Revolver Bullets: Soft vs. Hard

[RobS]

Revolver Bullets: Soft vs. Hard

Introduction:
I’ve done some experimenting on the topic of soft vs hard bullets and since I see the value of both for hunting and shooting, I have decided to write about what my observations have been. I have seen many “colorful” threads detailing the topic and with the ton of pissing matches going on, there really is good knowledge on both sides should a person have an open enough mind to listen. Too many individuals here are so darn hard headed that they become bloated with the inability to sit back and listen or simply be polite. If you are one of these people please feel free to read on but hold your tongue if you decide you have the need to bash the tread. I believe that what I have learned from members here and how it translated over for my own experimenting can help others in the long run so I feel it is worth mentioning.

General statements vs soft and hard bullets:
Those who have hunting purposes, a soft bullet is a good tool to use as there is expansion which will create a larger wound channel if that is what is desired. A hard bullet also has its place as it brings with it the ability to penetrate and take some of the largest, deadliest animals that walk the earth and in addition a hard bullet can also be used to hunt even those animals that are not man eaters.

Target shooters, paper punchers, or pop can shooters etc. it comes down to what works best in your particular firearm. Shoot soft or hard bullets it makes not difference to me as long as you are happy and shooting your desired accuracy.

Playing around with the two differences:
Revolver: Ruger Super Redhawk 454 Casull 7 ½” barrel open sights
Barrel groove diameter: .452
Barrel throat diameter(where the rifling starts in the barrel): .454
Chamber cylinder throats: .455
Bullet: LBT LFN 280 grain Plain Base bullet
Powder: 12 grains of Herco
Velocity: 1,150 fps

I usually run a harder bullet from my magnum revolver (water quenched 18-20 BHN) which when sized came out to .455, but have read enough people who have made it work with softer bullets so I figured I would give it another whack since a bullet of 18-20 BHN hardness has hardly any expansion on an animal and I am not out to shoot a grizzly bear any time soon so don’t need the super penetration. With the harder bullet I had no problems with leading and was capable of consistent 1 ½ to 2” 30yrd 6 shot groups from a rest which is really good for me with open sights as I am not the greatest in the land type of handgunner.

So on to the soft side of things. I loaded up some 11.5 BHN wheel weight bullets, sized at .454 and headed to the range. Accuracy was decent 2 to 2 ½” but I headed back and started cleaning the bore from the heavy leading which had accumulated at the start of the barrel (1 ½ iches). Well heck I’m foiled again on the soft side of things or………………..am I???

After reading a post by a member here who swears by soft bullets and I do believe him as I've read his numerous posts; he is very knowledgeable. He also has posted up his proof with pics; you know the phrase, “A picture is worth a thousand words”. Anyway, he stated in a recent post that he has best accuracy with bullets that are sized .002 over his cylinder throats. He also stated he shoots 44 mags to 1200 fps with soft bullets…………………….so what gives here with what I am doing.

This is where I start to think, .002 over throat diameter. I took one of those 11.5 bullets that I had so much leading with and made up a dummy round. I sized my brass, then flared the case and finally seated the bullet. Next I pulled the round and from the once .454 bullet I found it to be swaged down to .452. Remembering my revolvers specs, can you see the problem with the bullet and my barrel throat diameter (GAS BLOW BY)????

So next I took my .454 lube/sizer die and honed it out to a point where I could seat the soft bullet and pull it leaving a bullet at .454. I took this same load to the range and like magic the bullet didn’t lead the barrel and I had equal accuracy as I did with the harder bullets. Now one can see by sizing over the cylinder throats that by the time the bullet is seated it really ends up being swaged down to the cylinder throats diameter or closely to them.

Conclusion:
NOTE: This is a consideration if your revolver is designed as it should be (throats are larger than the barrel’s groove diameter or possibly equal to).

Sizing a softer bullet .001 to .002 over cylinder throats can result in a bullet that is at cylinder throat diameters once seated in the brass and can yield good results. This is easily determined by making a dummy round, pulling the bullet and then checking the bullet’s diameter.

As for those who have tried soft bullets and it didn't work:
Individuals may have sized their bullets initially to their cylinder throats diameter and ended up with a small bullet due to seating which allowed for gas blow by. Gas blow by can yield leading and reduced accuracy.

And for the third option there is the possibility of using hard bullets that are sized to cylinder throats and upon seating the bullets don't swage down so there is good success there as well.

It comes down to bullet fit which has been said about a million times on this forum, but what is not examined is bullet fit of soft or hard bullets once the bullet is seated. Bullet fit has been stated on here as I have said but I have not read it in this regard (I am not saying someone has not posted it, I am saying I have not read it yet). I hope this helps shed some light for all of you who cast and reload as this may help out with your shooting endeavors.

Rob

[Mk42gunner]

Revolver Bullets: Soft vs. Hard

...

It comes down to bullet fit which been said about a million times on this forum, but what is not examined is bullet fit of soft vs hard bullets once the bullet is seated. Bullet fit has been stated on here as I have said but I have not read it in this regard (I am not saying someone has not posted it, I am saying I have not read it yet). I hope this helps shed some light for all of you who cast and reload as this may help out with your shooting endeavors.

Rob

Makes sense to me, Rob.

I do have one question though-- you stated that your water quenched bullets were sized to .455"; but your 11.5 BHN bullets were .454". Was this because of different alloys or hardnesses springing back differently, or was it a different sizing die?


Thanks,

Robert

[Lloyd Smale]

i guess i kind of see that you did alot of unessisary fooling around to get no where. thats allways kind of been my point. I have no doubt a guy can get softer lead to shoot but it takes more work to do it. Now you have cut your die so that youve basicaly lost case tension if you want to use a harder bullet or if you run into a gun that likes them at 452 as i to be honest most of my 45s prefer 452 bullets and my FA 454 wont chamber anything bigger then 452. Ive got 6 45 colts a 454 and even more 44s and i just dont have the time to fool with sizing bullets specificaly for each of them. Its enough work weeding though the molds and keeping specific bullets for each gun in stock. Ive yet to find or at least keep a 45 that wouldnt shoot 452 bullets well or a 44 that wouldnt shoot 430s. I do have some other dies that ive fooled with when really bored but i rarely use them. I find its easier to dump a gun that needs something odd ball to make shoot well.

[Bret4207]

Good work Rob. You've proven fit is King in cast. That concept is "hard" to get across for some reason. Well done.

I've never been a proponent of the harder alloys for general use, not because they can't or don't work but because plain ol' WW material is far, far more readily available and will work up to the 2K range in many cases. I simply can't afford to discard a gun that just needs some fitting, nor can I afford to buy special alloys. So I save my small supply of linotype for truly special purposes, same with my tin. If I can't do it with WW, water quenching and good fit it just may not get done!

If we could get the idea across to the beginners that simply alloys will do the job, and more, they'd be a lot better off than believing they needed "hard" alloys which many have no way to obtain. If we can get the concept of fit across instead of the "magic bean" of a particular Bhn they'd be a lot better off. If we can get the message across that harder is just different instead of better they'd be a lot better off.

[44man]

Seems as if Rob has missed the hundreds of posts about fit and case tension. :confused: The hardness and also the powder you use has such a large bearing on what you can do and much has been posted here.
But to ruin the die was the wrong way when all that is needed is a larger expander for the softer lead, then you can have two expanders and switch back and forth. Have enough of them and you can go down to pure lead if you choose and still have a good die.

Now Bret says he doesn't like hard lead but likes water dropped WW's????
Bret, that is what I consider HARD and tough and is my go to alloy for most shooting, funny that we have argued so much over it! :veryconfu
Only special cases and revolvers will have me changing the alloy and I only make them a few points harder strictly for paper punching or for a heavy PB like in my .475. (Actually, I just make them tougher.) GC .475 boolits are still WW's of about 20 to 22 BHN.
Now I have over the years, posted many, many group pictures and I can tell you that 95% were shot with plain old WD WW metal.
The only time I found harder then my normal alloy works better is with fast powders in my .44 where 28 BHN cut group size a tremendous amount when using Unique and 231 but I will not waste this alloy for plinking. It was just a series of tests.
I have to admit that I was surprised myself with the results and had to test many times to confirm what I was seeing.
Now you might claim my harder alloy made larger boolits but measurements show .431" for both WW's and the harder alloy and they were shot from .4324" throats with no leading and almost one hole groups at 25 yards with the harder boolit, I showed the pictures.
Yeah I know, since when do I shoot 25 yards? [smilie=s: With a Keith type boolit and a plinking load that still cut groups in half at 50 yards when I used the hard lead.
Funny we have bickered over this only to find both of us are shooting the same stuff. :confused:
For certain applications, harder IS better though.

[MT Gianni]

Many of my most accurate groups have been with dead soft lead and fast powders, think a swadged or hollowbase wadcutter and bullseye. It is so accurate that most PPC shooters would not consider using anything else. That is the problem I have with blanket statements such as " harder is better". Consider fit, application, and how fast you start it and we may end back up at 1442 x bhn = max velocity.

[HORNET]

44man, how do you figure that he ruined the die? What I get from the O.P. is that his seating die was sizing the boolits down from .455 to .452. This is the same problem that many on here have found from the carbide sizing ring on the Lee FCD. It doesn't matter what diameter you're getting out of the sizing die or if you make a new expander if the seating die is squeezing the boolit undersized. If excessive case neck tension had been the cause, honing the seating die out wouldn't have made any difference.

[Edubya]

"measurements show .431" for both WW's and the harder alloy and they were shot from .4324" throats "

Jim, have you ever tried a boolit sized to .433"? In every book that I have read, that would be the proper size to produce a non-leading accurate round, regardless of hardness.

EW

PS: I think that is what Rob is explaining and he has consolidated a lot of information to try to help other people from having to do the same.

[Bret4207]

Now Bret says he doesn't like hard lead but likes water dropped WW's????
Bret, that is what I consider HARD and tough and is my go to alloy for most shooting, funny that we have argued so much over it! :veryconfu


Once again your reading comprehension is lacking. Read what I wrote, not what you want it to say! I never, ever said I like or don't like hard lead or how often I WQ or how often I find it necessary. I realize you have no problems making claims that you have shot more, done more and can shoot better than anyone else here, but I will not have you putting words in my mouth. You have done more damage here than good with your insistence that "HARD" is better. You've undone a good deal of work we did getting people beyond that simple minded idea.

Go read what I wrote- harder can and does work fine in many instances. But it's not the magic bean you make it out to be.

[badgeredd]

RobS said:
"It comes down to bullet fit which been said about a million times on this forum, but what is not examined is bullet fit of soft vs hard bullets once the bullet is seated. Bullet fit has been stated on here as I have said but I have not read it in this regard..."

Excellent point Rob. And as said "fit is king!"

Edd

[44man]

Playing around with the two differences:
Revolver: Ruger Super Redhawk 454 Casull 7 ½” barrel open sights
Barrel groove diameter: .452
Barrel throat: .454
Cylinder throats: .455
Bullet: LBT LFN 280 grain Plain Base bullet
Powder: 12 grains of Herco
Velocity: 1,150 fps


We need to discuss this because I am confused by the measurements. What is the barrel throat? Are you sure you did not mean the cylinder throats? What do you mean by cylinder throats, is that the chambers?
DO YOU HAVE A TAPERED GROOVE TO GROOVE OF .454" TO .452" AT THE MUZZLE?
No Ruger has a tapered bore and I can not picture .455" throats either. Something here does not jive.
Bore should be .443", groove .452" and throats .453" or a tad over. ( The throats are the exit end of the cylinder.)
Now for your velocity. It is perfect for a hard boolit for any game from deer up. You do NOT need expansion for deer and that boolit will do the job. Keep the penetration, under no circumstances lose that.
If you decide to change to the faster velocity the .454 is capable of, then you will need some expansion---but not much, just a small mushroom. DO NOT RUIN PENETRATION!
The .454 is a special problem with slow powders because of failed ignition with anything less then full max charges of H110 or 296 plus accuracy suffers. We found cut down .460 brass with a LP mag primer allows load workup and 1" groups or less at 50 yards.
The SR primer in the .454 brass is not good. It will give you a headache. Why someone has not blown up a gun is beyond me. It is so easy to stick a boolit in the bore with failed ignition using a slow powder. STAY AWAY FROM STARTING LOADS OF SLOW POWDER unless you change to cut down .460 brass. The whole world is open to you with a brass change.
Your first job is to give us proper dimensions of your gun, I can't make heads or tails from what you gave us.

[44man]

44man, how do you figure that he ruined the die? What I get from the O.P. is that his seating die was sizing the boolits down from .455 to .452. This is the same problem that many on here have found from the carbide sizing ring on the Lee FCD. It doesn't matter what diameter you're getting out of the sizing die or if you make a new expander if the seating die is squeezing the boolit undersized. If excessive case neck tension had been the cause, honing the seating die out wouldn't have made any difference.
That is not what I read. I take it he has lapped the size die so he does not need the expander. He was not specific enough and if all he did was the seat die, he is OK.

[44man]

Jim, have you ever tried a boolit sized to .433"? In every book that I have read, that would be the proper size to produce a non-leading accurate round, regardless of hardness.

EW

PS: I think that is what Rob is explaining and he has consolidated a lot of information to try to help other people from having to do the same.
Yes, in fact I made molds to .434" yet get accuracy with no leading down to .430", I find no difference. My very best shooting boolit is the RD 265 gr at .432" but I attribute that to the boolit weight and design.
I made a .431", 330 gr deer boolit that shoots great at any range.
I find it extremely rare to find even a trace of leading with any of my revolvers. Maybe a touch on the first patch, loose stuff that shoots out with the next shot. Sometimes I don't clean a barrel for a year.
Here are three drop test boolits from my .44 using my 330 gr boolit at 200 yards.

[44man]

Once again your reading comprehension is lacking. Read what I wrote, not what you want it to say! I never, ever said I like or don't like hard lead or how often I WQ or how often I find it necessary. I realize you have no problems making claims that you have shot more, done more and can shoot better than anyone else here, but I will not have you putting words in my mouth. You have done more damage here than good with your insistence that "HARD" is better. You've undone a good deal of work we did getting people beyond that simple minded idea.

Go read what I wrote- harder can and does work fine in many instances. But it's not the magic bean you make it out to be.
But that is exactly what you wrote! You find water dropped WW boolits are good for anything up to the 2K range.
I feel you just look for something to dispute even after you say it yourself.
I forgive you because I know we think exactly alike. Have a beer and chill out! :bigsmyl2: Better yet, come over for a beer.

[HORNET]

That is not what I read. I take it he has lapped the size die so he does not need the expander. He was not specific enough and if all he did was the seat die, he is OK.
I'll agree that the terminology that was used was a little vague and could be made more specific as to what was changed in order to prevent errors due to differing interpretations. It would improve the O.P. substantially.

[RobS]

Spring back of the alloy.


Makes sense to me, Rob.

I do have one question though-- you stated that your water quenched bullets were sized to .455"; but your 11.5 BHN bullets were .454". Was this because of different alloys or hardnesses springing back differently, or was it a different sizing die?


Thanks,

Robert

[462]

Rob,
I, too, experienced seating dies reducing a boolit's diameter. A change in brand eliminated the problem. Also, as you did, I enlarged a seating die to accomodate a necessarily fat boolit.

I'm still experimenting with soft versus hard so will leave that part of the discussion to others.

[44man]

Many of my most accurate groups have been with dead soft lead and fast powders, think a swadged or hollowbase wadcutter and bullseye. It is so accurate that most PPC shooters would not consider using anything else. That is the problem I have with blanket statements such as " harder is better". Consider fit, application, and how fast you start it and we may end back up at 1442 x bhn = max velocity.
You also miss what I said! CERTAIN APPLICATIONS seems to stick in my mind.
But then when I was young and shot at the West Cleveland pistol club with the Cleveland police dept members, I was working on guns so I got the job of cleaning the lead from their guns. They shot Bullseye and dead soft wad cutters. There was as much lead on the outside of their guns as in the bores. Some took a week of work to clean. Yeah, .38 specials!
Now just how far do PPC shooters shoot? What do they shoot at?
Does a single one of them know what real accuracy from a revolver is?
Will you show us your groups and distance?
It seems as if you made the blanket statement.
I make a revolver shoot like a rifle to 500 meters and I would love for you to come over and shoot a .44 or .475 with pure lead boolits and show me how it is done. I would also love to see your .38 groups at any distance.
If I set you at the bench with any of my revolvers at 100 yards and put up 2" disks and you missed, it would be your fault, not the guns. I will let you clean my guns and if you find more then a tiny streak of lead on the first patch, you must be making lead.

[Char-Gar]

Rob.. Thanks for posting your work and conclusions. They validate what many of us have been saying for years, that hard is not always better.

I have proved to myself, beyond any doubt that a well fitting ACWW bullet is good to 1.2K or slightly above in a good sixgun. Faster than that I like to go to good old Lyman No 2. I have never found need for any hangun bullet harder than about 14 Bhn.

This is nothing new as generations of shooters have known this. Somewhere along the road the wheels fell off the wagon and folks went to seed on "hard cast" bullets. When Keith and others talked about hard cast they were talking about a binary alloy of 1-16 (tin to lead) which is butter soft compared to ACWW. That little bit of information droped out and folks thought hard mean "granite hard".

Kudos for the information on bullet fit and what reloading dies can do to bullet size. Most recent loading dies are made for those tight spec jacketed bullets and often those present problems to the cast bullet shooter. I am very careful about measuring the bullet seating portion of the die and the expander plug to see that I am getting what I think I am getting.

Thanks again, and take the compaints with a grain of salt. Our local Yodas, have staked out their position and they will die on that hill rather than move one inch. Human nature being what it is, that is to be expected.

[RobS]

i guess i kind of see that you did alot of unessisary fooling around to get no where. Thanks for the support.........LOLthats allways kind of been my point. I have no doubt a guy can get softer lead to shoot but it takes more work to do it. Now you have cut your die so that youve basicaly lost case tension acutally case tension is still there as I honed out the lube/sizer die (creating larger sized bullets) and yes I will need a new lube/size die for harder alloy bullets to take into consideration of the spring back effect.if you want to use a harder bullet or if you run into a gun that likes them at 452 as i to be honest most of my 45s prefer 452 bullets and my FA 454 wont chamber anything bigger then 452. Ive got 6 45 colts a 454 and even more 44s and i just dont have the time to fool with sizing bullets specificaly for each of them. Its enough work weeding though the molds and keeping specific bullets for each gun in stock. Ive yet to find or at least keep a 45 that wouldnt shoot 452 bullets well or a 44 that wouldnt shoot 430s. I do have some other dies that ive fooled with when really bored but i rarely use them. I find its easier to dump a gun that needs something odd ball to make shoot well. I do not have the gun collection you have (but it would be nice though) nor the money it would cost me to trade guns until I find exactly what is "perfect" so my lube sizer die that cost $20 took a hit and I just picked up a used .454 die last night here on the forum for $17 to my door so I can size hard bullets still


Seems as if Rob has missed the hundreds of posts about fit and case tension. :confused: No I have read them and enjoyed themThe hardness and also the powder you use has such a large bearing on what you can do and much has been posted here. Yep, I've read many of your post and what you do does work and I run your route too
But to ruin the die was the wrong way when all that is needed is a larger expander for the softer lead, then you can have two expanders and switch back and forth. I didn't ruin the lube/size die I modified it to size larger bullets. Case tension is actually greater since I am not using an expander to enlarge the brass prior to seating the bullet.Have enough of them and you can go down to pure lead if you choose and still have a good die. I have found it hard to find expanders that will work without buying a whole die. RCBS does make cowboy dies that are expensive as all get out and Lyman does make their M-dies but do not commercially sell just the expander part anylonger (you have to buy the whole die). I do not have a lathe to cut my own so the route I took was the most cost effective while keeping good case tension on the bullet
.........................
For certain applications, harder IS better though. yes it is, most definately it is

[RobS]

Playing around with the two differences:
Revolver: Ruger Super Redhawk 454 Casull 7 ½” barrel open sights
Barrel groove diameter: .452
Barrel throat: .454
Cylinder throats: .455
Bullet: LBT LFN 280 grain Plain Base bullet
Powder: 12 grains of Herco
Velocity: 1,150 fps


I corrected my original post to better explain what I meanWe need to discuss this because I am confused by the measurements. What is the barrel throat where the rifling begins? Are you sure you did not mean the cylinder throats? What do you mean by cylinder throats, is that the chambers Yes, the chamber cylinder throats?
DO YOU HAVE A TAPERED GROOVE TO GROOVE OF .454" TO .452" AT THE MUZZLE?
No Ruger has a tapered bore Well this ruger does and it came to me used so there you go and I can not picture .455" throats either. Something here does not jive. You are right but it is as it is
Bore should be .443", groove .452" and throats .453" or a tad over. ( The throats are the exit end of the cylinder.) yes the throats are at the end of the cylinder and that is what I measured out with slugs as I slugged each chamber

Your first job is to give us proper dimensions of your gun, I can't make heads or tails from what you gave us. These dimensions are correct.............and I too would question them if I was on your end reading it. Remember just because things don't look right does not mean it doesn't exist

[Bret4207]

But that is exactly what you wrote! You find water dropped WW boolits are good for anything up to the 2K range. You
I feel you just look for something to dispute even after you say it yourself.
I forgive you because I know we think exactly alike. Have a beer and chill out! :bigsmyl2: Better yet, come over for a beer.

I neither need or want your forgiveness. No where did I say I, "...find water dropped WW boolits are good for anything up to the 2K range. " That is a lie. Go back and read post #4 in this thread verbatim and try not adding your twist to it.

[Harter66]

As if to add credibility , I too have a Bicentenial 45 Colts Ruger Blackhawk that nearly perfectly matches the specs given . I've shot hard cast commercial bullets of 255grs .453" that leaded badly at 900 fps but were fine under 750 fps. Now I shoot a big soft 265grn .455" LEE boolit from a mould that drops a .453/257grn WW boolit up to 1100fps with no leading at all. I tried Win and CCI primers Red Dot ,Blue Dot, Unique and H110 ,seating depths ,all the tricks with the .001over bore hard bullets and got lead. Fat and soft fixed it all and let's me go fast too.

[44man]

These dimensions are correct.............and I too would question them if I was on your end reading it. Remember just because things don't look right does not mean it doesn't exist
Could it be that the previous owner power lapped it like crazy?
I am not saying you are wrong but that it is not standard.
Sounds like you are well versed and doing things correct.
Just what did the other guy do to the gun? 200 years of shooting will not change things that much. I feel he screwed up and got rid of it.
The SRH is Ruger's flagship gun. I have owned and shot too many of them. Mine was good enough to shoot beer cans at 200 yards and came with a perfect trigger pull. I have shot other owners guns that shot tighter then mine.
You have found things that are specific to your gun and might not relate to other guns.

[44man]

I've never been a proponent of the harder alloys for general use, not because they can't or don't work but because plain ol' WW material is far, far more readily available and will work up to the 2K range in many cases. I simply can't afford to discard a gun that just needs some fitting, nor can I afford to buy special alloys. So I save my small supply of linotype for truly special purposes, same with my tin. If I can't do it with WW, water quenching and good fit it just may not get done!

Right here Bret! Your words exactly.

[454PB]

Thanks for sharing your test results, RobS.

To me, whatever works in YOUR guns is good.

I own the same gun you have, plus a F.A. 83, and a Taurus Raging Bull. As Lloyd stated earlier, any boolit over .452" will NOT chamber in ANY of these. The Taurus will take them if I really push hard, but if they aren't fired, the loaded rounds are tough to remove.

I had to pull a batch of loaded rounds a while back, and I measured the pulled boolits.....all were still .452", and had been cast from a slightly linotype enriched mixture of WW alloy, about 14 BHN. You could actually see the lube grooves within the loaded rounds, they fit that tightly in the case.

I am a proponent of using boolits that are .001" to .002" over groove diameter, but sometimes it is not possible.

[MtGun44]

I get zero leading in .357 mag or .44 mag with .001 or .002 over throat diameter with
appropriate (normal) throat and groove diameters and normal S&W and Ruger smooth
barrels and air cooled wheel wts. I have tried water dropping and got no discernible
improvement for extra hassle, so I quit. I am talking about full power loads too, like
16.3 H110 in .357 and 21.0 2400 in .44 mag. These are my 'go to' loads for full magnum
power and top accy. Not that there aren't other good loads, just that these always
seem to work, even with very different boolits, and they are definitely where I start
nowdays, and usually there is no need to look farther.

Back to something I first saw Bret say - but that I have independently arrived at,
Fit is king. Bret has it dead right as far as I am concerned.

Rob - thanks for the report. I, too wonder if getting a bigger expander would have been
a better route - altho at the expense of more working of the brass and perhaps shorter
brass life. However, you had the die on hand and I'm not sure how easy it would be
to get a larger expander, esp in a reasonable time.

Your basic results - that AC WWts .001-.002 over cyl throat diam will be accurate and will
not lead is another example of what I beleive to be a KEY truth for revolver loaders.

Not that there may not be other reasons to use hard boolits, but my point is that for easy
loading and use of ordinary alloys with no special work, this is A reliable answer, certainly
NOT the only answer, but an easy, relaible and dependable method to recommend to a newbie
for his first hot loads with the magnum revolvers and boolits.

Bill

[Wayne Smith]

Rob, Lyman M type expanders are made and sold by CH4D. Check them out. They will make them to your dimensions.

[RobS]

Could it be that the previous owner power lapped it like crazy? Yes that is a possibility, I can't say for sure though as I have lost his contact info and if he did then I'm sure he wouldn't admit it.
I am not saying you are wrong but that it is not standard. Yes you are definately right........not standard but it can happen
Sounds like you are well versed and doing things correct.
Just what did the other guy do to the gun? 200 years of shooting will not change things that much. I feel he screwed up and got rid of it could be sounds possible.
The SRH is Ruger's flagship gun. I have owned and shot too many of them. Mine was good enough to shoot beer cans at 200 yards and came with a perfect trigger pull. I have shot other owners guns that shot tighter then mine.
You have found things that are specific to your gun and might not relate to other guns. that is possible, but it is all the same bucket of bolts in general.

Providing the chamber cylinder thoats are larger than the groove diameter of the barrel then we are working in the same direction. Bullet fit is what I am trying to bring to light here regarding soft or hard bullets and what they undergo during the seating process. I have seen a bullet that is perfectly fit for my cylinder throats swaged down upon seating. At one time I didn't know the bullet was being swaged down all I knew was they leaded the barrel and for that I started water quenching bullets and had the success you speak of. Those harder bullets do not swage down at all upon seating and there comes in to play the aspect of bullet fit as those bullet retained their original sized diameter. Should a soft bullet be used then a person needs to know what their bullet is doing once it is seated. Either an expander die which you mentioned is an option as it will open up the brass so the bullet isn't swaged down or a fatter bullet can be used in order to compensate for inevitable swage. I believe that using a larger bullet is better as case tension will be greater than using an expander.

Now onto the powder selection: Yes all of you who use slower powders you are correct and justified in using them. I agree 100% that a slower powder is gentler on the bullet vs using a faster powder which forcefully gives a bullet a good a$$ kicking to start with vs a slow powder and the gentle push which then continues to accelerate down the rest of the length of the barrel. If you all haven't figured out yet, I do not have a ton of cash just flying around so if I can achieve an accurate 1150 fps with 12 grains of Herco vs a very similar result using twice as many grains of a slower powder, I will go the economic route and load twice as many rounds.

[RobS]

Rob, Lyman M type expanders are made and sold by CH4D. Check them out. They will make them to your dimensions.

Thanks Wayne and this is good info for those who may not choose to go with a larger bullet approach. I believe I will, since I have already started it this way, size larger bullets and let the case swage them down to the needed diameter. I feel this is better as there will be greater case tension.

[RobS]

Thanks for sharing your test results, RobS.

To me, whatever works in YOUR guns is good. HERE, HERE

I own the same gun you have, plus a F.A. 83, and a Taurus Raging Bull. As Lloyd stated earlier, any boolit over .452" will NOT chamber in ANY of these. The Taurus will take them if I really push hard, but if they aren't fired, the loaded rounds are tough to remove.

I had to pull a batch of loaded rounds a while back, and I measured the pulled boolits.....all were still .452", and had been cast from a slightly linotype enriched mixture of WW alloy, about 14 BHN. You could actually see the lube grooves within the loaded rounds, they fit that tightly in the case. I have been playing with this BHN and the whole swage down process on bullets upon seating and have found that with my case sizing die I am able to have no change in diameter of a bullets base if I stay above 13 to 13.5 BHN. Others mileage may vary though as case sizing dies are all different and case thickness is different and so on and so forth; the only way to know is to seat, crimp, pull and measure the bullet

I am a proponent of using boolits that are .001" to .002" over groove diameter, but sometimes it is not possible. Reality yes, you can't cram a square peg into a round hole

[Edubya]

"the only way to know is to seat, crimp, pull and measure the bullet"

I'd like to suggest one more thought into your endeavor: Leave off the crimp, or at least do a minimum crimp. The crimp will shave off some of the soft lead when removing the boolit from the brass. This will give you an erroneous reading. Of course you could cut the brass to remove the boolit, it take a very steady hand to keep from altering the boolit.

EW

[Lloyd Smale]

just because some ppc shooters use swadged wadcutters isnt any kind of praise for them. I shoot ppc and id guess that 75 percent of the guns that are used have never even seen a load workup and i know of many that havent even been sighted in on a bench. A couple years ago i got into the heads of two of the guys i shoot with that they needed to do some load work. Funny thing is there both handloaders but only loaded cheap bulk bullets and whatever powder they could find that worked. there scores went up from mid 80s to mid 90s just by actually finding a bullet that shot well in there guns. How competitors think they can reliably hit a 2 inch x ring with a a gun that shoots 3 inch groups is beyond me. Id about bet that most of the so called experts using swadged wadcutters either do it because they dont know any better or because there the cheapest bullet they can find. Ask John paul jones. he was a very prominent ppc shooter in his day on the west coast. he will preach to everyone that the only alloy for shooting ppc is linotype. He obviously had a better supply then ive found but he claimed nothing shot near as well. He was no dummy when it came to cast bullets. he was the west coast distributor star

[RobS]

I'd like to suggest one more thought into your endeavor: Leave off the crimp, or at least do a minimum crimp. The crimp will shave off some of the soft lead when removing the boolit from the brass. This will give you an erroneous reading. Of course you could cut the brass to remove the boolit, it take a very steady hand to keep from altering the boolit.

EW

Your statement is of consideration although my intent in this thread is to describe bullet fit of soft and hard bullets as it pertains to their diameter after reloading them or after they come back out of the case in which they were loaded in. Even if erroneous the bullet after it leave the brass is what I look at to determine if it is going to fit the cylinder throats that I am planning on shooting the bullet through. An average on a sample of bullets could give a person a degree of variance if diameters were vastly difference. Although I have not had a substantial variance on my readings between the several crimped bullets I pulled. The largest variance in my experimentation was .0005 or less with a crimped bullet. Now just 5 minutes before starting this reply I went and seated 3 bullets not crimped and they held the same variance as the crimped.

[Edubya]

Rob, I found a similar thing with my .44 and 9mm. This convinced me to try backing off the sizing die enough as to not size the full brass on once fired brass. The de-caper must be screwed in to do it's job but the sizing sleeve can be backed out to resize only the last quarter of the brass. This has eliminated a lot of the leading for me.

EW

[Bret4207]

I've never been a proponent of the harder alloys for general use, not because they can't or don't work but because plain ol' WW material is far, far more readily available and will work up to the 2K range in many cases. I simply can't afford to discard a gun that just needs some fitting, nor can I afford to buy special alloys. So I save my small supply of linotype for truly special purposes, same with my tin. If I can't do it with WW, water quenching and good fit it just may not get done!

Right here Bret! Your words exactly.

Yes, my words exactly, but that's not what you said. The words and meaning differ. In your rush to build your ego and massage your"legend" you twisted my words and meaning. I guess when you are a better man the Elmer, Skeeter, Munden, etc and every other handgunner who ever lived you can twist and lie as you choose.

Here's a fine example of your ego running amuck. I'd include your asinine claim that a guy wearing a vest wouldn't even feel the impact of a 9mm, but I don't know how to multiple quote, plus- you really aren't worth it.

Read these words and tell me this clown is worth listening to-

Originally Posted by 44man View Post
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!
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.

[Bret4207]

just because some ppc shooters use swadged wadcutters isnt any kind of praise for them. I shoot ppc and id guess that 75 percent of the guns that are used have never even seen a load workup and i know of many that havent even been sighted in on a bench. A couple years ago i got into the heads of two of the guys i shoot with that they needed to do some load work. Funny thing is there both handloaders but only loaded cheap bulk bullets and whatever powder they could find that worked. there scores went up from mid 80s to mid 90s just by actually finding a bullet that shot well in there guns. How competitors think they can reliably hit a 2 inch x ring with a a gun that shoots 3 inch groups is beyond me. Id about bet that most of the so called experts using swadged wadcutters either do it because they dont know any better or because there the cheapest bullet they can find. Ask John paul jones. he was a very prominent ppc shooter in his day on the west coast. he will preach to everyone that the only alloy for shooting ppc is linotype. He obviously had a better supply then ive found but he claimed nothing shot near as well. He was no dummy when it came to cast bullets. he was the west coast distributor star

Lloyd, I have no doubt that a guy with a good supply of linotype could work up great loads. And I agree completely about the short range guys with 4" groups, I used to work with a guy who shot a Gold Cup and the absolute cheapest ammo he could find. Zero sense to me. The problem, or my problem anyway, is that the supply of linotype and other enrichment materials is either non-existent or ridiculously expensive. No slight meant to Roto metals or any one else, but free WW vs paying big bucks plus shipping? It's a snapper for me. Same for buying bulk softies and expecting performance equal to properly fitted boolit.

My issue is with those who sell the idea that hardness alone is the key to successful cast shooting. Nothing could be further from the truth.

[44man]

Bret, I was getting under your skin with that! :mrgreen:
How else could I get you to post pictures?
Some of what I say is true though, if it wasn't, these pages would be full of good group pictures.
Now you have to find a single post from me where I ever said I am a better shot.
I only know how to get a revolver to work, nothing more, nothing less.
But it seems to irk you to no end and even though you agree with a lot of what I say and even repeat it, you just have to find something to pick apart.
So excuse me while I figure out another post to irk you! :drinks:
You are easy to rile up! :kidding:

[45 2.1]

I don't know how to multiple quote, plus- you really aren't worth it.

Hit the multi-quote symbol on each post you want to quote, then hit the post reply. They all come up and you can insert you replies between them.


So excuse me while I figure out another post to irk you! :drinks: You are easy to rile up! :kidding:
Things like that work both ways Jim.............. and your rather easy to mess with yourself............... so consider the consequenses.............;-):kidding:

[44man]

Hit the multi-quote symbol on each post you want to quote, then hit the post reply. They all come up and you can insert you replies between them.


Things like that work both ways Jim.............. and your rather easy to mess with yourself............... so consider the consequenses.............;-):kidding:
Yes, I know but I never get angry, just feel bad and anyone can say anything to me. I actually like Bret, he really does agree with me but should also ease off a little too.
I will and when you see smileys, etc, you know I am just kidding anyway.
And I refuse to use that bold print, it looks too much like hollering. It just might be why Bret can rub a person wrong.
Him and I can agree to disagree if I didn't feel like I was getting screamed at with the bold print. It is not nice, it is not calm and only looks like it is used to pick every sentence apart.
It is like a liberal screaming and talking over a conservative trying to explain reason.
I hope nobody else goes that route.
Just maybe you should give Bret a warning too. I will agree to stop messing with him.

[Cherokee]

Rob - thanks for you report

Bret & 44 - You guys really do go at it some time

Fit is king, softer bullets work fine for me when they fit.

[Wayne Smith]

Rob - thanks for you report

Bret & 44 - You guys really do go at it some time


Yeah, they do, but, ya know what? Most of the time when they do - I learn something!

[Matt_G]

Yeah, they do, but, ya know what? Most of the time when they do - I learn something!

To bad we have to dive into a septic tank to find those pearls though. [smilie=b:
I wonder how many never learn anything from these threads just because they won't wade through the BS. I'm willing to bet it's quite a few and I don't blame them one bit.