wd 50/50

[white eagle]

will water dropping harden up a 50/50 alloy ?
I mostly a/c everything :Fire:
( but seeing the other post I thought I would open a new one)
my intentions are the same as far as expansion expectations
but if I w/q them would it help ?
or just move to 75/25 ?
Just curious:drinks:

[Ole]

It sure will.

I water drop my 50/50 SKS boolits and they end up around 16BHN after a week's worth of aging.

[Shiloh]

Yes, They harden.

I use 50/50 water dropped for rifle. I thought they were to soft as one could drag a thumbnail over them and scratch the. No issues at 1800+. They get fairly hard after a week and one has to press hard
to scratch.

Shiloh

[outdoorfan]

With the ww's and soft lead that I use at 50/50, the boolits are 8-9 bhn AC & 21 or so bhn when oven HT'ed.

[Von Gruff]

So how does the WD 50/50 expansion differ to AC 50/50 for a hunting boolit.

Von Gruff.

[outdoorfan]

So how does the WD 50/50 expansion differ to AC 50/50 for a hunting boolit.

Von Gruff.

Some say that once the caliber gets to .358 or bigger, WD'ing 50/50 alloy (if the melt temp isn't too hot) can produce a hard exterior and softer interior that will expand on impact.

I do it differently. I torch the nose of those oven HT'ed 50/50 boolits (with the rest of the boolit under water), and therefore produce a nose that's 8-10 bhn while the base remains at 20-21.

To answer your question the best I can, I don't think WD'ed alloy will be anywhere near as good for expansion properties alone as AC will do.

[45 2.1]

With the ww's and soft lead that I use at 50/50, the boolits are 8-9 bhn AC & 21 or so bhn when oven HT'ed.

The AC and WD are meant for different velocity ranges. You can also nose anneal or draw boolits to any hardness between AC and WD hardnesses. The entire spectrum is available if you do it right. I much prefer the WD for above 2000 fps when used in rifles, you get Nosler partition performance from them.

[geargnasher]

Like 45 2.1 said, the two processes are intended for different velocities. AC50/50 obviously has its velocity limitations, but lower velocities is what we use it for when we need good expansion with a slower boolit. WD50/50 should be pushed much harder, well over 2k fps, and as a general statement it will give equivalent expansion at those velocities. Build the alloy for your specific purpose.

The WD50/50 is usually somewhere between AC straight WW and WD straight, but mainly I use the 50/50 as a means to achieve higher velocities while still having a boolit malleable enough to mushroom and retain weight in a situation where an equivalent-hardness AC boolit alloy would disintegrate.

Gear

[outdoorfan]

Like 45 2.1 said, the two processes are intended for different velocities. AC50/50 obviously has its velocity limitations, but lower velocities is what we use it for when we need good expansion with a slower boolit. WD50/50 should be pushed much harder, well over 2k fps, and as a general statement it will give equivalent expansion at those velocities. Build the alloy for your specific purpose.

Gear


Yes, I forgot to include, like 45 2.1 stated, that any hardness level between the two can be obtained. And, yes, I'm sure WD'ed 50/50 will expand quite nicely at 2000 fps, but what if a person is looking for a longer range application where velocities might dip in the 1400-1500 fps range by the time the boolit arrives on target? I think a 2-part boolit or annealed nose would work the best in that scenario IF the meplat by itself isn't enough to create the type of wound channel desired.

[geargnasher]

Outdoorfan, you bring up a good point. If you're looking for long-range expansion after the velocity has dropped off significantly (how much it really matters depends greatly on BC and just how far you're talking about), softnosed or annealed-nose boolits would seem to be the way to go. Personally, I'd try testing a paper-patched 20:1 lead/tin boolit for that if it was necessary.

Gear

[45 2.1]

Like 45 2.1 said, the two processes are intended for different velocities. Not necessarily AC50/50 obviously has its velocity limitations, but lower velocities is what we use it for when we need good expansion with a slower boolit. WD50/50 should be pushed much harder, well over 2k fps, and as a general statement it will give equivalent expansion at those velocities. Build the alloy for your specific purpose. Many different things can be accomplished with either with a very large overlap in velocities. It really depends on what your trying to do.

The WD50/50 is usually somewhere between AC straight WW and WD straight About 19 to 21 BHN dependent on your source, but mainly I use the 50/50 as a means to achieve higher velocities while still having a boolit malleable enough to mushroom and retain weight in a situation where an equivalent-hardness AC boolit alloy would disintegrate No, they do not when done correctly.

Gear

You need to rethink what you've posted here and elsewhere. We use them interchangably and have one gun prefer one and another gun prefer the other and some guns take either AC or WD. The only difference is the boolits being water dropped or heat treated. We have pushed the AC alloy to 2400 fps (and past) with sub MOA accuracy and no leading too. This is where a little more knowledge of reloading methods help.

[44man]

I can only speak about my 45-70 revolver at 1631 fps. Oven hardened 50-50 will not group without a gas check. Too much jump to the rifling.
I tried Babore's HP on a deer and it was destructive to say the least!
I had zero leading with a PB but don't like how they shoot. The Gas checked ones shot very tight with an occasional flier.
A rifle might do well with either.
I have a hard time equating hardness to the alloy when hardened, I feel it toughens the outside but does not change the ductile properties. I know it did not harm penetration even with expansion but all I shoot are deer.
The alloy does work fine but all that is needed is to find what your gun likes, whether AC, WD, or oven hardened. Just use the most accurate.

[JJC]

I have been debating the same thing Wd 50 50 seems to be a good proven choice for some. I think it comes down to desired accuracy and performance. Testing the variables is the sure way to tell.

[geargnasher]

Bob, I don't understand you. You say the following:


The AC and WD are meant for different velocity ranges. You can also nose anneal or draw boolits to any hardness between AC and WD hardnesses. The entire spectrum is available if you do it right. I much prefer the WD for above 2000 fps when used in rifles, you get Nosler partition performance from them.

Then I said:


Like 45 2.1 said, the two processes are intended for different velocities. AC50/50 obviously has its velocity limitations, but lower velocities is what we use it for when we need good expansion with a slower boolit. WD50/50 should be pushed much harder, well over 2k fps, and as a general statement it will give equivalent expansion at those velocities. Build the alloy for your specific purpose.

The WD50/50 is usually somewhere between AC straight WW and WD straight, but mainly I use the 50/50 as a means to achieve higher velocities while still having a boolit malleable enough to mushroom and retain weight in a situation where an equivalent-hardness AC boolit alloy would disintegrate.

Gear

Then you come up with this:


You need to rethink what you've posted here and elsewhere. We use them interchangably and have one gun prefer one and another gun prefer the other and some guns take either AC or WD. The only difference is the boolits being water dropped or heat treated. We have pushed the AC alloy to 2400 fps (and past) with sub MOA accuracy and no leading too. This is where a little more knowledge of reloading methods help.

I don't understand what your argument is. It seems that you are going out of your way to prove us both wrong in the statement that certain alloys are better for HV than others by citing the examples of guns that will shoot anything. Those examples are quite the exception in my experience. If it is the method that is the exception, then why can't you make almost any rifle shoot HV soft boolits?

Gear

[45 2.1]

I don't understand what your argument is. Read some of BABores stuff... he understands it pretty well now, at least the non poly approaches. It seems that you are going out of your way to prove us both wrong in the statement that certain alloys The point is the alloy, which can be about any practical hardness within its AC to heat treated range, has more control of what you get than you realize. The same alloy at different hardnesses and depth of hardness. The "meant for" statement is for the average caster who doesn't want to know more. The general attitude here is if I can't do it, it can't be done. Several people here have had their eyes opened to the possibilities involving cast when they put time into learning how. are better for HV than others by citing the examples of guns that will shoot anything. Those examples are quite the exception in my experience. Depends on how and what you've seen. If it is the method that is the exception, then why can't you make almost any rifle shoot HV soft boolits? I have (specific to the pressure level and velocity involved for the cartridge as some are too small to do much with), but the methodology involved has to be learned. Its not a cookie cutter approach. AND, I don't want to put up with the flak from people saying its impossible...... much easier to stay quite and teach it specifically to people who want to learn it.
Gear

[geargnasher]

I certainly don't subscribe to the "general attitude", and I do want to know more, that's why I keep asking for details and keep trying to get to the bottom of seeming contradictions and misunderstandings. If there is something I can learn without having to reinvent the wheel myself then I'll be that much farther ahead. If each man had to start with zero knowledge and figure it all out himself, odds are about twenty billion to one that he'd even invent gunpowder.

I'll never understand why you call it "Methodology" if it can't be shown in print. Perhaps technical writing isn't your gig. To anyone who has ever cast, loaded, and fired for more than one gun it quickly becomes apparent that there is very little that is "cookie cutter", but a lot that is "box of tools" that we can draw from to help us perform tasks, as well as a strategic flow chart for their selection and use. All one needs to know are the principles of what we're doing, the physical properties of the materials involved, and the methods used to manipulate these properties for the desired results. Experience teaches us the nuances and how and when to employ certain methods and tactics, but we first need to know what they are and how they work so we can judge what to do. This can only be done with a good "toolbox" of methods stored away. It's only as mysterious as you choose to make it.

Gear

[45 2.1]

that's why I keep asking for details and keep trying to get to the bottom of seeming contradictions and misunderstandings. That is already in print. BABore, 357Max and I have told the method many times with little response or thats too much trouble to do. Its easy when all your ducks are in a row. If there is something I can learn without having to reinvent the wheel myself then I'll be that much farther ahead.
I'll never understand why you call it "Methodology"= how you do things. if it can't be shown in print. It can't really. Perhaps technical writing isn't your gig. It is, but I get no response when I do it. All one needs to know are the principles of what we're doing, the physical properties of the materials involved, and the methods used to manipulate these properties for the desired results. Not really. Experience teaches us the nuances and how and when to employ certain methods and tactics, but we first need to know what they are and how they work so we can judge what to do. This can only be done with a good "toolbox" of methods stored away. It's only as mysterious as you choose to make it.

Gear

A test for you Gear using your methods: Take a single cavity mold you know to be good, get it up to heat where you know it will cast good boolits and cast 50 consectutive boolits. Give the weights of those boolits.............. Lets see how good your toolbox is.