"hard cast"

[porthos]

i'm getting tired of seeing the term hardcast in the for sale section. usually refering to 9mm and 45 auto bullets. i think that "hard cast" would be counter productive. comments??

[StrawHat]

I prefer softer boolits, myself. It is the size and the lube that prevent leading, not the alloy.

Kevin

[Delkal]

The term "hard cast" has been overplayed since its peak in the 90's. Everyone was told they wanted super hard bullets so commercial casters started casting 1:1 linotype : pure lead that was the same hardness than the legendary Lyman #2 because it was cheap. Then commercial casters started adding even more linotype since harder is always better.

A friend gave me some "hard cast" heavy for caliber bullets to try for a hot loaded 45 colt from a famous named manufacturer. But since I already had a too much to handle 300 grain load they sat for a decade. Later heard about hard cast being brittle so I clamped one of these mega performance for big critter bullets into my vice and hit it with a hammer.......it crumbled into pieces!

Since then I have always added at least 2% tin/ pewter to my alloys. Linotype is very hard but it doesn't have enough tin to make it tough or perform well on game so now I always try for an equal amount of tin and antimony.

Sure there are exceptions. A bullet for punching paper at BHN<12 just needs a small amount of tin to fill up the mold. And any alloy like 96/2/2 or 94/3/3 while less hard than Lyman number 2 will still be an excellent performer since the magic happens when tin and antimony is equal.

I do stop adding tin for super hard alloys at 4-5% but I rarely need bullets > BHN 20.

[20:1]

"Hard Cast" is simply an alloy that contains a metal besides lead with the intent of making the bullet harder. How much harder? It doesn't matter, just harder than pure lead.

How was that, Bret?

[405grain]

Commercial bullet casters prefer to use harder alloys because it prevents dents and damage to the bullets during shipping. There are two things wrong with this type of bullet. First, it is usually too hard for it's given application, and may not expand, or might even break up on impact instead of penetrating. Second, factory bullets are "one size fits all". When we cast our own we can tailor the bullets diameter and softness/hardness to fit our own firearm and application.

If the bullets in the swapping & selling section are factory made bullets, then there's a high probability that they are indeed "hard cast".

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

I actually like it when people use the term "Hardcast", because it lets me know their level of knowledge on the topic.

[Nobade]

I actually like it when people use the term "Hardcast", because it lets me know their level of knowledge on the topic.

Especially hardcast heads.

[Bigslug]

The eyes of the vast majority of shooters will glaze over the moment you start talking about the technicalities of reloading.

The eyes of the vast majority of reloaders will glaze over the moment you start talking about the technicalities of either reloading for precision or bullet casting.

The term "hard cast" is for that vast majority unwilling to acquire the education or those lacking the time and energy to try explaining it to them. Really not that big a deal so long as the producer/seller is the one that understands the problems. In his writings, Veral Smith contends that for a lot of applications, so long as both the bullet fit and lube issues are sorted out correctly, harder is better for both speed and accuracy. While that is not 100% true for all things, he isn't wrong either. A commercial caster won't have any way to be certain if a .454" bullet is going on top of a powder-puff .45 Colt cowboy load or a full-steam Casull, but the harder bullet will work in both assuming it's sort of in line with nominal chamber/bore specs, has a lube that sort of seals, and won't take as much of a beating in shipping either.

We're typically not the ones buying it, so ultimately, what's it matter?

[waksupi]

I actually like it when people use the term "Hardcast", because it lets me know their level of knowledge on the topic.

I'm with you. To me that indicates their only experience is with commercial cast bullets.

[dverna]

i'm getting tired of seeing the term hardcast in the for sale section. usually refering to 9mm and 45 auto bullets. i think that "hard cast" would be counter productive. comments??

I look at the alloy content rather than a name for an alloy. "Hardball" is a common name, and it is normally 92-2-6 alloy. Places selling Hardball list the composition. No fuss no muss.

My experience is both limited and extensive.

I have limited experience with alloys. I also have limited experience with HV rifle loads and thumper pistol loads. But your post is on 9mm and .45's.

I have fired at least 250k cast bullets. Almost all of them in .38/.357, .45 ACP and 9mm.

The only alloys I have used are Linotype and "Hardball". My first bullets were Bullseye bullets made from Linotype because that was what my mentor used and told me to buy. Linotype is supposedly too hard for light target loads (2.7 gr Bullseyes with 148 gr). We got 50 shot groups at 50 yards that were 2.5-3". We might have done better with softer alloy but we were ignorant. We did not get leading...strangely enough. One thing for sure, Linotype was easy to work with. I had excellent bullets within an hour of starting to cast using my first mold, a 10 cavity H&G mold. I was in heaven...1000 bullets an hour that were accurate enough to shoot perfect scores. I shot the same M52 for years and never bought a Lewis lead remover. It was not until 30 years later, when I found this forum, that I learned from smarter folks that hard bullets lead!! Who'd of thunk!!!

As a got older I ended up buying commercial bullets. I had more money than time or desire to cast. Those bullets were made from 92-2-6 - Hardball alloy. They worked well at 700-1200 fps. My CAS and plinking rifle load was 2.7 gr of Clays under a 130 gr .38 bullet. 10 shots into 1.25" at 30 yards was good enough. I cleaned the guns once a year.

Hard alloys have not been "counterproductive" for my needs. Good accuracy is important to me. At 700-1200 fps, harder alloys have done the job of accurately putting holes in paper and plinking steel. I do not hunt with cast bullets, but if I did, I would do what works for others. 16:1 or 20:1 alloy. People who know what they are doing have proven those alloys work.

But you specifically asked about 9mm and .45 so I am not sure how hardcast would be counterproductive. I suppose if you are looking at self defense bullets in those calibers, hardness would be a consideration. I use premium jacketed bullets for SD.

I stay with commercial alloy because it works. I may be ignorant, but ease of use is more important than saving money on alloy. Most people here are old timers who have a stash of wheel weights or a way to get them at reasonable cost. If you have to scrounge stuff to make alloy, I doubt there is much money saved using scrap.

I have bought tens of thousands of commercial cast bullets. I would never buy homemade cast bullets unless I trusted the seller. Too much risk with getting "mystery alloy" IMO. And I often wonder how many reports of problems with hard bullets are due to "mystery alloy", the wrong bullet sizing, sloppy reloading, and/or a poor lube selection.

[country gent]

I believe that depending on use a bullet can be to hard. A bpcr rifle or light loads dont generate the pressure to obturate the hard bullets they require a softer bullet.

Commercial bullets have to withstand shipping, handling in production environments ( the casting machine drops them into a pan then poured into another to transport to other areas. then into packaging). Our bullets are dropped onto a padded area then carefully handled to the finish.

[35 Rem]

Non cast bullet shooters are absolutely convinced that firing a lead bullet of any type will clog their barrel with permanent clumps of lead. The commercial lead bullet sellers attempt to counter this to some degree by calling all their bullets "hard cast" with the implication that if a lead bullet is hard enough it won't smear a coat of lead down your bore like a rotten banana being shoved down a water pipe. Of course, making their bullets harder allows them to survive shipping with fewer dents which makes a much better impression to the customer too. Yeah, it does usually show a person's level of knowledge about cast bullets if they use the term. Either that or they have given up and figure that you might as well speak the language that others use.

[charlie b]

FWIW, I use relatively hard cast bullets as well in my smokeless guns. Lyman #2. The 'Hardball' alloy gives about the same performance. The most important thing is to fit the bullet to the throat/bore.

Undersized hard alloy bullets will lead the barrel badly. This is the most common experience of new lead shooters and why many will swear off lead bullets forever.

[Outpost75]

If you go back and read Keith's book Sixguns, Elmer was no engineer, but knew what worked from his empirical testing and experience. He favored softer 1:16 or 1:20 tin-lead alloys for revolvers and harder alloys like Lyman No.2 only for the .45 ACP due to its shallow depth of rifling.

The often recommended 50-50 linotype and plumber's lead to approximate No.2, actually a wee bit softer at 13-14 Bhn, is a great general purpose alloy for either GC rifle, 9mm or .45 ACP and for the .357 and .44 Mag revolvers.

For hunting alloy in all calibers it is hard to beat 50-50 Wheelweights and plumber's lead with 1-2% tin added to improve fill out.

[Bass Ackward]

A complicated subject better understood if you follow the firearm / lead history and “why” folks did what they did.

Hardness is easier to understand when you define it. “Hard” is any BHN number that prevents the plastic or deformation state from what you are doing to it. You simply cannot generalize and say that you are too hard or brag or ask how hard you should be cause it’s always different. The smaller the case volume, or the faster you bring up pressure (faster powder) before the lead is supported by steel, the better or worse the lube, and the gun itself define it. If you learn to understand the results you are seeing, you can realize what you need to do or what you need to do next.

[35 Rem]

Bottom line is to specify alloy make up or actual hardness rather than simply claiming "Hard cast". If it isn't quantified, "Hard" is meaningless.

[Texas by God]

Especially hardcast heads.

Or hardcast “pills” or “projos”…….


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[white eagle]

hardcast serve the masses

[Larry Gibson]

hardcast serve the masses

Exactly, and as also mentioned it is a term coined for the commercial cast bullet industry. Generally, in that context it designates commercial cast bullets with BHNs in the 12 - 18 range.

[HWooldridge]

Colonel E.H. Harrison's book on casting and reloading made much mention of linotype and Alox 50/50 lubricant. I started reloading in 1979 then bought a first edition and learned most of my casting process and practice from his writings. Even back then, there was a penchant to use a hard alloy, especially in rifles. Most of my early .44 mag and .45 Colt loadings were pure linotype - they didn't expand but did make nice clean caliber-sized holes in most anything you cared to shoot. I really didn't start casting softer alloys until reading more information - both here on this forum and elsewhere.

There used to be a guy near Conroe, Texas who cast Keith style pills out of a very hard alloy - I probably still have a few in the cabinet. At .44 mag velocities, they would punch through old car bodies and up to 1/4" mild steel plate if you were up close. A friend of mine shot them out of his .44 Contender and killed several nice deer with it. We never found any slugs, regardless of the shot angle to the animal - every one went straight through.