Lee moulds TL452-200-SWC or 452-200-SWC

[chili dipper]

I initially was going to go with the 452-200-SWC because that seems close to the commercial cast boolit that I'm currently using, which has been reliable in my 1911's. But since I'm going to use alox or a mixture with alox suggested on this forum I was also thinking about the tumble lube version TL452-200-SWC. But that one looks so radically different from what I've used with good results in my guns, I'm a little reluctant to go with that mould.
Appreciate any thoughts/advice you can offer. Thanks.

[2wheelDuke]

My 1911 seems pretty happy with the TL version. I don't have the conventional version to compare to, but the micro grooved one works fine for me.

[Rocky Raab]

Some here don't, but I really like the TL designs and any of several ways to use LLA. The best part is that if your gun balks, Lee moulds aren't wallet killers.

[fecmech]

The lee 200 swc tl is a close approximation of the Lyman 452460. They are both better than 10 ring 50 yd accurate out of my "Wad" gun. My stock Springfield Mil Spec feeds both with no problem.Hope this helps. Nick

[timkelley]

In my opinion, you should get the one that looks the same as the one you've been using. You can tumble lube, pretty much, any boolit and it will work very well. I cast a dozen or so different boolits and only a couple are listed as tumble lube designs.

[Moonie]

I tumble lube all my pistol boolits, none are TL designs, almost all are LEE molds.

[MtGun44]

IMO TL is a maginal lube system. The good news is that the .45 ACP is very fogiving and
may well be a good candidate for TL. We get LOTS of folks that have problems with
poor lube performance with TL, especially in hotter calibers like 9mm.

The primary advantage to TL with liquid alox is lower initial cost without the lubrisizer.

Bill

[fecmech]

Bill-I've come around somewhat on TL bullets, and you may have something there about it being a marginal system. For me this past summer I had great results with it in the .38 spl both pistol and rifle(to 1150 fps). Out of the rifle I was able to maintain between 3 and 4 MOA at 200 yds with The Lee TL SWC and the Hornaday "Clone" from BABore using TL. My K-38 and Ruger GP will both group in the 2-3" range at 50 yds running roughly 900 fps. Barrels were never cleaned as there was no leading. I have not tried to push for mag velocities with those bullets so I can't speak to that aspect. I have also had great luck with it in the .45 auto. I think if you can get good bullet fit it's a good system for std pressure pistol cartridges like the .38,.44 spl,.45 Auto & colt. Until this past summer I kind of looked down my nose at it but it has it's place.

[Jech]

I own a 6-cavity Lee 452-230-TC and 452-200-FP both in conventional wax groove styles. Initially I planned to pan-lube but later discovered Recluse's 45-45-10 recipe and never looked back...I highly recommend it. Check out the sticky in the boolit lube forum and see what I'm talking about.

With either boolit, I've never had leading or any other lube-related issue when tumble lubing these conventional styles...many others will echo my sentiment I'm sure. Every gun is unique and what works for some won't work for others so YMMV. Worst case scenario, you try it and end up spending some quality time with a chore boy pad :Fire:

~ Jech

[kir_kenix]

Both lube systems work. I have both boolits and my nod goes to the convenventional lubed 452-200-swc. TL works, but it is a compromise. I have got them to shoot well in most everything, but it gets tougher in some of the faster cartridges. You should have no trouble getting either to shoot well in your .45.

[Shiloh]

I have zero complaints about the LEE .452 TLSWC in a 1911. It performs flawlessly. No feeding issues, and I am thoroughly pleased with the accuracy.

Shiloh

[MtGun44]

Note that I say it appears to be a marginal lube system, not that it cannot work. It
clearly does work for some, and it appears within certain limits of alloy, hardness, design,
fit, pressure and velocity, it can work very well indeed.

I still submit that we get large numbers of folks that fail badly with TL boolits, mostly
in higher intensity calibers.

I personally dislike the smell, mess and dirt magnet nature of the stuff and I have two
Stars and two conventional lubrisizers, so will continue to leave it alone.

I DO understand that for the newbie, especially the less than financially well set newbie,
the system is very attractive. I will continue to warn of the less than stellar record, but
will not tell someone that the TL system cannot work. I try very hard to only stick to the
facts as I know them. I continue to believe that conventional designs are more forgiving
and capable over a wider range of the variables than TL, and that a beginner that can afford
it should start down the conventional design path, perhaps with pan lubing, like I started
with when I had no spare $$.

Bill

[Jech]

Yeah the smell and essence of the stuff is an acquired taste. However, I must say that it also doubles as an amazing even magical repellent for SWMBO ;)

I see what TL style bullets are trying to accomplish, what I don't get is why does TL have to be applied to a TL bullet. Since my experience is limited to handguns, I won't speak for bore-scorching magnum rifle calibers but I know Recluse's can be pushed pretty fast in many rifle calibers.

What I'm really curious to hear is are there any folks out there who tried tumble lubing conventional style bullets and had negative results.

[garym1a2]

My first mold was the 2up Lee TL452-230-2R mold. I had to beat the heck out of the mold to get them to drop and theyr always where on the large size. I replaced it with the 2Up 200SWC and it was great. They almost drop right out, they also are not a problem to tumble lube this bullet. I liked it so much I got the 6Up version and not can drop a ton of .45s.