MidSouth Shooters SupplyLee PrecisionGraf & SonsInline Fabrication
Titan ReloadingRepackboxRotoMetals2Wideners

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 83

Thread: Most people ARE NOT baking PC long enough

  1. #61
    Boolit Master
    Dragonheart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Katy, Texas
    Posts
    1,858
    Quote Originally Posted by Vettepilot View Post
    New to PC and researching. I want to build up my stock of ammo, and would like to PC. Some of the ammo will undoubtedly get stored long term. Months or longer; hence my concern.

    It seems that some of the posters here are missing the point, which is not whether the PC is adhering well and shooting fine with their particular bake time/process, but whether the end result is impervious to gunpowder.

    Personally, I am still not convinced, at least as regards all powders and long term storage effects.

    Comments wecome...

    Vettepilot
    Properly cured powder coated bullets causing cartridge failure, long term ammo storage problems, eroding gun barrels, global warming, etc. is a horse that is dead and buried as far as I am concerned.

    I went to the range last Tuesday and fired 200 PC rounds loaded 3 years ago and every single round fired as expected. So I would tell you not to worry about it. Load and store PC just like you would any jacket or plated bullet, but that is just Me. If you are still worried, then forget the PC completely and store copper jacketed bullets like the military does.

    As far as a proper PC cure I would suggest you follow the actual Powder Manufactures Recommended Curing Schedule for the polymer being used. A proper cure is the only way to achieve all the benefits of PC. As this original post implies, many are not curing the polymer properly and instead of listening to the powder manufactures they are getting their information off You Tube, this site, some internet post or other dubious source. But once again that is just Me.

  2. #62
    Hopefully ensuring a proper cure will be the answer, and the end result will be impervious to gunpowder. My concern is far less about degradation of the powder coat itself; much more about degradation of the gun powder. In my research, I encountered at least two reported cases of the gunpowder being severely degraded. (Please don't ask me to quote those sources. I have been ALL OVER the web looking into this, and could never remember where I read those two reports.)

    I would be severely bummed out to gear up to PC, spend the time and money to load up a thousand rounds of 30.06 and another thousand of 44 mag and 9mm, only to find out a year or so later they are duds or poor performers. More testing is definitely needed IMHO. I wish industry would get involved/interested in this concept.

    Vettepilot
    "Those who sacrifice freedom for security, have neither."
    Benjamin Franklin. (A very wise man!)

  3. #63
    A bit off topic, but....

    Apparently powder coating, properly done and with the proper alloy projectiles, will allow use of full magnum loads in say 44 magnum for example. However, up to what velocities have you guys had good results in rifle applications?

    Thanks,
    Vettepilot
    "Those who sacrifice freedom for security, have neither."
    Benjamin Franklin. (A very wise man!)

  4. #64
    Boolit Master
    Dragonheart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Katy, Texas
    Posts
    1,858
    Velocity with properly coated and cured PC is not an issue. I use jacketed load data for PC and the only thing I see is about a 5% velocity increase. I have been doing this since 2012 and haven't bought a bullet since, but 99% of my shooting now is handgun. If you want to take my word for it make and load all the PC handgun bullets you want and they will be ready when you are. Full power not a problem even +P not a problem, good accuracy at handgun ranges, for me that means 25 yards.

    However, accurate full power rifle loads at distance (100+ yards) are a problem and not because of the PC. The problem is in the non-concentric (lopsided) cast bullets. Non-concentric is inherent in the casting process and PC can not correct this. For improved results you need to pick your mold and take steps to correct the problem. For this best read the post "Accuracy at 350 yards".

  5. #65
    Boolit Master

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NW Ohio, almost as N and W as you can be :-)
    Posts
    2,598
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonheart View Post
    However, accurate full power rifle loads at distance (100+ yards) are a problem and not because of the PC. The problem is in the non-concentric (lopsided) cast bullets. Non-concentric is inherent in the casting process and PC can not correct this. For improved results you need to pick your mold and take steps to correct the problem. For this best read the post "Accuracy at 350 yards".
    Some of the issue IMHO has to do with the bullet exit at the muzzle, some think the bullet nose bends while the body is still in the barrel due to the high RPM of the bullet. PC seems to have went a lot further towards full power rifle loads easier than any other method though.

    Bill
    Both ends WHAT a player

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by Vettepilot View Post
    Hopefully ensuring a proper cure will be the answer, and the end result will be impervious to gunpowder. My concern is far less about degradation of the powder coat itself; much more about degradation of the gun powder. In my research, I encountered at least two reported cases of the gunpowder being severely degraded. (Please don't ask me to quote those sources. I have been ALL OVER the web looking into this, and could never remember where I read those two reports.)

    I would be severely bummed out to gear up to PC, spend the time and money to load up a thousand rounds of 30.06 and another thousand of 44 mag and 9mm, only to find out a year or so later they are duds or poor performers. More testing is definitely needed IMHO. I wish industry would get involved/interested in this concept.

    Vettepilot

    Almost everyone I've seen who quotes their bake time for PC is well below factory specs for required bake time to achieve full cure.
    Many You-Tube PC'ers make pretty boolits that are ARE NOT fully cured trying to save time. You may/are trusting your live to what you do reloading.
    YOU DON'T CUT CORNERS RELOADING PC is part of reloading. Get and read the manufacturers specs [bake temperature, when to start timing your bake either by alloy temperature of flow of PC depending on manufacturers specs] for a full cure and do your PC right.

    Like dragon said and as far as I've seen, PROPERLY CURED PC'd boolits will not react to or affect gunpowder.

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by Conditor22 View Post
    Almost everyone I've seen who quotes their bake time for PC is well below factory specs for required bake time to achieve full cure.
    Many You-Tube PC'ers make pretty boolits that are ARE NOT fully cured trying to save time. You may/are trusting your live to what you do reloading.
    YOU DON'T CUT CORNERS RELOADING PC is part of reloading. Get and read the manufacturers specs [bake temperature, when to start timing your bake either by alloy temperature of flow of PC depending on manufacturers specs] for a full cure and do your PC right.

    Like dragon said and as far as I've seen, PROPERLY CURED PC'd boolits will not react to or affect gunpowder.
    I certainly agree with this. What's a few extra minutes of bake time to ensure a proper cure cost you? Almost nothing, and certainly worth it IMHO.

    Vettepilot
    "Those who sacrifice freedom for security, have neither."
    Benjamin Franklin. (A very wise man!)

  8. #68
    Boolit Master
    Dragonheart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Katy, Texas
    Posts
    1,858
    Quote Originally Posted by Willbird View Post
    Some of the issue IMHO has to do with the bullet exit at the muzzle, some think the bullet nose bends while the body is still in the barrel due to the high RPM of the bullet. PC seems to have went a lot further towards full power rifle loads easier than any other method though.

    Bill
    I was not a physics major, but I have had lengthy conversations with physicists discussing the cast bullet problem as well as testing of full power PC bullets. The problem is the rifle bullets, which tend to be much longer in length come out of the mold lopsided. This is not a phonma of just rifle bullets all cast bullets are lopsided. You can easily see this using a micrometer. Sizing makes the bands round, but does nothing about the remainder of the bullet. So you still have a non-concentric (lopsided) bullet. As one physicist said, a fired non-concentric bullet will start to wobble especially at higher velocities; once the wobble starts it will only get worse as the distance increases. I think most have found this to be true and the reason standard cast bullet accuracy has been achieved at short ranges with lower velocities. But what is the point of shooting a .556 at 22LR velocities that typically won't function the action?

    When NOE introduced nose sizing bushing I thought this was the answer, but I quickly found out after purchasing a bunch of these bushings that they truly would size and make the bullet nose round. However, the bullet remained non-concentric because this two step sizing process created two separate round surfaces. Like laying a nickel on a quarter, you have two perfect circles, but that does not mean they are concentric to each other. This is the reason I believe swaging the entire bullet is the best answer, but how many are going to invest in what swage dies cost?

    To my knowledge, BAMA, has made the most progress in overall sizing the nose rider design bullets to make the most concentric PC cast bullets I have seen and his full power long range accuracy proves that is the answer. Additionally, Bama's gas checks are seated as good as it gets. Bullet nose bending doesn't hold water for me when the more obvious, lopsided bullet, is apparent. Run a rifle match bullet through a concentricity gauge and you will see a dial that just doesn't move regardless where it is set on the bullet. Do the same with a cast bullet and see the difference.

    I would suggest first reading what Bama has accomplished if you wish to pursue the subject and good luck with it.

  9. #69
    My question to this would be, exactly why do cast bullets cast lopsided, and is there anything we can possibly do about it?

    If it is due to uneven cooling, or the "drop" out of the mold, (while soft), would keeping them in the mold longer help?

    Vettepilot
    "Those who sacrifice freedom for security, have neither."
    Benjamin Franklin. (A very wise man!)

  10. #70
    Boolit Master
    Dragonheart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Katy, Texas
    Posts
    1,858
    Short answer, no. Lopsided cast bullets has nothing to do with alloy, the quality of the mold, the experience of the uses or the casting technique. It is primarily the physics of the cooling of the mold & alloy and the necessary mold tolerance allowing the mold to function.

    The only fix is to reshape the entire bullet to make it concentric. Since the majority of what I shoot now is handgun it is not a big issue for me as my PC handgun bullets will easily deliver under 1-1/2" groups at 25 yards, which is better than I shoot.

  11. #71
    Boolit Man



    tucumcari_kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    98
    As Dragonheart and others have said, for safety and consistency, apply PC as recommended by the polymer manufacturer. They know what they are doing, and hopefully there are some references to bullets in that. All that said there ARE people on YouTube and other places that discuss their success or lack thereof by doing some alternate curing techniques. I applaud those people for pushing the envelope and experimenting - that is the story of this hobby. Maybe we wouldn't have a 44 magnum if Elmer Keith hadn't spilt a cylinder now and then or even more powerful cartridges if John Linebaugh hadn't taken a few chances. Most of the YouTube videos I have seen, the presenters are pretty clear to say "This is working for me, but you'll have to determine for yourself if it works" and most discuss that their techniques differ from the "norm". Most of us were taught these skills be people who were careful and cared for us. Neophytes have to be careful where they learn techniques and what they listen to. A person that will try reloading or PC after watching a single video on YouTube certainly exist but they are going to be a menace regardless. I would say to everyone KEEP EXPERIMENTING, but make it clear that it is an experiement and it differs from the norm. When possible refer to the accepted references so that the folks developing their skills will be able to find out the correct basic information while enjoying the the experiements of the pioneers and the extroverts among us.
    -Mike

  12. #72
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    1,970
    Would anyone say that powder coating bullets are different than what MOST powder coat companies powder coat and list recommendations for?

    Again I mean no hurt, harm, anguish or turmoil by my post I have posted on this posted subject. I am not baiting, trolling or calling out anyone. I am making a post based on my experience, knowledge and/or belief or opinion. That is all.
    We Know Mass Cannot Be Weighed But It Has Newtonian Weight And That Is Derived From Kilograms And Kilograms Can Be Converted to Pounds. But, Still Mass Cannot Be Weighed. But How is the kilograms obtained? Can Kilograms Be Weighed? Evidentally Yes It Can. But, Still Mass Cannot Be Weighed So Kilograms Must Not Exist. Funny Isn't It.
    One good thing out of this the next time I'm at the doctors and they want to weigh me I'll tell them mass cannot be weighed.

  13. #73
    Boolit Master

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NW Ohio, almost as N and W as you can be :-)
    Posts
    2,598
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonheart View Post
    Short answer, no. Lopsided cast bullets has nothing to do with alloy, the quality of the mold, the experience of the uses or the casting technique. It is primarily the physics of the cooling of the mold & alloy and the necessary mold tolerance allowing the mold to function.

    The only fix is to reshape the entire bullet to make it concentric. Since the majority of what I shoot now is handgun it is not a big issue for me as my PC handgun bullets will easily deliver under 1-1/2" groups at 25 yards, which is better than I shoot.
    I have proved to myself that a bullet cast in a lyman mold (pretty sure it was 452460 which actually has a bore ride band) cast from linotype sized to .452 and fired from a ransom rest can shoot 1.25" at 50 yards from a really well tuned up 1911.

    Load was 4.0 Bullseye.

    I did work over the mold and make a thicker A2 sprue plate, used A2 because I had it on hand. Used Linotype because it casts really nice and I had some on hand as a known alloy.

    Bill
    Both ends WHAT a player

  14. #74
    Boolit Master

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NW Ohio, almost as N and W as you can be :-)
    Posts
    2,598
    Quote Originally Posted by 44MAG#1 View Post
    Would anyone say that powder coating bullets are different than what MOST powder coat companies powder coat and list recommendations for?

    Again I mean no hurt, harm, anguish or turmoil by my post I have posted on this posted subject. I am not baiting, trolling or calling out anyone. I am making a post based on my experience, knowledge and/or belief or opinion. That is all.
    I have thought about your point . And I do agree that as far as I know no mfg has provided instructions for powder coating bullets....yet . Fairly certain no mfg has provided instructions for dry tumbling-shaking objects to apply the PC either .

    Most things have limits and if there is too short a curing time..............what is too LONG a curing time ? What happens if you bake at 400F for 12 hours ??

    Bill
    Both ends WHAT a player

  15. #75
    Boolit Man



    tucumcari_kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    98
    Quote Originally Posted by 44MAG#1 View Post
    Would anyone say that powder coating bullets are different than what MOST powder coat companies powder coat and list recommendations for?

    Again I mean no hurt, harm, anguish or turmoil by my post I have posted on this posted subject. I am not baiting, trolling or calling out anyone. I am making a post based on my experience, knowledge and/or belief or opinion. That is all.
    That was my hidden point, I guess. Polymer performance in regards to the substance coated and the use it is put to. Probably a little beyond the pale of what was originally intended by PC developers/manufacturers. But certainly the issue of coverage and curing should be pretty straightforward. Again, I say, the best info is the best available by the manufacturer. There is room for experimentation, I would say tumble coating isn't exactly what the manufacturer suggests, and there is a place for experimentation. If the hammer test/smash test is the most effective way of ensuring proper bullet coverage and cure, then I say if it passes that test, it must pass. If your recovered bullets are still coated and there is no leading, the proof is in the using. There is a lot of room for discussion and disagreement and I for one, think that is all a healthy way of learning and growing. As long as no one thinks their answer is the only possible "right" answer in any situation.
    -Mike

  16. #76
    Boolit Man



    tucumcari_kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    98
    Quote Originally Posted by Willbird View Post
    I have thought about your point . And I do agree that as far as I know no mfg has provided instructions for powder coating bullets....yet . Fairly certain no mfg has provided instructions for dry tumbling-shaking objects to apply the PC either .

    Most things have limits and if there is too short a curing time..............what is too LONG a curing time ? What happens if you bake at 400F for 12 hours ??

    Bill
    My bullets melted... but they looked pretty....
    -Mike

  17. #77
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Farmerville,Louisiana
    Posts
    509
    As far as cost go, to help with cure, an extra 5-10 mins. With an oven or toaster, at .08 cents per KW hour, if toaster is 1000 watts, and you run it 10 more mins. Will cost less than a few penneys, after you turn off toaster leave them in for cool down. You will still be cooking for a while.

  18. #78
    You can do your own test! AFTER your powder coated boolit passes the smash test, put it in a container surrounded by the powder you will be using under it.
    If over the period of time you plan on storing the boolit the coating doesn't react to the powder your cure time is long enough.

    I DO NOT want to load 5,000 boolits today and have them not work in 5 - 10 years.

    If your planning on shooting them in the next 3-6 months use that as your test period.

    I guess I could do a long term test but with which powder? I have apr 60 different powders from 8 manufacturers.

  19. #79
    Boolit Master
    Dragonheart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Katy, Texas
    Posts
    1,858
    Quote Originally Posted by 44MAG#1 View Post
    Would anyone say that powder coating bullets are different than what MOST powder coat companies powder coat and list recommendations for?

    Again I mean no hurt, harm, anguish or turmoil by my post I have posted on this posted subject. I am not baiting, trolling or calling out anyone. I am making a post based on my experience, knowledge and/or belief or opinion. That is all.
    You are 100% right, the powder manufacture' techs I spoke with back in 2012 did not know a thing about PC bullets, but they knew what their polymers needed to cure to obtain all the properties their polymers could deliver. The commercial powder coaters I visited didn't know anything about bullets, but they knew how to apply pc to a wide variety of objects and cure it to a beautiful finish and obtain all the properties that particular polymer could deliver.
    The physicist and chemists specializing in polymer physics I discussed PC with also were not knowledgeable with pc bullets, but they very familiar with ballistics and the properties of polymers. It was from them that I learned the polymer was hard enough, durable enough and could acheive such an exceptionally strong bond to form a jacket around the bullet provided the jacket was of sufficient thickness and properly cured. I asked if a polymer jacket could withstand the torque spin up of the 30-06's 50K chamber pressure and they confirmed it could. I have since proven with my own field tests the polymer jacket can withstand the torque spin up and others have done the same.
    One thing all these professionals had in common and was telling me to follow the cure schedule for the polymer used.
    I am all for experimenting, but we do get a number of new to PC look here for information on the process. I just believe in giving them the most correct information we have. As for me, I experiment on a regular basis, but in all honesty what would I have to gain by intentionally reducing the strength of something I know that works?

  20. #80
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    1,970
    While, no doubt you are correct and I am deficient on my out look on the subject I still believe that there is room for experimentation. Where do you think we would be if it wasnt for people experimenting like Elmer Keith, Phil Sharpe, Townsend Whelan and others like them. It isnt like powder coating specs are written in stone. I am all for experimenting on most things. I do experiment but I understand someone who wants to go directly by the book and never vary from it. I am all for that too. Shake and bake however you want to do it. By the book or by the by gosh method. As long as what you do gives the results you want that is all that matters. Not what you say or I say. But as the old saying goes "proof is in the pudding" goes here. Whether it is by the book written by some one else or by our own book.


    Again I mean no hurt, harm, anguish or turmoil by my post I have posted on this posted subject. I am not baiting, trolling or calling out anyone. I am making a post based on my experience, knowledge and/or belief or opinion. That is all.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonheart View Post
    You are 100% right, the powder manufacture' techs I spoke with back in 2012 did not know a thing about PC bullets, but they knew what their polymers needed to cure to obtain all the properties their polymers could deliver. The commercial powder coaters I visited didn't know anything about bullets, but they knew how to apply pc to a wide variety of objects and cure it to a beautiful finish and obtain all the properties that particular polymer could deliver.
    The physicist and chemists specializing in polymer physics I discussed PC with also were not knowledgeable with pc bullets, but they very familiar with ballistics and the properties of polymers. It was from them that I learned the polymer was hard enough, durable enough and could acheive such an exceptionally strong bond to form a jacket around the bullet provided the jacket was of sufficient thickness and properly cured. I asked if a polymer jacket could withstand the torque spin up of the 30-06's 50K chamber pressure and they confirmed it could. I have since proven with my own field tests the polymer jacket can withstand the torque spin up and others have done the same.
    One thing all these professionals had in common and was telling me to follow the cure schedule for the polymer used.
    I am all for experimenting, but we do get a number of new to PC look here for information on the process. I just believe in giving them the most correct information we have. As for me, I experiment on a regular basis, but in all honesty what would I have to gain by intentionally reducing the strength of something I know that works?
    We Know Mass Cannot Be Weighed But It Has Newtonian Weight And That Is Derived From Kilograms And Kilograms Can Be Converted to Pounds. But, Still Mass Cannot Be Weighed. But How is the kilograms obtained? Can Kilograms Be Weighed? Evidentally Yes It Can. But, Still Mass Cannot Be Weighed So Kilograms Must Not Exist. Funny Isn't It.
    One good thing out of this the next time I'm at the doctors and they want to weigh me I'll tell them mass cannot be weighed.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Abbreviations used in Reloading

BP Bronze Point IMR Improved Military Rifle PTD Pointed
BR Bench Rest M Magnum RN Round Nose
BT Boat Tail PL Power-Lokt SP Soft Point
C Compressed Charge PR Primer SPCL Soft Point "Core-Lokt"
HP Hollow Point PSPCL Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" C.O.L. Cartridge Overall Length
PSP Pointed Soft Point Spz Spitzer Point SBT Spitzer Boat Tail
LRN Lead Round Nose LWC Lead Wad Cutter LSWC Lead Semi Wad Cutter
GC Gas Check