Confused about alloys

[DerekP Houston]

A little levity goes a long way! It's just a little embarrassing though being the butt of the joke.

charlie

Hey at least you know to take care of your PC equipment and clean it out! I've seen some disgusting setups in my line of work .

Personally I have not tested the BHN of any of my lead, all except the first 24lbs has been range scrap with 1%~ tin added. Only load that caused me issues was 9mm, rest have worked out great.

[Yodogsandman]

For 9mm, I use COWW's, then add about 2 oz pewter to the full pot and water quench the boolits as I cast them. Never bothered to check the hardness, it works. So, I'm using an alloy of about 95% lead, 3% antimony, 1.5% tin with trace amounts of arsenic and copper with a approximate BHN of 13.5 before water quenching.

I'd cut that alloy of 7.5 % antimony at least in half with pure lead and add just enough tin to fill out your mold well. Water quench if you feel you need to. BHN is way overrated in the realm of casting useful boolits.

[Mitch]

I have found the 8.6 for pure lead in the roto formula works well.if you look at the lead calculator here this is what is is base on.Ya think just maybe roto knows what they are doing.Agan this all depends on knowing what alloy you are starting with.I agree with everyone that the harness is not all that importanf cose enough for most of what we do is fine.the reason for the 8.6 and not 5 is from the curve in the hardness whe the sn and sb are in small amonts once you get about 8.6 harness the curve flattens out and it more predictable.dont get lost in the nuber all that much cast some up and shoot em that is the real test.happy casting

[OS OK]

Hey at least you know to take care of your PC equipment and clean it out! I've seen some disgusting setups in my line of work .

Personally I have not tested the BHN of any of my lead, all except the first 24lbs has been range scrap with 1%~ tin added. Only load that caused me issues was 9mm, rest have worked out great.

I've been working the irrigation project here for weeks now. I come up for lunch or a rest and get on this white keyboard...soon it looks like I've been wiping buggers on it...I couldn't take it anymore...was gaging myself!

[montana_charlie]

I just found something very interesting on the hardness calculator.
One of these is wrong.

I share your frustration with the hardness calculators that are written with 8.6 as the starting hardness for pure lead.
Using the one linked in your 'quote', 10 pounds of pure lead returns an estimated hardness of 8.6 BHN.
Subtracting 5 pounds of lead and substituting 5 pounds of tin, I still have ten pounds of alloy with an 8.6 BHN hardness estimate.

Where is that calculator that you found which uses '5' for pure lead?

[OS OK]

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...oy-calculators

I think this is it...been a while. It's a spreadsheet...Looks like this, only more organized on the X-cell spreadsheet (seems that I can't copy correctly to do it justice!) all the columns are squashed together here.

Lead Alloy Calculator Cost Calculator module
7/6/12 by bumpo628
Description Tin % Antimony % Arsenic % Copper % Silver % Lead % Weight (lbs) Hardness Unit Price ($ / lb) Price ($)
40 to 1 2.44% 0% 0% 0% 0% 97.6% Brinell 8 $2.41 $0.00
30 to 1 3.23% 0% 0% 0% 0% 96.8% Brinell 9 $2.57 $0.00
25 to 1 3.85% 0% 0% 0% 0% 96.2% Brinell 9 $2.67 $0.00
20 to 1 4.76% 0% 0% 0% 0% 95.2% Brinell 10 $2.79 $0.00
16 to 1 5.88% 0% 0% 0% 0% 94.1% Brinell 11 $2.89 $0.00
10 to 1 9.09% 0% 0% 0% 0% 90.9% Brinell 12 $3.44 $0.00

Pure Antimony 0% 100.00% 0% 0% 0% 0.0% Brinell 50 $13.99 $0.00
Chilled Shot 0% 2.00% 0.625% 0% 0% 97.4% Brinell 10 $2.02 $0.00
Magnum Shot (6 or 9) 0% 4.00% 1.25% 0% 0% 94.8% Brinell 13 $1.95 $0.00
Magnum Shot (7 - 8.5) 0% 6.00% 1.25% 0% 0% 92.8% Brinell 13 $1.75 $0.00
Antimonial Lead 0% 5.00% 0% 0% 0% 95.0% Brinell 13 $1.89 $0.00
Rotometals Super Hard 0% 30.00% 0% 0% 0% 70.0% Brinell 36 $4.09 $0.00

40/60 Solder 40.00% 0% 0% 0% 0% 60.0% Brinell 15 $8.94 $0.00
50/50 Solder 50.00% 0% 0% 0% 0% 50.0% Brinell 14 $9.97 $0.00
60/40 Solder 60.00% 0% 0% 0% 0% 40.0% Brinell 16 $11.59 $0.00
63/37 Solder 63.00% 0% 0% 0% 0% 37.0% Brinell 17 $11.99 $0.00
Pewter 92.50% 6.00% 0% 1.50% 0% 0.0% Brinell 23 $5.00 $0.00
Lead Free 95/5 Solder (Cu) 95.00% 0% 0% 5.00% 0% 0.0% Brinell 15 $0.00
Lead Free 95/5 Solder (Sb) 95.00% 5.00% 0% 0% 0% 0.0% Brinell 15 $18.49 $0.00
Lead Free 95/5 Solder (Ag) 96.00% 0% 0% 0% 4.00% 0.0% Brinell 15 $0.00
Pure Tin 100.00% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.0% 0.0625 Brinell 7 $15.99 $1.00

Electrotype 2.50% 2.50% 0% 0% 0% 95.0% Brinell 11 $0.00
Linotype 4.00% 12.00% 0% 0% 0% 84.0% Brinell 19 $1.50 $0.00
Stereotype 6.00% 14.00% 0% 0% 0% 80.0% Brinell 23 $0.00
Monotype 9.00% 19.00% 0% 0% 0% 72.0% Brinell 26 $2.50 $0.00
Foundrytype 15.00% 23.00% 0% 0% 0% 62.0% Brinell 30 $0.00

Pure Lead 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100.0% 10 Brinell 5 $1.20 $12.00
Stick On Wheel Weight 0.25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 99.8% Brinell 6 $1.16 $0.00
Range Lead (avg.) 0.17% 1.00% 0% 0% 0% 98.8% Brinell 10 $1.02 $0.00
Clip On Wheel Weight 0.50% 3.00% 0.25% 0% 0% 96.3% 10 Brinell 12 $1.08 $10.80
Isotope Lead (lg. cores) 1.00% 3.00% 0% 0% 0% 96.0% Brinell 11 $1.11 $0.00
Isotope Lead (ingots) 2.50% 2.50% 0% 0% 0% 95.0% Brinell 11 $1.17 $0.00
Lyman No. 2 5.00% 5.00% 0% 0% 0% 90.0% Brinell 15 $2.99 $0.00
Hardball Alloy 2.00% 6.00% 0% 0% 0% 92.0% Brinell 16 $2.69 $0.00

Custom Alloy 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.0% Brinell 9 $0.00
Custom Alloy 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.0% Brinell 9 $0.00

Mixed Alloy Tin % Antimony % Arsenic % Copper % Silver % Lead % Weight Est. Hardness Unit Price ($ / lb) Price ($)
0.56% 1.50% 0.12% 0.00% 0.00% 97.8% 20.1 10.1 $1.19 $23.80

Notes: Results:
Yellow fields are input for the formula. Boolit Weight (grains) 200
Antimony content increases hardness. Tin content improves mold fill-out and adds a little hardness. Calculator Update Page
Boolits with more than 6% Antimony will be too brittle. Copper content increases hardness. Boolit Cost (ea.) $0.034
Arsenic is a grain refiner that greatly improves heat treating and quenching in lead/antimony alloys.
Hollow points intended for hunting/expansion should be about 2% Sn and 2% Sb. Cost per 20 pcs $0.68
Water quenching increases hardness. For example, WW alloy can go from 12 up to 18. Cost per 50 pcs $1.69
Estimated hardness calculated by Rotometals formula: Brinell = 8.60 + ( 0.29 * %Tin ) + ( 0.92 * %Antimony ) Cost per 100 pcs $3.39
According to Missouri Bullet, the optimum Brinell Hardness = CUP / 1279.8. See your load data for the CUP. Cost per 500 pcs $16.95
References: Cost per 1000 pcs $33.89
www.castboolits.gunloads.com . www.lasc.us/SuperHard.htm . www.lasc.us/WiljenArsenic.htm Solder Ref.
www.missouribullet.com/technical.php . www.lasc.us/CastBulletNotes.htm . www.lasc.us/HeatTreat.htm . Qty of boolits with 20.1 lbs of alloy = 702
www.fellingfamily.net/isolead/index.html . www.midwayusa.com . From Ingot to Target - Glen Fryxell .
Where to buy lead:
Castboolits Vendor Sales Castboolits Swappin & Sellin RotoMetals.com MissouriBullet.com Cost module concept by Oreo

[Traffer]

OK, here we go. This is where the confusion started for me. I purchased 25lb of this lead.
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...shipping-12-10)
I was surprised when I tested it and it came out at 11.5 to 12bhn. I bought it thinking that it would be considerably harder. According to the hardness calculator here it should be in the 16 to 18bhn range. Another member posted the Rotometals formula starting with 5. So it would be 5+ (.92 times the percentage of antimony) which comes out to be 11.9bhn. That really confused me. Through my investigation I have found that the starting number for the Rotometals formula is actually 8.6 which would put 7.5% antimony alloy at 16bhn. However, The lead that I received is actually the same hardness as range scrap which is right around 12bhn. I am trying to ascertain if I was sold range scrap and told it was 7.5% antimony. If it was 7.5% antimony it would be much much more useful to me to work up an alloy for my 9mm. I am planning on using powder that will put the pressure at nearly 25,000 psi so I need harder lead. That is what this thread is all about.

[imashooter2]

Hardness alone cannot tell you the content or percentages of an alloy. If you need to know what is actually in your alloy, your only realistic option is to have someone with an XRF gun shoot it for you.

From the ad link you posted, member orisolo posts images of an XRF analysis of what he was selling. It seems probable that what was pictured is what was sold.

[Chris C]

Traffer, you'd be surprised the info you'll find on this link. http://www.lasc.us/CastBulletNotes.htm It has helped me tremendously in gaining understanding of this lead/antimony/tin voo-doo stuff.

[Yodogsandman]

Did you wait any amount of time after casting to check the hardness? The hardness varies greatly between the time you cast them and say 3 weeks later if using them air cooled.

[montana_charlie]

Thanks OS OK, but that got me to page 1 of an 11 page thread.

Here is what I did,

I downloaded one of the calculators, then clicked on the cell which holds the Estimated Hardness.
That reveals the formula for that calculation ... which uses 8.6 for the hardness of pure lead.
It's found in Cell I47 in the calculator edition I am using.

First, I changed the 8.6 to 5.
I ran a 'request' for the hardness of 95 pounds of lead and 5 pounds of tin.
I already know that the correct answer is 7.8 BHN, and the calculator result was 6.6 ... closer than the 8.6 previously returned.

Then, I started changing the multiplication factor for Tin, raising it until I got a readout of 7.8.

Feeling that the lead/tin ratio was now closer to correct, I set out to correct the Antimony part of the calculation.

For that, I left the same 5 pounds of tin in place and added 5 pounds of antimony, then reducing lead weight to 90 pounds.
The result was down around 12-something, which is wrong. The alloy (90/5/5) is actually Lyman #2, and we all know it is supposed to be 15 BHN.

So, I started increasing the value of the multiplier for antimony.
When I found a number that produced an estimated hardness of 15, I ran a different test to see if the new formula works.

I entered 97 pounds of lead, 1.5 pounds of antimony, and 1.5 pounds of tin. I already know this alloy tests at 8.2 BHN

With the new formula in the Estimated Hardness cell, the calculator returned 8 BHN ... a LOT closer than any calculator I have seen to date.

In the end, this is the formula in Cell I47.

=5+(0.55*B47*100)+(1.45*C47*100)

Try it out on alloys that you know the hardness of, and see how well it works.

[bumpo628]

Thanks OS OK, but that got me to page 1 of an 11 page thread.

Here is what I did,

I downloaded one of the calculators, then clicked on the cell which holds the Estimated Hardness.
That reveals the formula for that calculation ... which uses 8.6 for the hardness of pure lead.
It's found in Cell I47 in the calculator edition I am using.

First, I changed the 8.6 to 5.
I ran a 'request' for the hardness of 95 pounds of lead and 5 pounds of tin.
I already know that the correct answer is 7.8 BHN, and the calculator result was 6.6 ... closer than the 8.6 previously returned.

Then, I started changing the multiplication factor for Tin, raising it until I got a readout of 7.8.

Feeling that the lead/tin ratio was now closer to correct, I set out to correct the Antimony part of the calculation.

For that, I left the same 5 pounds of tin in place and added 5 pounds of antimony, then reducing lead weight to 90 pounds.
The result was down around 12-something, which is wrong. The alloy (90/5/5) is actually Lyman #2, and we all know it is supposed to be 15 BHN.

So, I started increasing the value of the multiplier for antimony.
When I found a number that produced an estimated hardness of 15, I ran a different test to see if the new formula works.

I entered 97 pounds of lead, 1.5 pounds of antimony, and 1.5 pounds of tin. I already know this alloy tests at 8.2 BHN

With the new formula in the Estimated Hardness cell, the calculator returned 8 BHN ... a LOT closer than any calculator I have seen to date.

In the end, this is the formula in Cell I47.

=5+(0.55*B47*100)+(1.45*C47*100)

Try it out on alloys that you know the hardness of, and see how well it works.

I tried to find a formula that started at 5 too, but I couldn't do it.
Your formula doesn't give the correct value for Lyman #2 (12.25 bhn is the result - not 15 bhn), so it isn't quite right either.

I think the problem is that it isn't linear.

The rotometals formula that starts at 8.6 gives the correct values for alloys that have at least 1% of both tin and antimony. The upper limit is accurate with alloys commonly used in boolit casting.
I would love to have a formula that matches all the known data points, but until then we can use the rotometals formula as long as we recognize the limitations.

[jsizemore]

A little levity goes a long way! It's just a little embarrassing though being the butt of the joke.

charlie

Not if you do it regularly.

[OS OK]

"This stuff ain't 'rocket science' boys...It's more like 'horseshoes and hand grenades'...'close is good enough'!''

"Don't be overthinking this mess, your waisting brain cells you'll need later in life."

One day you might find your retired self sitting in front of your pot...staring...wondering why your sitting there!

[runfiverun]

For 9mm, I use COWW's, then add about 2 oz pewter to the full pot and water quench the boolits as I cast them. Never bothered to check the hardness, it works. So, I'm using an alloy of about 95% lead, 3% antimony, 1.5% tin with trace amounts of arsenic and copper with a approximate BHN of 13.5 before water quenching.

I'd cut that alloy of 7.5 % antimony at least in half with pure lead and add just enough tin to fill out your mold well. Water quench if you feel you need to. BHN is way overrated in the realm of casting useful boolits.

me too.
target about 900-950 fps with your load and pick the proper diameter.

[Traffer]

OKey Dokey,
I am going to go with this in my Norinco 9mm:
start with 12bhn lead. (unquenched wheel weights) Cast in a Lee 358-117R mold (.358" 117 grain round nose) (I slugged my barrel and it comes out to .3565") Going to use 6.2 grains of HS6 and seat it to 1.1' oal. I will let you know if it takes my hand off.Attachment 171015

[Motor]

Traffer.

I use whatever lead I can get and make it harder with linotype.

It's funny that you mentioned 15bhn in your earlier post for 9mm because that is where I ended up when I did my load development. These are loads only hot enough for reliable function in my rather slide heavy Ruger pistols.

Just as a side note: Since switching from lube to powder coating I can now use 12bhn hardness.

In fact with the powder coating I'm using 12bhn for everything. It makes casting much simpler.

Motor

[Traffer]

I hear so much good stuff about powder coating. I am going to do it as soon as I learn the other basics here. lol

[montana_charlie]

I tried to find a formula that started at 5 too, but I couldn't do it.
Your formula doesn't give the correct value for Lyman #2 (12.25 bhn is the result - not 15 bhn), so it isn't quite right either.

Did you make all three changes in that formula?

My calculator looks like this when given the ingredients of Lyman #2.



To get the right results in the Custom Alloy boxes, you have to make the same changes there.

[bumpo628]

Did you make all three changes in that formula?

My calculator looks like this when given the ingredients of Lyman #2.



To get the right results in the Custom Alloy boxes, you have to make the same changes there.

I got a different result before because I wrote a new formula in a blank excel sheet and I'm not sure what I did wrong.
I just double-checked it in the calculator and it works like you said. It's a bit off on the lino and mono calculations, but that's no big deal since it works on most of the common lower % boolit alloys. It is definitely better than the current one.

I'll have to update the calculator with your corrected formula next time I revise it.

Thanks a lot Charlie!