Ladle vs Bottom pour

[Rusty W]

Got a new mould from NOE awhile back, just now getting around to casting w/it. Started the ProMelt up & the hot plate for the mould. Started casting about 40-50 bullets bringing the mould up to temp & since it was a new mold just seeing how it acted/reacted. It dropped good shootable boolits right from the start so I just kept going. I had a lyman ladle laying by the pot because I have a 45/70 mould that just refuses to produce a good boolit unless I use a ladle. An idea popped into my head to see how the NOE would do w/a ladle. It's a little slower than the bottom pour but it produces a prettier boolit. Question is why? Same alloy, same temp, about 675, only difference is ladle vs bottom pour. I haven't measured them or weighed them to see if there's a difference there. They'll probably shoot the same through the Ruger & the target will never know the difference, if I'm lucky enough to hit it..lol

[pka45]

Very interested to see where this goes. I just use the ladle right now, no experience with bottom pour.

[runfiverun]

that's a mold temperature difference.
slow down your cadence with the bottom pour.

[M-Tecs]

The middle bullet on the right has a serious base flaw. The bottom one has base damage. The frosting and base damage are most likely due to higher mold temp due to a quicker cadence.

[Rusty W]

There's some bad bases on a few boolits. The bullshop lube creeped a little. Curious on the window of mold temp. It's a dual cavity aluminum & I have a probe & thermometer, I just need to drill it for the probe. I made a pour from the bottom pour, watched the sprue solidify, break, empty then fill with the ladle. I done this 3 times, 1 pour w/the ladle then back to the bottom pour, then back to the ladle. Each time the ladle produced a prettier boolit. I also tried the pressure cast, holding the nozzle against the mould & letting it use what's in the ladle for a sprue, and holding the ladle about 1" away & letting it pour in making a sprue on top. Either way the ladle made a prettier boolit. Looks like it's time to change the battery in the thermometer & do some testing. Or just run the things through the 45 & get some BAC on them so I can run them through my other 45...lol

[Mk42gunner]

Quite the contrast between casting styles there. I do think rfr has it right, a cadence thing.

With that said, while I can make acceptable boolits by either method; I enjoy ladle casting more than bottom pouring.

Robert

[Vinne]

1+ slow down your bottom pour and they should cast just fine.

[Devon]

Heat rises. The surface lead in the pot may be 50 degrees hotter than the lead that comes out of the bottom pour spout.

[44man]

I have never had luck with BP. Too fussy and needs attention every few boolits. I call the hole a slag port.

[GLynn41]

since we are on dipping -- I have an RCBS ladle and Lyman -- and the Lyman is far and away better
an old NRA cast bullet book I have mentioned that poured bullets can tend to be a little lighter than bottom pour
and I cast this way because I got tired of the mess I had from a bottom pour I changed over to the ladle very quickly when I started
casting in the 70's and have no desire to go back I am content

[country gent]

I started out with a couple bottom pour pots. I built a big pot for smelting and odds and ends work. Started ladle casting the bigger bullets and found my reject rate went way down. And bullets looked better with the ladle. I don't pour for a sprue with the ladle but pour a full ladle letting the excess run off and back into the pot. I get great bullets this way. For ladles I use the lymann, RCBS and just started experimenting with the rowel#1. I prefer the RCBS currently. I have one I'm converting to a dual spout for my big 2 cavity moulds. The rowel is becoming a favorite for the single cavities though. Experiment with temp flow and angle of the moulds see what you can do.

[TexasGrunt]

With my Lee aluminum molds and bottom pour pot I keep a wet cloth nearby to cool down the mold. Helps keep the cadence going. I just press the bottom of the mold on the wet cloth for a few seconds.

[NoAngel]

I've tried both. Opinions vary and they are just that opinions. My opinion, bottom pour sucks. The vast majority of the time, a ladle will produce superior bullets.

[Soundguy]

that's a mold temperature difference.
slow down your cadence with the bottom pour.

Agreed. the ones on the right, being ladle, are just a tad cooler.. the frosted ones on the left are too hot from the BP.

[Soundguy]

I've tried both. Opinions vary and they are just that opinions. My opinion, bottom pour sucks. The vast majority of the time, a ladle will produce superior bullets.

Once you learn how to use a bottom pour, they work fine.

[Crusty Deary Ol'Coot]

Bottom pour "faster" then ladle pouring -------------- Well that depends!

Yes I have tried a bottom pour and for years have been a ladle caster.

The Rowell bottom pour ladle is A #1.

But then as to speed and my comment, "depends" ------------

If your cruising along with one mold your likely good to go with a bottom pour, until you exhaust your alloy supply. Then What?

I seldom cast with only one mold, the exception being with my 4 cavity 465gr - 45/70 bullets where I use a different alloy. But in my typical/normal casting, even when casting by myself, I will be running 2 - 3 molds, all of 4 cavity or greater whenever possible and there is simply no way any bottom pour pot other then possibly some commercial version can keep up the pace.

My pot is of 40 - 45lbs capacity and using it over the old Coleman gas stove, I can continue to cast even while adding back sprues or additional ingots.

Even though a bottom pour may be faster, as long as the alloy lasts, I'd need at least 2 and likely 3 such pots to maintain my casting pace with the open pot and bottom pour ladle.

My suggestion as per the original posters question is not to slow down the casting rhythm, but to run an additional 1 or 2 molds which will allow a rapid rate of casting while allowing each mold to properly cool. BUT, doing so will rapidly drain that bottom pour pot!

Crusty Deary Ol'Coot

[Yodogsandman]

Bottom pour for most, ladle pour for heavier boolits over 400 gr.

[paul h]

I've only cast with a bottom pour furnace, and have been happy with the results of the accuracy of my cast bullets and my production. I primarily cast for handguns.

If I was a competitive shooter I would investigate ladle pouring to see if I could produce more accurate bullets.

I've never found frosty bullets to be an issue, so long as I get complete fillout and no deformities in the base and bands I'm happy.

[country gent]

My casting pot is 100+ lbs also and when casting this pot is large enough for 2 others to cast with me. (I seldom cast alone due to mobility issues ). Its mass makes regulating temps far easier. Even when we stop to flux and add sprues back it seldom drops more than 15*-20*. I'm not stopping constantly to refill the pot, when you cast 360-550 grn bullets running 2 moulds and 2 others are casting the same pot levels drop pretty quick. A 20lb pot dosnt last long when casting these big bullets. I find ladle casting to be more consistant and as fast as a bottom pour now. Once the muscle memory and routine takes over things go quick, one thing to do is always do everything the same every thing sits in its place and is where it should be. after a short time your not looking for tappers ladles or tools you just pick them up.

[Soundguy]

Bottom pour "faster" then ladle pouring -------------- Well that depends!

Yes I have tried a bottom pour and for years have been a ladle caster.

The Rowell bottom pour ladle is A #1.

But then as to speed and my comment, "depends" ------------

If your cruising along with one mold your likely good to go with a bottom pour, until you exhaust your alloy supply. Then What?

I seldom cast with only one mold, the exception being with my 4 cavity 465gr - 45/70 bullets where I use a different alloy. But in my typical/normal casting, even when casting by myself, I will be running 2 - 3 molds, all of 4 cavity or greater whenever possible and there is simply no way any bottom pour pot other then possibly some commercial version can keep up the pace.

My pot is of 40 - 45lbs capacity and using it over the old Coleman gas stove, I can continue to cast even while adding back sprues or additional ingots.

Even though a bottom pour may be faster, as long as the alloy lasts, I'd need at least 2 and likely 3 such pots to maintain my casting pace with the open pot and bottom pour ladle.

My suggestion as per the original posters question is not to slow down the casting rhythm, but to run an additional 1 or 2 molds which will allow a rapid rate of casting while allowing each mold to properly cool. BUT, doing so will rapidly drain that bottom pour pot!

Crusty Deary Ol'Coot

Its sad that some are unable to add lead to their pot while casting.

Just keep your ingots ready and stacked. I pre make my alloy ingots, vs trying to alloy in the pot. Keep them stacked and ready to add. I make them in 1/2 & 1 # ingots, so there is very little heat loss adding an ingot.

Math is easy.. 1# is 7000 grains. If you are casting big 500gr 45-70 projectiles, and recycling your sprue, every 14 projectiles, feed in another # ingot, etc...