Two Great Handgun Alloys

[curioushooter]

Two very useful handgun alloys...

1) 16:1 for cast Hollowpoints. Considerable testing conducted on calibrated ballistic gel has demonstrated (to me at least) that nothing can beat binary alloys. Adjust the ratio to suit the pressure level (32:1 works at 38 special pressures). I've found that 1:16 is adequate for 357 when kept in the SAAMI spec pressure level without gas checks. Even small amounts of antimony increase brittleness and reduce weight retention and decrease the performance even with Lyman devastator-type profile cavities which are designed for tertiary alloys. Despite this, they work better with binary.

2) 96-2-2. This alloy is the same hardness as 16:1 and is more economical (due to reduced tin content and ability to use wheelweights as base metal). For any solid it performs just as well and is less sticky in the mold (greater shrinkage). If desired, arsenic in the form of magnum shot can be added to alloy for heat treatment of alloy for increased hardness, though the BHN of ~11 of aircooled metal is adequate for most everything. This alloy is easily made with wheelweights. Add one to two parts clip on WW to one part pure lead and then add an ounce of tin for every three pounds of WW+pure lead. It can also be made very easily with pure metals by adding three ounces of Roto's SuperHard and one ounce of tin to every three pounds of pure lead. I have found that the quality of WW metal varies. I recently received a large quantity of OLD WW metal (from the 60s) from a co-worker who's father cast but passed away back in the 70s. She had been keeping it in the basement of the house (which she inherited) for all these years. This is without a doubt the finest WW metal I've ever used. Clean and it has significant tin. It casts beautifully on its own. Modern WWs which I abandoned some years ago are not as good, but they still are cheap and do have signifigant antimony content. I think with modern WWs two parts WW to one part lead is about right, while with these older WWs more some more lead is needed.

[Bazoo]

I thought wheel weights were more like 96 lead, 3 antimony, and .3 tin. That's what Fryxell's book says and that's in line with most all I've seen for modern weights.

[Burnt Fingers]

The only handgun that I use lead harder than 11-12 is my .327 FM.

[curioushooter]

I thought wheel weights were more like 96 lead, 3 antimony, and .3 tin. That's what Fryxell's book says and that's in line with most all I've seen for modern weights.

This is true. This is why two pounds of modern WWs added to one pound of pure lead arrives at 2% antimony. Then add another once of tin per pound, in this case three ounces. Going a tad over with the tin is not a problem. WWs contain arsenic which allows for water quenching and heat treating. Even with just 2% antimony, the effect is noticeable. I am certain that the old 60s era WWs I am working with currently have greater tin and antimony. I would say they are closer to 4% antimony and .5% tin. But there is no way to know for sure obviously.

The hardness of 1:16 and aircooled 96-2-2 is ~11 BHN. If you heat treat or water quench the BHN on the 96-2-2 can be increased.

It's easy to obtain pure lead and tin at my local scrapyards. I can buy rotometals superhard to get antimony. I strongly recommend little to no antimony be used if you are casting hollowpoints.

A lot of the work done "testing" hollowpoints is done on wet newspaper or milk jugs of water; these are both dubious mediums and I've never been able to get good data from either. All the testing I have done is on properly calibrated ballistic gel, and this is why I think binary alloys are best contrary to some advice given. High tin content seems to be essential for good weight retention, an issue that is often overlooked. I did a lot of initial testing with a 91-6-3 which is 6% tin and 3% antimony in 357 mag. When I retested with just simple 16:1 (94-6) the performance was similar or better at typical handgun velocities. No leading was observed either with the same bullets, same lube, sized in the same sizer. That extra hardness from the antimony is just not necessary, especially if gas checks are being used. I did extensive testing with 32:1 at 38 special pressure. This worked well great too.

No alloy I've tried works in my 357 rifle unless it has a gas check.

[fredj338]

I admit to not really caring about my alloy for most handgun applications. I shoot mostly range scrap. If I want it a bit harder I will add clip ww or a small amount of lino, but generally, 10-11bhn range scrap shoots great.

[curioushooter]

Range scrap is pretty much just lead, isn't it?

I agree, alloy doesn't matter much with solids, the key is keeping things consistent on lot to lot if you desire accuracy. My observation is that many people are satisfied with pretty low performance in handguns, and if this is you, then pretty much anything will do.

My interests are pretty much long range handgunnning, like to 100 yards, and cast hollowpoints. Both of these require attention to detail with alloy. I've found that by basically using just two alloys across the board (one for HPs and one for solids) I was able to isolate variables to figure out better what was not working.

[ShooterAZ]

One other alloy I have found very useful for handguns is from the 34 pound Isotope Cores. It is purported to be 96/3/1. It come up occasionally on the S&S forum, and I have laid in a decent supply of it. The BHN is around 9-10, and it's super clean and casts and shoots very well.