92-6-2 vs 91-7-2 difference in bullet weight.

[Just The Tip]

I've started a small bullet company to help feed the local IPSC shooters with coated bullets, in my search for slightly less expensive lead I found some significantly less expensive but instead of 92-6-2 it's 91-7-2. With it being IPSC power factor is an important part of the game, does any one know if casting a 180gr .40 with 91-7-2 would a noticeable difference? If so any thing I can do to get the weight back up?

thanks
JTT

[GabbyM]

Most of your bullets will run overweight with 2:6 alloy anyway. Depends upon the brand of mold. 1% won't make much difference in weight. In general the 7% Sb should cost more since Sb is more expensive than lead. What you need to do is keep the bullets the same after you put them on the market. So your alloy supply needs to be steady. In high pressure pistols like 9mm and 40 S&W I'd go for the 7% Sb any day of the week. I can collapse 2:6 9mm bullets with full house loads. You know when it is happening because the lube gets pushed out of the grove as the bullet mushes and smoke like a black powder gun comes out the muzzle. That's also a sign of over pressure loads but as a bullet seller you don't want to try explaining that to IPSC shooters. My supplier was Mayco Industries. They sold either alloy or anything else you wanted. 2:7 was always more expensive than 2:6 because it is. So I'd consider reliability of supply . Good chance is the other vendor is just charging to much.

Here is an alloy calculator that will come in handy if you need to blend up alloys in the future.
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...oy-calculators

[Nose Dive]

I agree with GabbyM 110%. You should find a suitable blend that fits the desires and needs of your clientele. Maybe do a bit of 'marketing surveying'...or, ask them what 'they' want. Then supply that blend and strive like heck to be 100% consistent with that product line. That way, they 'know' what they are buying from you. buying today...buying next week....'they know'......

And, if you find yourself in a feed stock position that you must 'vary' the product blend, be DARN SURE TO TELL THEM BEFORE THEY BUY.... Simply, they must 'trust you and trust your product'....A.K.A. 'customer/supplier' relations...

I would share you a tell of a very BIG USA restaurant chain...Yep...'the burger joint'....and some issues they had a few years back about some falsified quality issues in their products....ALL WAS BS....but...due to this bad rumor they suffered a .5 to .3% drop in hamburger sales. This doesn't sound like much but multiply that by $16 or so billion USD's and see the impact. It was so bad, they had to address it in their advertising schemes for about 10 months to kill the rumor.

effect here'''' ... lost revenue, lost loyalty and increased expenditures.....all very bad in business.....

Now, this example is on a grand scale, but the issue is 'customer loyalty'... simply, they must trust you to supply them the product they want and they will 'drive the extra mile' to buy from YOU.

And, be sure of this rule...."if you don't take of your customer...RELAX....someone else will!"

Nose Dive

Cheap, Fast, Good. Kindly pick two.

[Just The Tip]

Yup, consistency is gonna be the key, I already have one load of the 92-6-2 alloy and things are going well. As its the IPSC market I'm going for I'm selling 124gr and 147gr in 9mm and 180gr in .40. The new supply of alloy is about .40 cent per lbs cheaper, in my opinion my other supplier is just over charging. Ordered the 91-7-2 and yes the bullets are about 1 grain light in the 124 and 1.5 grain in the 147 haven't tried the 180 molds yet. By no means would I ever try sneak it past customers without full disclosure, a sure fire way to ruin my reputation before I even get rolling.

With the molds I have does anyone know I they can be re-machined to drop the proper weight or would I need to order new sets if I wanted to use this alloy?

[Just The Tip]

Donnie is the one who has been holding my hand more or less with the set up, he recommended and himself used 92-6-2 for Bayou Bullets. Figured why rock the boat. The idea of cutting with pure would work and probably save me some money especially if I don't have to cut the molds again.

[Just The Tip]

Should mention molds are already groove less.

[Ken in Iowa]

I would add 2% lead and see what you get.

BTW, you sound like the type of person that I would like to do business with.

[lwknight]

At 7% antimony and 2% tin you may notice some tiny inclusions in the bullets. That is pure antimony not in alloy.
Realistically other than that I doubt that anyone could really tell the difference.
The 2-6-92 has been proven over and over and...... Why rock the boat?

[bumpo628]

Maybe you should just mix the 2-7-91 with some pure lead and tin to make it 2-6-92 so that your product is consistent.
Add 15.5 lbs of the 2-7-91 with 2.5 lbs of pure and 1 oz of pure tin to make 2-6-92.
I get 2.06% tin and 6.01% antimony with that ratio, but you can play around with the calculator to fine tune it if you like.
The savings on the pure lead should pay for the tin.

[Just The Tip]

Thanks, I think that might be my best option at the moment. Next time I'll be a bit more careful when ordering alloy, take this as a lesson learned.

[youngmman]

I shoot a 93-5-2 alloy with a BHN of 14. The 92-6-2 has a BHN 15-16, so there really isn't much difference in hardness and none at all in bullet weight for any practical purpose.

[Just The Tip]

I agree with you about no difference in weight for any practical purpose... but we're talking IPSC shooters. I know cause I am one, personally as some one who trains allot and shoots so long as the bullets are consistent I don't care. Not to generalize too much but allot of people talk about shooting more than they ever will shoot, these are the people I have to pacify with know bullet weights that they are comfortable with. Any miss step in product and word will travel like wildfire, a couple small bullet companies have had this issue and years later are still unable to shake the stigma of poor quality bullets.