BNH Vs. Speed

[JIMinPHX]

I've been working up loads for a snub nose .44 & I seem to have found the speed at which my alloy no longer holds up to the force applied by the twist of the rifling. The picture below says it all. The red lines show how much width the grooves left on the boolit. I was pushing these with 10 grains of Unique. I got different speeds by adjusting the seating depth of the boolit.

[fredj338]

What is your recovery medium? Did you boil the lube out for the pics?

[JIMinPHX]

Those were shot into crumb rubber. The 1100fps ones went about 21" deep. The slower ones went more like 19" or maybe 20" deep. The boolits shown are as-recovered. I didn't clean them up at all. The lube was a mixture of Lyman Super Moly & Orange Magic. I didn't intentionally mix the two. There was some moly left in the lubber when I loaded the Orange Magic. I would estimate the lube to be about 90% Orange Magic.

[Buckshot]

..............So you're showing that the grooves were beginning to wipe the lands out, eh? Common WW is supposed to be somewhere around 11 bhn so you're a couple points harder. Have you ever tried pure lead, and done the same test, but starting at a lower velocity?

...............Buckshot

[JIMinPHX]

The alloy is recovered bird shot + 1% tin. It normally comes up slightly harder than WW. I just loaded up some of the same 1100fps rounds, duplicating everything, except using water dropped boolits that come up around 23-24bnh. I'll try them as soon as I get a chance & see how different they look.

I have not tried the same thing with pure lead or a softer alloy than I am using now.

I'm a little puzzled because I've pushed the same alloy a little faster in 9mm & .357 mag, and also a LOT faster in .223 & .30 cal without the groove marks getting wiped out like this. I'm sure that the amount of bearing surface has something to do with the other boolits holding up better, but I'm beginning to wonder if the diameter makes a difference too. Maybe the torque applied to the boolit by the grooves increases in direct proportion to the increase in diameter & the inertial resistance of the boolit increases as a square function of the diameter or something like that. I'll have to look up some formulas that I probably haven't used in over 10 years & see what the math looks like before I can make an educated conjecture about that.

Has anyone out there got any thoughts about that?

[45 2.1]

Boy, is this one gonna generate some disagreement................ If you study this for awhile, your going to see that other alloy types and different powders will have different results. What you show is for your alloy and powder choice which will be different than others combinations.

[44man]

The heavier boolit has more inertia then the smaller calibers.
10 gr of Unique is HARD on a boolit, punching it too fast right at the beginning. Slower powder will help correct the problem.
My work with the .44 has shown I could not get accuracy until I reached 28 BHN, using the fast powders. And that was with a light boolit of 245 gr.
When I plink with this boolit I water drop WW boolits and only use 7 gr of Unique. 22 BHN can just take it at that point. For 296 I get the best accuracy at around 25 BHN and the heavy weights.
Unique and pure lead???? I don't think so! :kidding:
If you want to cure skid, make the boolits HARD. Make them .001" to .002" over bore size, better yet, fit the throats.
I refuse to shoot soft lead and every single problem has been solved by making a better alloy and making the boolit harder.

[44man]

Looking at those pictures makes me think they started life as a Keith. I see a portion of a shoulder until the last one.
SLUMP! Classic soft lead problems.
The barrel was most likely leaded too.

[243winxb]

but I'm beginning to wonder if the diameter makes a difference What is your barrels groove diameter? How large were the bullets when dropped from the mould? What diameter were they sized to?

[cajun shooter]

If using bird shot in the alloy you can have two different out comes on which shot was used. If chilled shot was used then it will be softer than if Magnum shot was used. I know you are aware of this but failed to mention which was chosen.

[45 2.1]

I refuse to shoot soft lead and every single problem has been solved by making a better alloy and making the boolit harder.

Excellent advice............ if you want a cast version of a full metal jacket. What, you need expansion...... no need, just shoot a cannon that will effect your nerves later in life.

When I plink with this boolit I water drop WW boolits and only use 7 gr of Unique. 22 BHN can just take it at that point.

I'm really surprised you would say something like this Jim. That amount of Unique is under a starting load in a 44 Mag (I believe thats the smallest handgun you've said you own) that gives 800 fps or less........hard to imagine anyone needing a very hard boolit just to plink with..... let alone all the other people in the world that use really soft boolits at this level, and all the manufacturers that use swaged soft boolits in factory loads. Elmer himself used a less than WW hardness boolit to shoot excellent groups out of an iron sighted full load 44 Mag. His load still works fine and is extremely accurate. Why can't you see this?

[targetshootr]

The one on the right looks like a different kind of boolit than the others and it show the most difference between red lines.

[StarMetal]

Ten grains of Unique under a Saeco .429 TCN was my target plinking load for my Smith 629. It was deadly accurate and darn good load. I'm not buying 10 grains of Unique is bad or that hard on the cast bullet.

I have a Smith 25 45 Colt that skips worse then that with lots of alloys and it's about THE most accurate revolver I own. 44man will attest to the 100 yard groups with it using iron sights. As long as I get groups I'm getting and it's not leading my barrel, I don't care what the bullets look like after shooting them. I feel the major difference in revolver then any other type of firearm is the bullet having to jump from the cylinder to the rifled bore. Shoot those same loads in something else that doesn't have a cylinder, say like a lever rifle in the same caliber and I bet you'll see a difference then. Don't forget that the bullet is traveling pretty fast by the time it passes the forcing cone. It's hard for the rifling to put the brakes on the bullet without some skidding.

[JIMinPHX]

The 3 boolits were all from an old Ideal (now Lyman) 429244 mold. They were all the same alloy. They were all air cooled. The extra slump of the right boolit may have been caused by it hitting another boolit inside the boolit trap. I picked that one boolit to put in the picture because it had a good representative rifling line on it. I think that there were others from that set that didn't slump like that. I'll see if I can find some more to photograph, but I may have thrown them all into the melting pot last night. I'll have to look.

The front shoulder on the right boolit may have been wiped out because that one had a firm roll crimp over the shoulder & the roll crimp may have wiped the shoulder off when when the round got fired. The others were seated out further & the front shoulders on them were forward of the crimp before firing.

45 2.1's concept about the fast powder being the problem is interesting. I'll try this with some H-110 when I get a chance & see what happens.

10 grains of Unique is what I was using. At standard book COAL for the .44 mag, I got the results on the right side of the picture, so what .44 man says about that charge being too hard on the boolit looks to be correct in this particular example. I suspect that StarMetal had better results with 10 grains behind his TCN because that boolit had more bearing surface, but that's just a guess on my part.

The groove diameter on this gun is a few thousandths bigger than the throats, so I expect that I am going to get some leading no matter what I do. I sized the boolits a half thousandth bigger than the throats. The throats have been coming out lead-free, so I think that I'm OK there.

The leading that I see is just forward of the forcing cone & not all that bad, so I'm just living with it for now. This thing is a snubby that I use as a defensive gun & don't plan on shooting real often, so a little leading is not that big of a deal to me. It's not worth re-barreling or reaming the throats for the amount of ammo that I plan to put through this thing.

The shot that I melted was recovered from a skeet field, so it's a random mix from whatever shells were shot there. I don't know the material's actual pedigree.

[44man]

I refuse to shoot soft lead and every single problem has been solved by making a better alloy and making the boolit harder.

Excellent advice............ if you want a cast version of a full metal jacket. What, you need expansion...... no need, just shoot a cannon that will effect your nerves later in life.

When I plink with this boolit I water drop WW boolits and only use 7 gr of Unique. 22 BHN can just take it at that point.

I'm really surprised you would say something like this Jim. That amount of Unique is under a starting load in a 44 Mag (I believe thats the smallest handgun you've said you own) that gives 800 fps or less........hard to imagine anyone needing a very hard boolit just to plink with..... let alone all the other people in the world that use really soft boolits at this level, and all the manufacturers that use swaged soft boolits in factory loads. Elmer himself used a less than WW hardness boolit to shoot excellent groups out of an iron sighted full load 44 Mag. His load still works fine and is extremely accurate. Why can't you see this?
That is exactly what you want, a cast boolit as hard as a jacketed so it takes the rifling. No, you will never convince me that soft lead is better. Elmer shot good groups, never excellent or super. Sorry, I was a follower of Elmer but found better. He was ecstatic with 1" at 25 yards. With all the group pictures I have posted, not a single person has EVER shown better with soft boolits.
All the other people in the world do not know what a revolver can really do and "go bang" with a hole somewhere in the paper is great for them. There is not a single person here that has shot 1" or less at 100 yards with a revolver except by accident. An accident is just that too. No, you have to show me as I have shown. My revolvers will out shoot many rifles at 100 yards or 500 meters for that matter.
There is ZERO need for expansion in the .44, .45, .475 and .500 because the velocity is correct. Now the 45-70 is too fast and NEEDS expansion for deer but that is where accuracy suffers with softer boolits. I go from 5 shots in 5/16" with hard to 1" with fliers by making boolits softer, at 50 yards. Good enough for deer.
Why would you need expansion with a WLN or WFN in the .44? If I could pile up all the deer at your front door shot with these I would, if it would help. Sorry, I ate them! :kidding:
The .44 is a mild ***** cat and so is the .45 Colt. The .475 lets you know the gun went off. We spent all day Saturday shooting a .500 JRH, I am none the worse for wear and I am 72+. Been shooting the .44 since 1956, nice, easy going little gun. Even with 320 and 330 gr boolits it feels like a .38.
But you have never proven me wrong, you just keep saying what others have done and if you really go back, you will see what they claim or did was not what I get, not by a long shot.
I do not believe anyone has EVER, EVER shot the groups I get with cast boolits at any distance with revolvers right out of the box. No fancy $3000 guns that I will beat anyway.
I am leaving the gate open so you can enter and show soft boolit groups, come on in.
You notice how light my plinking load is----good start. From that point on the boolit needs to be HARDER as the load is increased but since I use water dropped WW's, 7 gr is the limit unless I want more expensive alloys. What you forget is the extreme pressure punch with fast powder that ruins boolits.

[303Guy]

Not dissagreeing with you, 44Man, but you're talking extreme cutting edge accuracy. We're talking bottom end, lucky to get 1" at 25 yds, 'accuracy'. I started out with quite hard cast boolits in my 44mag. Then one day I recovered a boolit and the land impressions were higher than the 'grooves'. The metal in between had been flame eroded away. I switched to my 'crappy looking' soft alloy and found the accuracy to be much better and recovered boolits had full bore impressions. Had I used correctly sized boolits as you do, I would probably have achieved even better accuracy. You also have scoped guns with good triggers. Mine had fixed iron sights with the rear notch too narrow to aim with and the most horrid trigger. It was a 'Federal Marshall' clone. I loved that gun!

[243winxb]

The groove diameter on this gun is a few thousandths bigger than the throats, Then the bullet is undersized and you will not get good contact with the lands/grooves. Unless the bullet Obturates (means to block or obstruct). Your bullet is to hard to expand using Unique, plus the gas check..... Your alloy might be as high as 6% antimony, if magnum shot was used , + your tin. I would not heat treat/water drop as your leading will get worse. IMO Edit/add- I shoot 10gr Unique with my cast, very accurate.

[454PB]

That's a gas check design, why not use a gas check?

[243winxb]

Gas checks on the end ones, middle one missing the GC. Unless my eyes are bad. http://i338.photobucket.com/albums/n420/joe1944usa/SpeedEffectMarks.jpg

[44man]

Not dissagreeing with you, 44Man, but you're talking extreme cutting edge accuracy. We're talking bottom end, lucky to get 1" at 25 yds, 'accuracy'. I started out with quite hard cast boolits in my 44mag. Then one day I recovered a boolit and the land impressions were higher than the 'grooves'. The metal in between had been flame eroded away. I switched to my 'crappy looking' soft alloy and found the accuracy to be much better and recovered boolits had full bore impressions. Had I used correctly sized boolits as you do, I would probably have achieved even better accuracy. You also have scoped guns with good triggers. Mine had fixed iron sights with the rear notch too narrow to aim with and the most horrid trigger. It was a 'Federal Marshall' clone. I loved that gun!
I would shoot Creedmore with my SBH at 100 yards and shoot one pop can after another, open sights when I could still see good. Now I use a red dot---NO SCOPE and until you see the difference, you will find the red dot is not easy to shoot groups with. The dot is very large.
Saturday I shot a bunch of water bottles (12 oz) off the 100 yard rail with my .475 and if you looked at them all side by side I would have a 1/2" group. All were centered.
What do you mean by "bottom end?" A revolver is SOOOOO easy to get super accuracy from, there is no need for "bottom end" stuff.
Some guns just will not do it no matter what. Short barrels, clones, dirt cheap guns, etc. Most Ruger's, S&W's, Freedom's, BFR's, etc, WILL shoot better then we can control them. There is no excuse for a poor shooting gun when you load your ammo.
All I can say is harder has always been more accurate and is easier to work a load with. Way too hard might not be good (brittle) and soft never is.

[303Guy]

A revolver is SOOOOO easy to get super accuracy from, there is no need for "bottom end" stuff. Point taken. I wish I had that revolver today. I would apply your knowledge! For all the boolit erosion, that gun never had any leading. The bore couldn't have been too bad. (I suppose the same mechanism that was cutting the boolit was also keeping the bore grooves clean. There was no skidding of the boolit. I used a powder similar to H4227).

I didn't realize you were shooting open sights and red dot! You're good!:Fire:
(I don't mind being not good, as long as I can meet folks who are).:drinks:

[JIMinPHX]

Gas checks on the end ones, middle one missing the GC. Unless my eyes are bad.

Your eyes are not bad. The center one was fired with no gas check. The other two have copper gas checks. The gas check didn't seem to make much difference in leading or anything else.

[44mag1]

What you forget is the extreme pressure punch with fast powder that ruins boolits.

Im no expert but I believe this, I use titegroup for my 44 plinking loads and get a small amount of leading, If I use 2400 or h110 I dont get leading

[JIMinPHX]

Right now, I'm just working up loads for a snubby that gets used as a defensive gun for problems at powder burn range, so I'm not looking for absolute perfection. I'm just looking for the punchiest load that I can handle reliably in such a small package.

After I get this one worked up, I'll probably turn my sights to working on a load for a longer barreled hunting revolver. It sounds like I'm going to want to pick 44man's brain, among others, when I get to that point.

I had originally started this thread because I found it interesting to have seen the differences that I saw on the recovered boolits from such a small change in velocity. I thought that others might find it interesting too.

I do have a pair of questions for everybody now. How long do you seat your boolits & how much crimp do you apply? I've found that even on a S&W, I have plenty of room to seat a boolit out far past the "official" max COAL of 1.61". I've also found that if I only use a lite roll crimp, that the boolits will pull out of their cases under recoil in this little palm cannon that I'm using. I've now taken to using a much heavier crimp, but as you can see from the photo, it takes its toll on the shoulder of the boolit.

As for expansion, I'm not too worried about that. These boolits start out life being pretty fat, so even if they don't expand at all, they should still be pretty effective. Also, I can always throw a small hollow point in them with one of the drill jigs that I make, if I feel that I need to.

[DragoonDrake]

For my hot revolver loads, I crimp at the crimp groove and just enough crimp to see/finger-feel the brass into the groove. I know I should measure but whenever I do, I am always too short or too long. I just start at the bottom of the published data and work up for accuracy and watch for pressure. I don't hunt with these loads yet, as I did not have a chance this past deer season.

Good luck JIMinPHX.

Adam

[Lloyd Smale]

Im with 44man. Ive been accuarcy testing cast bullets for well over 20 years in sixguns and its been rare that ive ever found soft lead outshooting hard even at low pressure. If a bullet is fit well to a gun that is fit well hard will about allways outshoot soft. Elmer may have used softer lead but ive never seen in print where he had access to linotype or any harder alloys. What he had was pure lead and tin. He made due with what he had. He also lived in a time where alot of sixguns including the smiths and colts he loved came from the factory with cylinders and bores that were not allways perfect and sometimes terrible. In those cases he might even have gotten better luck with soft lead. But like 44man said he may have gotten decent accuracy but he was not shooting one inch 25 yard groups with guns and alloys like that. No doubt hard alloys arent needed for light plinking loads and if you want to cast them to use up some range lead or alloy some pure to do the same you can get away with it but if your looking for the alitimate accuracy a GOOD gun can produce look at harder alloys.

[cbrick]

There is not a single person here that has shot 1" or less at 100 yards with a revolver except by accident.


Nonsense!

Rick

[45 2.1]

That is exactly what you want, a cast boolit as hard as a jacketed so it takes the rifling. No, you will never convince me that soft lead is better. Elmer shot good groups, never excellent or super. Sorry, I was a follower of Elmer but found better. He was ecstatic with 1" at 25 yards. With all the group pictures I have posted, not a single person has EVER shown better with soft boolits.
All the other people in the world do not know what a revolver can really do and "go bang" with a hole somewhere in the paper is great for them. There is not a single person here that has shot 1" or less at 100 yards with a revolver except by accident. An accident is just that too. No, you have to show me as I have shown. My revolvers will out shoot many rifles at 100 yards or 500 meters for that matter.
There is ZERO need for expansion in the .44, .45, .475 and .500 because the velocity is correct. Now the 45-70 is too fast and NEEDS expansion for deer but that is where accuracy suffers with softer boolits. I go from 5 shots in 5/16" with hard to 1" with fliers by making boolits softer, at 50 yards. Good enough for deer.
Why would you need expansion with a WLN or WFN in the .44? If I could pile up all the deer at your front door shot with these I would, if it would help. Sorry, I ate them! :kidding:
The .44 is a mild ***** cat and so is the .45 Colt. The .475 lets you know the gun went off. We spent all day Saturday shooting a .500 JRH, I am none the worse for wear and I am 72+. Been shooting the .44 since 1956, nice, easy going little gun. Even with 320 and 330 gr boolits it feels like a .38.
But you have never proven me wrong, you just keep saying what others have done and if you really go back, you will see what they claim or did was not what I get, not by a long shot.
I do not believe anyone has EVER, EVER shot the groups I get with cast boolits at any distance with revolvers right out of the box. No fancy $3000 guns that I will beat anyway.
I am leaving the gate open so you can enter and show soft boolit groups, come on in.
You notice how light my plinking load is----good start. From that point on the boolit needs to be HARDER as the load is increased but since I use water dropped WW's, 7 gr is the limit unless I want more expensive alloys. What you forget is the extreme pressure punch with fast powder that ruins boolits.

I do believe your funnin' us again with absurb drivel like before.............OR your doing something else which isn't well thought of.


Im with 44man. Ive been accuarcy testing cast bullets for well over 20 years in sixguns and its been rare that ive ever found soft lead outshooting hard even at low pressure. If a bullet is fit well to a gun that is fit well hard will about allways outshoot soft. Elmer may have used softer lead but ive never seen in print where he had access to linotype The closest big newspaper office would have had it......think about it. Keith lived a long time and never changed his method.... that should say something to you. or any harder alloys. What he had was pure lead and tin. He made due with what he had. BS He also lived in a time where alot of sixguns including the smiths and colts he loved came from the factory with cylinders and bores that were not allways perfect and sometimes terrible. In those cases he might even have gotten better luck with soft lead. But like 44man said he may have gotten decent accuracy but he was not shooting one inch 25 yard groups with guns and alloys like that. No doubt hard alloys arent needed for light plinking loads and if you want to cast them to use up some range lead or alloy some pure to do the same you can get away with it but if your looking for the alitimate accuracy a GOOD gun can produce look at harder alloys.

You both need to see the Keith exhibit put on at the NRA shows. What you think he did and what he actually did aren't the same thing. 44man doesn't have anything on Keith considering the difference in quality of guns and loading components used.


Nonsense! Rick

+1 Rick

[44man]

Nonsense!

Rick
Of course you are correct but I do it on a regular basis with cast boolits with a number of guns, all stock and a red dot.
Remember the article for the search for the MOA revolver? Thousands spent with the gun turned over to various custom shops, then jacketed bullets used until they finally did it after many, many tries. A strong scope too.
There are many here that can get an inch at 50 yards, some can get tiny groups at long range but almost nobody gets small groups with cast.
Back in my IHMSA days I commonly shot 1/2" groups at 50 meters but I used Hornady bullets. That was open sight production.
Yes I know you can shoot but you have to show how many shoot cast into small groups at 100. How many can get a rifle to do it?
I have shown before how I shot a scoped 10" 30-30 TC Contender at 100 with cast and how I shot single shots with jacketed at 100 and 200 yards. Yes the one group while working a load has 5 shots in 5/8" with the MOA.
How many rifle shooters can shoot coins at 100 using cast? How many can hit a pop can at 100 every shot with a revolver and cast boolits? I did it with my SBH and open sights, over and over.
Is it ME? Or how I make my guns shoot? I am NOT that great of a shot. The simple fact is that a few of my friends can out shoot me and that makes me smile because I will always be proud of the work I have done that lets them shoot so good.
I met them right here on this site too, found they lived close. The greatest bunch of guys are RIGHT HERE and I feel the same about all of you.
But to throw out the word "nonsense" means you have to find those that shoot 1" or under with revolvers and cast boolits at 100 yards and show us. I will accept 1-1/2". What the heck, make it 2" on a consistent basis.

[44man]

I do believe your funnin' us again with absurb drivel like before.............OR your doing something else which isn't well thought of.



You both need to see the Keith exhibit put on at the NRA shows. What you think he did and what he actually did aren't the same thing. 44man doesn't have anything on Keith considering the difference in quality of guns and loading components used.



+1 Rick
No, not funnin at all. What you don't get is that I don't claim to be a better shot then Keith because I am NOT a great shot. Some of the shooters of old and today just amaze me, like Bob Munden, etc. To tell the truth, I suck unless I am on a bench or shooting from Creedmore.
You are wrong about the guns though and my old S&W back in the early 50's and even my first BH in 1956 shot as good as any of my new guns. Only the BFR's have bested them. The only thing I have done is to find better boolits and change loading procedures to allow the guns to do what they were made to do.
I assure you, if you bring an old Keith gun or an original BH here and YOU shoot it, it will do as good or better then you think it can.
Keith was fantastic but he stopped when he was happy. He did not go far enough with his boolit because he was a hunter first. He had limits with alloys and powders and made the best of what he had.
No, it is not the guns, I think there is a better chance to get a bad one today then long ago. Steel has improved but workmanship has gone down. I actually prefer older guns for accuracy but not the strength. Not to say new guns are not accurate but it will cost you big time, no more $90 tack drivers.
45 2.1, I know you hate me and don't know why. What do I do wrong with my loads?
I followed Keith to a "T" long ago and was shooting 400 and 500 yards with my original BH and S&W 29 back in the 50's. I had the bars across my sights. I have his books and read everything from him. He is still my hero and started me. But IHMSA showed me something was not good enough. Not the gun but what I fed it.
I make no apologies for the work I have done. Close to 60 years with revolvers.

[felix]

Wrong! 44man, you are the best shot on the board. Your logic follows engineering principles when saying more pointed boolits shoot better. However, It takes a good gun to keep everything centered, which is required to make short bearing projectiles shoot better than true-to-form Keiths.

A case in point are the results of a returned 22 rim fire Ruger early model (from Ruger) with the floating firing pin replaced. Before repair it could not shoot beans with either LR or MAG cylinder, even when brand new. Afterwards, it shot right along with a couple of Smith model 41s. The action was converted to the new model style with the lawyer trigger and associated links. It remains thataway because the accuracy improvement was phenomenal. Both cylinders now lock-up like a bank vault before and after the trigger is pulled. Somebody at the factory entertained the challenge; four months worth. ... felix

[StarMetal]

No, not funnin at all. What you don't get is that I don't claim to be a better shot then Keith because I am NOT a great shot. Some of the shooters of old and today just amaze me, like Bob Munden, etc. To tell the truth, I suck unless I am on a bench or shooting from Creedmore.
You are wrong about the guns though and my old S&W back in the early 50's and even my first BH in 1956 shot as good as any of my new guns. Only the BFR's have bested them. The only thing I have done is to find better boolits and change loading procedures to allow the guns to do what they were made to do.
I assure you, if you bring an old Keith gun or an original BH here and YOU shoot it, it will do as good or better then you think it can.
Keith was fantastic but he stopped when he was happy. He did not go far enough with his boolit because he was a hunter first. He had limits with alloys and powders and made the best of what he had.
No, it is not the guns, I think there is a better chance to get a bad one today then long ago. Steel has improved but workmanship has gone down. I actually prefer older guns for accuracy but not the strength. Not to say new guns are not accurate but it will cost you big time, no more $90 tack drivers.
45 2.1, I know you hate me and don't know why. What do I do wrong with my loads?
I followed Keith to a "T" long ago and was shooting 400 and 500 yards with my original BH and S&W 29 back in the 50's. I had the bars across my sights. I have his books and read everything from him. He is still my hero and started me. But IHMSA showed me something was not good enough. Not the gun but what I fed it.
I make no apologies for the work I have done. Close to 60 years with revolvers.

Jim,

You know I can beat that 2 inch group at 100 yards with cast with my Model 25 Smith 45 Colt. In my hay day I could run pop cans off sticks at 100 yards with the same can "not off the bench or creedmore" but standing. Also the same revolver shoot the same with soft or hard cast. To top it all over the cylinder mouths are .456 and I shoot bullets sized to .452.

I have a Remington 541-S custom sporter 22 rifle that I'll hit those coins with at 100 yards using a lead bullet...that count? :kidding:

How about my 6.5 Swede, 6.5x54MS, and 6.5 Grendel. Do they qualify for the coin at 100 yards with cast? :cbpour:

P.S. Hate is a strong word, 45 2.1 does not hate you.

[45 2.1]

Keith was fantastic but he stopped when he was happy. Nope, your wrong. He did not go far enough with his boolit because he was a hunter first. He had limits with alloys and powders and made the best of what he had. BS, you haven't seen his targets. Most are better than yours...................
45 2.1, I know you hate me and don't know why. Jim, the only "Beef" I have with you is you think there is only one way to get to where you've gotten........ in reality, there are several ways there with most any well put together gun. I don't want the newer guys to think they can't do it some other way. What do I do wrong with my loads? Nothing wrong with your loads or method, but it ain't the only way there.
I followed Keith to a "T" long ago and was shooting 400 and 500 yards with my original BH and S&W 29 back in the 50's. I had the bars across my sights. I have his books and read everything from him. He is still my hero and started me. But IHMSA showed me something was not good enough. This isn't about shooting steel. Not the gun but what I fed it. Therein lies a lot of material. I make no apologies for the work I have done. Close to 60 years with revolvers.

[44man]

Jim,

You know I can beat that 2 inch group at 100 yards with cast with my Model 25 Smith 45 Colt. In my hay day I could run pop cans off sticks at 100 yards with the same can "not off the bench or creedmore" but standing. Also the same revolver shoot the same with soft or hard cast. To top it all over the cylinder mouths are .456 and I shoot bullets sized to .452.

I have a Remington 541-S custom sporter 22 rifle that I'll hit those coins with at 100 yards using a lead bullet...that count? :kidding:

How about my 6.5 Swede, 6.5x54MS, and 6.5 Grendel. Do they qualify for the coin at 100 yards with cast? :cbpour:

P.S. Hate is a strong word, 45 2.1 does not hate you.
Yes, of course! I have said many here can do it. But after doing the work. I don't want to get down on any of you, only try things, do the actual work, never accept what is written as fact. What I do might not work for some but how can anyone argue before trying?
Deep seated beliefs are the things that bother me.
Never listen to me or anyone else, change what you do until you get the results you are looking for.
My goal is to make everyone think and work out things instead of sticking to what someone said or did.
45 2.1 might not hate me but he does come back at me a lot without any proof. I do not hate him and we would be fast friends if he lived close. Who knows, I might even change his mind. I think he would love my Ruger! :holysheep

[Gohon]

Why is it every time a a thread like this gets started where most of us have a chance to learn something from different opinions and to accept or reject those opinions, the same two guys get into a [edit] match. One seems to reject the idea there are other ways of doing things to achieve the same results he has achieved and the other appears to purposely search out the first person makes personal rude attacks against that person for the same reason. Unbelievable................

I come to this board not so much to share but to learn because even though I've been shooting and reloading for many years I'm just your average shooter and not very good at that. You two sure make it difficult to even do that.

[outdoorfan]

Why is it every time a a thread like this gets started where most of us have a chance to learn something from different opinions and to accept or reject those opinions, the same two guys get into a pissing match.




Jim, the only "Beef" I have with you is you think there is only one way to get to where you've gotten........ in reality, there are several ways there with most any well put together gun. I don't want the newer guys to think they can't do it some other way.

There's your answer.

[44man]

Keith was fantastic but he stopped when he was happy. Nope, your wrong. He did not go far enough with his boolit because he was a hunter first. He had limits with alloys and powders and made the best of what he had. BS, you haven't seen his targets. Most are better than yours...................
45 2.1, I know you hate me and don't know why. Jim, the only "Beef" I have with you is you think there is only one way to get to where you've gotten........ in reality, there are several ways there with most any well put together gun. I don't want the newer guys to think they can't do it some other way. What do I do wrong with my loads? Nothing wrong with your loads or method, but it ain't the only way there.
I followed Keith to a "T" long ago and was shooting 400 and 500 yards with my original BH and S&W 29 back in the 50's. I had the bars across my sights. I have his books and read everything from him. He is still my hero and started me. But IHMSA showed me something was not good enough. This isn't about shooting steel. Not the gun but what I fed it. Therein lies a lot of material. I make no apologies for the work I have done. Close to 60 years with revolvers.
Oh yes I have seen his targets, many, many of them. I have beaten him over and over and also every gun writer in every rag. Because I worked my tail off.
I also have said over and over that each must find what works for them and my way is not the only way but it works for me. It works for my friends and others that PM me on the sites.
I am not going to push soft lead and nobody so far has shown a single group at any distance that is better then the right boolit for the gun and velocity.
The fact is that I do not remember you ever posting any group pictures. And for sure, accuracy is the most important thing for steel shooting or hunting. No second place with either. I love animals so they either die fast so I can eat them or they live on in peace.
Strange how good a hard cast can be!

[Char-Gar]

I really don't see any difference in the recovered bullets that could not have been induced by impact with the media. The higher the impact velocity, the greater effect it will have on the bullets.

[felix]

Gohon, the following pic depicts the logic usually followed on this board. It's called show and tell, and it normally does not go deeper than that implied in the pic. ... felix

[Gohon]

There's your answer

Sorry but that's not an answer.......it's an excuse. There is a way to post a different opinion without calling the others persons opinion BS or absurb drivel you know. Not trying to start anything, I just enjoy things more when there is a little less heat thrown out. Besides IIRC some of the writings I've read about Keith is he considered 1-16 a hard cast during his time. So what is hard today doesn't match what was hard yesterday. There is no hard (pun intended) rule that works for everyone.

Thanks Felix.......kind of puts a different light on things.

[44man]

I really don't see any difference in the recovered bullets that could not have been induced by impact with the media. The higher the impact velocity, the greater effect it will have on the bullets.
Not so, the rubber will not squash boolits. The damage was done in the gun. Any time a boolit is changed to some other shape, why not start out with the other shape? Strange how a Keith can be formed to an LBT in the gun. What alignment can you predict with a deformed boolit? 99% of shooters do not know what their boolit looks like before it hits the target.
Look again, do you see the meplat changed? Some are crooked and most likely from hitting other boolits. There is no way to wipe out the shoulder evenly with impact.

[StarMetal]

Sorry but that's not an answer.......it's an excuse. There is a way to post a different opinion without calling the others persons opinion BS or absurb drivel you know. Besides IIRC some of the writings I've read about Keith is he considered 1-16 a hard cast during his time. So what is hard today doesn't match what was hard yesterday. There is no hard (pun intended) rule that works for everyone.You just answered what 45 2.1 said. There is no hard rule that works for everyone.

Thanks Felix.......kind of puts a different light on things.

....but 44man imposes on all of us it's his way or the highway....even thought he tries to cover it with he's trying to make us think. Fact is everything he said won't work does most often work. I for one have shot soft alloy very well out of the aforementioned revolver. To boot I shot it with one grain less powder then 44man claims, 10 grains Unique, that slams the alloy bullet unnecessarily too hard.

So far I see a pretty civil thread, which I think you're reading too much into.

[44man]

Gohon, the following pic depicts the logic usually followed on this board. It's called show and tell, and it normally does not go deeper than that implied in the pic. ... felix
Good! I show and tell, others just tell. Can we get more show?

[StarMetal]

Good! I show and tell, others just tell. Can we get more show?

Yes Jim, look at the bug hole targets I shot with the Swede and my 6.5x54MS. You asked if anyone could hit a coin at 100 yard with a cast bullet from a rifle. I can't say I've shot a coin, but those two rifles shoot good enough, and at HV I might add, to do a coin. I do have a coin down on my cartridge display board I shot with a RCBS 357 SWC 150 grain from my Model 19 (old model too) revolver at 100 yards. It's a 4 inch barrel. I think I've presented some show, what do you think. The rifle targets are posted, but I'd have to take a pic of the coin and post it.

I notice no comment on my 22 Remington taking coins out at 100 yards???

[44man]

....but 44man imposes on all of us it's his way or the highway....even thought he tries to cover it with he's trying to make us think. Fact is everything he said won't work does most often work. I for one have shot soft alloy very well out of the aforementioned revolver. To boot I shot it with one grain less powder then 44man claims, 10 grains Unique, that slams the alloy bullet unnecessarily too hard.

So far I see a pretty civil thread, which I think you're reading too much into.
You do not explain or show what "very well" is.
All of us have shot very well but just what dies that mean?
I am a nut and admit it, very well just does not work for me.
I like the "civil" part, lets keep it nice. We are all friends and I am not better then anyone, I just hate to waste years of work if anyone can do better.
I am stubborn, true, I admit it. I only want to help though.

[Lloyd Smale]

Im as bullheaded as they come and truely believe in my opinion or i wouldnt waste the time to post it. I think many others here feel the same. Unlike alot of fourms opinions here are USUALLY from experience. Its not that its my way or the highway. Ive seen other approaches work for other people. Never say it cant be done because someone here will be bullheaded enough to spend a year making it happen. I dont call bs on anyone for two reasons. One my partents taught me not to critisize people even if your absolutely sure there wrong and guys ive been proven wrong just to many times. What is suppose to happen here is a question is asked and you then recieve a bunch of differnt opinions. Rarely are two exactly the same. If you dont like the answer someone gives discuss it politely or shut your mouth. If you dont like someone you can block there posts and never have to see another one. Everyone has a right to give there opinion so why read it if its going to anger you?

[45 2.1]

I dont call bs on anyone for two reasons.

Lloyd, you or anybody else here don't know exactly what Keith did on his own. All the stuff he wrote was what he saw and did without any brag involved. He had many of his guns customized by local and top name gunsmiths, sometimes after he blew them up the first time. These rigs have been in old articles written by the people he gave those guns to with the history involved. To say he worked with what he had is like saying poor old Keith.... he had to make do (which he didn't if you look at the guns in the photographs with him since an early age).

[44man]

Lloyd, you or anybody else here don't know exactly what Keith did on his own. All the stuff he wrote was what he saw and did without any brag involved. He had many of his guns customized by local and top name gunsmiths, sometimes after he blew them up the first time. These rigs have been in old articles written by the people he gave those guns to with the history involved. To say he worked with what he had is like saying poor old Keith.... he had to make do (which he didn't if you look at the guns in the photographs with him since an early age).
He did have good guns for the time but what he was limited in were gun strength, alloys and powders. The best was 2400 and it is still good but has limits. I never found top accuracy with it. I used many, many pounds of it because it was all there was. Yes, he had to make do just as everyone else did but he excelled in what he did.
He was great, I still admire him and his work.
That is where you slip, you don't give credit to revolver makers that allow 60,000 PSI in a cylinder. Elmer would be rolling in roses today.
He was on the cutting edge but never thought a 320 gr or heavier boolit could be shot from the .44. He did not have H110 or 296. He did not have hard alloys.
As much as we all love him, you can choose to live in the old days or advance beyond what was possible back then. That was my choice. Make the revolver better and more accurate. We are at the cutting edge today with the strongest revolvers ever thought of. The old ones were accurate but had limits and so did Keith.
Get over it, times have changed, Elmer is gone. I lived in those times, had fun but I now want to live in the here and now.
Do you still drive a model T?

[357maximum]

I am not a mathmetician but let me take a swing with my version of the formula's at play here.


BHN discussion + hardheaded individuals = :takinWiz:

RPM discussion + hardheaded individuals = :takinWiz:

anything 6.5 in nature + hardheaded individuals = :takinWiz:

Boolit shape discussions + hardheaded individuals = :takinWiz:

alloy @ High Velocity discussions + hardheaded individuals = :takinWiz:

If you remove the constant (hardheaded idividuals) from any of the above ...the equation falls apart. Therefore I conclude that it is not the topic at hand that is the issue.................IT is the SAME hardheaded individuals (the constant) that keeps the formula intact.

Sometimes we just need to agree to disagree in order to save civility. What works for me may not work for you and vicey versey.

I find softer/tougher/more mallable than normal boolits + a full case of slow burning powder(consumable fillers) generally get me where I want to go, BUT...BUT that may not always work and it definately will not work for everyone all the time.......I have accepted that and have moved on, maybe a few others should do the same. We have alot bigger issues at hand that each others handloading/casting practices. Alot of this headbutting is akin to trying to convince a liberal of the truth around him.


Personally I have seen techniques from both/all camps work here at times.........the other guy is not neccessarrily wrong just because you feel you are THAT right.

I must also say if you is gonna brag.....be prepared to back it up with evidence.....cudo's to those that do.

[Lloyd Smale]

I agree totaly with the statement that he told it the way it was. I have friends that knew him personaly and will attest to the fact there wasnt one iota of bs in him.
Lloyd, you or anybody else here don't know exactly what Keith did on his own. All the stuff he wrote was what he saw and did without any brag involved. He had many of his guns customized by local and top name gunsmiths, sometimes after he blew them up the first time. These rigs have been in old articles written by the people he gave those guns to with the history involved. To say he worked with what he had is like saying poor old Keith.... he had to make do (which he didn't if you look at the guns in the photographs with him since an early age).

[Lloyd Smale]

anyone that feels they need proof of any results i pass on will need to take a ride up here. Im not about to take pictures of targets. Ive got enough problem just keeping data straight and my wife would have to do it as the camera she bought needs a smarter operator then me. Bottom line is i dont take much store in pictures of groups anyway. Its just to easy to shoot a group at 50 yards and claim it was at a 100. Plus i cant see that far anyway! come here though and its all the beer you can drink and enough sixguns to shoot that youll go away needing a wrist brace. Open invitation to anyone here. I like arguing over a beer more then on the internet anyway.

[44man]

anyone that feels they need proof of any results i pass on will need to take a ride up here. Im not about to take pictures of targets. Ive got enough problem just keeping data straight and my wife would have to do it as the camera she bought needs a smarter operator then me. Bottom line is i dont take much store in pictures of groups anyway. Its just to easy to shoot a group at 50 yards and claim it was at a 100. Plus i cant see that far anyway! come here though and its all the beer you can drink and enough sixguns to shoot that youll go away needing a wrist brace. Open invitation to anyone here. I like arguing over a beer more then on the internet anyway.
I like the way you think! I am having that beer right now myself.
My invite has always been open from day one too.

[RobS]

anyone that feels they need proof of any results i pass on will need to take a ride up here. Im not about to take pictures of targets. Ive got enough problem just keeping data straight and my wife would have to do it as the camera she bought needs a smarter operator then me. Bottom line is i dont take much store in pictures of groups anyway. Its just to easy to shoot a group at 50 yards and claim it was at a 100. Plus i cant see that far anyway! come here though and its all the beer you can drink and enough sixguns to shoot that youll go away needing a wrist brace. Open invitation to anyone here. I like arguing over a beer more then on the internet anyway.


I like the way you think! I am having that beer right now myself.
My invite has always been open from day one too.


Always a great place especially when the mention of sitting down, taking it easy and drinking a cold one with someone. Actually there are a lot of folks here I would like to sit down and just shoot the sh-t with as there isn't a whole lot of people who I associate with in my professional life that even understand the sweet smell of burnt powder.

Even if we disagree we can always agree that casting, reloading, and shooting is something that we enjoy............even if we all don't do it the same way.

Rob

[JIMinPHX]

The picture below shows what I shot today. These were about 23bnh. They had the same COAL & crimp that the right boolit in the first picture had. The shoulders didn't get wiped off these. The boolits on the right, in the picture below, shot about a 3-1/4" group that looked fairly random. The ones on the left shot under 1-1/2" with 3 of 5 touching. The H-110 felt snappier, but the speeds were about the same, so I think that some of my felt recoil came from muzzle blast of a slow powder in a snubby. The groove marks in the H-110 boolits are a little wider than the ones that were pushed by Unique. The groove marks on all these boolits are all much wider than the ones on the 13bnh boolits that were pushed at the same speed in my earlier trial. A few of the gas checks came off in the crumb rubber today. None of the gas checks came off the softer boolits in the first trial. I was pleasantly surprised to find that I did not have any leading today.

[243winxb]

Interesting, but keep in mind the bullets were not .001" over groove diameter as they should be.
The groove diameter on this gun is a few thousandths bigger than the throats, No leading, great, i was wrong, i was sure it would lead being harder. but all have a gas check today or do they?? Edit add- i guess what we have learned is an undersized bullet is more accurate if its hard and has a gas check. Would i be correct?:confused: Or did the change in powder & pressure make the difference?:confused:

[44man]

Interesting, but keep in mind the bullets were not .001" over groove diameter as they should be. No leading, great, i was wrong, i was sure it would lead being harder. but all have a gas check today or do they?? Edit add- i guess what we have learned is an undersized bullet is more accurate if its hard and has a gas check. Would i be correct?:confused: Or did the change in powder & pressure make the difference?:confused:
It seems he shot the boolits too soon. They have to age, expand and harden. I feel land marks will get smaller after boolits age a few weeks.
Gas checks should never come off even if the mold needs lapped to make a better fit but aging a boolit can get them tighter. A little skid at the front of the boolit is OK but the check should be tight enough to not turn when it engages the rifling. If a boolit is sized and you can spin the check with your fingers, it will not do it's job. The reason for not losing gas checks with softer boolits is the slump.
Yes, powder makes a difference but he is also shooting a short barrel. I feel he is doing very well because a short barrel is much harder to control.
I like a man that experiments and inspects recovered boolits.

[44man]

I took a good look at the H110 boolits and they DO look better, not nearly as much damage.

[cptinjeff]

I for one, and speaking as a forum newbie, don't mind the heat that much, as long is not personal. Two folks from different camps arguing their point (respectfully) can teach us casual readers a lot. When you have to try to prove your point instead of just give an opinion, it gets into helpfull details not always discussed the first go around. Works for me.:coffee:

I agree with Lloyd about the pics and that is how I feel about them. On the other hand, I admire 44man and his group pics (and enjoy viewing them).....wish I could do that. I know I can shoot coke cans at 50 yards off hand pretty regular...but putting in on paper at even 50 yards is tuff for me.

44man. As a relative casting and life newbie compared to you, I have to disagree that harder is always better and Keiths always have less accuracy, or that rifle accuracy is the ultimate goal of a revolver. I kill all my game with iron sighted hand guns and feel like what I'm getting accuracy wise is plenty for MY intended goal. Don't let us young bucks get you down. Your knowledge and experience is a great asset to this forum. Even though I disagree with those things...I learned and continue to learn tons from your posts (on these subjects and others) in the short time I've been here.

It does seem strange however, that when not discussing an issue like accuracy, or boolit hardness, or boolit shape your posts seem like they come from a different person. Very respectful, gentle, helpful, informative, understanding that the poster most likely isn't at your level (and are non-intimidating as a result), and usually right. When it comes to above issues, they come from a seemingly hardheaded guy who is "challenging" everybody to prove him wrong. I’m not complaining about this….just thought it might be interesting to you coming from a relative outsider. Just an observation from a guy who "knows enough to know he doesn't know much"
Thanks for letting me vent my thoughts and thanks for your input into this great forum.

[StarMetal]

It seems he shot the boolits too soon. They have to age, expand and harden. I feel land marks will get smaller after boolits age a few weeks.
Gas checks should never come off even if the mold needs lapped to make a better fit but aging a boolit can get them tighter. That one's an iffy. I've shot good groups with gas checks that have come off. I would prefer the check to be consistent in whether it stays on or comes off. A little skid at the front of the boolit is OK but the check should be tight enough to not turn when it engages the rifling. I believe you mean the bullet should not turn in the gas check when both engage the rifling. If a boolit is sized and you can spin the check with your fingers, it will not do it's job. I agree but that's not the only job of the gas check and the other jobs it still can do if it turns. The reason for not losing gas checks with softer boolits is the slump.
Yes, powder makes a difference but he is also shooting a short barrel. I feel he is doing very well because a short barrel is much harder to control. Short barrel handguns are what I grew up with and I've done the same things with them that you have done.
I like a man that experiments and inspects recovered boolits.

It's not only a disagreement between two different respected views, but three. Okay for the millionth time. I have a 8 3/8 barreled (my only long barreled handgun besides a six inch barreled Luger) Model 25 Smith in 45 Colt. The cylinder throats are .456. The groove is .451. I size my bullets to .452. I have used soft alloy, hard alloy, everything inbetween, and jacketed. It shoots them all the same (even the jacketed). I have shot bullets that were fitted to those .456 throats and there was absolutely no difference in how the revolver shot. Now I would agree that if the throats were say .452 and the groove was .454 that things wouldn't work out so well. Also I've shot all those bullets with very fast powders and very slow powders. The point is what I just stated is all wrong according the handgun experts here, but yet my Model 25 shoots, again, as 44man knows what it will do. 45 Colt Smiths have very shallow rifling in them unlike their 44's or 357's. I believe this is because the barrels on them serve dual roles as 45 Colt's and 45 ACP's.

I have, but don't shoot gas checked bullets from this revolver because I feel I don't need to. I'm not pushing it to 44 magnum velocities. The revolver is not picky to anything including bullets or powders. I got lucky with this one.

[243winxb]

44man
They have to age, expand and harden. How much do your bullets increase in size over time?:confused: I did 1 test, took measurement for 1 month, bullets got larger by .0003" Alloy was about 75% wheel weight & 25% pure, a guess as it was scrap. Bullets were oven heat treaded to near slump at 450* for 1 hr. then dumped into cool water. Thank you for your reply. :smile:

[BABore]

44man How much do your bullets increase in size over time?:confused: I did 1 test, took measurement for 1 month, bullets got larger by .0003" Alloy was about 75% wheel weight & 25% pure, a guess as it was scrap. Bullets were oven heat treaded to near slump at 450* for 1 hr. then dumped into cool water. Thank you for your reply. :smile:

If you size them after heat treating, they don't grow at all. At least where the sizer touched. The bigger the boolit diameter and the higher the antimony content of your alloy, the more they grow. For instance, I had two lots of 400 grain boolits set aside (lost in the rubble) for my 480 Ruger. Both from the same batch of WW alloy, cast at the same time. The boolits cast out at 0.4785 and I usually size them to 0.478 to fit my throats. Lot #1 was sized and checked, but not lubed. Lot #2 was as cast. I discovered them after two years. Lot #1 boolits measure as I had sized them, 0.478. Lot #2 measured 0.485 diameter. I ended up reheat treating them and sized them immediately. Had a bugger of a time with the gas checks. In measuring other lots, it seems like the boolits don't do alot for the first 6 months or so. Between 6 months and 1 1/2 years seems to be where growth accellerates, then peaks out. Very useful if you have small GC shanks or bore ride nose. Some patients as well.

In regards to the main peeing contest here. I have revolvers that only like hard boolits, ones that only like them soft, and some that don't care. I take the time to see what a gun likes for alloy and hardness for each particular boolit, powder, and velocity. Just because a gun shows a strong preference for a soft or hard boolit does not keep me from trying it all over again if I bring something new to the party. I have more fun in the testing than just banging away.

Then again you just got to realize that both Lloyd and 44man are real lazy.:takinWiz: Lloyd likes to shoot alot and doesn't want to spend too much time fussing over alloys and hardnesses. Hard boolits get him shooting faster. :Fire:

44man is just hard headed and likes his boolits to match. He's only lazy in the fact that he nevers wants to walk more than 25 yards from his beer cooler so all the targets he posts are really from there. :drinks::p:kidding:

[454PB]

I find it ironic that Elmer Keith and gas checked boolits are discussed in the same breath. Elmer didn't think much of using gas checks in revolvers.

The 429244 was designed by Ray Thompson.

[44man]

44man How much do your bullets increase in size over time?:confused: I did 1 test, took measurement for 1 month, bullets got larger by .0003" Alloy was about 75% wheel weight & 25% pure, a guess as it was scrap. Bullets were oven heat treaded to near slump at 450* for 1 hr. then dumped into cool water. Thank you for your reply. :smile:
Expansion and hardening depends on the alloy. The more pure, the less each is. My .476" sized boolits grow to .478". So it also depends on the starting diameter, small boolits grow less. Antimony content is the key.

[44man]

44man is just hard headed and likes his boolits to match. He's only lazy in the fact that he nevers wants to walk more than 25 yards from his beer cooler so all the targets he posts are really from there. :drinks::razz::kidding:
I wont touch that Bruce, just makes me laugh more and get another beer. OH heck, how about some Scotch? I raise my glass to a great fellow.

[JIMinPHX]

The few gas checks that did come off, were pulled off in the crumb rubber. The gas checks were within a few inches of where the boolits were. The gas checks did not come off in flight.

My suspicion, based on seeing how much slump there is in some of the boolits, is that my harder alloy is just getting into the sweet spot of hardness, where it is soft enough to obdurate & fill the grooves of the barrel, but is no longer too soft. That's just a quick guess though. I need to do some more testing.

The extra slump in the slower Unique-pushed boolits does seem to lend credence to 44-man's notions about faster powders shocking the boolits & slumping them before they leave the barrel.

[303Guy]

Just because a gun shows a strong preference for a soft or hard boolit does not keep me from trying it all over again if I bring something new to the party. I have more fun in the testing than just banging away.I like the way you think, BABore!:drinks:


The extra slump in the slower Unique-pushed boolits does seem to lend credence to 44-man's notions about faster powders shocking the boolits & slumping them before they leave the barrel.I've seen this effect for myself with low velocity loads for my Pig Gun. Not only was boolit deformation quite marked with fast powder (Clays/AS30) but case expansion was notable too, even though the pressure was supposedly lower than a faster powder produced. I took the case expansion to mean the action was being shocked similarly and ceased that line of testing!)

[cptinjeff]

It's not only a disagreement between two different respected views, but three. .

ALL THE BETTER:idea:

[MT Gianni]

It's not only a disagreement between two different respected views, but three. Okay for the millionth time. I have a 8 3/8 barreled (my only long barreled handgun besides a six inch barreled Luger) Model 25 Smith in 45 Colt. The cylinder throats are .456. The groove is .451. I size my bullets to .452. I have used soft alloy, hard alloy, everything inbetween, and jacketed. It shoots them all the same (even the jacketed). I have shot bullets that were fitted to those .456 throats and there was absolutely no difference in how the revolver shot. Now I would agree that if the throats were say .452 and the groove was .454 that things wouldn't work out so well. Also I've shot all those bullets with very fast powders and very slow powders. The point is what I just stated is all wrong according the handgun experts here, but yet my Model 25 shoots, again, as 44man knows what it will do. 45 Colt Smiths have very shallow rifling in them unlike their 44's or 357's. I believe this is because the barrels on them serve dual roles as 45 Colt's and 45 ACP's.

I have, but don't shoot gas checked bullets from this revolver because I feel I don't need to. I'm not pushing it to 44 magnum velocities. The revolver is not picky to anything including bullets or powders. I got lucky with this one.

Joe, I hope that no one is saying to size only to throats that are larger than bore for accuracy. i have always heard and experienced, to increase throats size to +.0005 -.0015 if smaller than bore and size to bore + .001-,002.

[StarMetal]

Joe, I hope that no one is saying to size only to throats that are larger than bore for accuracy. i have always heard and experienced, to increase throats size to +.0005 -.0015 if smaller than bore and size to bore + .001-,002.

Mt, yes I am saying that. Size to throat, size to throat...that is if the throat is larger then the groove. I haven't found that in my revolvers. My .456 throat shoots house a blazing in the .452 bore.

Listen to this one. Shoot the fattest bullet that you can get your cartridge to chamber in a semi-auto pistol. I hear that a lot on here. Was just out shooting my Chinese Tokarev 7.62x25. The fattest bullet the cartridge will chamber with is .313 and barely. So I shot two groups...one set with .313 and the other with .310. The .310 shot a 1 inch group at 25 yards, the same bullet at .313 shot about two or slightly larger groups.

My motto is slug the bore and first try shooting bullets .001 to .002 larger and go from there.

[44man]

Well, YES Joe. Some of my best groups are with a .430" boolit from a .430" groove and a .4324" throat. But a .432" boolit is also great.
I have always thought some boolit fit is over rated.

[303Guy]

StarMetal, those two boolit sizes you tested, were there any other differences that could have accounted for the difference in groups? The larger ones could have suffered uneven sizing from the seating process for example? (Not that there's anything wrong with 1 inch groups from a pistol! So why look further?)

[StarMetal]

StarMetal, those two boolit sizes you tested, were there any other differences that could have accounted for the difference in groups? The larger ones could have suffered uneven sizing from the seating process for example? (Not that there's anything wrong with 1 inch groups from a pistol! So why look further?)

At the larger size .313 they were barely sized. The .310 sizing actually sized them down noticeably. They are from the same casting batch and I sized them all to .313 right after cool enough to handle. The .310 sizing I done today. So much for sizing after the have hardened which is months and months. No leading either.

Did I mention it was fast powder too?

[cbrick]

But to throw out the word "nonsense" means you have to find those that shoot 1" or under with revolvers and cast boolits at 100 yards and show us. I will accept 1-1/2". What the heck, make it 2" on a consistent basis.

No, I don't "have to find" anyone doing anything.

You threw out these statements . . .


There is not a single person here that has shot 1" or less at 100 yards with a revolver except by accident.

I do not believe anyone has EVER, EVER shot the groups I get with cast boolits at any distance with revolvers right out of the box. No fancy $3000 guns that I will beat anyway.

Sorry to bust your bubble but you are not the only one working with long range revolver grouping. ALL of my revolver testing and grouping is at 150 and 200 meters, not 100. The only modification to my revolver is a trigger job and all I shoot is boolits, never ever jacketed. My revolver did not cost $3000.00, it was $1200.00 brand new, Bo-Mar rear sights $100.00 for competition, $300.00 Burris 12X for load development, $35.00 for a trigger job.

But hey, if it makes you feel better to believe you are the sole person that can shoot a revolver . . .

BTW, I don't shoot diamonds either. 18 BHN via convection oven HT and 1 1/2 years of shooting hundreds of 5 shot groups changing only the alloy BHN proved rather conclusively that the harder they were past 18 the more long range groups opened up. As hard as you can get them is not a magic wand and in many instances makes things worse. To tell those here that are new to casting that hard will solve their problems is simply wrong and will lead them down a path of grief.

Rick

[303Guy]

cbrick, just trying to gain insight - when you say you hardened the alloy, was that by alloying alone or alloying and heat treating? My thinking here is that perhaps the hardening method or alloying elements could make a difference as to which hardness works best in a particular gun. Since you have done pretty well extensive testing, your results could reveal quite a bit if all the details could be shared.:drinks:

P.S. You wouldn't by any chance have kept pictures of your test results?[smilie=1: It could make an interesting thread.

[Lloyd Smale]

yup it sure does get me shooting faster. It cuts the time wasted shooting soft lead trying to find accurate loads. Probably cuts my bench time in half. Soft lead is about like a soft you know what) its fine when your causually hanging around but when you get serious hard is what gets the job done;)
If you size them after heat treating, they don't grow at all. At least where the sizer touched. The bigger the boolit diameter and the higher the antimony content of your alloy, the more they grow. For instance, I had two lots of 400 grain boolits set aside (lost in the rubble) for my 480 Ruger. Both from the same batch of WW alloy, cast at the same time. The boolits cast out at 0.4785 and I usually size them to 0.478 to fit my throats. Lot #1 was sized and checked, but not lubed. Lot #2 was as cast. I discovered them after two years. Lot #1 boolits measure as I had sized them, 0.478. Lot #2 measured 0.485 diameter. I ended up reheat treating them and sized them immediately. Had a bugger of a time with the gas checks. In measuring other lots, it seems like the boolits don't do alot for the first 6 months or so. Between 6 months and 1 1/2 years seems to be where growth accellerates, then peaks out. Very useful if you have small GC shanks or bore ride nose. Some patients as well.

In regards to the main peeing contest here. I have revolvers that only like hard boolits, ones that only like them soft, and some that don't care. I take the time to see what a gun likes for alloy and hardness for each particular boolit, powder, and velocity. Just because a gun shows a strong preference for a soft or hard boolit does not keep me from trying it all over again if I bring something new to the party. I have more fun in the testing than just banging away.

Then again you just got to realize that both Lloyd and 44man are real lazy.:takinWiz: Lloyd likes to shoot alot and doesn't want to spend too much time fussing over alloys and hardnesses. Hard boolits get him shooting faster. :Fire:

44man is just hard headed and likes his boolits to match. He's only lazy in the fact that he nevers wants to walk more than 25 yards from his beer cooler so all the targets he posts are really from there. :drinks::p:kidding:

[Bret4207]

That is exactly what you want, a cast boolit as hard as a jacketed so it takes the rifling. No, you will never convince me that soft lead is better. Elmer shot good groups, never excellent or super. Sorry, I was a follower of Elmer but found better. He was ecstatic with 1" at 25 yards. With all the group pictures I have posted, not a single person has EVER shown better with soft boolits.
All the other people in the world do not know what a revolver can really do and "go bang" with a hole somewhere in the paper is great for them. There is not a single person here that has shot 1" or less at 100 yards with a revolver except by accident. An accident is just that too. No, you have to show me as I have shown. My revolvers will out shoot many rifles at 100 yards or 500 meters for that matter.
There is ZERO need for expansion in the .44, .45, .475 and .500 because the velocity is correct. Now the 45-70 is too fast and NEEDS expansion for deer but that is where accuracy suffers with softer boolits. I go from 5 shots in 5/16" with hard to 1" with fliers by making boolits softer, at 50 yards. Good enough for deer.
Why would you need expansion with a WLN or WFN in the .44? If I could pile up all the deer at your front door shot with these I would, if it would help. Sorry, I ate them! :kidding:
The .44 is a mild ***** cat and so is the .45 Colt. The .475 lets you know the gun went off. We spent all day Saturday shooting a .500 JRH, I am none the worse for wear and I am 72+. Been shooting the .44 since 1956, nice, easy going little gun. Even with 320 and 330 gr boolits it feels like a .38.
But you have never proven me wrong, you just keep saying what others have done and if you really go back, you will see what they claim or did was not what I get, not by a long shot.
I do not believe anyone has EVER, EVER shot the groups I get with cast boolits at any distance with revolvers right out of the box. No fancy $3000 guns that I will beat anyway.
I am leaving the gate open so you can enter and show soft boolit groups, come on in.
You notice how light my plinking load is----good start. From that point on the boolit needs to be HARDER as the load is increased but since I use water dropped WW's, 7 gr is the limit unless I want more expensive alloys. What you forget is the extreme pressure punch with fast powder that ruins boolits.

I'm sorry, but the sheer ego and self righteousness is getting to me. Starmetal- I take back anything I ever said about your ragged one hole groups. This guy has you beat all to heck.

For those who still care to listen, see CBRick abd BA Bores posts, or think of it this way- 1st comes fit, above all else comes fit. Then you have two choices- Use the alloy you have and see what happens with various loads and boolits and guns. That's what 45 2.1 was saying, what many of us do. Each gun is a law unto itself. What works with one gun won't necessarily work in another. So you can either fiddle fart around like I suspect the vast majority of us do and see what you guns like with whatever alloy you have. #2- Go to a particular alloy and pin all your hopes on it. This is the case with the antagonist here. Get the hardest possible alloy and then do everything in your power to support your theory.

IME, and I've only been casting 30 some years, there is no one wonder alloy for cast. There are very, very few rules in cast too. A harder alloy CAN work great, a REALLY, REALLY HARD alloy can probably work great. My experiments with 30+Bhn left me lukewarm. But the lesson I learned is that by working with what I had and keeping an open mind I found more success than I did trying to develop the "perfect" alloy.

BTW- Pictures on the internet, unless witnessed by reliable people, are as believable as that pic of Sarah Palin in a mini skirt with a glass of booze or of Al Gore in a similar outfit. It means nothing.


Off to search for the "ignore user" button.

[44man]

Well, it is not an ego trip, just kind of true after devoting over 54 years to the revolver. Many of you can do it, Cbrick is a great shot that I have acknowledged many times and he has shown what he does. I hate to argue with him because he is right most of the time too.
Lloyd knows what he is doing and so does Bret.
Bass is real smart but I always says he works too hard because he makes fun of my hats! :kidding:
I never said my way is the only way, I just relate my experience, nothing more, nothing less so others can experiment.
So forgive me for sounding harsh.
I just never understand why nothing is ever shown if it works and everything I suggest winds up as a dispute that makes me lash back.
303 guy seems to understand things and asks about alloy differences. I have often said hardness means little because all kinds of alloys will read the same BHN but one is just no good because of what is in the lead. The problem being that nobody has the same lead. Your 18 to 20 BHN might be tougher then what I need 25 BHN for to reach the same results. I HATE BHN STUFF because it is not a true indication just like muzzle energy is not an indication of killing effects.
When I say I need harder to make it work, do you ever consider I might be right because of what I have to work with?
Before I wrote this I went down to my range with a revolver, found 4 bottles, no new ones because the garbage was picked up this morning. One has some .22 holes in the top but I got some water in them. I shot these at 100 yards from Creedmore and about centered all of them. Looks like about a 3/4" grouping. .475 Linebaugh by the way. The hole in the right bottle is centered just to the right of the vertical rib, hard to see. Now I will be called a liar so Bret, no need for ignore, I will just stop posting. You don't need me.

[PAT303]

Boy, is this one gonna generate some disagreement................ If you study this for awhile, your going to see that other alloy types and different powders will have different results. What you show is for your alloy and powder choice which will be different than others combinations.

A centre X with that answer!!!. Pat

[Frank]

The best way to communicate is to show your target. Keyboard claims and groups abound the internet. Showing a group isn't bragging, it's just being consciencious and making the effort to substantiate the claim. "Works for me", or "Shoots great" might work for some at 25 yds, but there are those who strive to do better. They are the ones who demand more, and therefore, they should be respected by their request.

[PAT303]

I think what people mean and what people write are two different things,if we were face to face around a reloading bench I think the information would come across a lot different. Pat

[303Guy]

I'm with Frank. You folks have a huge store of knowledge and experience and you guys hold me in awe with your shooting skills, not to mention the work you have all put into this hobby of ours. I'm not sure if you'all realize just how much value you add to this forum and the degree of motivation and inspiration you give to those of us who are trying to 'get there'. So please don't any of you 'go quiet' or use 'ignore'. For what it's worth, I value your different perspectives.:drinks:

[45 2.1]

I'm not sure if you'all realize just how much value you add to this forum and the degree of motivation and inspiration you give to those of us who are trying to 'get there'. So please don't any of you 'go quiet' or use 'ignore'. For what it's worth, I value your different perspectives.:drinks:

What causes things to be taken elsewhere (like to e-mail) is the intersession of the PTB...........................

[cbrick]

cbrick, just trying to gain insight - when you say you hardened the alloy, was that by alloying alone or alloying and heat treating? My thinking here is that perhaps the hardening method or alloying elements could make a difference as to which hardness works best in a particular gun. Since you have done pretty well extensive testing, your results could reveal quite a bit if all the details could be shared.:drinks:

P.S. You wouldn't by any chance have kept pictures of your test results?[smilie=1: It could make an interesting thread.

All of the BHN testing in this series was done from the same 40 pound batch of CWW + 3% pure bar tin. All powder was from the same 8 pound can and all primers were from the same lot number, all brass was virgin-unfired WW from the same lot number. Only the BHN was changed in steps from air cooled to convection oven HT 30 BHN.

Here are a couple of articles where I discussed this in more detail.

http://www.lasc.us/HeatTreat.htm
http://www.lasc.us/CastBulletAlloy.htm

I normally don't take pictures but I do have a few that I'll look for. I also normally shoot groups on the steel targets since that is what I shoot in competition and they are already hanging there at the correct distances, I only need to paint them.


I will just stop posting. You don't need me.

Wow 44man . . . It's not the wrong time of the month for you is it? From vain to just plain silly in one thread. Of course your posts are valuable, informative and quite worthwhile. I for one look forward to your posts and at sometime in the future reminding you again that your not the only one that does it. [smilie=s:

Of course there are things I disagree with you on such as harder is a cure all and you are the only one that can do it. There is no one on the board that I am in complete lock step with but I come closest with Bret on hardness. Everyone has their way to achieve what it is they are trying to achieve and if they succeed they are doing it right for them. I can't imagine that anyone here (or anywhere else) agrees completely with me on everything, there's just too many possible ways of doing the same thing and far too many variables effecting the outcome.

It is for the vastness of the possibilities and experiences displayed here that after 5 years I am still a member of this board and yes 44man, that includes your contributions.

Rick

[Frank]

cbrick says
I normally don't take pictures but I do have a few that I'll look for. I also normally shoot groups on the steel targets since that is what I shoot in competition and they are already hanging there at the correct distances, I only need to paint them.

You don't have to take pics. You back it up with articles. :coffeecom

[ghh3rd]

I am enjoying this thread. I'll have to print it out so I can re-read it a couple of more times and let it all sink in. So much good stuff from different perspectives.

[44man]

OK, OK, sorry for some of the stuff I said but there are times for it because some of you do it to me all the time! :holysheep
I just want to show you what I am talking about. Make your own decisions.
These are pulled boolits from factory .500 JRH loads so I can make molds of the boolits. They started life as .501" with very tight crimps and good case tension.
We shot 2 boxes of these and only shot 1 group of 4 tight with a bad flier for the fifth. No other group at 50 yards would make me shoot at deer any farther. We used the bench and a scope too. The slower load was really bad.
Notice the front band damage, it is about wiped out. For those that think brass and crimp magically jump open before the boolit leaves, I leave those thoughts to you.
The boolits measure .4994" and even the gas check has lost .0006" in diameter. These are shot before shot. Some will argue that "bump up" will reform them into perfect boolits.
They are 18 BHN.
I will make PB molds and cast them at least 25 BHN and bet I can get them down to 1" or less at 50.
Let the arguing ensue, I will not comment on these further until we start to load for the gun.

[JIMinPHX]

these are my latest samples. They were fired with 21 & 22 grains of H-110. The speeds were just over 1200fps & just under 1300fps respectively. I can't tell which boolits were which. I didn't stop to recover them between strings. The groups were not quite as good as with 20 grains of H-110 @ around 1100fps, but that may have just been me. My hand was a little jittery after touching off these rounds in a little snubby with slim wood grips. I got baseball size groups at 35 feet, with 2 boolits in 1 hole once. These were 23 BNH. The roll crimp on the assembled rounds was .015" deep.

[454PB]

Does it seem strange to anyone else that these fired boolits all show lead smeared onto the sides of the gas checks?

I've never seen this in any of my recovered boolits.

[felix]

Yes, the lead used does not have enough shear strength. Improper tin-antimony ratio, and/or other strange impurities in the lead. Adding copper might fix this which would then indicate a tougher total composition. ... felix

[44man]

Does it seem strange to anyone else that these fired boolits all show lead smeared onto the sides of the gas checks?

I've never seen this in any of my recovered boolits.
That depends of what you shoot the boolits into. We get that with boolits shot into hard stuff like wood. Boolits recovered from water or other materials do not do that.
I have shown this before. The left boolit is from my alloy while the right one is water dropped WW metal. There is only a few points in BHN between them so listen to Felix, if that happened in the bore, it is trouble that needs solved.
The poor groups show a problem. Will harder help? Maybe, maybe not but an alloy change, even if a lower BHN just might.
Felix is a lot more diplomatic then me but he knows one heck of a lot. I wish he would get less easy going and get more involved.
Cbrick shoots long range but also avoids technical explanations for what shoots good. He has shown what he does but never explains.

[JIMinPHX]

Yes, the lead used does not have enough shear strength. Improper tin-antimony ratio, and/or other strange impurities in the lead. Adding copper might fix this which would then indicate a tougher total composition. ... felix

So then, if the tin/antimony ratio is improper, which one do you think I have too much of & which do I not have enough of? The alloy was recovered bird shot off a skeet field + 1% tin. It came up 13 BNH air cooled & 23 BNH water dropped.

[Frank]

44man said
Notice the front band damage, it is about wiped out. For those that think brass and crimp magically jump open before the boolit leaves, I leave those thoughts to you.
The boolits measure .4994" and even the gas check has lost .0006" in diameter. These are shot before shot. Some will argue that "bump up" will reform them into perfect boolits.
They are 18 BHN.


44man said
The left boolit is from my alloy while the right one is water dropped WW metal.


I seated store bought BH 14 bullets. After pulling they were still .459. Case tension was .006.

Then I shot a 1" 5-shot group with this bullet at 100 yds. Groove diameter is .457

It was in a rifle and the twist is 1-20.

I still think harder is better because I can do more 1" groups at 100 yds consistently with the hard boolits I have casted.

Bottom line: I agree with the second point but not the first. I'm not convinced a BH 18 bullet is sized down by brass.

[44man]

I tend to look at it different. I have used Craftsmen tools most of my life but every single metric open end wrench I bought from Sears will open up and slip on even the soft motorcycle nuts.
No problems with US sizes but even after two returns, the metric wrenches don't work.
Steel?
I have long extensions made in china that I have ganged up to reach stuff on a truck and used a huge breaker bar on without harming them.
Steel?
Is lead any different? Who knows what is in what you are shooting?
That is why you need to see what is going on in your gun or even in your brass.
Many say when they make boolits harder, they get leading but is it the BHN or the alloy? I will always lean towards harder if there is a problem.

[felix]

Jim, that being your lead, you should add some antimony. Double up with WW for another go at it. No other changes at this time. Odds are you have too much arsenic. Logical only, no proof. Logical because you have stuff from the shot towers giving an excessive hardness when dropped. ... felix

[fecmech]

Back on page one in one of the original posts Jim said his groove was bigger by a couple thou than his throats. You have lead soldered onto the gas checks, I think he is gas cutting to beat hell. Once you go through the throat you no longer have a seal.

[JIMinPHX]

Back on page one in one of the original posts Jim said his groove was bigger by a couple thou than his throats. You have lead soldered onto the gas checks, I think he is gas cutting to beat hell. Once you go through the throat you no longer have a seal.

It's going to be several weeks before I have time to get back to this again, but when I do, I'll try those boolits in another gun that does not suffer from oversized grooves & see what the results are.

[JIMinPHX]

Jim, that being your lead, you should add some antimony. Double up with WW for another go at it. No other changes at this time. Odds are you have too much arsenic. Logical only, no proof. Logical because you have stuff from the shot towers giving an excessive hardness when dropped. ... felix

WW come up a little softer than the mix I am currently using. I don't think that adding WW would up my antimony content. I can see where it might thin out the arsenic though. I have a few WW ingots laying around, so I can try that. I also have some antimonyal hard lead rod that makes linotype look soft. I can add some of that to bring up the antimony content. Which do you think might work better?

[44man]

I have a feeling balance is important. Too much antimony is no good, it can shear from the surface or make a boolit brittle. Need to get the right amount of tin added to bond the antimony but too much tin is no good either.
WW's can be a problem with depleted tin from recycling and they most likely toss in all those stick on weights too.
If we could all afford true alloys it would be easier.
First thing I would be doing is lapping out the throats on the gun with a larger bore. I missed that part with your first posts. Fechmech is right, gas checks will not stop leading or gas cutting unless they seal.
Felix makes a good point, cut down the shot and add more WW's.
Most of what you do is hopeless until the gun is fixed first.

[243winxb]

Post 14 >
The groove diameter on this gun is a few thousandths bigger than the throats, 44man >
I missed that part with your first posts. I didn't miss it. :grin:

[Lloyd Smale]

ill give you an example of what 44man is saying. I use alot of #2 and have many loads worked up for handguns with it. When i had my pole barn fire i had all kinds of alloys smelted and in piles. Well it all melted into the dirt floor. there was everything from pure to monotype to pure tin in ingots there. I recovered about half of it. maybe 1500lbs. I didnt know what anyof the slabs were as they were melted together in my dirt floor. I smelted and resmelted again an again to at least get something out of all of it that was consistant. I was suprised when it hardness tested about identical to #2. Ive casted a bunch of bullets out of it so far and in testing it just doesnt shoot as well as #2 mixed properly. My guess is i had a bunch of tin in ingots and i probably revovered it all in the mix and it just has to much tin in it. It sure does cast well though. Its probably the most forgiving alloy ive ever casted with. Just isnt up to snuff in the accuracy dept.

[303Guy]

Great information! I don't recall reading about this phenomina under "Alloys 101". (Lots of things I don't remember).[smilie=1:

[JIMinPHX]

I'm thinking that this boolit doesn't have enough bearing surface because I use the same alloy for .223 & .30-30 rounds that get pushed much faster & there's no problem there. I get zero leading, good accuracy & good grooves on the recovered boolits.

That having been said, perhaps since this mold is the only one that I have for this caliber, I may be able to overcome the insufficient bearing surface with an improved alloy. When I have time to get back to this little project, I'll try.

[454PB]

That design is one of the very first moulds I bought when I began casting 39 years ago. It is a good one, and has shot well in every .44 magnum I own or have owned.

[Oyeboten]

Very interesting Thread, and I will read through it again a few times.

About to be new to Casting, Hat-in-Hand, and very much appreciating the good people here.

One thing which comes to mind, which is to repeat in a way some mentions others have made, is that if we do not know the actual composition of the Lead Alloy we are using, casual Hardness Tests alone will not be a reliable indicator of how that Alloy will perform.

And, in a Revolver, having a Throat which is smaller than one's Bore, also would seem to be a detail which ought to be corrected, I would think.

Far as I recall from reading, Forcing Cone shape or taper should be deferentially suited for Lead, or Jacketed/Copper-Patch, or made to be one or the other according to what one is going to stay with if one is seeking the best Boolit performence and accuracy.

Many Revolvers are indifferent to this or their Makers elect a compromise, as far as how they come from the Factory.

[cbrick]

I'm thinking that this boolit doesn't have enough bearing surface because I use the same alloy for .223 & .30-30 rounds that get pushed much faster & there's no problem there. I get zero leading, good accuracy & good grooves on the recovered boolits.

I think you'll find, as already mentioned, that with groove diameter larger than throat diameter that alloy and/or BHN changes won't help much, sure seems to me that it's a fit issue including the leading on the gas checks.

As for the rifle rounds with the same alloy, I shoot my 308, 7-08 and 30-30 to 2,000+ fps with air cooled WW & tin @ 12 BHN. The same alloy in my 357 revolver with top end loads works best HT @ 18 BHN and 1550 fps. This is an issue that I have pondered for several years and the best SWAG I've come up with is a diameter issue with larger revolver boolits. I get similiar results with my Marlin 45 Colt.

Now if I could figure out a way to test that. [smilie=6:
Rick

[Bret4207]

ill give you an example of what 44man is saying. I use alot of #2 and have many loads worked up for handguns with it. When i had my pole barn fire i had all kinds of alloys smelted and in piles. Well it all melted into the dirt floor. there was everything from pure to monotype to pure tin in ingots there. I recovered about half of it. maybe 1500lbs. I didnt know what anyof the slabs were as they were melted together in my dirt floor. I smelted and resmelted again an again to at least get something out of all of it that was consistant. I was suprised when it hardness tested about identical to #2. Ive casted a bunch of bullets out of it so far and in testing it just doesnt shoot as well as #2 mixed properly. My guess is i had a bunch of tin in ingots and i probably revovered it all in the mix and it just has to much tin in it. It sure does cast well though. Its probably the most forgiving alloy ive ever casted with. Just isnt up to snuff in the accuracy dept.

A fine way to prove what I've maintained all along- my 15 Bhn isn't necessarily the same as someone elses 15 Bhn. Bhn alone means...zilch, nada, nothing. It's the composition and what you do with it that matters. That's why I say work with what you've got and learn to use it.

All the talk of "hard alloy" is just defeating the nearly 10 years of work we've dome here trying to wean people off the myth that harder is better. It isn't "Better", it's different. Now that work is being undone.

Thanks a lot.

[44man]

Thanks guys, we are starting to get somewhere without arguing.
I showed the pulled, damaged boolits from .500 JRH loads. I consider them hard as I can not mark them with my fingernail and was surprised they measure 18 BHN yet suffered being sized and ruined in the brass.
I had to pull a boolit from a .500 Linebaugh load from the same company to duplicate a mold. It shows no damage and still measures .5127". I can not scratch it either but get this; it measures 15 BHN!
So even boolits from the same company are not the same. One measures softer yet is tougher. We can't tell how much difference there is in accuracy because the Linebaugh is a short, fluted, back up gun and recoil can't be controlled from the bench. It is WILD! [smilie=1:
Whitworth came to shoot yesterday and we were shooting beer cans at 100 with my .475, got the JRH sighted with the open sights and changed to the Linebaugh. He set up a course with bottles of water and walking it he swung from bottle to bottle and blew up every one. The gun does what it was made for very well.
So the 15 BHN boolit acts the same as my 25 BHN boolits and is why I hate BHN stuff too.
I just do not know how to describe an alloy, do we say hard cast or go by BHN? Neither is correct and will not tell anyone what is meant so they can get their guns working.
I make the same alloy for tight groups, starting with WW's but each batch is different. One will shoot one hole groups and the next will not, depending on the pile of WW ingots I start with. Both can be the same BHN.
It drives me nuts but I will still do all I can to help a shooter with a problem even if I get all kinds of disagreement but I can't perform magic and only offer suggestions to try next.
I know the revolver better then any gun I ever worked with and know exactly what it needs to shoot. I just don't know how to make lead do the same things time after time.
Yes, I shot beer cans at 200 yards and shot some tiny groups at 500 meters plus more sub 1" groups at 100 then I can count but once that batch of lead is gone, I am lost too and will never say I can do it again. With the boolits I have left for the .475 I am getting around 3/4" at 100. The next batch might take me to 2" and I have no idea how to fix it.
But think of this, with what I am shooting right now, every one of you can come here, shoot my revolver and hit beer cans at 100 yards from the bench. Red dot or open sights. Want to move back to 200? Sure and you will hit the targets. My next batch of boolits might SUCK!
Whitworth brought a friend that never shoots a revolver. We started him with the .44---Yeah, smallest revolver we have! He did great. Moved him to the .475, then the JRH and finally the Linebaugh. He did super and had a huge smile. I think he only flinched twice all day and was clanging my little 50 yard steel plate over and over.
Now just how many of you have started a new shooter with a little .44 mag and gone to a .500 Linebaugh in one session?

[45 2.1]

Now just how many of you have started a new shooter with a little .44 mag and gone to a .500 Linebaugh in one session?

Most of the people i've taught have trouble with a 357 Mag at the beginning and sure wouldn't be back with a 44 Mag. Why brag about shooting big handguns anyway?

[StarMetal]

I'd rather not teach someone how to shoot a handgun, at that moment, if I didn't have a smaller one to start them on. 44man's lucked out that his friend didn't develop a flinch or distaste for handguns starting him out on a large 44 mag. To be comfortable with the handgun being able to squeeze that trigger ever so slowly while concentrating on sight/target alignment and not having to worry about that big bad boy coming back and whacking you or stinging your hand, possibly bruising your knuckles or scaring the daylights out of you is vitally important. A flinch is one of the hardest shooting problems to get rid of. In the manner 45 2.1 said I know people that were a little afraid of the 38 Special, alone a 357 mag. It's not only the recoil that intimidates new shooters, it's the blast. They also must be instructed to safe shooting practices especially hearing and eye protection, safe gun handling, and a safe target.

[44man]

I forgot to mention that Whitworth shot 5 shots into an inch at 50 yards with the .500 JRH. I shot the last two he had left and they were touching.
So how can it be explained? The ammo he had is indeed good enough for all hunting so was it the grip change since the last time we shot?
The shiny micarta grips he shot the first time had blood all over everything. Took 3 band aids to keep him shooting.
I got a flier the first group at the last session but the grips had me clenching my teeth after looking at his fingers.
I need a transfusion bottle setup on my range!
More work to be done, does the act of pulling a boolit cause more damage then shooting it? Is there a brass hardness difference between the JRH and Linebaugh? More stuff to work on but I will not quit.
I have a new appreciation of the loads he brought and think it was just US with the fierce recoil and amount of blood from the bench. That is enough to make any group jump around.
I still refuse to shoot his .500 Alaskan with micarta grips! [smilie=l: I can't get that stupid yet. I don't have gloves thick enough for that stupid gun! I have to admit some revolvers SCARE me, that cartridge in a rifle would beat your shoulder black and blue. I would only shoot it if he changes grips.
Hey, how much fun can we have?
Whitworth has torn up hands and a healing gash on his head so as I stand there and look at him as he hands me his guns with blood dripping from his nose and hands---HOW THE HELL CAN I SHOOT GROUPS?
Oh, the .44 is SOOOO pleasant! The .475 is a ***** CAT!
Whitworth is one tough son of a gun! Throw rocks at him when he shoots and he still won't miss.

[Whitworth]

Most of the people i've taught have trouble with a 357 Mag at the beginning and sure wouldn't be back with a 44 Mag. Why brag about shooting big handguns anyway?


No one is bragging. The simple truth is that we were shooting the handguns that we hunt with, and none of them are small calibers. Yes, under normal circumstances I wouldn't let a newbie shooter anywhere near my .500 JRH or my .500 Linebaugh -- nor the .475 for that matter. That said, he comfortably handled one of my Model 29s and shot it really well. We eased him into the .475 and he shot that easily. Next step were the various .500s, but not off of the bench. He did well and enjoyed it and I would consider him the exception, not the rule -- oh, and he has shot handguns before, just nothing on the upper end of the scale.

[Whitworth]

Please don't throw rocks at me when I am shooting........:(

[45 2.1]

No one is bragging. The simple truth is that we were shooting the handguns that we hunt with, and none of them are small calibers.

I was responding to this: Whitworth brought a friend that never shoots a revolver. We started him with the .44--- As a general statement it looks like a setup, But one never knows. Deer don't require that amount of energy to kill and looking at what Jim posted below, maybe this is just a joke like he has been doing for a bit now. Seriously, do you have to bleed to have fun?


The shiny micarta grips he shot the first time had blood all over everything. Took 3 band aids to keep him shooting.
I got a flier the first group at the last session but the grips had me clenching my teeth after looking at his fingers.
I need a transfusion bottle setup on my range!
More work to be done, does the act of pulling a boolit cause more damage then shooting it? Is there a brass hardness difference between the JRH and Linebaugh? More stuff to work on but I will not quit.
I have a new appreciation of the loads he brought and think it was just US with the fierce recoil and amount of blood from the bench. That is enough to make any group jump around.
I still refuse to shoot his .500 Alaskan with micarta grips! [smilie=l: I can't get that stupid yet. I don't have gloves thick enough for that stupid gun! I have to admit some revolvers SCARE me, that cartridge in a rifle would beat your shoulder black and blue. I would only shoot it if he changes grips.
Hey, how much fun can we have?
Whitworth has torn up hands and a healing gash on his head so as I stand there and look at him as he hands me his guns with blood dripping from his nose and hands---HOW THE HELL CAN I SHOOT GROUPS?
Oh, the .44 is SOOOO pleasant! The .475 is a ***** CAT!
Whitworth is one tough son of a gun! Throw rocks at him when he shoots and he still won't miss.

A 44 is SOOOO pleasant......... and on and on. You must be having a blast saying this.

[StarMetal]

One of the worse nastiest 44 mags to shoot is the original Model 29 Smith with 4 inch barrel and those sharp checkered grips. Now tell me that's nice to shoot!!!!!

Take a Model 94 Winchester in 44 mag and put the buttstock on your gonads and tell me that's nice to shoot. Even Mike Venturino noted, as I did, that mild 45 Colts out of the 94 eventually take their toll on your shoulder for some reason when they are fairly nice to shoot out of handguns.

What this all boils down to is macho men bragging about something BIG they have and say they enjoy and it's the best.

[Whitworth]

Not necessary to bleed to have fun, but sometimes it is necessary to bleed to test, and these big revolvers are no fun on the bench, just a necessary evil when testing loads and/or dialing them in. After that, it is only field positions. I do a lot of testing, and that is what sometimes happens.

I hunt deer in December only, there is other game to be hunted the rest of the year.

I too think the .44 is a pleasant round -- it's all relative.

[Whitworth]

What this all boils down to is macho men bragging about something BIG they have and say they enjoy and it's the best.


When I was a young man, fresh out of the Marine Corps, I would shoot upwards to 500 rounds of .44 magnum a session. The recoil was rather heavy, but when you are at your physical peek, it's really no big deal. I am quite a bit older now, and don't particularly like getting the snot pounded out of me when on the bench, but again, it is a necessary evil when testing -- not a display of machismo. Most of these revolvers aren't bad offhand, but when you get on the bench, you pay the price. No one is trying to prove anything, just trying to site-in and test loads. All of us have differing tollerances, some higher than others and I really don't find the .44 mag unpleasant to shoot. JMHO.

[44man]

I'd rather not teach someone how to shoot a handgun, at that moment, if I didn't have a smaller one to start them on. 44man's lucked out that his friend didn't develop a flinch or distaste for handguns starting him out on a large 44 mag. To be comfortable with the handgun being able to squeeze that trigger ever so slowly while concentrating on sight/target alignment and not having to worry about that big bad boy coming back and whacking you or stinging your hand, possibly bruising your knuckles or scaring the daylights out of you is vitally important. A flinch is one of the hardest shooting problems to get rid of. In the manner 45 2.1 said I know people that were a little afraid of the 38 Special, alone a 357 mag. It's not only the recoil that intimidates new shooters, it's the blast. They also must be instructed to safe shooting practices especially hearing and eye protection, safe gun handling, and a safe target.
Hard to say, everyone is different. Some are afraid of a mouse while others can face a charging buf. You have to gauge the persons ability. Some need a .22 and will never progress to a .38.
Some think a 30-06 is so hard on the shoulder and the next can shoot a .458 like a toy.
Yes, it is strange to have a new guy shoot a large handgun real good. The teacher is important too.
But there are times the reverse is better. Show how to shoot a large gun and let the man try. Teach him what to do and from then on, he will shoot anything. I have more success starting a man with a real gun then I do with a toy.
Some come and watch us shoot but refuse to shoot our guns. Others say the heck with that little thing, let me shoot a real gun.
I will never force my large guns on anyone while others foam at the mouth to shoot them.
Too many can shoot a .22 and turn white with a .44. Why not make them comfortable with a .44 and progress?
You are the key with your friends, you are the key to teach. If a .44 scares and hurts you, how can you teach? We have more success and have more people buy large guns because we have no fear of them ourselves. Pass it on, never talk recoil or pain, you do nothing but do harm.
I have had new shooters shoot very heavy stuff and think it is normal, to become great shots. Others that I started with a .22 never moved to a real gun. The 1911 is more then a gun should be! Can't be shot!
Others take a .500 saying it is a little worse then the .44 but still not bad.
You have to make the decision and how to progress with a person, make it fun, not a chore. Once safety and starting instruction is over, make it fun. Laugh and show recoil itself does no harm. Put up all kinds of stuff to shoot, not close range paper targets.
The tight butt, formal stuff has to leave, shoot for fun. I have had women on my range go through boxes and boxes of ammo, never wanting to stop and getting angry that the ammo is gone.
YOU are the start of a love of shooting for a new person.

[45 2.1]

Most of these revolvers aren't bad offhand, but when you get on the bench, you pay the price. No one is trying to prove anything, just trying to site-in and test loads. All of us have differing tollerances, some higher than others and I really don't find the .44 mag unpleasant to shoot. JMHO.

You might take a clue from the British. When they tested large, heavy recoiling firearms, they used a standing benchrest. It works with handguns also and has been used that way for a long time. There is a point, in any of the large American species, where extra energy just exhausts itself in the hillside on the offside of the animal after passing thru it (regardless of whether its broadside or end to end). Perhaps your hunting the Big 5................

[StarMetal]

Hard to say, everyone is different. Some are afraid of a mouse while others can face a charging buf. You have to gauge the persons ability. Some need a .22 and will never progress to a .38.
Some think a 30-06 is so hard on the shoulder and the next can shoot a .458 like a toy.
Yes, it is strange to have a new guy shoot a large handgun real good. The teacher is important too.
But there are times the reverse is better. Show how to shoot a large gun and let the man try. Teach him what to do and from then on, he will shoot anything. I have more success starting a man with a real gun then I do with a toy.
Some come and watch us shoot but refuse to shoot our guns. Others say the heck with that little thing, let me shoot a real gun.
I will never force my large guns on anyone while others foam at the mouth to shoot them.
Too many can shoot a .22 and turn white with a .44. Why not make them comfortable with a .44 and progress?
You are the key with your friends, you are the key to teach. If a .44 scares and hurts you, how can you teach? We have more success and have more people buy large guns because we have no fear of them ourselves. Pass it on, never talk recoil or pain, you do nothing but do harm.
I have had new shooters shoot very heavy stuff and think it is normal, to become great shots. Others that I started with a .22 never moved to a real gun. The 1911 is more then a gun should be! Can't be shot!
Others take a .500 saying it is a little worse then the .44 but still not bad.
You have to make the decision and how to progress with a person, make it fun, not a chore. Once safety and starting instruction is over, make it fun. Laugh and show recoil itself does no harm. Put up all kinds of stuff to shoot, not close range paper targets.
The tight butt, formal stuff has to leave, shoot for fun. I have had women on my range go through boxes and boxes of ammo, never wanting to stop and getting angry that the ammo is gone.
YOU are the start of a love of shooting for a new person.


Geesh Jim, that's the largest pile of horse puckey I've heard in a long time. So you're saying if we press a kids hand on a hot stove burner it depends on the individual whether he will touch that burner again? I suppose you two drive big block muscle cars with the pedal to the medal and four barrel wide open red lined everywhere you drive to also huh? :kidding:

[44man]

Geesh Jim, that's the largest pile of horse puckey I've heard in a long time. So you're saying if we press a kids hand on a hot stove burner it depends on the individual whether he will touch that burner again? I suppose you two drive big block muscle cars with the pedal to the medal and four barrel wide open red lined everywhere you drive to also huh? :kidding:
You do not understand at all. Would you hand a woman a .475? or a .44? Would you hand a child any one of these? Get real, there are children, women and men. Then there are girly men that faint at a drop of blood. And there are real women.
Can't you gauge who you are teaching?
I can tell you my wife would shoot a .44 mag good enough to make many sick and so can my one daughter. The other daughter will never see one.
WOW, a woman shooting a .44! Some tough men are frightened by the gun.
How can you say that is horse puckey?

[StarMetal]

You do not understand at all. Would you hand a woman a .475? or a .44? Would you hand a child any one of these? Get real, there are children, women and men. Then there are girly men that faint at a drop of blood. And there are real women.
Can't you gauge who you are teaching?
I can tell you my wife would shoot a .44 mag good enough to make many sick and so can my one daughter. The other daughter will never see one.
WOW, a woman shooting a .44! Some tough men are frightened by the gun.
How can you say that is horse puckey?

Jim,

Those women are exceptions. I know some women that could probably kick most members butts on this forum.

I still think new shooters should be brought up through the stages of shooting starting from the 22. And what's that statement a 22 isn't a serious firearm?

[Oyeboten]

Well...one thing I am getting from this Thread, is that if one wishes to know what they have as an Alloy, one best start off with Pure Lead, and, in small batches, carefully add other Metals and keep good notes on what Ingots, and what Boolits, are what.

Wheel Weights are not of a consistent Alloy, and will be composed of whatever got thrown and recycled into the Pot when manufactured.

While cheap and plentiful, they do not represent an Alloy composition which can be known, nor which can be counted on for consistency.


Pure Lead

Pure Tin

Antimony

Bismuth

Or as may be...


A Good Scale, a Good Notebook, and some Numerical and or Alphabetical Character Metal Stamps for marking one's Ingots of specific and intentional Alloys...and keeping track of which Boolits are of what Alloy-composition in one's testing.


Otherwise, no one is able to know what they have, to compare what they have to what someone else has, for Alloy, since no one knows what they or anyone else has for there to be any comparison in Boolit behavior...far as this being one important factor for Boolit behavior in interior Ballistics contexts, or, in terminal Ballistics contexts where that may be of interest.

[Whitworth]

You might take a clue from the British. When they tested large, heavy recoiling firearms, they used a standing benchrest. It works with handguns also and has been used that way for a long time. There is a point, in any of the large American species, where extra energy just exhausts itself in the hillside on the offside of the animal after passing thru it (regardless of whether its broadside or end to end). Perhaps your hunting the Big 5................

Yep, a standing bench is in the works, but inthe interim, there are deadlines and testing that needs to be done.

Energy exhausting itself in the hillside.....hmmmmm May I ask if you hunt with a handgun? Just curious. There is not a .454 commercial load that doesn't develop more "energy" than the loads I use in my .500 Linebaugh (525 grain bullets at 1,100 fps). Take a guess which one is more effective on big game. The .500s make two large holes in game and that is what I desire when I hunt.

Starmetal -- that would be two four barrels, not merely one......(at least back in the old days):mrgreen:

[jwp475]

I was responding to this: Whitworth brought a friend that never shoots a revolver. We started him with the .44--- As a general statement it looks like a setup, But one never knows. Deer don't require that amount of energy to kill and looking at what Jim posted below, maybe this is just a joke like he has been doing for a bit now. Seriously, do you have to bleed to have fun?



A 44 is SOOOO pleasant......... and on and on. You must be having a blast saying this.


What has energy got to do with anything when it comes to killing Deer

[jwp475]

You do not understand at all. Would you hand a woman a .475? or a .44? Would you hand a child any one of these? Get real, there are children, women and men. Then there are girly men that faint at a drop of blood. And there are real women.
Can't you gauge who you are teaching?
I can tell you my wife would shoot a .44 mag good enough to make many sick and so can my one daughter. The other daughter will never see one.
WOW, a woman shooting a .44! Some tough men are frightened by the gun.
How can you say that is horse puckey?

My oldest son was shooting my 475 Linebaugh when he was 11 years old, with out a hitch

[JIMinPHX]

That design is one of the very first moulds I bought when I began casting 39 years ago. It is a good one, and has shot well in every .44 magnum I own or have owned.

Since you had such good luck, would you mind sharing a few more details with us? Alloy? Powder? Gas check? Speed? Etc.?

[JIMinPHX]

As for the rifle rounds with the same alloy, I shoot my 308, 7-08 and 30-30 to 2,000+ fps with air cooled WW & tin @ 12 BHN. The same alloy in my 357 revolver with top end loads works best HT @ 18 BHN and 1550 fps. This is an issue that I have pondered for several years and the best SWAG I've come up with is a diameter issue with larger revolver boolits. I get similiar results with my Marlin 45 Colt.

Now if I could figure out a way to test that. [smilie=6:
Rick

That mimics something that I was talking about earlier. I was wondering if the larger diameter caused the boolit to have greater resistance to spinning due to more rotational inertia. I need to look up the formula for that. If inertia is a square function, then I think that I have a case there. The rotational torque force is a linear function. If there is a linear force against a square function force, then the square force will win out as diameter increases. If that is the case, then 2 x diameter = 2 x torque & 4 x inertia. I need to look those formulas up some time & see what they actually are.

[Oyeboten]

Hi JIMinPHX



If that is the case, then 2 x diameter = 2 x torque & 4 x inertia. I need to look those formulas up some time & see what they actually are.

(Testing my mental model of these conditions)

Yes...or, more or less the function of Foot Pounds and Torque, though the opposite in effect, where in this case, the inertial differentiation would be toward the center of the Boolit wanting to lag behind the rotational acceleration of the periphery...but seeing as the Rifling is applying a rotational coersion to the Boolit whose force is in relation to the rate at which the Boolit is accelerating, one would expect a more violent or sudden rate of liniar acceleration to underlie possible skiddings, if all else were ideal...and, all else might not be ideal here.

Though in a Rifle of course, or in the kinds of rifles mentioned, the Boolit has no jump to speak of, nor other constricting or inconvenient transitions, intervening as it leaves it's Cartridge Case and engauges the Rifling...or, ideally, the Boolit's nose is at the Rifling to begin with, in a Breech Loading Rifle, before it is even emerging from the Case.

One thing the OP could do, it so slug the Barrel...and, see how that Boolit fits in the Cylinder's secondary aperature or Throat...and, then, see how it fits through the Forcing Cone...empirically...toward deciding of those respective openings are sized right for the Bore.

Though a Vernier Dial Calliper would work well for measuring these diameters also.

[45 2.1]

What has energy got to do with anything when it comes to killing Deer

Shoot a deer with a round nose boolit that doesn't expand or isn't put in a nerve center and see what happens. Oh, thats right, you probably won't get to see because you won't recover it in all likelyhood (that is if its shot in soft material, if you want little energy try a brain shot). Little or no energy to the animal equals no dead deer within sight. Even the hard boolit crowd here knows enough to hit bone to incapacitate the deer where it doesn't go much of anyplace.

[QUOTE=Whitworth;874175]Yep, a standing bench is in the works, but inthe interim, there are deadlines and testing that needs to be done.

Energy exhausting itself in the hillside.....hmmmmm May I ask if you hunt with a handgun? Just curious. Probably much longer than you. 41 years so far. There is not a .454 commercial load that doesn't develop more "energy" than the loads I use in my .500 Linebaugh (525 grain bullets at 1,100 fps) The 500 S&Ws little weak sister....... Take a guess which one is more effective on big game. I don't have to guess and I don't have to use either to equal or exceed their effectiveness with much smaller stuff. The .500s make two large holes in game and that is what I desire when I hunt. Maybe you should read Taylors "African Rifles and Cartridges". A good book on bullet/boolit types and effectiveness over the mans lifetime.

[Bret4207]

Well...one thing I am getting from this Thread, is that if one wishes to know what they have as an Alloy, one best start off with Pure Lead, and, in small batches, carefully add other Metals and keep good notes on what Ingots, and what Boolits, are what.

Wheel Weights are not of a consistent Alloy, and will be composed of whatever got thrown and recycled into the Pot when manufactured.

While cheap and plentiful, they do not represent an Alloy composition which can be known, nor which can be counted on for consistency.


Pure Lead

Pure Tin

Antimony

Bismuth

Or as may be...


A Good Scale, a Good Notebook, and some Numerical and or Alphabetical Character Metal Stamps for marking one's Ingots of specific and intentional Alloys...and keeping track of which Boolits are of what Alloy-composition in one's testing.


Otherwise, no one is able to know what they have, to compare what they have to what someone else has, for Alloy, since no one knows what they or anyone else has for there to be any comparison in Boolit behavior...far as this being one important factor for Boolit behavior in interior Ballistics contexts, or, in terminal Ballistics contexts where that may be of interest.


You're getting the important part, had to wade through the organic bovine fertilizer to do it, but you got it. Personally, I melt down large batches of WW and use it for years. My method is to see what my alloy will do and work with it. If I see a REAL need for a harder or softer alloy I use a boughten enrichment alloy that is always the same and add that rather than guessing with a little of this and a little of that. On the occasions I remember to write everything down it's paid off nicely.

[Whitworth]

Shoot a deer with a round nose boolit that doesn't expand or isn't put in a nerve center and see what happens. Oh, thats right, you probably won't get to see because you won't recover it in all likelyhood (that is if its shot in soft material, if you want little energy try a brain shot). Little or no energy to the animal equals no dead deer within sight. Even the hard boolit crowd here knows enough to hit bone to incapacitate the deer where it doesn't go much of anyplace.

[QUOTE=Whitworth;874175]Yep, a standing bench is in the works, but inthe interim, there are deadlines and testing that needs to be done.

Energy exhausting itself in the hillside.....hmmmmm May I ask if you hunt with a handgun? Just curious. Probably much longer than you. 41 years so far. There is not a .454 commercial load that doesn't develop more "energy" than the loads I use in my .500 Linebaugh (525 grain bullets at 1,100 fps) The 500 S&Ws little weak sister....... Take a guess which one is more effective on big game. I don't have to guess and I don't have to use either to equal or exceed their effectiveness with much smaller stuff. The .500s make two large holes in game and that is what I desire when I hunt. Maybe you should read Taylors "African Rifles and Cartridges". A good book on bullet/boolit types and effectiveness over the mans lifetime.

Yes, I have read Taylor, and it is yet another theory as far as knockout values are concerned. .500 Linebaugh is no one's weak little sister. It actually fits into a normal-sized revolver unlike the 1.6-inch cased cartridges and it predates the .500 Smith by about 20 years. I have a .50 Alaskan revolver that will make a .500 Smith go run and hide, but it is no more effective on game than the .500 Linebaugh, despite its magical "energy levels." So, what is your go-to cartridge for big game, if I may ask?

[jwp475]

Shoot a deer with a round nose boolit that doesn't expand or isn't put in a nerve center and see what happens. Oh, thats right, you probably won't get to see because you won't recover it in all likelyhood (that is if its shot in soft material, if you want little energy try a brain shot). Little or no energy to the animal equals no dead deer within sight. Even the hard boolit crowd here knows enough to hit bone to incapacitate the deer where it doesn't go much of anyplace.

[QUOTE=Whitworth;874175]Yep, a standing bench is in the works, but inthe interim, there are deadlines and testing that needs to be done.

Energy exhausting itself in the hillside.....hmmmmm May I ask if you hunt with a handgun? Just curious. Probably much longer than you. 41 years so far. There is not a .454 commercial load that doesn't develop more "energy" than the loads I use in my .500 Linebaugh (525 grain bullets at 1,100 fps) The 500 S&Ws little weak sister....... Take a guess which one is more effective on big game. I don't have to guess and I don't have to use either to equal or exceed their effectiveness with much smaller stuff. The .500s make two large holes in game and that is what I desire when I hunt. Maybe you should read Taylors "African Rifles and Cartridges". A good book on bullet/boolit types and effectiveness over the mans lifetime.



There are 2 types of collision , 1- Elastic collisions, the colliding bodies remain in motion and energy is transfered. 2- inelastic collisons. In a perfect inelastic collision the colliding bodies stick together. Energy is transformed into other forms of energy, mostly thermal but also sound, etc. Momentum is transfered in ALl COLLISIONS.

Ballistic Pendulums were used to callculate velocity before electric chronographs. The pendelum was shot and the distance of the pendulumm swing was measured. Once the distance of the pendelums swing was measured this gave the amount of momentum that was transfered, with this info the velocity of the bullet could be calculated
Note that energy is not what was measured, but what is calculated. My 454 shooting a 360 grain bullet at 1400 FPS has 1566 FPE. A 22-250 shooting a 55 grain bullet 3600 FPS has 1582 FPE. Despite the slight advantage IN ENERGY THE 22-250 is a poor choice for Bear and Buffalo, yet the 454 with the 360 grain bullet is a very good choice.

The round nose non expanding bullet does not have a wide enough meplat and therfore does not impart as much direct applied force as a wide meplat flat point. The round nose does not crush tissue as effeciently as does the flat point wide meplat hard cast.

Do I hunt?

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/ParkerBuffInSnow.jpg


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/00000009.jpg


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/parker_buffalo.jpg


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/HuntingPicturesAndBuddy014.jpg


I have hunted enough to know that "ENERGY" is a POOR INDICATOR OF LETHALITY

[45 2.1]

... Yes, I have read Taylor, and it is yet another theory as far as knockout values are concerned. And everything else is opinion considering Taylor's experience in testing what was out there and its effectiveness. .500 Linebaugh is no one's weak little sister. Actually it is, it is basically a 50-70 in handgun form but it does have the best diameter to generate good results with solids. It actually fits into a normal-sized revolver unlike the 1.6-inch cased cartridges and it predates the .500 Smith by about 20 years. I have a .50 Alaskan revolver that will make a .500 Smith go run and hide, but it is no more effective on game than the .500 Linebaugh, despite its magical "energy levels." One of the trueisms involved in shooting solid boolits is that they only transfer a limited amont of energy to the animal and take the rest of it into the hillside past it. Once you get soo big with a solid, anything with more umph doesn't do any more unless it is a lot bigger in diameter. Have you taken much game with a .500 Smith? Deer, but they don't do anything that yours doesn't do with an emphasis on too much potential energy not being used or wasted in that the animal doesn't absorb enough of it when hit (unless you go end for end to allow more time in the animal). Of course this is a poor comparison as most solid shooters want to hit bone and the expanding crowd want to hit a softer spot and transfer energy (different methods). Proper alloy and boolit design in the smaller calibers transfers more energy into deer than the 44 Mag and above calibers do with solids. This isn't saying that your method with over 45 caliber isn't more suitable for close quarter usage against things that bite (and do have enough bulk and toughness to absorb more from the boolit plus break heavier bone structure), but neither of us have too much of that problem where we live. Caliber/power level is relative to the purpose intended...........and the performance wanted.

[jwp475]

500 Linebaugh (525 grain bullets at 1,100 fps) The 500 S&Ws little weak sister.......


This big Bull was shot with the 500 Linebaugh one shot put him on the ground in seconds and the 525 graim WLFN exited


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/parker_buffalo.jpg


How is the 500 S&W better?

[jwp475]

One of the trueisms involved in shooting solid boolits is that they only transfer a limited amont of energy to the animal and take the rest of it into the hillside past it.



You may be the winner of a Pultzer prize if you can prove that "ENERGY" is transfered in an inelastic collision. That proof will transform Physics as we know it today

[Whitworth]

... Yes, I have read Taylor, and it is yet another theory as far as knockout values are concerned. And everything else is opinion considering Taylor's experience in testing what was out there and its effectiveness. .500 Linebaugh is no one's weak little sister. Actually it is, it is basically a 50-70 in handgun form but it does have the best diameter to generate good results with solids. It actually fits into a normal-sized revolver unlike the 1.6-inch cased cartridges and it predates the .500 Smith by about 20 years. I have a .50 Alaskan revolver that will make a .500 Smith go run and hide, but it is no more effective on game than the .500 Linebaugh, despite its magical "energy levels." One of the trueisms involved in shooting solid boolits is that they only transfer a limited amont of energy to the animal and take the rest of it into the hillside past it. Once you get soo big with a solid, anything with more umph doesn't do any more unless it is a lot bigger in diameter. Have you taken much game with a .500 Smith? Deer, but they don't do anything that yours doesn't do with an emphasis on too much potential energy not being used or wasted in that the animal doesn't absorb enough of it when hit (unless you go end for end to allow more time in the animal). Of course this is a poor comparison as most solid shooters want to hit bone and the expanding crowd want to hit a softer spot and transfer energy (different methods). Proper alloy and boolit design in the smaller calibers transfers more energy into deer than the 44 Mag and above calibers do with solids. This isn't saying that your method with over 45 caliber isn't more suitable for close quarter usage against things that bite (and do have enough bulk and toughness to absorb more from the boolit plus break heavier bone structure), but neither of us have too much of that problem where we live. Caliber/power level is relative to the purpose intended...........and the performance wanted.


Deer aren't particularly hard to kill in my opinion, and I do like expanding bullets in the smaller calibers like the .429 mag, but the expansion just isn't necessary with the larger calibers -- as you pointed out. When the game gets more dense -- like hogs, bison, etc., I want two holes every single time, and expanding bullets are not reliable in my opinion. So, bigger calibers with heavy hardcast, flat-nosed bullets are my choice.

Again, my .50 Alaskan can push a 525 grain bullet to 1,600 fps and it is no more effective than my .500 Linebaugh shooting the same bullet at a mere 1,100 fps.......but it is more difficult to shoot.

[45 2.1]

Momentum is transfered in ALl COLLISIONS. The big question is how much................... plus the fact that momentum isn't the deciding factor. Do I huntOther people here do the same thing.? . Nothing new there. Match the gun/ammunition type to the class of animal being hunted and you usually got no problem provided you place the boolit in the correct spot.

I have hunted enough to know that "ENERGY" is a POOR INDICATOR OF LETHALITY Tell me then, what exactly killed those animals........... a boolit/bullet with enough energy transfer to do the job or something else.

[45 2.1]

Deer aren't particularly hard to kill in my opinion This is true., and I do like expanding bullets in the smaller calibers like the .429 mag and smaller, but the expansion just isn't necessary with the larger calibers -- as you pointed out. That is provided the animal can absorb enough to kill it before it gets out of your range of control. Sometimes deer are quite heated up and do not respond whatsoever to a soft body hit from these solids. They run off, sometimes quite a long way, and are lost with their heart blown apart. The recourse there is to break them down with a spine, head or shoulder shot when useing solids. When the game gets more dense -- like hogs, bison, etc., I want two holes every single time, and expanding bullets are not reliable in my opinion. Friends have killed several buffalos without thru penetration with soft orund/flat points. Depends somewhat on the animal and its state at the time. But if you taylor your load and method to the game sought and have had no problems, then you are good to go. So, bigger calibers with heavy hardcast, flat-nosed bullets are my choice.

Again, my .50 Alaskan can push a 525 grain bullet to 1,600 fps and it is no more effective than my .500 Linebaugh shooting the same bullet at a mere 1,100 fps.......but it is more difficult to shoot. Granted, maybe an African trip for jumbo will let that Alaskan do its stuff better with more animal to go thru. Thin skinned smaller big game are a different story most of the time though.

[jwp475]

I have hunted enough to know that "ENERGY" is a POOR INDICATOR OF LETHALITY Tell me then, what exactly killed those animals........... a boolit/bullet with enough energy transfer to do the job or something else.



Holes through the chest cavity and heart killed the Buffalo, the tisse is throw out of the bullet path by the transfer of momentum. The basis of inelastic collisions go back to Newtons 3 laws of motion and they do not deal with energy relationships..


In the first picture of an exit in the rib cage of a 6X7 Bull Elk is the exit created by my 300 win mag and a 180 grain bullet with an impact speed of approxiamtely 2600 FPS for 2700 FPE.

I am holding a loaded 300 win mag for size comparison

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/HuntingPicturesfrom2006060.jpg


As I approached the downed Elk he raised his head and I shot him again through the rib cage with my 500 JRH with a 440 grain wide meplat hard cast bullet at 950 FPS generating only 888 FPE


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/HuntingPicturesfrom2006061.jpg


The wound with the handgun and only 888 FPE was larger by 2 to 3 times from start to finnish


So much for rating lethality with FPE... You do realize that in Europe instead of FPE figure they use "Joules" which is a thermal measurement.

1 Joule equals 0.737562149 Foot Pound Of Energy

[jwp475]

Again, my .50 Alaskan can push a 525 grain bullet to 1,600 fps and it is no more effective than my .500 Linebaugh shooting the same bullet at a mere 1,100 fps.......but it is more difficult to shoot. Granted, maybe an African trip for jumbo will let that Alaskan do its stuff better with more animal to go thru. Thin skinned smaller big game are a different story most of the time though.

We have shot Asian Buffalo with both the 50 Alaskan from a rifle and with the 475 & 500 Linebaugh and 500 JRH . The 50 Alaskan does not offer more killing ability in our observation. The 500 L and JRH as well as the 475 L penetrate and exit through both front shoulders.

The 50 Alaskan and the 500 S&W have fared no better at the Linebaugh seminars in the poentration department.

Again FPE transfer in an inelastic collision is a fallicy and G&A BS

[45 2.1]

Holes through the chest cavity and heart killed the Buffalo, the tisse is throw out of the bullet path by the transfer of momentum. The basis of inelastic collisions go back to Newtons 3 laws of motion and they do not deal with energy relationships.. I'm sure Mr. Newton would be quite surprised to here that.


In the first picture of an exit in the rib cage of a 6X7 Bull Elk is the exit created by my 300 win mag and a 180 grain bullet with an impact speed of approxiamtely 2600 FPS for 2700 FPE.


So much for rating lethality with FPE... You do realize that in Europe instead of FPE figure they use "Joules" which is a thermal measurement. So, you shot this animal in Europe? Or your from there......................

1 Joule equals 0.737562149 Foot Pound Of Energy Funny a "thermal" unit of measurement and FPE are related as equal. Wouldn't you say.

[jwp475]

1-I'm sure Mr. Newton would be quite surprised to here that.


. 2-So, you shot this animal in Europe? Or your from there......................

3-Funny a "thermal" unit of measurement and FPE are related as equal. Wouldn't you say.


1- How can you possable be sure of what Sir Issac would or would not be surprised to hear?


2- The location of a kill has what to do with the topic at hand?


3- No

[StarMetal]

a unit of electrical energy equal to the work done when a current of one ampere passes through a resistance of one ohm for one second
English physicist who established the mechanical theory of heat and discovered the first law of thermodynamics (1818-1889)
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn (http://www.google.com/url?q=http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn%3Fs%3Djoule&ei=XqzNS7y1NIH-8Aas88Bc&sa=X&oi=define&ct=&cd=1&ved=0CBIQpAMoAA&usg=AFQjCNEM2Ten1LYJhvbiF_VTCxjN318jtg)
Joule is a lunar impact crater that lies on the far side of the Moon. It is located to the north-northeast of the walled plain Mach. To the northwest of Joule is the crater Blazhko.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule_(crater) (http://www.google.com/url?q=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule_%28crater%29&ei=XqzNS7y1NIH-8Aas88Bc&sa=X&oi=define&ct=&cd=1&ved=0CBMQpAMoAQ&usg=AFQjCNGhX7LyiRFQ8r8AU2yRMY4Bi_IKkA)
The joule (symbol J), named for James Prescott Joule, is the derived unit of energy in the International System of Units. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule (http://www.google.com/url?q=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule&ei=XqzNS7y1NIH-8Aas88Bc&sa=X&oi=define&ct=&cd=1&ved=0CBQQpAMoAg&usg=AFQjCNF9nFG3RjT7H5qsScIHemG_XZKSBQ)
Joule is a concurrent dataflow programming language, designed for building distributed applications. It is so concurrent, that the order of ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule_(programming_language) (http://www.google.com/url?q=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule_%28programming_language%29&ei=XqzNS7y1NIH-8Aas88Bc&sa=X&oi=define&ct=&cd=1&ved=0CBUQpAMoAw&usg=AFQjCNF3bUa6Py1GTzgm8QncM_CclCYvrA)
In the International System of Units, the derived unit of energy, work and heat; the work required to exert a force of one newton for a distance of one metre. Also equal to the energy of one watt of power for a duration of one second. Symbol: J
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/joule (http://www.google.com/url?q=http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/joule&ei=XqzNS7y1NIH-8Aas88Bc&sa=X&oi=define&ct=&cd=1&ved=0CBYQpAMoBA&usg=AFQjCNEBcPGdxyN6Y-U7DxMK6BmDmHvaEQ)
The basic unit of work or energy.
www.ergon.com.au/ergonia/glossary.shtml (http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.ergon.com.au/ergonia/glossary.shtml&ei=XqzNS7y1NIH-8Aas88Bc&sa=X&oi=define&ct=&cd=1&ved=0CBcQpAMoBQ&usg=AFQjCNFxua_7tE1db4bYsaWU6Xog1LhlUA)
A unit of energy. One joule is the energy required to lift a small apple one meter against the Earth's gravity.
https://lasers.llnl.gov/education/glossary.php (http://www.google.com/url?q=https://lasers.llnl.gov/education/glossary.php&ei=XqzNS7y1NIH-8Aas88Bc&sa=X&oi=define&ct=&cd=1&ved=0CBgQpAMoBg&usg=AFQjCNHYHp1QMk3Z6QTXZd6b9aFm68J4OQ)
(SI symbol: J) The amount of energy needed to apply a force of 1 newton over a distance of 1 metre.
www.fao.org/docrep/003/x3910e/X3910E13.htm (http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/x3910e/X3910E13.htm&ei=XqzNS7y1NIH-8Aas88Bc&sa=X&oi=define&ct=&cd=1&ved=0CBkQpAMoBw&usg=AFQjCNGb1ndqQ3xCOEkYn_bZDoVnT-AeQQ)
The SI unit of energy, equal to one newton-meter.
www.et.upt.ro/admin/tmpfile/fileI1254990522file4acda2baa54ba.doc (http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.et.upt.ro/admin/tmpfile/fileI1254990522file4acda2baa54ba.doc&ei=XqzNS7y1NIH-8Aas88Bc&sa=X&oi=define&ct=&cd=1&ved=0CBoQpAMoCA&usg=AFQjCNF8q6y3Q3Z3oJ5T-iJJSsfYeL4x1A)
is the SI unit of energy measuring heat, electricity and mechanical work. It was named after English physicist James Prescott Joule. ...
ecohho.wordpress.com/hho-glossary/ (http://www.google.com/url?q=http://ecohho.wordpress.com/hho-glossary/&ei=XqzNS7y1NIH-8Aas88Bc&sa=X&oi=define&ct=&cd=1&ved=0CBsQpAMoCQ&usg=AFQjCNEvR4r-9wsSa-api2alrCN4CktCQA)
a unit of energy in the MKS units system
www.flowmeterdirectory.com/sensor_terminology_a.html (http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.flowmeterdirectory.com/sensor_terminology_a.html&ei=XqzNS7y1NIH-8Aas88Bc&sa=X&oi=define&ct=&cd=1&ved=0CBwQpAMoCg&usg=AFQjCNHznzTCNCVr4xI1-b_leTOC3zQOfg)
A measurement. The international unit of energy. One joule is equal to one WATT - second or 0.737 foot pounds.
www.pneumatic-source.com/resources/glossary/j.shtml (http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.pneumatic-source.com/resources/glossary/j.shtml&ei=XqzNS7y1NIH-8Aas88Bc&sa=X&oi=define&ct=&cd=1&ved=0CB0QpAMoCw&usg=AFQjCNF78EITrAuUQJwur3VVRecfu6ZEdA)
Unit of work or energy. 1 joule = 1 watt second = 2.7778 ×10−4 watt-hour. Since joule is a small unit, giga joule (GJ) is often used, 109 ...
report.vattenfall.com/csrreport2008/Menu/Glossary (http://www.google.com/url?q=http://report.vattenfall.com/csrreport2008/Menu/Glossary&ei=XqzNS7y1NIH-8Aas88Bc&sa=X&oi=define&ct=&cd=1&ved=0CB4QpAMoDA&usg=AFQjCNFu7ToS4sbOt3kTrtCsl_1YdWZbRQ)
Unit of energy. A joule is one watt for one second.
www.electricfence.org.uk/page007.aspx (http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.electricfence.org.uk/page007.aspx&ei=XqzNS7y1NIH-8Aas88Bc&sa=X&oi=define&ct=&cd=1&ved=0CB8QpAMoDQ&usg=AFQjCNHGRJG9ZjkA-MlIZ8Dt9_X-SRiLtQ)

[jwp475]

Knowledge without understanding is a dangerous thing. For a little knowledge entices us to walk its path, a bit more provides the foundation on which we take our stand, and a sufficient amount can erect a wall of knowledge around us, trapping us in our own ignorance.


A good quote to live by

[45 2.1]

Quote:
Again, my .50 Alaskan can push a 525 grain bullet to 1,600 fps and it is no more effective than my .500 Linebaugh shooting the same bullet at a mere 1,100 fps.......but it is more difficult to shoot. Granted, maybe an African trip for jumbo will let that Alaskan do its stuff better with more animal to go thru. Thin skinned smaller big game are a different story most of the time though.
We have shot Asian Buffalo with both the 50 Alaskan from a rifle and with the 475 & 500 Linebaugh and 500 JRH . The 50 Alaskan does not offer more killing ability in our observation. The 500 L and JRH as well as the 475 L penetrate and exit through both front shoulders.

The 50 Alaskan and the 500 S&W have fared no better at the Linebaugh seminars in the poentration department. Thats nice to read again, but the referenced quote was about jumbo, not a buff (though he is one of the big five). I am sure that the referenced cartridges do deliver about the same effect on the game and one would have a problem finding an example to prove one was any better than the other for some usages.

Again FPE transfer in an inelastic collision is a fallicy and G&A BS Since most of the world has cartridges rated in terms of energy and/or Taylors knock out value, why don't you convince all of them to adopt your standard and tell them what you know to get them to do that......... I'll be waiting for the new standard to appear.

[45 2.1]

A good quote to live by

It applies to quite a few people here.

[jwp475]

It applies to quite a few people here.

You mean not every one? Whom are excluding?

[45 2.1]

You mean not every one? Whom are excluding?

Take a WAG................ :violin: :shock:

[jwp475]

Quote:
Again, my .50 Alaskan can push a 525 grain bullet to 1,600 fps and it is no more effective than my .500 Linebaugh shooting the same bullet at a mere 1,100 fps.......but it is more difficult to shoot. Granted, maybe an African trip for jumbo will let that Alaskan do its stuff better with more animal to go thru. Thin skinned smaller big game are a different story most of the time though.
We have shot Asian Buffalo with both the 50 Alaskan from a rifle and with the 475 & 500 Linebaugh and 500 JRH . The 50 Alaskan does not offer more killing ability in our observation. The 500 L and JRH as well as the 475 L penetrate and exit through both front shoulders.

The 50 Alaskan and the 500 S&W have fared no better at the Linebaugh seminars in the poentration department. Thats nice to read again, but the referenced quote was about jumbo, not a buff (though he is one of the big five). I am sure that the referenced cartridges do deliver about the same effect on the game and one would have a problem finding an example to prove one was any better than the other for some usages.

Again FPE transfer in an inelastic collision is a fallicy and G&A BS Since most of the world has cartridges rated in terms of energy and/or Taylors knock out value, why don't you convince all of them to adopt your standard and tell them what you know to get them to do that......... I'll be waiting for the new standard to appear.



Otto Candice according to John Linebaugh has taken over a hundred Bull Elephants and Otto has gotten over 2 feet of penetration on a frontal brain shot with a 450 grain steel tipped hard cast at 1250 FPS from the 500 L. He also got over 40" inches of penetration useing the Trophy Bonded Sledge Hammer rifle solid cut down to fit into the 475 L. The finnsihed bullet wieghed 390 grains. John Linebough loaded the ammo


I have no Idea why you suddenly brought Elephants into a disscussion about the realevance of FPE in calculating a cartridges lethality

Explain why the ballistics pendelum measures "momentum" and not energy since you believe (incorrectly) that "energy" TRANSFERS?

[jwp475]

I highly recomend this book by Duncan MacPhearson. This work will help one to understand how handgun guns work nad the uselessnes of FPE in calculating lethality


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/DuncanMacPhearson.jpg

[45 2.1]

Otto Candice according to John Linebaugh has taken over a hundred Bull Elephants and Otto has gotten over 2 feet of penetration on a frontal brain shot with a 450 grain steel tipped hard cast at 1250 FPS from the 500 L. He also got over 40" inches of penetration useing the Trophy Bonded Sledge Hammer rifle solid cut down to fit into the 475 L. The finnsihed bullet wieghed 390 grains. John Linebough loaded the ammo
Now, did any of these modified projectiles rivet, bend or deform and did they maintain a straight line of penetration? Fairly important stuff to know when judging how effective they were.


I have no Idea why you suddenly brought Elephants into a disscussion about the realevance of FPE in calculating a cartridges lethality If you have paid attention, you would have noted I having been saying energy transfered inside the animal in these posts, not anything about relevance of FPE regarding lethalitiy. You think about that..............

Explain why the ballistics pendelum measures "momentum" and not energy since you believe (incorrectly) that "energy" TRANSFERS? So, you believe momentum kills the animal?

[44man]

A .45 cal round ball from a flintlock will put deer on the ground FAST with any hit through the lungs. A .54 round ball smashes them with as much internal damage as the .300 Weatherby, yet no meat loss.
A .44 mag with hard cast is an amazing killer and so is a round ball from a cap and ball revolver. My last deer with one went straight up and straight down.
ALL shots will exit a deer unless a lot of bone is hit with the muzzle loader. I only recovered ONE .54 ball that smashed the shoulder and spine on a large doe.
All of my revolvers with HARD flat nose boolits will kill so fast it is unreal, EXCEPT ONE, the 45-70. IT IS TOO FAST at 1631 fps for a hard boolit. This gun NEEDS expansion as does the .454, .460, .50 Alaskan, etc. Increase the size of the animal and they start to work again. Increase the velocity even more and they start to work again.
ME means nothing at all, what counts is what the projectile does inside the animal.
5 tons of ME means nothing if the bullet zips through or if the wrong bullet is used that blows up on the entry side. 5 tons will not kill a deer any faster then a cap and ball revolver with the same hit.
Solids for large animals work because of bone and skull penetration. NOT ME.
Bullet performance is what does the work and must be matched to the caliber and velocity. Once the bullet is correct, hydraulic or nerve shock can kill fast but the bullet still must be placed in the exact spot to transmit the energy to the spine or brain.
I have had to track too many deer shot by neighbors with 7mm and .300 mags over a mile with holes big enough to stick your head in because of poor hits while a little round ball from a cap and ball revolver drops them in place to ever say more ME is needed.
Paper figures are just that! Fodder to start the wood stove.

[StarMetal]

A .45 cal round ball from a flintlock will put deer on the ground FAST with any hit through the lungs. A .54 round ball smashes them with as much internal damage as the .300 Weatherby, yet no meat loss.
A .44 mag with hard cast is an amazing killer and so is a round ball from a cap and ball revolver. My last deer with one went straight up and straight down.
ALL shots will exit a deer unless a lot of bone is hit with the muzzle loader. I only recovered ONE .54 ball that smashed the shoulder and spine on a large doe.
All of my revolvers with HARD flat nose boolits will kill so fast it is unreal, EXCEPT ONE, the 45-70. IT IS TOO FAST at 1631 fps for a hard boolit. This gun NEEDS expansion as does the .454, .460, .50 Alaskan, etc. Increase the size of the animal and they start to work again. Increase the velocity even more and they start to work again.
ME means nothing at all, what counts is what the projectile does inside the animal.
5 tons of ME means nothing if the bullet zips through or if the wrong bullet is used that blows up on the entry side. 5 tons will not kill a deer any faster then a cap and ball revolver with the same hit.
Solids for large animals work because of bone and skull penetration. NOT ME.
Bullet performance is what does the work and must be matched to the caliber and velocity. Once the bullet is correct, hydraulic or nerve shock can kill fast but the bullet still must be placed in the exact spot to transmit the energy to the spine or brain.
I have had to track too many deer shot by neighbors with 7mm and .300 mags over a mile with holes big enough to stick your head in because of poor hits while a little round ball from a cap and ball revolver drops them in place to ever say more ME is needed.
Paper figures are just that! Fodder to start the wood stove.

What makes a 44 mag hard cast a killer and the hard cast 45 not?

[44man]

What makes a 44 mag hard cast a killer and the hard cast 45 not?
You do not listen! The .44 and .45 colt do just fine with hard cast but as you make them too fast like in the .454, 45-70 and .460, you need to start expansion because the boolit is too fast. The secondary wound channel is too large, moving tissue out of the way from damage.
The only advantage to the faster boolit is range or the size of the animal.

[Ole]

Jim-

I have about 300 180 grain Hornady XTP's on hand that I bought for my bulldog .44 special. They should work great in 1000-1100 fps range for defense work.

Let me know if you're interested in using some for testing.

[StarMetal]

You do not listen! The .44 and .45 colt do just fine with hard cast but as you make them too fast like in the .454, 45-70 and .460, you need to start expansion because the boolit is too fast. The secondary wound channel is too large, moving tissue out of the way from damage.
The only advantage to the faster boolit is range or the size of the animal.


Ross Seyfred changed his tune to recommending hard cast for handgun hunting of deer and now recommends expanding jacketed. Hard cast isn't the best choice for deer unless you shoot bone.

[jwp475]

1-Now, did any of these modified projectiles rivet, bend or deform and did they maintain a straight line of penetration? Fairly important stuff to know when judging how effective they were.[/B]

2-If you have paid attention, you would have noted I having been saying energy transfered inside the animal in these posts, not anything about relevance of FPE regarding lethalitiy. You think about that..............

2-So, you believe momentum kills the animal?

1- if the bullets bent, riveted or deformed the penetration would have been inadequate.


2-I have paid attention and your claims of FPE transfer is totaly incorrect

3-Momentum transfer is the mechanism that allows the tissue and/or bone to move. The would channel is created by the amount of direct applied pressure created, the frontal area of the projectile and the amount of hydraulic pressure created as we;; as tyhe amount of penetration.

You have never explained why the measured distance of the ballistics pendelum gives the amount of MOMENTUM TRANSFERED and not the amount of ENERGY TRANSFERED. Of course the answer is that energy is illrealivant in the calculations of an inelastic collision.

My 338 Lapua launches a 300 grain SMK at 2800 FPS that is 5222 FPE. A 458 Win launching a 500 grain bullet at 2050 FPS is 4665 FPE. There is no way no how that the Lapau is a better round for Very Large Game


A 30-06 shooting a 130 grain bullet at 3200 FPS generates 2956 FPE, the 30-06 shooting a 180 at 2700 FPS is good for 2913 FPE, again their is no way no how the 130 is even in the same league as the 180 for taking of Elk or larger size game


Again explain to us all how FPE is realavant to wound trauma incapacitation??

[jwp475]

Ross Seyfred changed his tune to recommending hard cast for handgun hunting of deer and now recommends expanding jacketed. Hard cast isn't the best choice for deer unless you shoot bone.

I have killed many Deer very dead very quickly with wide Meplar hard cast bullets with out hitting Bone.

Please feel free to show your references to Ross changing his tune and recomending Jacketed bullets over hard cast. In other words where did you see this in print? Ross does indeed like a cast bullet with the front cast with soft lead and the rear cast hard for penetration. There are indeed some expanging bullets that will work well for Deer, but so do heavy hard cast and there is no need to change loads when one wishes to take larger game

[waksupi]

I kinda work on the concept of dwell time. More energy is transferred to a silhouette with a slower heavy bullet, than a faster bullet. I believe the same works on critters.

[StarMetal]

I have killed many Deer very dead very quickly with wide Meplar hard cast bullets with out hitting Bone.

Please feel free to show your references to Ross changing his tune and recomending Jacketed bullets over hard cast. In other words where did you see this in print? Ross does indeed like a cast bullet with the front cast with soft lead and the rear cast hard for penetration. There are indeed some expanging bullets that will work well for Deer, but so do heavy hard cast and there is no need to change loads when one wishes to take larger game

I believe it was back when he last wrote for Guns & Ammo. He started an article about hard cast being the ticket for deer hunting using hand guns. Few months later he revisited the article stating he got tons of mail complaining about all the deer that hunters lost because the bullet just punched through the deer like armor piercing rounds and not leaving a good blood trail.....so he rethought his suggestion and said that probably jacketed expanding bullets would be better. I'm not digging through the internet to find it, you can if you wish....but he did say and wrote it.

[jwp475]

I talk to Ross from time to time and a wide Meplat hard cast works very well. Now a narrow meplat hard cast is another animal all together and I will readily admit that they are not as effective as I like


All jacketed bullets do not expand as this 357 158 grain Gold Dot plainly shows as does the Winchester 176 grain Silver tip in 41 Mag


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/HorsesBullets002.jpg

[StarMetal]

I talk to Ross from time to time and a wide Meplat hard cast works very well. Now a narrow meplat hard cast is another animal all together and I will readily admit that they are not as effective as I like


All jacketed bullets do not expand as this 357 158 grain Gold Dot plainly shows as does the Winchester 176 grain Silver tip in 41 Mag


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/HorsesBullets002.jpg

I can agree to that. I think in his article he just stated hard cast. Didn't define a specific bullet and I would say it was taken that say you had a SWC mold for a 44 caliber bullet....just hard cast it and good to go. Not so. Now that wide flat nose makes a tremendous difference. So rather then try to talk readers into a specific good cast design he said the expanding jacketed was the way to do. Now he has done lots of testing and hunting with soft nose cast bullet and heard he liked them a lot.

[454PB]

Since you had such good luck, would you mind sharing a few more details with us? Alloy? Powder? Gas check? Speed? Etc.?

I was away from this thread for a while, but here are a few recipes:

Lyman 429244 cast from straight linotype, Lyman GC, sized .430"
WW brass, CCI 350 primer
23 gr. H110
In a Ruger RH, 7 1/2" barrel 1360 fps.
Same info but with 24 gr. WW296 1418 fps.

Lyman 429244 WW alloy, heat treated, Hornady GC, sized .430"
WW brass, CCI 350 primer
23.5 gr. H-110
In a S&W 29, 6" barrel 1205 fps.
Same info in TC Super 14 1594 fps.

Lyman 429244 WW alloy, Hornady GC sized .430"
WW brass, CCI 350
22 gr. WC820
In a Ruger RH, 7 1/2" barrel 1390 fps.

More recently, I've been using Lil'Gun and have found it to match or exceed the velocity of H-110/WW296 when used in identical charge weights.

[44man]

All of my deer are shot with hard boolits with the exception of the 45-70 that I use Babore's great boolits in. I use WLN and WFN boolits and kills are dramatic. I shoot behind the shoulder to limit meat damage because I like the shoulder meat but when I do shoot them there, damage is minimal. Rarely does a deer go more then 30 yards and the ground is so full of blood, no need to track at all. Unlike the 240 XTP that stays in the deer and leaves little or no blood trail.
This is what a 25 BHN boolit does to a heart.
Then the exit hole.
Then damage from a softer hollow point with the 45-70.

[44man]

Now Joe, I could post deer pictures killed with hard cast until tomorrow. How many do you want?
I lost half the shoulder with the deer shot with the 50-50 hollow point from my 45-70 BFR. TOO SOFT. Adjustment needed. It did NOT kill the deer any faster then the .44, .45 or .475 with hard boolits.
I have to admit that deer hit with the .475 are out of it and run into trees, etc. There IS a difference in reaction to the hit. Not at the impact but what the deer does after. Deer hit with the .44 or .45 will run a trail but with the .475 they don't know where they are going.

[303Guy]

Deer hit with the .44 or .45 will run a trail but with the .475 they don't know where they are going. Now that is interesting! Just today I shot two turkey, one with an 85gr Nosler BT 25/303 at high velocity, the other with a 230gr 303 Brit 'very' hollow nose Pig Gun boolit at somewhat supersonic velocity. The results were about the same.

[45 2.1]

1- if the bullets bent, riveted or deformed the penetration would have been inadequate. Professional hunters will tell you that bullets that bend, rivet and deform still kill big game, but the bullet failed to do as it should. How about some pictures since you danced around the question/ or something from someone else that can answer the question.


2-I have paid attention and your claims of FPE transfer is totaly incorrect You seem to have the notion that I have quoted any FPE figures, which I haven't, YOU HAVE THOUGH. Please, since you don't like the term FPE, why are you useing it?

3-Momentum transfer is the mechanism that allows the tissue and/or bone to move. The would channel is created by the amount of direct applied pressure created, the frontal area of the projectile and the amount of hydraulic pressure created as we;; as tyhe amount of penetration.

You have never explained why the measured distance of the ballistics pendelum gives the amount of MOMENTUM TRANSFERED and not the amount of ENERGY TRANSFERED. The concept and explanation are answered in freshman physics in college. Find your answer there by taking the course. They will also tell you about the other variables involved which you haven't said anything about. Of course the answer is that energy is illrealivant in the calculations of an inelastic collision.

[45 2.1]

Now Joe, I could post deer pictures killed with hard cast until tomorrow. How many do you want?
I lost half the shoulder with the deer shot with the 50-50 hollow point from my 45-70 BFR. TOO SOFT. Adjustment needed. Correct, don't shoot the deer in the shoulder........ It belongs in the ribcage just behind the heart. Try it out. It did NOT kill the deer any faster then the .44, .45 or .475 with hard boolits.
I have to admit that deer hit with the .475 are out of it and run into trees, etc. The regular effect of a soft HP 41 Mag is the deer collapses in place, DRT. Why are yours running? There IS a difference in reaction to the hit. Not at the impact but what the deer does after. Deer hit with the .44 or .45 will run a trail but with the .475 they don't know where they are going. That seems to be a regular thing with solids, unless major bone is hit, from all the calibers.

[jwp475]

1- if the bullets bent, riveted or deformed the penetration would have been inadequate. Professional hunters will tell you that bullets that bend, rivet and deform still kill big game, but the bullet failed to do as it should. How about some pictures since you danced around the question/ or something from someone else that can answer the question.


You seem to have the notion that I have quoted any FPE figures, which I haven't, YOU HAVE THOUGH. Please, since you don't like the term FPE, why are you useing it?

3-Momentum transfer is the mechanism that allows the tissue and/or bone to move. The would channel is created by the amount of direct applied pressure created, the frontal area of the projectile and the amount of hydraulic pressure created as we;; as tyhe amount of penetration.

Yo3-The concept and explanation are answered in freshman physics in college. Find your answer there by taking the course. They will also tell you about the other variables involved which you haven't said anything about. Of course the answer is that energy is illrealivant in the calculations of an inelastic collision.

Professional hunters have been "tossed and or gored by bullets that bent, riveted and or tumbled, Name a hunter that is happy with Poor bullet performance. Talk about grabbing at straws


This is the post that you stated that you brought up the "Energy"



I was responding to this: Whitworth brought a friend that never shoots a revolver. We started him with the .44--- As a general statement it looks like a setup, But one never knows. Deer don't require that amount of energy to kill and looking at what Jim posted below, maybe this is just a joke like he has been doing for a bit now. Seriously, do you have to bleed to have fun?



A 44 is SOOOO pleasant......... and on and on. You must be having a blast saying this.


What has energy got to do with anything when it comes to killing Deer


Ginger Rodgers ain't got nothing on you when it comes to dancing

[Bret4207]

I kinda work on the concept of dwell time. More energy is transferred to a silhouette with a slower heavy bullet, than a faster bullet. I believe the same works on critters.

Ric, better drink a lot liquids before getting into this urinating contest.:killingpc

[45 2.1]

Ric, better drink a lot liquids before getting into this urinating contest.:killingpc

Especially with this new guy............. :veryconfu

He should recognize this post and where he posted it:

I would not call the truth "splitting hairs". Go to the University and ask a Physics proffesor. Energy transforms into other forms of energy in an inelastic collision is a fact. Hydro static shock is a slag term, for hydraulic pressure. The faster the bullet the higher the hydraulic pressure that is created. This is what allows your 243 to blow much larger holes in Deer than it other wise would by simple crushing the tissue with the frontal area of the bullet

FPE is like horse power in an engine it is calculated, not measured

Perhaps he should explain himself now.

[jwp475]

Still dancing around this aren't you?



I was responding to this: Whitworth brought a friend that never shoots a revolver. We started him with the .44--- As a general statement it looks like a setup, But one never knows. Deer don't require that amount of energy to kill and looking at what Jim posted below, maybe this is just a joke like he has been doing for a bit now. Seriously, do you have to bleed to have fun?



A 44 is SOOOO pleasant......... and on and on. You must be having a blast saying this.


What has energy got to do with anything when it comes to killing Deer

You're good for the bait and switch type degate

[44man]

Only one way to drop a deer in place and that is to knock out the central nervous system or disrupt it with enough shock.
No one can ever say every deer they shoot drops in place. I have it happen often but it still depends on what is hit. A deer with no heart left can go 100 yards. I think they do that in about 10 seconds! :bigsmyl2:
I have had deer shot with hard cast from the .44 and .475 hit the ground so fast I didn't see them fall past the recoiling gun but I will never say it happens every shot.
What is wrong with watching a deer fall in 30 yards anyway?
Besides that, many of the deer I shoot are moving and I have to find an opening where I can shoot, some are on a dead run too. They just never seem to stop in openings. It is thick here, not food plot shooting. Most shots are done in a split second.

[Gohon]

I once read a article about a couple of scientist, lab tech types that were interested why some animals such as deer drop on the spot and why some do not. What they did was set up shop at a slaughter house and if I remember right it was where goats were slaughtered. Anyway, what they did was put a animal in a pen and from a predetermined distance they shot the animal. Each animal was tagged as to whether it died instantly, ran around the pen for awhile or need additional shots. They then performed a autopsy on each animal to determine what had taken place. As expected some animals that had their hearts destroyed dropped immediately and some did not. The one common denominator they did discover was all the animals that dropped on the shot, their brains were literally turned to mush where as the other animals the brains appeared normal.

Their conclusion..........the animals that dropped on the spot were hit at precisely the moment the heart had just pumped blood and the impact of the bullet caused a second and rapid stroke of the heart which double pumped the heart, thus over pressurizing the brain.

Was their conclusion correct?..........I don't have a clue but I suppose it is possible. Just food for thought.

[45 2.1]

Only one way to drop a deer in place and that is to knock out the central nervous system or disrupt it with enough shock. Quickly enough with enough force to mimic something larger.
No one can ever say every deer they shoot drops in place. I have it happen often but it still depends on what is hit. A deer with no heart left can go 100 yards. I think they do that in about 10 seconds! :bigsmyl2:
I have had deer shot with hard cast from the .44 and .475 hit the ground so fast I didn't see them fall past the recoiling gun but I will never say it happens every shot.
What is wrong with watching a deer fall in 30 yards anyway? Basically nothing, but at times that distance will not let you recover one in some locals and boundaries.
Besides that, many of the deer I shoot are moving and I have to find an opening where I can shoot, some are on a dead run too. They just never seem to stop in openings. It is thick here, not food plot shooting. Most shots are done in a split second. We all have places like that................



I once read a article about a couple of scientist, lab tech types that were interested why some animals such as deer drop on the spot and why some do not. What they did was set up shop at a slaughter house and if I remember right it was where goats were slaughtered. Anyway, what they did was put a animal in a pen and from a predetermined distance they shot the animal. Each animal was tagged as to whether it died instantly, ran around the pen for awhile or need additional shots. They then performed a autopsy on each animal to determine what had taken place. As expected some animals that had their hearts destroyed dropped immediately and some did not. The one common denominator they did discover was all the animals that dropped on the shot, their brains were literally turned to mush where as the other animals the brains appeared normal.

Their conclusion..........the animals that dropped on the spot were hit at precisely the moment the heart had just pumped blood and the impact of the bullet caused a second and rapid stroke of the heart which double pumped the heart, thus over pressurizing the brain.

Was their conclusion correct?..........I don't have a clue but I suppose it is possible. Just food for thought.

That study was done in Africa also........... same conclusion. A lot depends on how the boolit behaves and how it transfers its energy.

[wiljen]

Gents, personal attacks are not tolerated here. I am seeing some comments that are headed quickly in that direction and advise that it ceases before I have to give anyone "a 10 day vacation". Keep it on topic, disagreement is fine, dissension is fine, name calling and such is NOT.

[StarMetal]

I once read a article about a couple of scientist, lab tech types that were interested why some animals such as deer drop on the spot and why some do not. What they did was set up shop at a slaughter house and if I remember right it was where goats were slaughtered. Anyway, what they did was put a animal in a pen and from a predetermined distance they shot the animal. Each animal was tagged as to whether it died instantly, ran around the pen for awhile or need additional shots. They then performed a autopsy on each animal to determine what had taken place. As expected some animals that had their hearts destroyed dropped immediately and some did not. The one common denominator they did discover was all the animals that dropped on the shot, their brains were literally turned to mush where as the other animals the brains appeared normal.

Their conclusion..........the animals that dropped on the spot were hit at precisely the moment the heart had just pumped blood and the impact of the bullet caused a second and rapid stroke of the heart which double pumped the heart, thus over pressurizing the brain.

Was their conclusion correct?..........I don't have a clue but I suppose it is possible. Just food for thought.

I read that in a gun magazine. It was explained just as you posted. The animal that is hit in the heart at the instance the heart is pumping "out" increases the whole blood systems pressure dramatically and ruptures the brain as stated. The author had shot two elk under almost the same circumstances with a 338 Magnum. Both heart shot. The one dropped instantly, the other did not. The one that dropped had brain with destroyed blood vessels. Makes sense to me.

[44man]

I once read a article about a couple of scientist, lab tech types that were interested why some animals such as deer drop on the spot and why some do not. What they did was set up shop at a slaughter house and if I remember right it was where goats were slaughtered. Anyway, what they did was put a animal in a pen and from a predetermined distance they shot the animal. Each animal was tagged as to whether it died instantly, ran around the pen for awhile or need additional shots. They then performed a autopsy on each animal to determine what had taken place. As expected some animals that had their hearts destroyed dropped immediately and some did not. The one common denominator they did discover was all the animals that dropped on the shot, their brains were literally turned to mush where as the other animals the brains appeared normal.

Their conclusion..........the animals that dropped on the spot were hit at precisely the moment the heart had just pumped blood and the impact of the bullet caused a second and rapid stroke of the heart which double pumped the heart, thus over pressurizing the brain.

Was their conclusion correct?..........I don't have a clue but I suppose it is possible. Just food for thought.
There might be a lot of truth in that. I have shot deer with the .44 pitch nose first to the ground. The same hit on another and it will run into the ground at about 30-40 yards. But the revolver just does not have the energy to transmit that much force to the brain and depends on other factors to kill.
Shot with the 45-70 and hard boolits have cost me a few deer and those I found went as far as 200 yards. MUCH more ME but too fast to work unless expansion and a boolit slowdown in the animal allows it to work.
Tissue must be cut and destroyed around the boolit passage because the revolver just can't shock any distance like a rifle can.
I will always feel there is a dead spot with a flat nose, hard boolit where the pressure wave from the nose will move tissue out of the way. The same boolit from a rifle can create so much of a pressure wave that it will kill fast.
Looking for the highest velocity you can wring out of a revolver or using the fastest expanding bullet you can find can be counter productive. The best way is to just use a larger caliber at the proper velocity.
I will never understand why anyone will compare a rifle to a revolver!
I can make any gun work by choosing the correct bullet but I am a cast boolit shooter and I kill a lot of deer, 5 to 7 a year so I see results firsthand. This is why I say the .454, .460 and 45-70 needs the correct bullet or alloy for cast while the .44, .45, .475 and .500 JRH and Linebaugh can work fine with hard boolits. I will not say anything about the .500 Smith or Alaskan because I never shot anything with them. But I can only assume they need some expansion.
If I tell you every deer I shoot with a .41 will drop DRT, you can come kick me in the butt! :mrgreen: But I don't own one of the little guns anyway so I am safe from your boot.

[StarMetal]

There might be a lot of truth in that. I have shot deer with the .44 pitch nose first to the ground. The same hit on another and it will run into the ground at about 30-40 yards. But the revolver just does not have the energy to transmit that much force to the brain and depends on other factors to kill.
Shot with the 45-70 and hard boolits have cost me a few deer and those I found went as far as 200 yards. MUCH more ME but too fast to work unless expansion and a boolit slowdown in the animal allows it to work.
Tissue must be cut and destroyed around the boolit passage because the revolver just can't shock any distance like a rifle can.
I will always feel there is a dead spot with a flat nose, hard boolit where the pressure wave from the nose will move tissue out of the way. The same boolit from a rifle can create so much of a pressure wave that it will kill fast.
Looking for the highest velocity you can wring out of a revolver or using the fastest expanding bullet you can find can be counter productive. The best way is to just use a larger caliber at the proper velocity.
I will never understand why anyone will compare a rifle to a revolver!
I can make any gun work by choosing the correct bullet but I am a cast boolit shooter and I kill a lot of deer, 5 to 7 a year so I see results firsthand. This is why I say the .454, .460 and 45-70 needs the correct bullet or alloy for cast while the .44, .45, .475 and .500 JRH and Linebaugh can work fine with hard boolits. I will not say anything about the .500 Smith or Alaskan because I never shot anything with them. But I can only assume they need some expansion.
If I tell you every deer I shoot with a .41 will drop DRT, you can come kick me in the butt! :mrgreen: But I don't own one of the little guns anyway so I am safe from your boot.


Shoot an unopened popcan with that 44 mag and tell me it doesn't have enough hydraulic shock to a deer heart. Nope, not going to agree with you here Jim. It doesn't take much of a blood pressure increase to damage areas in any mammals brain. One reason why a stroke in a human is so dangerous for those of us with high BP....blood pressure boys, not black powder!!!! :D

[45 2.1]

Shot with the 45-70 and hard boolits have cost me a few deer and those I found went as far as 200 yards. MUCH more ME but too fast to work unless expansion and a boolit slowdown in the animal allows it to work. Among other things.
Tissue must be cut and destroyed around the boolit passage because the revolver just can't shock any distance like a rifle can.
You might be rather surprised what can be done in that regard. I will always feel there is a dead spot with a flat nose, hard boolit where the pressure wave from the nose will move tissue out of the way. The same boolit from a rifle can create so much of a pressure wave that it will kill fast.
Looking for the highest velocity you can wring out of a revolver or using the fastest expanding bullet you can find can be counter productive. The best way is to just use a larger caliber at the proper velocity. There is more than one way.............
I will never understand why anyone will compare a rifle to a revolver! Done all the time, by some people on the forum.
I can make any gun work by choosing the correct bullet but I am a cast boolit shooter and I kill a lot of deer, 5 to 7 a year so I see results firsthand. You are not by yourself in that regard. This is why I say the .454, .460 and 45-70 needs the correct bullet or alloy for cast while the .44, .45, .475 and .500 JRH and Linebaugh can work fine with hard boolits. You basically have a like caliber in those (all could be used without expansion provided they are capable of transfering energy into the animal at the right time/location). The problem your seeing is they don't do that correctly all the time for the boolit type your trying it with. The difference is the boolit, alloy and the method you are useing. There is no cure-all boolit, each has an intended sweet spot it should be used on the animal. Mix methods and results are confused. I will not say anything about the .500 Smith or Alaskan because I never shot anything with them. But I can only assume they need some expansion. Depends what your trying to do with them..................
If I tell you every deer I shoot with a .41 will drop DRT, you can come kick me in the butt! :mrgreen: Hee hee But I don't own one of the little guns anyway so I am safe from your boot. That you are, I wouldn't kick you anyway. Too bad we couldn't have a beer and then I could show you what i've been talking about.

[felix]

I am not a hunter in any respect, but I can feel the logic in this discussion as it relates to the SEE condition. It appears to be even more random than the DRT syndrome being alluded to here, but I no longer wonder. I've had my fair share of these over the years, but it took THREE in a row to make me a believer. ... felix

[44man]

EVERY one here is welcome to a beer! [smilie=s:

[JIMinPHX]

Oh well,
so much for trying to discuss the effects of hardness & speed on boolit rifling...

I'll catch you boys later.

Play nice now!

[Oyeboten]

Some good Food for Thought info here -


http://www.lasc.us/CastBulletNotes.htm


Just found it...


Glad for this Thread...it has got me into more thinking than I had been onto, and all for the best.

[303Guy]

so much for trying to discuss the effects of hardness & speed on boolit rifling...For what it's worth, I think I have stumbled onto something - maybe it's not only the strength of the boolit alloy to take the rifling but the strength of the alloy to resist bending in the throat and also in the seating press! Faster twist rifles tend toward longer throats for heavier bullets and for higher velocity more strength is needed to stay straight. Maybe?

Boolit bending during seating is real! If that boolit is not supported in the seating die it'll bend. So how much support does the seating die actually give the boolit? Well, mine gives enough so one can't see the bend but it's there. Solution? Stronger alloy OR less neck tension.

[45 2.1]

For what it's worth, I think I have stumbled onto something - maybe it's not only the strength of the boolit alloy to take the rifling but the strength of the alloy to resist bending in the throat and also in the seating press! This thread has done some good then.....Faster twist rifles tend toward longer throats for heavier bullets and for higher velocity more strength is needed to stay straight. Maybe? Not exactly........the holy grail of accuracy is launching the boolit straight..... and that can be done several ways.

Boolit bending during seating is real! If that boolit is not supported in the seating die it'll bend. So how much support does the seating die actually give the boolit? Well, mine gives enough so one can't see the bend but it's there. Solution? Stronger alloy OR less neck tension. Both work, but its easier useing the second one.

[Bret4207]

Oh well,
so much for trying to discuss the effects of hardness & speed on boolit rifling...

I'll catch you boys later.

Play nice now!

If the boolit fits correctly in the first place, that is it fills the throat and grooves to retard or prevent gas cutting, if it's launched straight with out deforming the boolit and if the design is one the gun "likes" then the alloy will hold the rifling to the limit of it's makeup- it's sheer or pressure threshold, however you wish to state it. When you exceed the sheer strength of the alloy you will get stripping and gas cutting. How much, if it leads, if it becomes inaccurate depends on how much slip there is and what else happens.

The hard part is figuring out if you have exceeded the thresholds of the alloy or if you haven't done a good job on fit. I have seen pictures posted here showing apparent slippage. The poster blames a soft alloy. I wonder if there aren't other forces at play. Of course without knowing for sure it's just opinion and guess work.

As a very general rule the faster you push a boolit, all else being equal, the stronger, NOT HARDER, an alloy you need. But there are so many other variables involved I'm not sure there is any way to make a more "hard and fast" statement than that.:veryconfu

[JIMinPHX]

Jim, that being your lead, you should add some antimony. Double up with WW for another go at it. No other changes at this time. Odds are you have too much arsenic. Logical only, no proof. Logical because you have stuff from the shot towers giving an excessive hardness when dropped. ... felix

Will someone please give that man a cigar. I added about 20% babbitt to my mix & water dropped. The babbitt was about 5%sn, 15&sb & 80% pb. My boolits came up 27bnh at casting time & about 30bnh a few days later. I put 5 of 6 in a single ragged hole at 35 feet from a snub nosed revolver using 20 grains of H-110 & a deep seated boolit. I had no idea that I would be able to shoot that well, even with perfect ammo. The picture below shows the condition of the fired boolits. This new alloy holds up great.

Thank you for the suggestion Felix. [smilie=w:

[JIMinPHX]

I was away from this thread for a while, but here are a few recipes:

Lyman 429244 cast from straight linotype, Lyman GC, sized .430"
WW brass, CCI 350 primer
23 gr. H110
In a Ruger RH, 7 1/2" barrel 1360 fps.
Same info but with 24 gr. WW296 1418 fps.

Lyman 429244 WW alloy, heat treated, Hornady GC, sized .430"
WW brass, CCI 350 primer
23.5 gr. H-110
In a S&W 29, 6" barrel 1205 fps.
Same info in TC Super 14 1594 fps.

Lyman 429244 WW alloy, Hornady GC sized .430"
WW brass, CCI 350
22 gr. WC820
In a Ruger RH, 7 1/2" barrel 1390 fps.

More recently, I've been using Lil'Gun and have found it to match or exceed the velocity of H-110/WW296 when used in identical charge weights.

Thank you very much for posting that. When you get a chance, would you mind letting me know what your COAL was?

Thanks,
Jim

[loaded303]

Without reading 10 pages of ego is there a synopsis chart with numbers with and without GCs? Say...up to 2000 plus fps without leading the barrel? Thanks

[TXGunNut]

Without reading 10 pages of ego is there a synopsis chart with numbers with and without GCs? Say...up to 2000 plus fps without leading the barrel? Thanks

Nope; fit is primary, alloy is secondary. A good lube is helpful as well. Sometimes a little ego is a good thing, even if a bit annoying.

[waksupi]

Without reading 10 pages of ego is there a synopsis chart with numbers with and without GCs? Say...up to 2000 plus fps without leading the barrel? Thanks

Only someone with bunches of ego would ask that, without reading through the topic. Without input, there is no cause for ego.

[cbrick]

Without reading 10 pages of ego is there a synopsis chart with numbers with and without GCs? Say...up to 2000 plus fps without leading the barrel? Thanks

Hhmmm . . . I must be missing something. You state that you did not read the thread and yet you state that is 10 pages of ego.

Rick

[oger]

Just read the whole post definitely some difference of opinion I will through my two cents in. Over 30 year ago when I decided to try shooting a revolver at distances farther than I could throw a rock one thing that I discovered was that using very fast powder always accelerated the tendency for a bullet to lead. It really didn't seem to matter at what velocity (to a point) after much playing all of my 44 cast loads used IMR 4227 and everything was fine. At the time I didn't cast any handgun bullets ( they were so cheap and I was too busy playing with single shot rifles) so I have no real reference point as to their hardness.

[454PB]

Thank you very much for posting that. When you get a chance, would you mind letting me know what your COAL was?

Thanks,
Jim

Wow, a post over two years old......I had to read all 10 pages AGAIN, what a perfect example of thread drift.

Jim, I used the standard crimp groove....whatever COL that produces, and a heavy roll crimp. As I'm sure you know, a very tight case tension is required to prevent boolit movement in recoil. That's one of the reasons I tend to use harder alloys....it prevents sizing of the boolit when seating. But, like 44man and Lloyd, I have better results overall with harder boolits in all my magnum revolvers.

[oger]

Got into this thread very late but it got me thinking. Has anyone actually tested the difference in performance between a water quenched bullet where all you really are doing is surface hardening and an air cooled bullet of the same surface hardness?

[loaded303]

Hhmmm . . . I must be missing something. You state that you did not read the thread and yet you state that is 10 pages of ego.

Rick
Hmmmm 3 pages in was more than enough for 10 pages. best regards

Whats the answer to the title of the thread Rick sir?

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

Without reading 10 pages of ego is there a synopsis chart with numbers with and without GCs? Say...up to 2000 plus fps without leading the barrel? Thanks

2000+ fps...Yama Hama !!!!

I'd think it isn't about BHN vs Speed,
but more like BHN vs Pressure
http://www.lasc.us/CastBulletNotes.htm
that is a pretty good read.

[loaded303]

2000+ fps...Yama Hama !!!!

I'd think it isn't about BHN vs Speed,
but more like BHN vs Pressure
http://www.lasc.us/CastBulletNotes.htm
that is a pretty good read.

thank you jon. greatly appreciated

[cbrick]

I'd think it isn't about BHN vs Speed,
but more like BHN vs Pressure

Yes but the pressure/time, not pressure alone. Just to use a nice round number, say 25,000 PSI and using a slower powder with that 25,000 PSI being reached with the bullet half way down the bore - or with a fast powder and that same 25,000 PSI while the bullet is just exiting the case. In the OP he used the same load for all of his tests and increased pressure by seating deeper and increasing the pressure/time curve.

Rick

[popper]

99894
Notice the difference in width of the front vs rear bands. Skidding in the front. Hard to tell if the second is bore is mushed fore & aft or just the groove is moved back. Lube grooves are not very compressed so I'd say pressure isn't that high. Even though accuracy is claimed to be high, I would say the alloy is marginal - for target shooting.

difference in performance between a water quenched bullet where all you really are doing is surface hardening Huh? Hammer test a WD vs AC and see the diff.

[220]

2000+ fps...Yama Hama !!!!

I'd think it isn't about BHN vs Speed,
but more like BHN vs Pressure
http://www.lasc.us/CastBulletNotes.htm
that is a pretty good read.

Amazing the difference changing the pressure curve can have, I've had group sizes half when going to a slower powder that actually increased velocity by 100fps but reduced the peak pressure and obviously better suited the lead and bullet size I was using.
The more I get into casting the less I seem to know.

[loaded303]

Thanks for the info and reading link. Hardness and pressure and bricks pressure/time comment make sense.
Just wish there was a good starting point reference for hardness/bullet weight/velocity/pressure/powder types and weight. It would all be good then huh.
Best Wishes