They said it couldn't be done

[AriM]

AriM,

You just made the light come on! I attampted another thread recently on the smoke issue. I got some useful replies but also got comments that the performance of the lube was more important so don't worry about smoke. Clearly some people even on this forum don't understand the issues surrounding dispensing 4 rounds/second. The importance of getting a hardness tester has become greater as I start blending more of my "other metals" and reduced availability of WW.

My standard pistol alloy for years has been 20 lb ww and 1/2 lb monotype. The monotype was added for castability more than for hardness. My boolits usually have plenty of time to age before loading so I'm probably shooting a relatively hard boolit for pistol.

My .45ACP loads are primarily a 200 gr. SWC at about 645 fps. That boolit is probably not obturating. Since it's for steel plate and the gun is moving around, smoke is not as much of a problem as it is for IPSC where there may be several targets very close together each getting 2 shots.

For IPSC my goto is a high capacity .40. A 180 gr, boolit makes major at 917 fps. Again, the alloy may be too hard for obturation even though the .40 is operating at higher pressure than the .45ACP. Dang! Last weekend I cast 1600 nice hard boolits for the .40. I think it's time to start experimenting with softer alloys. I have plenty of softer lead ingots which I got from a friend who died last summer so I have no way of knowing what's in them. The need for the hardness tester grows. At any rate I'll give the softer lead with some added tin a try and see if that affects the smoke.

David

David,

Glad my experiences got you thinking. My goal, after all, is to further understand this sweet science. I am beginning more and more to believe, that smoking and leading are an issue of flame cutting and gas blow-by. I think that smokey hard coated lube, at low velocity, is a bit of a myth. Now I can see how a soft lube, at high velocities would indeed have the pressure and distance to ignite and "smoke". Let's be honest about it though. How much lube is really on a boolit? Not much. How much smoke comes out of the gun (when you have smoke issues)? A lot! Why would weather conditions change the amount of smoke that lube makes? The lube does not miraculously change chemical properties in temperature/moisture swings. Sure it might pick up a bit of water (from the air) and that water would be let off as steam, but not smelly smoke. Also I had a friend fire my gun, and observed where the smoke was coming from. The majority of it was emitted from the ejection port, not the muzzle. All of this stuff is a bit mysterious to me, and really has me puzzled. I am thinking that my lube formula is fine. The real problem lies in bad boolit to chamber fit. I can trace this back to BHN value of the projectile. Water dropped WW boolits would need an approximate chamber pressure of 25920 psi to properly obturate. That is just not going to happen in a 45 auto load. MAX saami chamber pressure in a 45 auto load is around 21000 psi. I would be hell bent to even approach that pressure in an unsupported chamber. If I do a bit of math I could probably figure out the MAX velocity, chamber pressure and appropriate BHN values at various velocities/charge weights, and make a chart as to what BHN value corresponds to what charge weight. However, this hardly seems worthwhile. There are factors which will affect these numbers, that i can't possibly account for. OAL, barometric pressure, humidity, temperature, primer composition, chamber headspace, freebore length etc etc etc etc. I could figure out these variables for my guns, and my loads....but to do so would not be worth the investment of resources. Let's look at the problem, rather than a miracle solution. Leading and smoke are due to gas blow-by, which is due to an incomplete seal in the chamber/bore. Lube and a properly soft alloy will make up for a lot of this problem. What is the real problem though? Is leading detrimental to pistol accuracy at 20 yard or less? Not in my opinion. Is smoke really that big of an issue? Not for me. My only concern would be premature erosion of the chamber throat, due to flame cutting. Think of it this way. What happens in a case/chamber is essentially a shape charge. Shape charges are used to cut through much harder alloy's than steel. So here is my bottom line. Find a good lube, find an easy way to apply it, cast a boolit that is the correct BHN for your chamber pressure, go shoot, have fun.

Either way I am going to continue the testing. I would like some answers to this stuff. I appreciate all of the great information from members here, but for us to think we have it all figured out, is naive, close minded and not based in reality. There are lot's of variables to test, which very few of us are qualified to test and even fewer have access to the equip. to do that testing. For now, I am going to keep it up with trial and error. I will keep pissing in the wind, and by some stroke of luck, I might get to a point where none blows back on me......:takinWiz:

David, about your thinking. PM me and I will help you do the math (or at least give you the formulas and links to LASC pages), so you can determine the proper BHN for each specific load. I have a feeling the older, more experienced guys know all about this stuff already, and are laughing at me

[runfiverun]

not laughing.
glad you are posting the good and bad.
and your conclusions.
alloy/ pressure balance is a good lesson to learn.
fit is another one.

[AriM]

not laughing.
glad you are posting the good and bad.
and your conclusions.
alloy/ pressure balance is a good lesson to learn.
fit is another one.

above all other things in life, I appreciate honesty and integrity. I will always keep my posts neutral (good and the bad) and will always check myself, or allow others to check me. I am here to learn and contribute. No good comes without bad. I promise to always keep it honest and to do my best to keep everyone and their gear safe. The testing shall continue.

I modified the lube and application method a bit this week. I shot 200 more rounds today. I also have 2 new boolit designs. The RCBS 452-201-swc, and the Lee 452-230-TL1r. Both load very nice. I am thinking that the Lee is the most reliable round I have ever cast. Not one hang up with it yet. The smoke was almost non-existent again today. The deposits in the chamber measured out to 0.3 grams. Acceptable by most standards, but not good enough. Something funny is still going on. The inconsistencies are just too great. I had NO deposits or smoke issues, when the weather was drier and warmer. I am really wondering what is going on. I will keep investigating and posting my findings. Thanks to all who are reading and taking the journey with me.

On another note. Swamprat (Donnie) sent me some samples of his boolits (Bayou Bullets). If you guys haven't tried them, please do. He makes an absolutely amazing product. I tested some today and I could not find one trace of deposits in the barrel, after 40 rounds. ZERO smoke, super accurate, good feel. Bayou Bullets are, IMO, the best boolit on the commercial market right now. They beat the hell out of ANY commercial cast boolit I have tried, and knock down all the jacket/plated offerings as well. Probably not in my best interest to promote my potential competition, but his product sets the bar. I am still WAY off what he has to offer right now.



here are my test results for Swamprats boolits

Bayou Bullets
.452" 230 grain RN 1r
4 grains Bullseye
Wolf LP primers
Mixed headstamp brass
1.238 OAL (average)

approx 2 inch groups (off hand) at 10 yards
no noticeable smoke
excellent feel (and recovery)

barrel weight
0 rounds (clean) 96.1 grams
25 rounds 96.1 grams
40 rounds 96.1 grams


here are the results of MY boolits

RCBS 452-201-SWC (water dropped WW alloy)
.452" 215grain (approx) SWC
5.4 grains of Bullseye
Wolf LP primers
Mixed headstamp brass
1.268 OAL (average)

approx 2 inch groups (off hand) at 10 yards
very light smoke
excellent feel, good sight tracking, and predictable recovery

barrel weight
0 rounds (clean) 96.1 grams
25 rounds 96.4 grams
40 rounds 96.4 grams

[runfiverun]

your waterdropped are too hard.
maybe, it does depend on fit in the grooves and the land heights. plus number of lands. your brass choice makes a diff also.
try once more and trust your alloy.
save the w-drop for the 9mm.

[AriM]

your waterdropped are too hard.
maybe, it does depend on fit in the grooves and the land heights. plus number of lands. your brass choice makes a diff also.
try once more and trust your alloy.
save the w-drop for the 9mm.

yes I am sure of that, read my post on page 5 about the hardness problem, and the math I am using to correct it. I need to burn up the rest of the water dropped WW before I do another run. I know it isn't the right alloy, but I have to finish the testing on it to be in line with my previous tests. I cast 1000 at a time, in each batch. I make it a point to run through ALL 1000 to keep my analysis consistent. Even if the initial results aren't good, I still complete the tests.

my post on page 5 states that the water dropped WW is approx. 18BHN (which I give detailed reasons for). The correct alloy for my load should be in the 9 - 12 BHN range. Please go back to page 5 and read my post and tell me if you think it's correct assumptions?

Thanks again for your help and continuing support.

here is a link to that previous post of mine.....
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...0&postcount=98


also, I have a nice batch of super clean lino. that I am saving for 9mm....; )

[runfiverun]

water dropped ww's are @18 to 20 bhn.
the hardness is dependant on the alloy temp and water temp [speed of cooling]
your powder rate can also have bearing on how an alloy re-acts in the bbl.
i usually deal with older ww's i have saved from the late 70's through the late 80's.
they are pretty consistent in their alloy,so my loads have changed little in the 45 acp.
however i recently purchased 1k of newer ww's that i have kept separate, they seem to respond better to unique powder. the older ones don't seem to care if i use titegroup through unique.
a slight powder change may change your results.
think of the push being based on time [yeah i know we are talking miliseconds here but one more milisecond is a large proportion compared to three]
if you have a 452 bbl and shoot 452 sized boolits how are the softer ones going to fill the bbl better?
think in the groove corners. thats where the proper traditional lube comes into play [sealant]
you are thinking out of the box with your lube here, but are on the right track with the combo of soft alloy and lube.
the lube isn't gonna squish up and seal so the lead has to help it.
and it has to do so all the way down the bbl.
how? try extending the pressure curve.

[AriM]

water dropped ww's are @18 to 20 bhn.
the hardness is dependant on the alloy temp and water temp [speed of cooling]
your powder rate can also have bearing on how an alloy re-acts in the bbl.
i usually deal with older ww's i have saved from the late 70's through the late 80's.
they are pretty consistent in their alloy,so my loads have changed little in the 45 acp.
however i recently purchased 1k of newer ww's that i have kept separate, they seem to respond better to unique powder. the older ones don't seem to care if i use titegroup through unique.
a slight powder change may change your results.
think of the push being based on time [yeah i know we are talking miliseconds here but one more milisecond is a large proportion compared to three]
if you have a 452 bbl and shoot 452 sized boolits how are the softer ones going to fill the bbl better?
think in the groove corners. thats where the proper traditional lube comes into play [sealant]
you are thinking out of the box with your lube here, but are on the right track with the combo of soft alloy and lube.
the lube isn't gonna squish up and seal so the lead has to help it.
and it has to do so all the way down the bbl.
how? try extending the pressure curve.

I have tried changing the powder. Same results, but the odd thing is that the smoking issue comes and goes. It is bad when it's cold and wet, and non existent when it's warm and dry. This had me thinking it might be powder. I have tried 2 different powder variables. No change. Only the weather effects the smoking issue. I think i am on the right track though. I also believe that either the paraffin or white grease in the lube have something to do with it. I am slowly modify the formula. Testing at each change. Hell it might just be easier to scrap that initial lube formula, and go for something simpler. That wouldn't effect the process, or the final coating. It might just help the smoke issue.

I am 100% with you on the second issue. Since the lube groove doesn't squish out a film bearing, the projectile would need to obturate more to create that film bearing. I think what would really help me would be a "bandless" boolit design. By that I mean a boolit with no lube grooves, similar to a paper patch boolit.

Here is an interesting thing though. Swamprats boolits (Bayou Bullets), are right around 18 bhn, he has a lube groove (with no lube in it) and a hard coating. His boolits are perfectly accurate and leave no deposits in the barrel, and make no smoke. So I am simply trying to get to where he is already at. That seems hardly worthwhile.

I am not saying I am going to give up, because this isn't about better, or profitable or anything along those lines. It's just an experiment, and I hope it leads to everyone involved learning something and potentially reaping the benefits. Seems like I might be re-inventing the wheel at this point, but I have come to far to call it quits. I am no quitter. Plus I am having fun doing this.

I am going to burn up those remaining boolits from this batch, and then recast without water dropping. Let's see if it changes anything. There has to be a magic ratio for each load. That is the goal. Match the lube and alloy to the gun and the load. Then figure out how to do that efficiently for other peoples guns and loads.

Thanks for continuing to think it through with me, it really helps. I had a brainstorm about it earlier today actually. What if I used some leaded grease in the coating. That way the coating contains soft lead. This would cause the outer layer to expand more rapidly and create a form fit bearing. I am so overthingking all of this.....but I sure am having fun.

[bigboredad]

Arim
I don't know if this will help or be a waste of time for you to read but here goes. I have to .45colt blackhawks one has a throat size of .453 the other .451 and both barrels come in at .451. I size my boolits to .454. with the same powder primer and everything being the same except the one one set I used lla jpw ms mix and on the the other set I used a home brewed pan lube. Out of both guns the lla mix would smoke pretty good the pan lubed boolits not so much smoke.

[AriM]

Arim
I don't know if this will help or be a waste of time for you to read but here goes. I have to .45colt blackhawks one has a throat size of .453 the other .451 and both barrels come in at .451. I size my boolits to .454. with the same powder primer and everything being the same except the one one set I used lla jpw ms mix and on the the other set I used a home brewed pan lube. Out of both guns the lla mix would smoke pretty good the pan lubed boolits not so much smoke.

I read all the comments, and consider them all little gems of information, respect and willingness to help an amateur (like myself). So the words are much appreciated.

I have also noticed that LLA is a bit smokey. LLA was the first thing I dropped from my mix on this last batch. The LLA has been replaced with another item.

Here is an odd tidbit. The deposits (which don't seem to contain any, or at least very little, lead) are towards the muzzle. The throat and chamber are totally clean.

I think that the pressure at which the outer layer of the boolit expands, is the key to both accuracy AND cleanliness. The one thing I can say for my boolits, they are VERY accurate. Much better than every commercial offering I have tried. The only ones that have come close have been Bayou Bullets and Bear Creek Supply.

I truly appreciate your input. Each one of these little bits from you guys, helps me put another piece into the puzzle. I am hoping I can get this issue sorted out soon and start sending samples out to you all.


P.S. very good community here. CB is hands down one of the best internet forums around (on any subject). I appreciate you guys, and the moderating team.

[runfiverun]

the cleaner burning agent in alliant powders is nitro and it smokes when it's humid.
if you could recover some of your boolits you might [most likely]just find bare lead where the lube used to be.
hard to say what would help near the end of the bbl but i would think some carnuba would help.
once a layer of that is in there, it adds a coat in the bbl much like floor polish looks when fresh.
since you can do a final tumble, a final coating in crumbled or powdered carnuba might be your answer.

[AriM]

the cleaner burning agent in alliant powders is nitro and it smokes when it's humid.
if you could recover some of your boolits you might [most likely]just find bare lead where the lube used to be.
hard to say what would help near the end of the bbl but i would think some carnuba would help.
once a layer of that is in there, it adds a coat in the bbl much like floor polish looks when fresh.
since you can do a final tumble, a final coating in crumbled or powdered carnuba might be your answer.

I always though fast single base powders had minimal nitro. Wow, if you are correct about that nitro thing, then that explains a lot. My testing is done with Bullseye and American Select (both Alliant Powders). Hmmmm. Thanks you so much for that little hint. That could explain the different performance in humid conditions.

One of my lube ingredients is cream of carnuba ; )

Maybe I should add more, or as you said, reinstate the final polish station, and add carnuba flake to the base substrate.

I might reformulate the lube a bit, and take out the white grease and some paraffin. I think one of my problems is an overdose of long chain hydrocarbons (PJ, paraffin, STP, Marine Grease). I am thinking I have overdone things.

Maybe I could replace some paraffin with more cream of carnuba.

Thanks again for all of your help. Wish I could buy you a round of your favorite.



P.S. maybe it's also time to ditch the home brew ingredients, and start using lab grade/pure chemicals. I have no idea what some of the byproducts of the stuff I am using are.

[runfiverun]

the home made stuff is fine it's pretty consistent depending upon availability and brand.
i'd try one thing at a time though.
add the final coat ,drop the stp, change the proportions a bit.
i have refined my main lube that i mix 2-1 with another about 4 times and have started on a moly type lube from moly lube sticks that aren't very common.
i might end up mixing the base lube i use with the moly type at some point if that works i would end up with....holy moses... over 40 lbs of lube.
i guess that might hold me a while.
you have the basic ingredients and procedure down, you just need to refine and standardize.
write it down and follow it, stock up on what works and have at it.

[AriM]

the home made stuff is fine it's pretty consistent depending upon availability and brand.
i'd try one thing at a time though.
add the final coat ,drop the stp, change the proportions a bit.
i have refined my main lube that i mix 2-1 with another about 4 times and have started on a moly type lube from moly lube sticks that aren't very common.
i might end up mixing the base lube i use with the moly type at some point if that works i would end up with....holy moses... over 40 lbs of lube.
i guess that might hold me a while.
you have the basic ingredients and procedure down, you just need to refine and standardize.
write it down and follow it, stock up on what works and have at it.

I do have an alternate lube/coating that I have been working on. It's dramatically "better". I involves a lengthier process though, and is more expensive. It uses some advanced polymers and is a spray application (but the same tumble curing). The results are a harder coating. It's just a major pain in the butt to apply. To do massive volumes, would require an industrial centrifuge.

On a more positive note. I did slightly redevelop the "soft" lube over the last week. I cut down on some proportions. Still haven't managed to get a hold of carnuba flake, but I did manage to reformulate a bit. Also, the biggest issue of importance. I cast a softer alloy. As expected the accuracy increased. Barrel deposits went down and smoke was almost nothing. I will post full test results tonight, or tomorrow.

Thanks again for helping me think through it all.

I have also been thinking about a moly grease/wax/poly lube. I have all the ingredients for it. I have just been looking for the right time to build it up. I don't want to get sidetracked from the current lube.

Have you considered maybe putting a bit of "complex grease" in with the moly stick? I did some testing with a moly/complex mix (as a slide/frame lube) and it was a really amazing combo. Drop point on Complex Grease is 470 deg. Also it is a "high-impact" grease. It does not breakdown under pressure. The only trouble I have had with it, is blending. It does seem to be impervious to solvent.

[runfiverun]

i went with some white lith.
i also used some of lars's carnuba red and some micro-parafin.
i cannot find out what the company uses as a carrier in the original sticks of moly as they say it's proprietory.[sp?]
it just sits there and hangs out till a bit of finger pressure is used then the molly shows itself.
it is the consistency of the lyman molly lube and looks close when on the boolit.
but i seriously doubt it is the same ingredients and i might have overshot the moly content on the first try but it works nicely in the 41 and 44 mags.
i always start a lube out in a revolver so i can easily monitor the bbl as i shoot.
then generally move the same loads to a levergun then eventually try it in my bolt rifles working up till the lube fails.
I tweak it as necessary along the way and some never make it past the revolver stage.

[AriM]

i went with some white lith.
i also used some of lars's carnuba red and some micro-parafin.
i cannot find out what the company uses as a carrier in the original sticks of moly as they say it's proprietory.[sp?]
it just sits there and hangs out till a bit of finger pressure is used then the molly shows itself.
it is the consistency of the lyman molly lube and looks close when on the boolit.
but i seriously doubt it is the same ingredients and i might have overshot the moly content on the first try but it works nicely in the 41 and 44 mags.
i always start a lube out in a revolver so i can easily monitor the bbl as i shoot.
then generally move the same loads to a levergun then eventually try it in my bolt rifles working up till the lube fails.
I tweak it as necessary along the way and some never make it past the revolver stage.

I am not going to give out the full product name or distributor, because I am using it in my proprietary spray lube (that one I am keeping under wraps, and it certainly needs more development). I will, however point you to something that you may or may not find very interesting. Google the exact keyword

"micronized polyethylene"

I won't mention which exact website to choose off the responses to the search....and I won't recommend the exact "micro powder" (hint) but you will find some very cool things, which I think you will appreciate.

I truly am thankful for your continued help. I hope we can keep the dialogue going.

I did testing again tonight (at my weekly steel match) and the reformulation worked very well. It was VERY humid and cold tonight, and the smoke was light to non-existent. The more important thing. The barrel deposits were .1 grams after 25 rounds and the same after 40. Here is the strange thing. After 100 rounds the barrel weight was the same as it was when totally clean 96.1 grams. Either my scale is playing tricks on me, or I have something very cool happening with my reformulated lube. Now that I am down to under one tenth of a gram of total deposits in the barrel, it's time to start weighing in grains. Here is where the real fun begins. I feel very close to a finished, releasable product/process. The accuracy of the boolits, is really something to behold. I think it's time to put the gun in the ransom rest. I am thinking that internal ballistics are reaching a point where more scientific measurement is necessary. Now also seems like a good time to start accurately measuring external ballistics (with a chrono. and ransom rest).

[runfiverun]

i think i'd shoot them one more time like you have been.
and move along.
remember you are testing the lube here and you need data from as many sources as possible.
you have it figured out in one caliber/gun combo.
you need to stress the lube to see it's potential/weakneses.
you need it to perform over a broad range of applications,narrowness has no place in the gun world.
if it won't handle longer bbls,or rifle pressures you need to know that so it can be applied to where it does work and move along to what will carry over for the revolvers and long gunsyou might end up with two or even three versions in the end with one being clearly superior,over the entire range and the others might be a bit more specialized.
you are looking for a do-all, and what you have may be it but there's only one way to know.

[AriM]

i think i'd shoot them one more time like you have been.
and move along.
remember you are testing the lube here and you need data from as many sources as possible.
you have it figured out in one caliber/gun combo.
you need to stress the lube to see it's potential/weakneses.
you need it to perform over a broad range of applications,narrowness has no place in the gun world.
if it won't handle longer bbls,or rifle pressures you need to know that so it can be applied to where it does work and move along to what will carry over for the revolvers and long gunsyou might end up with two or even three versions in the end with one being clearly superior,over the entire range and the others might be a bit more specialized.
you are looking for a do-all, and what you have may be it but there's only one way to know.

all very true. I would gladly settle on something that is less than perfect in one application, but performs well in all applications. or at least the majority of them. the next series of tests (after the final product) will be to test in some production guns, and in some carbines. will be interesting to see what the lube does at 25000 psi. even more interesting to see what it does in a bolt action.

I suppose the next logical thing would be to try it with a few double base and slower powders. I am really curious to see what it does with AA #7 at MAX. that is a pretty full case and a hefty chamber pressure. after that it will be interesting to see what happens with a powder, that has a pressure spike at max.

time to invest in a suit of armor and a blast shield

[runfiverun]

from my last post it looks like i need some punctuation/capitolization/spelling tutoring.
but you got the jist.

[Casting Timmy]

"micronized polyethylene"..... There's a patent out there that uses a polyethylene bullet lube and you can even read how they tell to apply a light coating on the bullet. Just google patent 4465883, you should pull up one that you can read about it.

I posted something about this a while back, is your coating really similar to this?

[AriM]

"micronized polyethylene"..... There's a patent out there that uses a polyethylene bullet lube and you can even read how they tell to apply a light coating on the bullet. Just google patent 4465883, you should pull up one that you can read about it.

I posted something about this a while back, is your coating really similar to this?

actually quite a few patents on bullet lubes use a micronized polymer. some even use a large molecular polymer. my coating doesn't involve high temp. high lubricity co-polymers.

I am developing a spray coating (as plan B) that has some polymer based items in it, but not micrnoized polyethylene. It has been done, and has proven to be a bit difficult to work with in a spray application (because it would require an industrial centrifuge for an even coating).

I thought it would be a good suggestion for runfive's stick lube though. I have a feeling it's the magic carrier/substrate that Lyman uses in their moly stick. Or at least something very similar.

What I am trying to do with my coating, is get an even coat, with little deposits, no leading, no smoke and a very simple application process. I need to be able to do thousands at a time, in a very short amount of time. Also it has to be done in a cost effective manner. So for me it's really a balancing act. I highly doubt what I finally bring to you guys, will be the "best" lube. It should, however achieve all of my listed goals. No easy task, thus far.