View Full Version : dropping boolits in water from the mold?

05-14-2005, 08:49 AM
Lee mold making a gas checked boolit using wheel weights for lead should i drop the boolits in water from the mold to cool them?i read this makes the boolit harder.

please tell me what to do as i dont know any thing about casting boolits other than alittle of what i read here.

do you feel a boolit made with wheel weights that are water quenched are hard enough?these will be boolits used in a 357max contender for general shooting and hunting deer,

thanks for any responces

Bass Ackward
05-14-2005, 09:10 AM
Lee mold making a gas checked boolit using wheel weights for lead should i drop the boolits in water from the mold to cool them? i read this makes the boolit harder.

please tell me what to do as i dont know any thing about casting boolits other than alittle of what i read here.

do you feel a boolit made with wheel weights that are water quenched are hard enough?these will be boolits used in a 357max contender for general shooting and hunting deer,

thanks for any responces


Yes and yes. Now you need a Lyman manual bad son. Makes good library material.

Then you should send a PM to JohnH. You guys need to become buds.

David R
05-14-2005, 09:43 AM
I have dropped my boolets in water from the mold, it works. They are harder and shoot fine. Just try to dent them with your fingernail.

Now I use gas checks so I don't bother trying to make them harder. I shoot 44 mag and 45 colt. 45 ACP doesn't need hard boolets.

05-14-2005, 12:35 PM
David, which gas checked molds are you using for 45??

05-14-2005, 03:47 PM
To get the best effect of quenching the alloy for hardness, and consistent hardness from bullet, to bullet, I believe it's important to drop the bullet as soon as possible after the sprue has hardened enough to cut it off, and to develop a rhythm so that the timing of the drop is consistent. You want the quenching to occur before the antimony crystals have begun to crystallize out from "solid solution" in the alloy. If some of the bullets have cooled more than others before quenching, this process may have begun to occur in some of the bullets but not others. I think consistency is the only advantage to be gained from batch-treating bullets with oven heating.

I like to water drop bullets, even when the extra hardness isn't needed. I ruin more bullets from dropping them on each other when they're soft when I don't water drop them. That's just klutzy me, though.

David R
05-14-2005, 05:21 PM
David, which gas checked molds are you using for 45??

Lyman 452424, 255 gr gas check. Kieth style, good looking boolit to me.

I don't use it any more, because I bought a Ruger Super redhawk in 44 mag. My 45 colt is a model 25-5 Lazer engraved "Model of 1989" Non fluted cylinder, 5", flat black. comes with a hogue grip. I love it, but dind't want to beat it to death with magnum type loads. Now I just use 9 grains of unique and a 250 kieth SWC.

It will shoot 4" to 6" @ 100 yards with my cast boolits. Good Gun.

05-14-2005, 06:44 PM
The only boolits I don't water drop are the 20 to 1 for my BPCR. I water drop all the rest because it is so much easier then trying to keep them apart on a towel. You must seat checks and size within 1/2 hour after casting to keep the hardness although I see no difference in the way they shoot.

05-14-2005, 08:53 PM
If you IM me with your email I will send you a pic that illustrates the differance in hardness between air cooled alloy and water dropped alloy.


05-14-2005, 11:18 PM
BA, We are buds! :)

Jeff, The bullets DJ sent me shoot very well. These are WW + 1% tin if I remember his alloy right, and I'd be surprised if he hasn't water dropped them.

I've not yet done any shooting of different alloys into wet news print or water jugs, been playing with lubes of late. But for a hunting bullet I don't believe you will want anything harder than about 10-12 BHN. A hunting bullet needs to be hard enough to withstand a bone strike, but mallable enough to not come to peices because of it. I have read that a water dropped WW bullet still has it's mallability, I want to run some tests for myself. Hardening bullets through alloying generally makes 'em to hard. at about 15 BHN, a bullet will shear but not expand, linotype @ 21 BHN has a tendancy to beak up in peices, but this is probably be the result of the high anitmony content, not the hardness itself.

The prevailing idea with cast is to use a large caliber (.400 and above) with large meplats that re 70-80% of the bullet diameter and simply punch holes in the animal that won't seal up, bleeding it to death. Then you have the guys using 30-30's pushing WW and a bit of tin to 1700-2000 fps and killing deer just fine with it. then there are still others making 2 alloy bullets, casting a nose from pure lead, following that pour with with a harder alloy creating a kind of cast premium bullet that will expand still leave a hard shank for deep penetration. DJ made some of this style for Vance this year, (30-30) and Vances dad killed his first deer with it. I'm considering this style pretty strongly

If I might suggest, try using WW and adding not more than 2% tin. the alloy I am going to use this aer is 20:1 (lead ,tin) It would be another that would probably work well for you too. I've driven this to 1800 in my 38-55 with no trouble, it will be interesting to see how it performs in the 357.

For what it may be worth I have used a 15 BHN ally (50/50 WW/Lino) on two deer and pure lead on another.

05-15-2005, 09:19 AM
Hi Jeff,

For what its worth, you may want to "draw down" your boolits (Check out Veral Smith's book - "Jacketed Performance From Cast Bullets" at the LBT site).

I water quenched some 38's that were made with 4 parts WW to 1 part Lynotype.

In the same casting session, I air cooled some of the same boolits.

I gave them 30 days to "harden-up" which ended last week, then measured their hardness.

The air cooled measured (on my LBT hardness tester) 20 bnh, while my water quenched measured 32 bnh.

So the water quenching does make a difference. Next, I want to compare some water quenched vs air cooled straight WW.

We will see how that goes.

But I would definatly recommend Veral Smith's book, it is a short, easy read, but filled with massive amounts of info!

Just a thought from Da U.P.!

05-17-2005, 10:24 AM
I guess I am the odd man out..but I don't believe there is any NEED for water droped bullets in handguns. Straight air cooled wheel weight bullets with a gas check will take any velocity up to 2K fps and maybe beyond.

Those rock hard water dropped bullets MIGHT cause more problems then they are worth. In addition to being the dickens to size, unless they are truly a proper fit for the cyinder throats and barrel, they can cause leading. If they are of the proper size, they will work just fine, but are truly unnecessary.

As previously started, it is difficult to get consistant hardness by water droping a cast bullet. If you want hard bullets, tempering in an oven with a water quench is a better way that will produce more uniform hardness.

for plain base cast bullets in sixgun, a medium alloy like Lyman No. 2 is as hard as you will ever need.

05-17-2005, 04:01 PM
I'm with Chargar on this one since BHN of >25 or so in a handgun may indeed be too much of a good thing. (CB's won't obturate or "slug up" if they're too hard.) Besides, if you size them, you get an immediate and pervasive (not just the surface) softening according to metallurgist Dennis Marshall, Jr. (another reason to read the Lyman CB Handbk.). Having said this, I must add that we're going about this wrong end to. The question du jour is do you really need such hard CB's? Inquiring minds want to know!

05-17-2005, 07:09 PM
Well Dick Lee refers in his book about the yield point of the alloy being a limiting factor to how fast you can accurately push cast boolits, I do not have a brinell tester but I doubt if my water dropped WW boolits are 25 brinell.

Mr. Veral Smith also advocates water dropping bullets from the mold.

I know revolver boolits especially in magnum calibers get pretty rough treatment before they finally leave the bbl, all the way from seating damage to being blasted by the muzzle blast as they exit the muzzle, and lots in between.

I have seen jacketed boolits(remington 180 grain) fired in 357 maximum that were 20% shorter after firing and the exposed lead swaged out so much that it had rubbed on the bore...this kind of deformation cannot possibly happen exactly the same way every time.

I would prefer my boolits to fit the throat, be bigger than the bore slightly , and seal the bore without having to obturate.


05-17-2005, 08:03 PM
Count me in with those who say that water-quenching for conventional handgun loads is not necessary.

When I can run an un-hardened straight-WW boolit at 1500-plus in a .44 Maggie without a sign of leading, I'm a happy shooter. This would be doubly so if I were using them on game animals, because a super-hard bullet is a dead certain non-expander in most circumstances, and also MIGHT be on the brittle side. I've had linotype bullets come apart, and quickly started softening the bullets a tad with pure lead (I had a LOT of lino available in those ancient days).

It's a win-win, to me.....a softer bullet is both more likely to expand, and less likely to shatter. In addition, it's a simpler casting routine when the water quench isn't needed.

On the issue of consistency in dropping boolits from the mould for quenching, when I'm doing my speed-casting routine the speed almost ensures consistency, because the casting rate is boringly unchanged.....and fast! Bullets drop from the mould every ten or twelve seconds, depending on the given mould. I'd wager that there's rarely more than a second or so of variation from cast-to-drop over a long run. That's close enough for my purposes.

If there is a mould-full which takes longer to drop for some reason, those bullets go to the sprue can and NOT into the quench bucket. I'm quite rigorous in this matter. This also maintains consistency, I think. I don't have a hardness tester, and really don't feel the need of one at this late date.

05-17-2005, 08:04 PM

If you used that 180 gr jacketed remington bullet as an example of a HARD jacketed bullet even gets deformed by the pressures of shooting it, it's a bad example because in all reality that core is very very soft alloy, possibly pretty close to pure lead and that jacket on it is nothing to speak of. Basically it's like water in a balloon, very easy to disform or move. I believe the only difference jacketed handgun bullets have over cast lead bullets is that they have more friction going down the bore.

If you're using the bullet as an example of how violent the trip down and out a revolver barrel is then I apologize.


05-17-2005, 08:07 PM
In certain semi auto pistols it is required that the bullet be hard enough to survive the trip from the magazine up the feed ramp and into the barrel. A too soft bullet will have it's nose stick on the feed ramp and tie up the gun. So there are some instances where water quenched bullets can be used in handguns.


05-17-2005, 08:38 PM
Willbird...The shooting and reloading world is chock full of myths and opinions which are passed off as fact. Many of these have been perpturated for generations and passed on by some of the noted gun writers. After 45 years at the reloading press and melting pot, I have discovered that just about anything you read, is suspect.

The only thing you know for certain is what you have worked out through your own experience. There just is no substitute. Many of the guys on this board are working from deep experience and not theory read in a book.

Go back and shoot about a thousand cast bullets each of varying hardness through your pistol. Try air cooled WW, Lyman No. 2, Linotype and your water droped bullets. Put them on paper and then come to your own conclusions. You might be suprised what you discover in the process.

As far as the hardness of water droped wheel weight goes, Linotype of a known hardness of 22 Bhn. pegs the scale on my hardness tested. Water droped ww is harder, but I have no way of knowing how much, but a Bhn of 25 does not sound unreasonable.

05-17-2005, 08:54 PM
Cayoot..I guess I am in kinda picky mood tonight, but I noticed your post on the hardness of your alloys and those numbers don't work for me.

Wheel weight runs 9-10 Bhn and Linotype runs 22 Bhn. A 4 (ww) to 1 (lino) mix could not yield an alloy of 20 Bhn. even after age hardening.

This tells me:

1) You have some new kind of wheel metal, not heretofore known
2) You have monotype or some other type metal and not Linotype
3) You need to get you money back from LBT on that tester.

I am truly not trying to be a horse's A&&, just trying to understand what is going on here.

05-17-2005, 09:27 PM
Star, yes I was using the jacketed bullet as an example of how violant the passage of the bullet from ctg. case to muzzle was in a 10" bbled contender. I also do not consider the section of the ogive supported by the jacket to be especially weak either, and that too was shortened and expanded quite a bit.

and as to treating everything I read as suspect, that would include things I read HERE :-)

I was just re-reading a bit of suspect Veral Smith, and had my memory refreshed that hardness alone is not the only benefit of water dropping...it also has other benefits such as straighter bullets. Well that was in a book, gotta strike that knowledge...I didnt load 1000 rounds to prove or disprove Veral.

maybe we need a section where book larnin isnt allowed....or is that what we already have here ??

bullets needing to obturate to seal the bore IS a myth or opinion passed off as fact, if a .432 bullet leaves the throat of my Redhawk (which it fits) and is swaged down by the forcing cone to fit the .429 bore why on earth would it need to obturate to seal ?? being that it swells the barrel during it's passage like a snake swallowing an egg and it is therefore larger than the .429 bore somewhat...why would it need to obturate ??(this is true and measured and quantified in "Rifle Accuracy Facts" by Harold Vaughn in a heavy bbled rifle with 270 bore and jacketed bullets...so one could probably be safe saying it happens in the redhawk too)...crap THAT is from a book too.

I use the constant PI too to calculate things, I have not measure the dia and circumferance of thousands of differant sized circles to prove it is true, nor did I develop my own version of it on my own. also other trig functions, once again from a book...............I heat treat, draw and temper steel with temps and colors from a book too...and machine all kinds of metals with speeds/feeds from machineries handbook

I must apologise for my ignorance about the hardness of water dropped, the BOOK says 20-25 brinell from water dropping...but then that is suspect, but it is gonna be tough to build my own brinell tester without using PI, or any books.

I HAVE fired several thousand bullets in a ransom rest. These bullets were cast from made from WW (air cooled), LINO, and pure lead from a pistol that will shoot 1.5" at 50 yards, now this was 45 acp, and 4.0 of bullseye, the harder bullets shot better....the softer bullets did not shoot as good...and recovered fired soft bullets exibited a much wider rifling groove than the more accurate harder bullets. I didnt know about water dropping back then, I had not read that book yet...... the end results were single cavity lino bullets shot 1.5" or less for 5 shots, WW air cooled shot 2.5", pure lead 3"

really it sounds like you just HATE water dropping charger....and I kind of like it.......as do lots of other guys here.


05-17-2005, 11:30 PM
Willbird, pard;

There's enough individual and collective experience on this Board to amply research (or to have ALREADY researched) practically any factor affecting the making and use of cast bullets.

We have learned, as a group and individuals, that many of the "BOOKS" you seem to regard so highly are in fact suspect in any number of specific fields affecting cast bullets. Yes, we here can read, and have read, and have experimented and will experiment. Yes, we find many Holy Truths in the books we all read, and the websites we study. We also find large amounts of unmitigated equine by-products, which we then disseminate amongst ourselves so that the casters here, and those who drop in, are not misled by wrong information.

It comes down to the ability to READ and ANALYZE and TEST and then DISCRIMINATE between what is valuable and what is dross. Also, what works for one or several of us will not necessarily work for all, due to a wide variety in the conditions and climates in which we study our hobby.

This specifically includes Veral Smith, who has certainly labored well in the casters' vineyard and created some interesting developments. I personally have some differences with parts of Veral's writings, but so what? He's not the High Poobah of Casting, and neither am I. LIKE CHARGAR, (not "Charger" BTW) I've been at this hobby for decades and have learned a fair bit about it...not everything, by any means, I must hasten to add. That's what keeps me interested.

Anyway, a legitimate difference of opinion is NOT cause for hard feelings or nasty posts. "BOOKS" will give a good basic groundwork for casters to build on, but they're not the last word on ANY subject, let alone one as arcane as bullet casting. Such books can also make us think, which is a decidedly valuable phenomenon. Many fine ideas have been born due to something in a book striking a note in someone's mind, which when followed up can break new ground.

We are not an ill-educated bunch of Luddites who think casting developments ended with Barlow or Keith. However, we DO honor and respect their contributions, as we do Veral's, and on occasion we even find that hints from a hundred years ago (or more) still have their uses today.

05-17-2005, 11:31 PM
Willbird..I didn't mean to twist your tail feathers that hard. There is indeed nothing wrong with book learning. We just remember that books are written by people mostly for financial reasons and are not "holy writ". Experience either validates or disproves what we read.

Many folks take what they read as "dictum" and spend many years wondering what they are doing wrong, when they received bad data in the first place.

I have had Veral Smith's book for some years and it is a valuable tool, but some of the stuff there does not bear up to real world experience. He has built himself a reputation as an expert, but so have folks like Massad Ayoub who has handed out so much bad legal advice it is pitiful. It is only in the last few years that folk in general have cracked the code on him.

To be a gun writer all you have to do is publish and get a check for doing so. That is not all that hard, especially if you are your own publisher. There are very few who can make a living as a gun writer, so they take to teaching classes, giving lectures or selling their own miacle products. The old maxim Caveat Emptor applies to what you read as well as what you buy.

I am a big fan of the 45 autopistol and would be the first to agree that harder is better due to the design of the lands and grooves. You can get good results with a softer alloy at 700 fps or so, but go much higher and you need harder.

However, due to the difference in design of the lands and grooves, conclusions drawn from the 45 autopistol do not necessarily carry over to the sixgun.

The internet is a great place to send messages, but a very poor place to communicate. It is easy to be misunderstood as to tone and intent and I plead guilty for being too direct at times and sounding like a pompus ***. But I really am a great guy..just ask my kids and wife :-)

05-17-2005, 11:47 PM
Willbird..just one final thought on the matter..after re-reading your post, you indicated tht I must hate water dropped bullets.

I don't hate them at all, how could a fellow hate a lump of lead. Lumps of lead do not produce emotion in me, either positive or negative. I feel they are not necessary in handguns. They do have a place in rifle shooting, although I prefer to oven temper.

If a fellow want to water drop his bullets, I have no problem with him. Drop away!

05-18-2005, 06:35 AM
We had an interesting post awile back Bruce about coming full circle, and it is very interesting to read Phil Sharpe and find almost verbatim a recipe for Felix Lube of all things, and that was back between the world wars.

I like you Bruce have been reloading and casting boolits for decades, over 3 of them to be exact....and I too read, sort, and apply, and not just in the cast bullet field. Interesingly enough most Aeroquip steel fittings are forged and water dropped for a higher brinell, and the water temp. of the quench tank is adjusted to compensate for how long it takes them to get to the water...and as you said the initial ones are thrown away as scrap because they are not the same as the production ones, they didnt hit the water at the same interval from leaving the die.

Nasty posts.....I think there might have been a couple there, from several people.............

Also Elmer keith wasn't Gawd, neither was Bill McGivern, Skeeter Skelton, or any of the others, but they tried things, and recorded their experiences, and tried to find something in them they could apply to the next challange.

I admit I have only cast 10,000 or so water dropped boolits in the last 3 months, and I have not fired them all yet......but I will.

and CHARGAR I apoligise for mis spelling your handle....and I really like reading everybody's ideas, as well as what they remember from years of reading..and it all goes into the mill and out comes BOOLITS :-)
afore I came here I was shopping for the best price on jacketed pistol boolits in bulk..and had no $$ to buy them with, reading the stuff here got the lead pot dusted off and plugged in (actually got a new one shortly thereafter hehe) and the star loader churning out thousands of ctg. with dull grey projectiles. (added a star lube sizer too and more 4 and 6 cavity molds)

also on the water drop I must admit I have 4000 pounds of range lead, and another 2 tons coming every 3 months until I say "when" so I have a vested interest in cutting it with WW and water dropping it up to probably the 10-12 brinell you get with pure tire weights.


05-18-2005, 09:21 AM
I want to make clear that if I popped my relief valve I apologise.

I SHOULD have praised CHARGAR for his input and opinion formed by experience.

and I should have gotten a better handle on what I like about water dropping and explained it's virtues as I see it.

1. Boolits can be harder for a given alloy. Some people feel this can result in a tougher boolit. I have a huge supply building of indoor range lead and alloying it with WW and water dropping I hope will let me use it in the place of pure WW...it would be even nicer if the result was BETTER than pure WW because it was tougher.

2.I don't have to fiddle with a towel or such to drop them on and keep moving them around, I can drop 1500-2000 in all one spot. I'm sure there are other good ways to have a place to put 1000 or more per hour and not trip over yourself but the bucket of water is sure convienent.

3. I really like the sound they make when they hit the water :-)

4. There is room for opinion here, but I will not ask, expect, depend upon, or want a magnum revolver cast bullet to expand, I will depend upon it to be a flat nosed punch that will go clear thru an animal from any angle...and or punch thru metal objects surrounding the target (that on some rare ocasion someday may be shooting back at ME).

5. hard bullets in general seem like a good idea because they MAY not be as readily damaged (noses) by lubesizing in a star sizer, and being seated in the cases with medium to high case neck tension.

IF their being hard is not required, in thinking about it that is even better, because pistol ammo that I loaded with them does not de-value as the boolits soften with age, that in fact could really be great because they were hard, got sized and loaded, then softened with age after they are safely put away :-).

I would like Kent Lomont to someday grudgingly admit that I have fired more 44 magnum ctg. than he has (Elmer Keith said many years ago that Lomont had probably fired more 44 magnum than any other man alive, and Lomont is still kicking and I presume firing 44 magnum) and I want the fastest and easiest to make, most accurate, and cheapest boollits to do that with.

hey we all have to have dreams eh :-) ??


05-18-2005, 10:17 AM

Yep, I failed to make clear that "nasty posts" was aimed generally, not just at you.

I also failed to say that I make a LOT of water-dropped bullets (but not 10,000 in the last three months, good grief you must be working overtime!). For reasons already mentioned, namely rifling form and mechanical reliability, I quench my autoloading peestol bullets from the mould about 95% of the time. I don't do this with revolver bullets, but there is NOTHING WRONG with doing so as long as the bullet dimensions are satisfactory. I wouldn't quench a bullet intended for hunting, but I don't hunt with a revolver anyway, so...???

On my bench it's just the opposite with rifle bullets. I DO quench about 90% or more, and the softer remainder is either destined for something like my Sharps or for the oven-heat-treating procedure. (And, I like the sound of the hot boolits hitting water, too!).

Before we moved to Nevada, we lived in a very remote location where bear encounters were common, not just likely, and I carried a .44 S&W Mountain Revolver religiously, as in, every time I left the house. It was loaded with with either the RCBS 44-250 KT or Lyman's 429244, cast from linotype/pure lead in about 2/3-1/3 ratio and UNhardened. This was because of some fragmentation I'd experienced with straight-lino bullets on animals. I wasn't expecting the bullets to expand, but I most assuredly did NOT want them fragmenting again. As it worked out I never did have to shoot a bear with these bullets, but I had confidence that they would penetrate the rather light frame of a black bear in a highly-satisfactory manner. I agree that a good magnum handgun bullet doesn't have to expand to be effective, especially since increased expansion = reduced penetration. For blackies, this didn't worry me at all, but for moose....that's REALLY where penetration becomes highly desireable.

I've never tried to track age-softening in my bullets, but I see a thread elsewhere here that gives some interesting stats. Have to check that out a bit more. You're right, with unhardened bullets we don't have to concern ourselves about bullets softening over a period of time. KISS, hmmm?

05-18-2005, 11:55 AM
Willbird--The example of Aeroquip steel fittings being water quenched as compared to cast bullets may not be apples to oranges. Maybe oranges to tangerines,in that steel can be tempered. Lead can't be tempered. Hardening results with our alloies are not as predictable nor definable. For example--how deep does the hardening go as oppossed to just being on the surface? How long do they have to harden for optimum? What temperature. On and on. Many things we cant answer. With steel it is more predictable. Case annealing also falls into the unknown area. How hot,what shade of red,should we do it to begin with???????

05-18-2005, 12:23 PM
Willbird--Your mention of Phil Sharpe prompted me to read his lube formula. One place he mentioned having used atleast 57 formulas. He used some stuff not found in FWFBL. Stuff like beef tallow,steam engine cylinder oil,crude ozocerite,japan wax,mutton tallow,dictaphone and Ediphone records,sodium hydroxide,castordag,oildag,powdered Achesons graphite#1340. This is not an effort to dispute what you stated--just pointing out that it was an interesting read for me. I bet some of that stuff would be hard to find nowdays.

05-18-2005, 12:48 PM
Carpetman, the deal that sounded lots like felix was of all things about using dictaphone records and the shavings from them, the words "Stearic Acid" leaped off the page at me...and then a mineral oil, and some beeswax. Also the explanation of what all the "Dags" are and were was great too. I figuire Sharpe must have been the wealthy scion of some old monied family, he had a distinguished military career as I recall but it seems he was of some means to have all the gadgets he had at hand to play with.

I agree the deal on the steel isnt science that can transfer right over, but the material was 12L14 and other than forging instead of casting the press was most definately doing the BruceB, I worked 30' from that 100 ton fire breathing monster for 2 years......also 12L14 isnt supposed to directly heat treat, so the quenching might have been somehow allowing some of the work hardening from forging to remain in effect...that part started out as a straight bar with a cross section like two D's back to back (they called it double D)....the bars were impact cutoff (and that is LOUD)..then it went thru an induction heater and from there into the die where it got made into an L shape..then down a short conveyor, then into the quench tank...the parts made that BruceB noise too :-) when they hit the water. The speed of the conveyor and the temp of the quench tank were adjusted to suit the part size and to end up with a given brinell hardness.


05-18-2005, 12:53 PM
BruceB, now you know it don't take long to make 10,000 hehe, 5000 of them were saeco 9mm for a guy with one of those buzzguns, actually several 9mm buzzguns. He uses cast boolits, surplus small rifle primers that were punched out of demilled ammo (the seller thinks he's nuts) amazingly he is still using high dollar bullseye pistol powder.

the rest were .432 240 Ly-Keith's and .358 158 roundflats, and MROliver and I pumped out a huge pile of .452-250 RF too for the 45 colt.

it's like popcorn, you just don't want to stop hehe I can't wait for the group molds to come :-)


05-18-2005, 02:21 PM

That's a coincidence....I once owned a Sten and a four-cavity 356402 at the same time. Good thing, too. No Dillon progressives at that time, and I hadn't really got around to studying my casting "technique", but I still managed to cast a heck of a lot of 9mms for that Sten. Loading on the turret press speeded things up considerably, too.

It worked fine with cast loads, unlike its big brother, the .303 Bren LMG. I fired a couple of 30-round mags of .303 linotype loads on full-auto, and then spent a LONG time cleaning the lead out of the gas system. The ever-higher temperatures were the culprit here, because I use cast bullets in SEMI-auto rifles on a regular basis without leading problems in bore or gas system.

Buckshot and I both know what you mean about not wanting to stop. When I really get "in the zone" while casting, and things are going well, and the boolits are just piling up and they look SO NICE....I just don't wanna stop. However, I cast standing-up, and my pore aging feets will only tolerate about three hours these days. I'm going to see what effect it will have if I sit on my high shop stool while casting. Should ease my hurtin' feet, anyway.

05-18-2005, 08:06 PM
Cayoot..I guess I am in kinda picky mood tonight, but I noticed your post on the hardness of your alloys and those numbers don't work for me.

Wheel weight runs 9-10 Bhn and Linotype runs 22 Bhn. A 4 (ww) to 1 (lino) mix could not yield an alloy of 20 Bhn. even after age hardening.

This tells me:

1) You have some new kind of wheel metal, not heretofore known
2) You have monotype or some other type metal and not Linotype
3) You need to get you money back from LBT on that tester.

I am truly not trying to be a horse's A&&, just trying to understand what is going on here.

Well Charger, after reading your post I went back to my reloading room and re-tested those sample boolits.

The non-water quenched read 25 bnh, but I was concerned that I must be doing something wrong, so I fliped the boolit over and tried it upside down, now I get 16. So I'm really getting screwed up in my confidence with this thing. I bought it used from a guy one town over who said that he never used it. It was in the original box and had the instructions and calibration boolit with it.

I then tested the water quenched boolit and got a bnh of 30.

So I'm scratching a hole in my head....am I doing it wrong or is this tester just off? Maybe I should just put the silly thing back in the box. I've been reloading for nearly 30 years and never needed one before, I only bought it since I took up casting....maybe I should leave it in the box forgotten.

I don't know!

05-18-2005, 09:07 PM
Cayoot- I often find the base of a boolit tests softer. I keep a few known samples around to check my cabintree tester. Even at that I still use it just for a reference to get an alloy close enough to what I had that worked or to test stuff before buyin'.


05-18-2005, 09:42 PM
Cayoot- I often find the base of a boolit tests softer. I keep a few known samples around to check my cabintree tester. Even at that I still use it just for a reference to get an alloy close enough to what I had that worked or to test stuff before buyin'.


Kenjuudo, Thanks alot, I was really getting frustrated! I appreciate your input.