Plain old WW and some tin and enrichment alloy and a 5 gallon bucket of water will do everything I need so far. Simple and cheap, works for me. I can alter the pressure curve with different powder and loading techniques, I can alter the final size of the boolit and I can alter the overall fit to an extent by sizing or bumping. I don;t see me bumping the nose of a 30 Bhn boolit in the standard equipment I have now.

I think it's a simple case of doing with what you ahve and making it work for you. I''m okay with the results I get and feel confident in my assessment of undersized hard boolits pushed fast. They always lead FOR ME. Doesn't mean they'll absolutely lead for everyone, but everything I've seen says they will FOR ME.

[243winxb]

bass ackward, how did you get these number? Computer program?
that 10 grains of Unique is 26.500 and @1200 fps 44man, What was the drop weight of the bullet as it came from the mould?
the RCBS 245 semi wad cutter PB. thank you.

[44man]

I know you are. And it drives you nuts. What you really can't understand is why I don't embrace an absolute. The answer is cause you don't believe it yourself. Why stop at 22 BHN if you can mold 30? Then it gets confusing because I will hear you claim no leading like that is an absolute too. Some of my best loads lead.

Personally, I believe that you have been a closet rocker all this time and you're just coming out. :grin: 50/50 lino-WW. Shame shame.

History is full of examples of soft lead with fast powders. Black is as fast as it gets. So please tell me why going to a slower powder than black (which is what you are advocating) causes poor accuracy? Where do you draw the line? It can cause more or different problems that we must address or WE or the gun or both cause the poor accuracy. Not the slug.

I had my computer dump when I upgraded to Vista that they only recourse was to wipe the drive and start over. Lost my address book, everything. So as I get pictures with soft stuff, I will send you some. Two new Whelans demanding the time right now. Not going to start with rocks for them either. That's why I built slow twisters. But you like fast twists don't ya? :grin:
There you go, confusion again! :confused: Black powder is very gentle starting a boolit unless you are using FFFFG. Pure lead can be shot with BP in almost any gun. You should not even compare it to fast smokeless. Peak pressure is very low and does not occur in the case.
Next, I do NOT have lino, I mix my own alloy of 20# of WW, 6.4 oz of tin and 9.6 oz of antimony.
The reason I do not use it all the time is the expense and time to make it. With slow powder I do not need it except for target and softer alloy works just fine with slow powders.
Yet air cooled WW metal WILL leave more lead in my bores unless I use annealed gas checks on them. Hard checks do not prevent the leading. But I can shoot water dropped WW with PB boolits with no problems.
You keep acting like I have never worked with this for the last 56 years! :confused:
All I will keep saying is that as your powder gets faster and peaks faster, boolits need to be harder, yet you do not need to overdo the hardness because that does not work very good either. Boolits should still be ductile, not brittle. Yet they have to resist being deformed when shot.
I would say from 25 to 30 BHN is ideal for top accuracy. The kind of alloy you use to get this hardness does matter, just because the lead says 30 will not tell you what you have in the alloy.
Then you say I used too much powder and cowboy shooters use lighter loads---EXACTLY and it is why I chose loads that impact the boolit harder. Knocking down the peak pressure will allow a softer alloy---gee whiz, why is this so hard to understand? If I used 2 gr of Bullseye so I could watch the boolit come out of the gun I could use pure lead!
You can't beat around the bushes. The harder you punch a boolit before and as it is leaving the brass, the more resistant to deformation it needs to be.
And notice because my boolits were also undersize, they still obturate in the bore because they are groove to groove size to start with---fit to the throats did not matter because I got good entry into the forcing cone without deformation.
Isn't it strange my .44 will shoot my heavy, hard boolits from .430" to .433" with no difference in accuracy? Sure, I like a better fit to throats but with the right boolit, powder, primer and alloy, all of my revolvers will outshoot most rifles with all sorts of boolits.
By adjusting the alloy to the powder or the powder to the alloy, I can make any revolver shoot.

[44man]

the softer part was in conjunction with larger.
to start the seal without bumping up the base at all, and the only sizing is just like it being done in a sizer.
it also will engage the rifling just fine,especially with a powder[pressure] pushing it down the bbl.
the reason so many like the 2400 powder it starts out soft and keeps pressure on the boolit for quite a ways.
or as bass would put it ,it's in the launch.
it also has to do with not deforming the boolit so it doesn't have to relax.
it don't have to obturate either.
Now you said it! [smilie=1: Just what have I been saying to Bass all along?
You do NOT want to expand a boolit to fit the throats and you do NOT want it to deform it in the forcing cone.
Slow the peak pressure and softer lead can be used.
You are exactly right.
Bass says it is in the launch and I beat him in the head with the same thing but he still says I am wrong. Have I not stressed this all along with every single revolver post I ever put on this site?
The boolit leaving the muzzle MUST look the same as what you stuck in the case to start with!
I went down last night to find some boolits in my trap which is a long box stuffed with rubber mulch. I had two sheets of cardboard and pulled a lot of rubber out until I could dig in about 3 feet. I never found a boolit so they have to be around the 4 foot level. I need a large sheet of plastic to dump the thing on.
I wanted to show pristine boolits that could almost be shot again eccept for rifling marks.

[44man]

How about an experiment from someone that has a .58 musket to show what harm boolit expansion does. The Minie' was designed to drop down a bore and expand to fill the rifling and it does that very well. BUT! :brokenima
Take a Minie' that you can drop down the bore and shoot a 50 yard group, that is if you can keep any on paper!
Now either lap out the mold or buy another that casts a ball exactly like the first one but takes a hard push to start in the muzzle and shoot more groups.
I can say for sure that the tighter Minie' will clang targets at 200 yards where the smaller one will not hold paper at 50.
Why? They both obturate in the bore! The small one expands to fill so what is going on?
It is because the tighter one did not have to expand as much and is not deformed crooked or upset (setback) in the bore.
Why would anyone use a revolver boolit that deforms?
I have said a million times that I do NOT believe in "bump up" of any kind in any gun.
The funniest one is shooting soft boolits through a barrel constriction and hope it "bumps up" again after the constriction is passed.
I can't tell you how many recovered boolits I picked up on the range that had the nose offset to the side from the center line or rifling marks all the way up one side of the nose and none on the other side.

[44man]

bass ackward, how did you get these number? Computer program? 44man, What was the drop weight of the bullet as it came from the mould? thank you.
245 on the nose with my alloy and 252.5 with water dropped WW.
10 gr of Unique should be around 30K or more. (CUP) An ideal deforming load! :wink:

[Bass Ackward]

I didn't say that you are wrong. See that's where this gets messed up.

This is a very big point. What I am saying is that you are not ALWAYS right. Big difference!

When you have perfect conditions, how many people have trouble shooting cast? Cast are the easiest things to shoot when everything is aligned. Rifles do well because in most cases misalignment is minimal compared to a revolver. Now why is this important?

For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction. What would you rather get hit in the head with, a balloon, or a rock? So from this you can see that if you are misaligned, a hard bullet transfers more impact energy to move the gun from it's aimed location and you get a flier. It ain't a flier. You just let the gun move in that direction. Strap the gun into a Ransom and magically it shoots better. If you have a well aligned gun, then it is possible to out shoot the mechanical movement in a Ransom.

Same goes for larger diameter bullets. They impact the cone the soonest and the longest making a gun harder to hold on target to shoot well. They also require the most metal to be removed or be shot out of the way before they or the gun becomes accurate.

If size matters less to accuracy what do we conclude? Good alignment.
If POI doesn't change except for vertical movement from barrel time what do we conclude? Good alignment under the whole pressure range.
If a woman can shoot a handgun well, what do we conclude? Good alignment.
If bullet hardness or design matters less to accuracy what do we conclude? One of the things is good alignment.
If a handgun can deliver a bullet like a rifle what do we conclude? Good alignment and shooter.

Are you catching a trend here? How many rounds through that gun again?

A gun, regardless of type is a bullet launching system. The less flaws that launching system has, or the more consistent it is to shoot, the better it will make you look and going hard is the idiot proof way to launch well. And the less a good gun will require you to know or understand. If a handgun has no misalignment, or misalignment under pressure, then why have a forcing cone at all? Why was it called a forcing cone in the first place? And is forcing cone wear really from powder? :grin: Give me a break.

Must make some of what we discuss seem like a foreign language huh?

[Larry Gibson]

I'll throw in a couple of thoughts as I've had this same discussion with several here.

There is a pretty big difference between "absolutes" and "rules". There are generally exceptions to rules but the rule most often applies. An "absolute" is just that; it always applies. The problem with this discussion and the others is that some seem to think the occasional "exception to the rule" negates the rule. It does not.

The rule here is; "bumping up" of a bullet causing it to seal/fit the bore does not produce the best accuracy. Using a bullet that properly fits the throat/barrel or is slightly sized down by the throat/barrel will produce better accuracy than "bumping up" of an ill fitting bullet.

The exception to the rule is; occasionally, under some circumstances, causing "bumping up" of an ill fitting bullet so it better seals/fits the throat sometimes does improve accuracy for that particular bullet in that particular gun.

Larry Gibson

[Bass Ackward]

bass ackward, how did you get these number? Computer program?

Yes. Might not be exact, but it is close if the velocity generated matches the computer prediction.

[leftiye]

Well put Larry! I've gotten stretched over a barrel a lot about "principles", or "rules." The fact that someone has a gun that for some alchemist's reason doesn't conform to a rule or principle only means that there was an exceptional set of conditions, or gun. Without some sort of rules, or principles, you have no understanding, only chaos. As seen in this discussion, some boolits act like jacketed bullets which shoot very well if a thou or two undersized. But generally a boolit that hits the forcing cone a thou or two OVERSIZED does best.

[44man]

Now Bass, Larry and Leftiye, there is not a single thing any of you said that I can disagree with in those last three posts.
It seems we all really do agree.
When you start to do unconventional things to correct a mechanical problem in a certain gun, those things do not apply to 95% of shooters. That is for YOUR problem gun.
A gun with a cylinder out of line with the bore sideways can be fixed and should have been at the start. Up and down is a different story and the gun should go out the door to the first buyer.
I will not watch a forcing cone wear off center when I can time it and I will not load special to lower the wear rate. It is so easy to see a cylinder out of line before the gun is ever shot. If your eyes can't see it there are range rods.
Same as a constriction at the threads that can be fixed.
But this has wandered all over the place from the point that a GOOD gun will shoot better when a boolit is not deformed in the throats or forcing cone.
Lets leave problem guns and gun smithing out of this.

[runfiverun]

one of the things i have found is that even in rifles you DO NOT have to oversize a boolit for your groove diameter.
in fact most of my better [grouping] rifles are a slip fit 18 bhn boolit right at and even past larry's rpm range.
in fact that is where i usually start my loads and work from there, I.E 1900-1950 in a 10twist.
and then painstakingly change things till something gives.
usually the boolit design or I "run out of lube". outrun my lube, whichever way you want to think of it. in that case the next step is lube,if it's design well i guess more money is involved [custom mold time] or thats where i quit, till i run across another design [similar to the one used but slightly changed] that shows promise in that rifle.
I had to edit this one.
to add it does still look like even though rifles and revolvers are being discussed[in other threads] the same exact PRINCIPLES are applied.
to the high end results anyways.
smiling to self..
how in ell do we argue about what we agree on?
especially in revolvers someone has a problem 44 says do this [make it harder] i say make it softer and larger,oh yeah see what your lube is doing to you too.
then we argue about [not sure what it is] when we are agreeing on everything except bhn,and it is all about the way the cylinders line up with the bbl?
and how large the throats are cut?

[Bret4207]

Dead on 5r5. You don't have to have an oversize boolit. The problem is most people are still in the "if it's a 308/30-06/30-30 I need to size .308/9". Not much help in a .310 barrel, or a .3095 for that matter. And since the noobs are almost always going to try for 2K+ right off the bat........

[44man]

Dead on 5r5. You don't have to have an oversize boolit. The problem is most people are still in the "if it's a 308/30-06/30-30 I need to size .308/9". Not much help in a .310 barrel, or a .3095 for that matter. And since the noobs are almost always going to try for 2K+ right off the bat........
You hit the nail on the head. I have proven it time and time again with bore size boolits. Start them straight, don't mess them up and they are good to go.
The problem with a revolver that has oversize throats is you can mess up the boolt before it gets in the barrel. That is where soft can fail.
I load only for accuracy and don't care how fast it is. Some have to be close to max, others don't.
I am amazed at the posts all these years with guys looking for pure velocity. All kinds of gripes about not being able to match book velocities. It is funny when muzzle energy is stated for a load.
So far I have never seen muzzle energy or velocity kill any deer. But now accuracy will do it every time. :drinks:

[runfiverun]

this is one of those threads that needs to hang around so it can be added to , and seen by the new guys.
i had to figure out a lot of this myself [time in the gun room,and range]
it may help them envision what they are looking for.

[Bass Ackward]

When you start to do unconventional things to correct a mechanical problem in a certain gun, those things do not apply to 95% of shooters. That is for YOUR problem gun.

Well this is really the key isn't it? I mean do you think that revolvers being less accurate bullet launching systems than rifles comes about because of perfection for 95% of everyone else? Why make a custom or line bored if it isn't a bigger issue than you think? Why did you buy them? Same goes for rifles too. Just that they still have the advantage of pressure working on the base only once instead of twice. And it is lower when it does cause of longer barrel length. OR why hollow points shoot better for most than solids.

You can buy good guns or you shoot them to be in "most cases". And metal will be removed until it no longer has any force exerted upon it and the bullets simply glide and ride the rails. But you also have to look at what happens over the life span. The farther a bullet has to jump, the harder it needs to be. The heavier it could need to be to reach and seal. And the lower the rifling height gets, the harder a bullet needs to be to hold the same velocity level (rotational force) to get the launch. Or why some designs shoot better than others. So a look at your testing may be telling you more than you are hearing or want to know right now. Father time is at work on that piece.

Set that barrel back and you might just find that the gun improves with softer lead. Shorten the cylinder up to a minimum and then set it back and you really slow the slug before impact. That means less direction changing force. That is if it concerns you. Understand?

But the questions that arise on this board are not because people have perfect guns. And if most would post how many rounds they have through them, I doubt that they have reached the 10k to 12k level that most experienced hand gunners tell me seems to be where performance improvement stops and you then have as good of a piece that you can get.

Once you get a gun "right" then a monkey can shoot cast in it. If he is an accurate monkey, then he can shoot quite well. But most of those guys don't belong to this board or post problems. You are the minority my friend, not the majority.

[crabo]

I think a lot of guns become "problem" guns when you reach the point where mediocrity is not acceptable. I shot thousands of cast boolits in speed plates and ISPC. I was really happy shooting comercially cast boolits that I bought from a guy at the matches.

Once I started casting, and started benching for accuracy, I was not happy with the way my guns shot cast. Then came the process of finding out what it takes to make my gun shoot.

I did notice that the same load, using air cooled and water dropped boolits, had different points of impact. Not only where the groups often dramatically different in size, but poi moved, more in some guns than others.

The saga continues....

[44man]

Bass is right of course and my .44 does have a lot of rounds through it---but it is a RUGER. Slugging it shows the exact same barrel dimensions it had when new. The forcing cone is the same except for a little sand blasting on the edges. I have a forcing cone brass lap and now and then I clean it with Flitz and it just takes a few turns to remove the carbon and it is nice and even all around.
But explain about both of my BFR's? The .475 has never seen a "J" word bullet and shot cast, any cast boolit I bought or made, right from the git-go. The first group blew me away and it continues to amaze.
Same with the 45-70, clanging steel at 500 meters the first week I had it. If it goes over 3/4" at 50 it is just my vision. A few seasons back I bought some Hornady bullets for deer because it is hard to kill them with hard cast so the gun has maybe 20 J bullets through it. It shoots any cast from 300 to 420 gr into one ragged hole.
Then my friends new 45-70 that I took out of the box, cleaned the bore and did the trigger, I was shooting 1-1/4" targets at 100 yards with my cast after 10 shots at 50 to sight it.
Scott's new Hunter out of the box shot 1/2" groups at 50 with my loads.
Whitworth's old model 29 is shooting my RD load like crazy.
No, I have had bad revolvers, A Dan Wesson, a Seville, (Spelling?) and a few other brands but I never had a bad Ruger or S&W and I have owned a pile of each but always had to sell to buy new.
Even the old S&W .357, If I remember it was a 27, was hitting 2" targets at 100 yards with the old 358156 HP.
No, I don't understand all of the problems some have and if a gun is trouble, get rid of it! [smilie=s: Why go through years getting nowhere?
Why does anyone need to shoot 2000 J bullets to make a gun shoot.
How about line bored? Please show it is better. Sounds good to line bore through the hole in the frame and then screw in a crooked barrel. I can tell you too many examples of line bored and custom revolvers that can't come close to a Ruger because guys come here to have me make them shoot because they can't do it. I can't either! :cry:
Sure, now and then a real jewel shows up and a lot of you have them and it makes me remember the old Dan Wessons where an IHMSA shooter would buy a bunch and pick out one that shot, then sell the rest. There are too many guns that if you get a good one, NEVER part with it because the next one might be a pig.
One friend has a lot of Jack Huntington custom revolvers and they are wonderful, fantastic workmanship! I will tell you without hesitation that they shoot the same as my BFR's, never better, never worse. There is only so much you can do with a revolver, then it is up to the owner to make it shoot.
I will never believe that the majority of fellas on this site have bad guns, some might need a little work is all. Don't get all worked up when your gun won't shoot, it might be your loading bench that is causing the trouble. If the gun is truely bad, dump it. [smilie=p:[smilie=p:

[felix]

You are talking experience, 44man. Most of us do not have it because the lack of genuine interest to see the project through. The only time I have seen folks deal with multiples are in the BR crowd. The guy who I messed around with years ago would only shoot 3 rounds through a new barrel to determine if it was competitive. He had a pile of rejects, to be later rechambered and sold to varminters. I quickly learned that certain barrel steels shot in 3 rounds, and for others it takes 100 or more. Most shooters in the BR game don't have patience when selecting a barrel, so it is wise for the smith to verify the product before shipment to the shooter. I might add here that the barrel/action threads have to be perfect to be competive in the BR game. ... felix

[44man]

You are talking experience, 44man. Most of us do not have it because the lack of genuine interest to see the project through. The only time I have seen folks deal with multiples are in the BR crowd. The guy who I messed around with years ago would only shoot 3 rounds through a new barrel to determine if it was competitive. He had a pile of rejects, to be later rechambered and sold to varminters. I quickly learned that certain barrel steels shot in 3 rounds, and for others it takes 100 or more. Most shooters in the BR game don't have patience when selecting a barrel, so it is wise for the smith to verify the product before shipment to the shooter. I might add here that the barrel/action threads have to be perfect to be competive in the BR game. ... felix
You are right of course and I never give up on a gun until it is really tested, might take a long time but sooner or later it is time to give up and move on. I have found that once I find a good load for say, a Ruger .44, then every Ruger .44 will shoot the same load with the exception of the Redhawk which will take a little different load.
The SRH will shoot the same loads as the SBH. That makes it easy with a new .44, I just need to shoot my loads and if they don't shoot like I want, then I go over the gun. If all is OK, I shoot enough to see what happens. I don't need to work loads at all.
I see no need to run 2000 rounds through any gun. Might take 100 or 200.

[felix]

The Ruger lever gun is terrible right out of the box. At least mine was. However, because Ruger likes to use hard steel barrels, I just shot my sample until it would wear out a competitive bench gun. The Ruger is just getting started under the same conditions. I used full force high antimony, low tin boolits to wear in the gun properly. Had fun doing it, though. The thing shoots anything now. Around 2 inches as far as I can tell at a hunnert. Out of the box, beer cans were entirely safe at the same distance even when using a firm hold off of the car top. ... felix

[Bass Ackward]

I will never believe that the majority of fellas on this site have bad guns, some might need a little work is all. Don't get all worked up when your gun won't shoot, it might be your loading bench that is causing the trouble. If the gun is truely bad, dump it. [smilie=p:[smilie=p:


I suppose that it is hard to understand. But Smith & Wesson used to machine rest all their guns. The ones that would shoot less than some magical standard were stamped DX. I believe that the standard was 1" at 50 yards with factory ammo. Some of those won't do well with cast. And some of the ones that failed the DX testing with copper shoot great with cast. So what can be the difference?

What the ratio of DX guns to (lets call them average) Classics was not very high and the guns sold at a premium for this. You mention Dan Wesson's. DWs used to have removable barrels that were held on by a threaded nut at the end. The nut could be tightened or loosen to in essence tune a revolver or it could cause a constriction at the frame and the muzzle. Some guns shot best .... not so tight and some tighter than heck.

Remember that alignment is hardest but still just one facet of accuracy and that everything else still must be right or some other compromise will be required. And if a cylinder is still line bored off or a barrel tightened too much then the true benefit of line boring won't be seen until that metal is removed too. It's simply supposed to be better from day one. But your BFR's are line bored. And they are cut rifled. Not an average piece by any stretch.

Or if stress in the steel ruins alignment with loads in the power range you want to shoot. We saw this with a Shilen barrel that was taken off a customer's rifle because it would not perform (1 1/2") as a 308 Win and re-chambered it to a family member's rifle in 308 Norma that just cut holes. Same barrel. Same type action. Same guy doing the job. Final result? Big difference.

The big thing I want you to see is that you had that gun 20 years ago. 20 years ago, your idea of hard (and accurate) was 50/50 ww/lino at 18 BHN. Now if you are like most of us, we were more on top of our game a few years back than we are today. So I can feel safe concluding that if you weren't shooting 30 BHN constantly in those days, that it was because you achieved satisfaction with accuracy you were looking for, and it came for you at 18 BHN. SO ask yourself, why does it require harder today?

Some day, and some round count, you won't be able to reproduce the accuracy you now enjoy. My guess is that to your eye, everything will still appear to be the same as it does now. By then you will blame your age or something, but the gun will just not hold or it will require heavier (slower accelerating) bullets and fewer designs to get there. What you can be grateful for is having had it in the first place. Many people never get one. Or if they do, they aren't good enough shots to really appreciate it. If they have a great gun, and they are great shots, then you have a friend, because they have no idea what I am talking about either. Wish I didn't know this either. :grin:

[44man]

I suppose that it is hard to understand. But Smith & Wesson used to machine rest all their guns. The ones that would shoot less than some magical standard were stamped DX. I believe that the standard was 1" at 50 yards with factory ammo. Some of those won't do well with cast. And some of the ones that failed the DX testing with copper shoot great with cast. So what can be the difference?

What the ratio of DX guns to (lets call them average) Classics was not very high and the guns sold at a premium for this. You mention Dan Wesson's. DWs used to have removable barrels that were held on by a threaded nut at the end. The nut could be tightened or loosen to in essence tune a revolver or it could cause a constriction at the frame and the muzzle. Some guns shot best .... not so tight and some tighter than heck.

Remember that alignment is hardest but still just one facet of accuracy and that everything else still must be right or some other compromise will be required. And if a cylinder is still line bored off or a barrel tightened too much then the true benefit of line boring won't be seen until that metal is removed too. It's simply supposed to be better from day one. But your BFR's are line bored. And they are cut rifled. Not an average piece by any stretch.

Or if stress in the steel ruins alignment with loads in the power range you want to shoot. We saw this with a Shilen barrel that was taken off a customer's rifle because it would not perform (1 1/2") as a 308 Win and re-chambered it to a family member's rifle in 308 Norma that just cut holes. Same barrel. Same type action. Same guy doing the job. Final result? Big difference.

The big thing I want you to see is that you had that gun 20 years ago. 20 years ago, your idea of hard (and accurate) was 50/50 ww/lino at 18 BHN. Now if you are like most of us, we were more on top of our game a few years back than we are today. So I can feel safe concluding that if you weren't shooting 30 BHN constantly in those days, that it was because you achieved satisfaction with accuracy you were looking for, and it came for you at 18 BHN. SO ask yourself, why does it require harder today?

Some day, and some round count, you won't be able to reproduce the accuracy you now enjoy. My guess is that to your eye, everything will still appear to be the same as it does now. By then you will blame your age or something, but the gun will just not hold or it will require heavier (slower accelerating) bullets and fewer designs to get there. What you can be grateful for is having had it in the first place. Many people never get one. Or if they do, they aren't good enough shots to really appreciate it. If they have a great gun, and they are great shots, then you have a friend, because they have no idea what I am talking about either. Wish I didn't know this either. :grin:
You still slip up, I NEVER had lino or a 50-50 mix of it. Why do you keep saying that????
Haven't I said too hard is as bad as too soft?
The boolits I shoot today are the same as I shot 40 or 50 years ago because I learned early on that soft is crap in a revolver. I did not have a BHN tester then but I could not scratch the lead with a finger nail. My guess would be 22 to 25 BHN.
Now how funny is it that all the S&W revolvers I owned (at least 8) would shoot 1/2" or under at 50 METERS and NONE were marked DX????
About the Dan Wesson and many I seen at shoots. Ever see one with the barrel and shroud pointing to the left so far you would need a rear sight 3" wide to get on paper? Ever see one that when the gap was set at one point, the cylinder would jam when you try to cock the gun? With a cylinder front so wobbly that every chamber has a different gap. I thought not!
No, BFR's are NOT line bored and the rifling is cut. SO WHAT? My Ruger's are not cut, yet still shoot.
Everyone still sticks rifles in here and BR to boot. I am talking revolvers and you still can't come out and admit that a ruined boolit before it gets in the bore ruins accuracy. Now how hard can that be? [smilie=1:
I have another test coming up, stay tuned.

[jack19512]

I never had a bad Ruger








I'm jealous. :mrgreen:

[runfiverun]

actually yes i have seen it, if i set my bbls back to minimum clearance it will hit another spot on the cylinder face.
thats how i know which cylinder to measure/set the gap from.
my dan wesson count ecceeds my ruger count by a ton and norinco is third [only 9mm's i can get to shoot cast worth a crap] followed by a freedom arms revolver made before they were freedom arms.

[felix]

A revolter is nothing but a freebored rifle with multiple chambers. The same methods to make a rifle shoot can be transfered to the revolter, time and money (machinery) permitted. The natural tolerances of the revolter are necessairly taken into account for the realized group sizes. A revolter is not expected to shoot as well as a rifle by almost everyone, so the same effort is not extended to the revolter. ... felix

[Bass Ackward]

1. Now how funny is it that all the S&W revolvers I owned (at least 8) would shoot 1/2" or under at 50 METERS and NONE were marked DX????

2. No, BFR's are NOT line bored and the rifling is cut. SO WHAT? My Ruger's are not cut, yet still shoot.

3. Everyone still sticks rifles in here and BR to boot. I am talking revolvers and you still can't come out and admit that a ruined boolit before it gets in the bore ruins accuracy. Now how hard can that be? [smilie=1:


1. How much force a gun exibits to shoot straight is a direct result of how it is held. Not everyone can control a misaligned gun as well as everybody else. Not everyone can shoot a revolver period. But if you get one where alignment is correct, then just about anyone can do better than they normally do.

2. Copied from BFR WEB site.

Barrel cylinder alignment is held to under .002 concentricity.
All barrels are precision cut rifled.
Barrel cylinder gap is held to less than .005.
All barrels are hand lapped.
All barrels are precision recessed crowned.
Cylinder tolerances are so tight that best accuracy is available with all chambers.
Tolerances between the cylinder throat and internal barrel dimensions are matched to each caliber.
Many of the BFR's calibers will shoot groups of well under 2" at 50 yards with mechanical sights.
All calibers feature twist rates specifically matched to the ammunition available and barrel lengths offered.

About 6 months ago I inquired about them building me a 44Mag. I asked about how they held these tolerances. I was told that they are line bored and cost would be $1600. The only point out of this is that these are not typical pieces.

3. This has essentially all been about damage and how controlling damage can allow a bullet to launch squarely. The revolving launching system is inherently more damaging than a rifle. Unless it is correct or you can hold it and counter the force for the amount that it is not. Not everyone can.

Based upon your argument for hard bullets, no 22LR should be able to hit a pie plate at 50 yards if they are that soft and driven that fast. Pure lead and faster powder. And boat tailed or rebated to boot.

[felix]

22LR powder speed is circa Herco, 4756, and the like. ... felix

[44man]

1. How much force a gun exibits to shoot straight is a direct result of how it is held. Not everyone can control a misaligned gun as well as everybody else. Not everyone can shoot a revolver period. But if you get one where alignment is correct, then just about anyone can do better than they normally do.

2. Copied from BFR WEB site.

Barrel cylinder alignment is held to under .002 concentricity.
All barrels are precision cut rifled.
Barrel cylinder gap is held to less than .005.
All barrels are hand lapped.
All barrels are precision recessed crowned.
Cylinder tolerances are so tight that best accuracy is available with all chambers.
Tolerances between the cylinder throat and internal barrel dimensions are matched to each caliber.
Many of the BFR's calibers will shoot groups of well under 2" at 50 yards with mechanical sights.
All calibers feature twist rates specifically matched to the ammunition available and barrel lengths offered.

About 6 months ago I inquired about them building me a 44Mag. I asked about how they held these tolerances. I was told that they are line bored and cost would be $1600. The only point out of this is that these are not typical pieces.

3. This has essentially all been about damage and how controlling damage can allow a bullet to launch squarely. The revolving launching system is inherently more damaging than a rifle. Unless it is correct or you can hold it and counter the force for the amount that it is not. Not everyone can.

Based upon your argument for hard bullets, no 22LR should be able to hit a pie plate at 50 yards if they are that soft and driven that fast. Pure lead and faster powder. And boat tailed or rebated to boot.
All is true about the BFR's for less money then a custom gun.
They do not make the .44 as a listed item so a custom might be line bored. But production revolvers are NOT. I know because I have talked to them. I E mail and call them often.
So you see, you can get a super revolver at a decent price. They have also reduced prices because they do not advertise much and do not pay gun writers to push their products. Have you ever seen a single writeup in any magazine? I asked Handloader and the guy got nasty. Money talks. To keep prices down on a wonderful bunch of guns, Magnum Research refuses to buckle under.
I gain nothing by telling how good they are, I am just so happy I don't have to pay big bucks for one of the best revolvers made today. It is nothing but a huge Ruger put together better and does not look any better on the outside then a Ruger. Ruger casts the parts. They use the exact same transfer bar system and all internal parts are basic Ruger except the hand that allows cylinder rotation in both directions.
Bass, if you want to have more fun then you ever had, buy a 45-70 BFR. It has less recoil then a .44, is so accurate it gets boring unless you shoot at rediculous targets and will make your friends eyes pop when you hand it to them.
Just think, you will need nothing but a trigger job! :Fire:

[Bass Ackward]

Bass, if you want to have more fun then you ever had, buy a 45-70 BFR. It has less recoil then a .44, is so accurate it gets boring unless you shoot at rediculous targets and will make your friends eyes pop when you hand it to them. Just think, you will need nothing but a trigger job! :Fire:


Fun? Goodness gracious man, that's what I have been telling you for years. Get off the bench. A handgun is supposed to be fun. Not overly serious. And a man has to know his limitations. It depends on how you view a handgun and how you want to use it. A BFR is basically useless for me and I will explain.

See, there are two forces at work here. It just isn't recoil, it's also weight / balance. I bag to get loads and then almost never after that. Then 98% of shooting for me is off hand or snap depending on the piece. I work on moving targets more than stationary. So a bench rest handgun is of little use to me. I have rifles for that.

But I have one anyway. It was built for 350 grain slugs before my arthritis set in. It handles everything though, but it needs to be bopped really. When I shoot it off hand, I have to place a stick with a V under my chin to keep me from falling forward. Takes a day and a half to get it out of the holster. Has to have a cross draw or the muzzle drags in the dirt. :grin:

My 1997 Freedom 357 on the other hand, has a thin 5 1/2" barrel. Draws and points like a dream. Bags OK too, but I would say it's a little light for that. Much better balance with the shorter, smaller diameter barrel. Freeking IDEAL snapper. Forget that it actually has sights from time to time. So forget glass. Chipmunks, turtles, snakes, fish, frogs, coyotes, cats, rats, birds catch hell with this one. More to my speed (capabilities) these days. ;-)

How long does it take you to get one of those BFRs out of it's hanger? :grin: Danged holsters look like an ironing board strapped across your chest. Makes your hat look like a lid off of a can of spray starch. :grin: If I ever feel down with one of those rigs, I would have to take it off to get up. Catch my drift?

[44man]

Fun? Goodness gracious man, that's what I have been telling you for years. Get off the bench. A handgun is supposed to be fun. Not overly serious. And a man has to know his limitations. It depends on how you view a handgun and how you want to use it. A BFR is basically useless for me and I will explain.

See, there are two forces at work here. It just isn't recoil, it's also weight / balance. I bag to get loads and then almost never after that. Then 98% of shooting for me is off hand or snap depending on the piece. I work on moving targets more than stationary. So a bench rest handgun is of little use to me. I have rifles for that.

But I have one anyway. It was built for 350 grain slugs before my arthritis set in. It handles everything though, but it needs to be bopped really. When I shoot it off hand, I have to place a stick with a V under my chin to keep me from falling forward. Takes a day and a half to get it out of the holster. Has to have a cross draw or the muzzle drags in the dirt. :grin:

My 1997 Freedom 357 on the other hand, has a thin 5 1/2" barrel. Draws and points like a dream. Bags OK too, but I would say it's a little light for that. Much better balance with the shorter, smaller diameter barrel. Freeking IDEAL snapper. Forget that it actually has sights from time to time. So forget glass. Chipmunks, turtles, snakes, fish, frogs, coyotes, cats, rats, birds catch hell with this one. More to my speed (capabilities) these days. ;-)

How long does it take you to get one of those BFRs out of it's hanger? :grin: Danged holsters look like an ironing board strapped across your chest. Makes your hat look like a lid off of a can of spray starch. :grin: If I ever feel down with one of those rigs, I would have to take it off to get up. Catch my drift?
I only have one response-----:bigsmyl2::bigsmyl2::bigsmyl2: OK, three!

[snaggdit]

And since the noobs are almost always going to try for 2K+ right off the bat........

Hey, I resemble that remark! At least in my first attempt at .223. But in my defense I did back down from starting load, just not enough!

[Lloyd Smale]

im no expert or cast rifle shooting so ill stick to the handgun side. My results mirron 44mans. I shoot ALOT of cast handguns and have a buddy who when healthy probably shot more then anyone in the US. We found that harder bullets shoot better then soft about 99 percent of the time. Even in guns that are slightly out of spec. Like 44 man said you cant expect to get accuracy out of a bullet that has deformed to fit a gun. Only exception ive seen is guns that are just so far out of spec that they should be tossed in the trash. In my experience if a gun shows dramatic improvement with softer bullets its a gun that will never meat my accuracy standards anyway. Lifes to short to pull your hair out because of a crap gun. A few years ago we did a 10 gun test that invoved 3 different calibers and bullets accross the board shot bettter as they go harder. At least up to about 18bhn then they for the most part leveled off. Some got a tad better as the bullets got harder but not enough to warant using more expensive alloys. What you have to remember is these principles and rules your refering to are rules that were made up by guys like you and me many years ago. For the most part they didnt have access to the better guns we have, the better molds we have and the harder alloys we can get now. Also for the most part they were made by men that didnt shoot near the volume some shoot now. For the most part there not rules but just wifes tales. Im not a fan of veral smith personaly i think hes a jerk but he is pretty knowlegable and just ask him his opinion of hard vs soft alloys. He like me and a few people i know, including 44man got there opinions by looking at targets not by reading something someone else wrote. I guess to look at it another way. If softer is better for accuracy and for causing less leading in a gun why do jacketed bullets work. there harder then any alloy we use. They work because they are tough enough to prevent deforming. How many times have you seen someone say there gun shoots jacketed bullets well but when they try cast there having problems then the first thing someone says is there using a alloy thats to hard. HOGWASH! If you doubt this take three of your best guns and loads and cast some bullets out of three alloys, say something 8bhn 12bhn and 20 bhn and see for yourself. Id bet a dime to a dollar that youll find the harder the alloy the better accuracy you get even at low pressures. Even my 45autos and 38 specials that i shoot in competiton with pip squeak loads do there best work with linotype or at least 5050 ww/lino.

[BABore]

I've got a couple wheelers that fall into that 1% of guns senario. My 480 Ruger SRH just plain doesn't care about alloy. Whether plinkers or full house loads, 10, 22, or 28 bhn boolits, SWC or LBT style, it shoots them the same. With an Ultra dot site, it runs just over an inch at 50 yards. I ran a lengthy test with a 400 grain PB Keith and a same weight gas checked, LBT style using both 10 and 22 bhn alloy. All four combinations used the same load. At 50 and 100 yards group size and POI were essentially identical. I could mix up the loads in the cylinder and never seen a hoot of difference. I later went back and tweaked the loads of each up and down a little to see if I was missing anything. Nope, nothing was gained. This gun is definetly abnormal and it will never leave my mitts.

My other abnormality is another Ruger. I picked up a pair of SBH Hunters in a trade. One in 41 Mag and the other in 44 Mag. Both were checked over and slugged for fitting. The 41 needed the throats lapped open a bit to run cast. The 44 had some thread constriction which was firelapped into submission. Both got their triggers worked over. Having learned a good lesson with my 480, I worked up loads for each with both 10 and 22 bhn boolits of several styles. In my load workups I would load 5 rounds at each charge for the soft boolit, then duplicate it with the harded ones. I would bench the hard ones first then move to the soft ones. In both guns I used 2400 and WW 296 with standard and mag primers. Standard primers were also tried with the 296. Once a sweet spot was established for each load group, I would load up at least 30 rounds of it for bench testing at 50 and 100 yards. If things still looked good, additional rounds were loaded and taken out to 200 and 300 yards. Here I was looking for boolit stability and any weird flyers.

With the 41 Mag, it showed a distinct preference for 22 bhn boolits. Softer ones didn't hold a candle to them. The 44 Mag was just the opposite. It totally preferred 10 bhn boolits. From there I went on to plinking type loads and repeated my testing. At 900 to 1,000 fps, both guns now liked 10 bhn boolits the best.

Bottom line is every gun is an individual. I test both soft and hard boolits whenever anything is changed and see what the gun tells me. I don't let stubborness and past experience get in my way. What works, works!

[Lloyd Smale]

BABore you about hit it on the head. In handguns there are no rules of thumb or principles. Only way to really tell what works is to shoot a varity of differnt things in every gun. Alot of this do is a matter of what you consider is truely a accurate load. For some people if a gun will hit a beer can at ten paces they think its accurate. Some like me consider a one inch 25 yard group accurate and some like 44mag consider a gun accurate only if it will do the same at 50 yards.

[Bass Ackward]

If softer is better for accuracy and for causing less leading in a gun why do jacketed bullets work. there harder then any alloy we use. They work because they are tough enough to prevent deforming. How many times have you seen someone say there gun shoots jacketed bullets well but when they try cast there having problems then the first thing someone says is there using a alloy thats to hard. HOGWASH!


Lloyd,

The vast majority of jacketed handgun bullets are pure / soft lead with a full length GC. The bullet does give in upon contact with the cone, it does re obturate or reshape under the pressure and the shell holds the rifling for a good launch. Only a solid copper Barnes at 45 BHN will match your statement.

The key for most people is shooting a long enough barrel to get enough velocity or rotation to have the slug fly well after the damage. The short barrel guy not only has to push more pressure to get this, but he has more muzzle pressure to deflect it. So he simply has to have a better gun.

The long barreled guy generally has more options from which to produce a good load. So the same argument about hard bullets can be made about longer barreled guns shooting better. Are there ever exceptions to this? :grin:

I don't disagree. But the discussion Jim and I were having off line, we felt that it might stimulate thought for others. Having a stable of great guns, mostly with longer barrels, and full power loads, does not create a data base that can help most people having trouble.

I was trying to get Jim to .... focus his efforts on some lighter loads for a change that may be more toward what guys are using and experiencing problems with. And get him to see the fun in the guns besides a bench.

That was my agenda. :grin:

[44man]

Lloyd,

The vast majority of jacketed handgun bullets are pure / soft lead with a full length GC. The bullet does give in upon contact with the cone, it does re obturate or reshape under the pressure and the shell holds the rifling for a good launch. Only a solid copper Barnes at 45 BHN will match your statement.

The key for most people is shooting a long enough barrel to get enough velocity or rotation to have the slug fly well after the damage. The short barrel guy not only has to push more pressure to get this, but he has more muzzle pressure to deflect it. So he simply has to have a better gun.

The long barreled guy generally has more options from which to produce a good load. So the same argument about hard bullets can be made about longer barreled guns shooting better. Are there ever exceptions to this? :grin:

I don't disagree. But the discussion Jim and I were having off line, we felt that it might stimulate thought for others. Having a stable of great guns, mostly with longer barrels, and full power loads, does not create a data base that can help most people having trouble.

I was trying to get Jim to .... focus his efforts on some lighter loads for a change that may be more toward what guys are using and experiencing problems with. And get him to see the fun in the guns besides a bench.

That was my agenda. :grin:
Bass, did you see my other post where I shot 28 BHN boolits with 5 gr of 231? First shot from a clean bore was a little low right but the next 4 went into 1/2" at 25 yards. With the RCBS Keith to boot! Dang, I hate that boolit style! :mrgreen: After I shot the target I shot the rest at pop cans off hand and none got away! :Fire:
But how does anyone shoot a .44 with less recoil then a .22? The things don't even make noise! :confused:
I think you need to shoot a box full of heavy .475 loads. Then you will see what a little gun the .44 is and you could stand on your head and shoot them! [smilie=1:
Remember, I am a hunter and long range shooter first and tin cans do not bleed. If I want to just have fun, I get out my .22's. No need to waste a ton of lead with the big guns.
Did I ever tell you about how I kept every shot on a steel chicken at 200 yards with my Mark II by aiming at a spot 53" above it?
WHAT! Did you think I only shoot 10 yards with a .22???? :drinks:

[Bret4207]

I'd like to add a couple of my thoughts to this discussion, which I'm learning a lot from BTW. First, we cannot reasonably compare cast and jacketed in the context we're using here. They are just too different. It's apples and sausage, we eat both but that's where the similarity ends.

Second, I'm a lover of plain old WW and I make no bones about it. It won't answer for everything, but it will for a good 75-90% of peoples shooting. I'm also one of the guys telling the noobs to start with WW and low to mid range velocity, I do this for a reason. Time and time again, since way back in '97 on Shooters, we see the same questions, problems and results from people new to this. They read the ad's about HARDCAST and they read the overly simplistic magazine articles or older books that make a simple leap that leading comes from "melting" boolits and soft alloy. We have to get them beyond that right off and into fit or they go through what I did and most other older guys went through- long sessions scrubbing the barrel and lousy groups. Until they wrap their heads around fit, until they realize all the slugging in the world won't really tell you what you need like listening to the gun does, until they figure out each gun is a rule unto itself and there are no "magic potions" they'll be stuck where I was years back- mediocre groups, barely adequate performance and frustration above all else.

Third- and what I the reality of this "you don't need hard alloy" argument- Just finding WW is hard enough for most guys, tell them they need additional tin and other enrichment alloy and it can get a little overwhelming. I just came into my first batch of linotype 2 years ago and I've been at this since the late 70's/early 80's. That stuff just isn't readily available like WW. Why give a noob or guy with limited experience the idea he HAS to have a hard alloy while at the same time telling him he doesn't need to worry about hard alloys but does need to worry about fit, but a hard alloy might help with things anyway? Rather confusing, eh?

Another thing someone mentioned was that most guys don't really wring a gun out. That's sure true. I've only really put a lot of cast time into 3-4 rifles and a a couple handguns. I don't know about anyone else but I have NO time. I actually had more time a few years back when the kids were in school . SWMBO was at work and I had from wake up to 2:15PM to myself. So now I steal a little time here and there and I use what I have and make it work. Someday maybe I'll be able to get back to really figuring things out in a bunch of guns, but for now I can take WW, size a little large and get decent results at moderate speeds. Judging by the groups I see guys shooting at the range or on websites my cast accuracy is better than many peoples jacketed loads.

I'll not say hard alloys don't work as well or better than softer alloys in some instances, but there are cases where a softer alloy works as well and some cases where it works better. I just don't see the vast majority of cast shooters benefiting from the harder/exotic alloys at this point. I'm still fighting the "fit is king" fight at this point. Let them get to that point then work on to more expensive alloys.

[BABore]

The key for most people is shooting a long enough barrel to get enough velocity or rotation to have the slug fly well after the damage. The short barrel guy not only has to push more pressure to get this, but he has more muzzle pressure to deflect it. So he simply has to have a better gun.
:grin:

You mean they make real wheelguns with barrels less than 7 1/2" long.:shock:

I thought they referred to them short ones as purse or nightstand guns.:takinWiz:

[StarMetal]

You mean they make real wheelguns with barrels less than 7 1/2" long.:shock:

I thought they referred to them short ones as purse or nightstand guns.:takinWiz:

When I was young :groner: When I was young....I'd make 44man cry over how my old model Ruger Blackhawk in 45 Colt shot with the 4 5/8 inch barrel. Ditto to my 4 inch Model 19 S&W. I can give you a phone number to a very good friend in Tulsa, Ok and upon him answering the phone ask him if he knows Joe so and so, then ask him how far away he could hit you using that Model 19 and he'll tell you as far as he can see you. Now age has crept up on me along with bad eye sight. Anyone else get a little upset shooting at an older age and it doesn't compare to when you were young? I mean I'm not doing terribly bad, but I done lots better when younger.

I too have a wheel gun that shoots anything, any powder, cast or jacketed. That's my Model 25 Smith in 45 Colt. Cylinder throats larger then Texaco oil barrels and it still shoots really really really good. That's hard of soft cast too, throw in lino. Got a rifle like that too, my 30-40 Krag.

Hey Bret, I've played with lino and babbitt since I was in junior high school. I still have some long lino ingots I got from the prison up in Ohio when I lived there. Don't use it for much anymore now. Too bad you can't get all the time you want for your hobby. I just rebarreled my 30 Luger from a 3 5/8 inch barrel to a 6 inch barrel and just put like 2-300 rounds through it the past two days. That doesn't include the 30 Luger Benelli, Colt 1911, and Browning HP that I shot to compare to the new Luger 6 inch barrel.

Far as this stuff was brought up on old Shooters is very much like the gun rags today. All they have done for the past 45 years, that I can see, is go in cycles as sure as the weather seasons...over and over and over.

Joe

[44man]

Bret, we say hard a lot but I did NOT want to get into it about BHN too much. It is not the total answer. There is just a whole bunch more at work with boolits then just hardness and to tell the truth BHN does not mean a whole lot to me other then comparison points.
Look at WW metal, it can be different all over the country, it can be recycled so much the good stuff is gone.
I can take WW metal boolits and harden to 22 BHN, then mix another alloy that STILL only hardens to 22 BHN. The WW's can lead the bore and shoot poor yet the alloy I made will not lead and shoot one hole groups.
I have added a little tin to WW's and had no gain at all so it was a waste.
We work with too many different alloys to just say it has to be so hard. Not true at all, it is what is in your alloy that is important.
The trouble is, it is too expensive to buy true alloys of all kinds to find what works best in ONE gun, let alone all of the guns you own. I HATE to just say BHN because it is a false indication of what is in your mix. What works for me might be way off for you.
If an alloy is the same BHN, one can be ductile and the other brittle. It still comes down to how much damage is caused to your boolit before entering the barrel and how it takes the rifling. Just changing an alloy can work wonders without changing the BHN.

[felix]

Absolutely correct because it has to do with how the boolit and barrel snap back to their steady-state form after the boolit has been ejected. In other words, both barrel and boolit have to be perfectly uniform before and after firing. Softer barrels typically will allow a harder boolit without permanent boolit deformity. Softer barrels will allow softer boolits as well. Hard barrels will destroy soft boolits, unless the boolits are extremely fine in springback (extremely tough). Adding copper to the boolit alloy helps immensely, but unfortunately they are harder to make consistent using the base alloys and home casting apparatus. ... felix

Also, don't forget the case material. It, too, is a projectile in reverse. The same rules apply to it. ... felix

[Lloyd Smale]

couple of my night stand guns. Both 4inch 500 linebaughs. You dont want to come into my bedroom at night. Anything over 5.5 inch is wasted weight and lenght in handguns and other things ;)
You mean they make real wheelguns with barrels less than 7 1/2" long.:shock:

I thought they referred to them short ones as purse or nightstand guns.:takinWiz:

[StarMetal]

Bret, we say hard a lot but I did NOT want to get into it about BHN too much. It is not the total answer. There is just a whole bunch more at work with boolits then just hardness and to tell the truth BHN does not mean a whole lot to me other then comparison points.
Look at WW metal, it can be different all over the country, it can be recycled so much the good stuff is gone.
I can take WW metal boolits and harden to 22 BHN, then mix another alloy that STILL only hardens to 22 BHN. The WW's can lead the bore and shoot poor yet the alloy I made will not lead and shoot one hole groups.
I have added a little tin to WW's and had no gain at all so it was a waste.
We work with too many different alloys to just say it has to be so hard. Not true at all, it is what is in your alloy that is important.
The trouble is, it is too expensive to buy true alloys of all kinds to find what works best in ONE gun, let alone all of the guns you own. I HATE to just say BHN because it is a false indication of what is in your mix. What works for me might be way off for you.
If an alloy is the same BHN, one can be ductile and the other brittle. It still comes down to how much damage is caused to your boolit before entering the barrel and how it takes the rifling. Just changing an alloy can work wonders without changing the BHN.


I dunno about all that. BHN does mean something to me in certain application, which I shoot a lot of, and that is high velocity in a fast twist barrel. I need a bullet tough enough to hold up to the fast twist rifling stress. Now guess what, my alloy is 50/50 WW/lead. I shoot one hole groups and my barrel doesn't lead. In fact I can't recall laboriously cleaning lead from my barrels...last time was back in the 80's. Not leading is big on my list of what I want from my cast bullets. By the way I don't think it's possible to lead the barrel on my Model 25 Smith. Speaking of that have you wondered if deep rifling grooved barrels are more prone to leading then the real shallow grooved rifling? That Smith I mention above has very shallow grooves. Ditto on my many of my 45 acp barrel and I have no leading issue there. Before some chimes up and says "Wait you said you haven't had to scrup leading out of your barrels since back in the 80's" Yup that's right. I'm talking normal fouling today. The Smith and those 45 acp barrels don't even get the normal fouling.

Tin? Ha ha....sorry but I feel that it's grossly overrated. That scrubbing of lead in the barrel back in the 80's I spoke of....well I was shooting indoors at the Tulsa shooting club and was shooting Hornady and Speer 148 gr hollow base wadcutters out of my four inch barrel Model 19 Smith. One day they had a good sale on double end full wadcutters that they had made up for them. Oh Geez!....did those lead up bad even at the low target velocities. I spoke to them about it and they said yeah, they've gotten lots of complaints. I asked what was the problem with them. They said the caster figured tin was good so added lots. Little tin okay, especially for filling out your mould, lots of tin waste of money.

Joe

[44man]

I dunno about all that. BHN does mean something to me in certain application, which I shoot a lot of, and that is high velocity in a fast twist barrel. I need a bullet tough enough to hold up to the fast twist rifling stress. Now guess what, my alloy is 50/50 WW/lead. I shoot one hole groups and my barrel doesn't lead. In fact I can't recall laboriously cleaning lead from my barrels...last time was back in the 80's. Not leading is big on my list of what I want from my cast bullets. By the way I don't think it's possible to lead the barrel on my Model 25 Smith. Speaking of that have you wondered if deep rifling grooved barrels are more prone to leading then the real shallow grooved rifling? That Smith I mention above has very shallow grooves. Ditto on my many of my 45 acp barrel and I have no leading issue there. Before some chimes up and says "Wait you said you haven't had to scrup leading out of your barrels since back in the 80's" Yup that's right. I'm talking normal fouling today. The Smith and those 45 acp barrels don't even get the normal fouling.

Tin? Ha ha....sorry but I feel that it's grossly overrated. That scrubbing of lead in the barrel back in the 80's I spoke of....well I was shooting indoors at the Tulsa shooting club and was shooting Hornady and Speer 148 gr hollow base wadcutters out of my four inch barrel Model 19 Smith. One day they had a good sale on double end full wadcutters that they had made up for them. Oh Geez!....did those lead up bad even at the low target velocities. I spoke to them about it and they said yeah, they've gotten lots of complaints. I asked what was the problem with them. They said the caster figured tin was good so added lots. Little tin okay, especially for filling out your mould, lots of tin waste of money.

Joe
Funny that you go all the way around and come back to what I have said! You say you rely on BHN then that you don't.
BHN is like muzzle energy, knock down crap and all of the stupid formulas that predict how a boolit kills.
If you have 6 alloys that are all the same BHN but one shoots super and another throws boolits all over, can you say it was the BHN?

[Bret4207]

I have seen 3 different alloys of mine all register within 1 Bhn of each other and all were as different as can be. Bhn is just a relative term for one characteristic of a given alloy. It's handy to know, but isn't the end all of the question.

[runfiverun]

toughness may be a better description of an alloy then bhn.
toughness to me means lower amounts of materials[Sb,Sn,Ag,Bi,Cu,] in the lead.
a lot of what is called leading [i think] is actually tin or antimonial tendrils being torn from the boolits exterior.
the alloy's contents have bearing here also, an alloy with more tin then antimony will lead a bbl as the softer spots of pure lead are exploited.
which way to go here ?a higher Sn,Sb content or manipulation of the alloy through other means heat , water?
or something more exotic like a copper tin solution? sulpher to change the grain structure?
zinc has some use here too.
or a truly exotic with silver ,zinc. and copper sulphate and tin as your binder.
or as bret said just make ww's work and pick away at one rifle till it does what you want, then wear it out.

[44man]

I shoot 30 and 20 to 1 mix in my BPCR and get zero leading. One day I made up air cooled WW boolits and tried them. I got the worst case of leading I ever seen.
I have not tried harder because of the expense. I don't know what water dropped would do either.
There is a lot to be said about the alloys at the boolit surface.
Bill Ferguson gave me the alloy mix I use and it has worked in all of my guns. I use a lot of water dropped WW boolits to save money but they are not as accurate.
Locking the metal at the surface with the right mix would be the solution but just maybe water dropping has more effect in that regard then we give it credit for.
Now a strange thing happened when I was playing with air cooled WW metal in my .44. Accuracy was poor until I annealed the gas checks, then accuracy improved. They still do not match my other alloy or water dropped though.
Heat treated 50-50 WW and pure is accurate and does not lead but I get fliers. Most will be in almost one hole with a circular pattern of fliers around the center group. Maybe a touch of tin would correct it. I blame how they take the the forcing cone.