Naphtali
05-28-2011, 01:19 PM
I have been casting with certified 30:1 for the special conical bullet for my .72-caliber muzzleloaders with superb results on which I'm not going to elaborate in this query. I thought my table for Brinnell range for lead:tin alloys was accurate. I find that our LBT and Log Cabin testers are giving significantly different (lower) Brinnell readings on bullets AND ingots than my table identifies.
I ask for the following information "just in case" I am able to afford an African hunt (for which I am saving) that would include Cape Buffalo. My bullet fits all of my 72s so well that bumping up bullet's base upon firing is not an issue. Therefore harder alloys that drop within parameters I ask about will shoot as consistently as 30:1. And I am not thinking of migrating to such a wastefully expensive bullet alloy for general shooting, for 30:1 does exactly what it's intended to do - except, perhaps, penetrate large support bones on Cape Buffalo. I guess I'm attempting to identify whether there is a lead:tin alloy that will not render a Cape Buffalo "dead but ambulatory" when hitting scapula or femur or pelvic girdle or other bone groups required for four-legged quick movement.
Assuming such an alloy exists, I would verify using the logical pattern: If A equals B, and B equals C, then A equals C.
That is, if a 458 Winchester Magnum 500-grain solid penetrates my plank-and dry newsprint bullet box a [fill in the blank] amount with no keyholing or direction change during passage through the test media, and this specific load is known (as it is) to be adequate and acceptable for breaking major bone groups of Cape Buffalo, then a .72-caliber bullet that penetrates the same distance in same bullet box and media without keyholing or changing direction will be functionally equivalent. . . . Whew! Long way around the concept or what?
1. Were I to use 20:1 what will Brinnell range be?
2. Would this alloy drop from my mold with a variance - from .731 inch I drop with 30:1 - of more than ± .0007 inch?
3. Were I to use 10:1 what will Brinnell range be?
4. Would this alloy drop from my mold with a variance - from .731 inch I drop with 30:1 - of more than ± .0007 inch?
I ask for the following information "just in case" I am able to afford an African hunt (for which I am saving) that would include Cape Buffalo. My bullet fits all of my 72s so well that bumping up bullet's base upon firing is not an issue. Therefore harder alloys that drop within parameters I ask about will shoot as consistently as 30:1. And I am not thinking of migrating to such a wastefully expensive bullet alloy for general shooting, for 30:1 does exactly what it's intended to do - except, perhaps, penetrate large support bones on Cape Buffalo. I guess I'm attempting to identify whether there is a lead:tin alloy that will not render a Cape Buffalo "dead but ambulatory" when hitting scapula or femur or pelvic girdle or other bone groups required for four-legged quick movement.
Assuming such an alloy exists, I would verify using the logical pattern: If A equals B, and B equals C, then A equals C.
That is, if a 458 Winchester Magnum 500-grain solid penetrates my plank-and dry newsprint bullet box a [fill in the blank] amount with no keyholing or direction change during passage through the test media, and this specific load is known (as it is) to be adequate and acceptable for breaking major bone groups of Cape Buffalo, then a .72-caliber bullet that penetrates the same distance in same bullet box and media without keyholing or changing direction will be functionally equivalent. . . . Whew! Long way around the concept or what?
1. Were I to use 20:1 what will Brinnell range be?
2. Would this alloy drop from my mold with a variance - from .731 inch I drop with 30:1 - of more than ± .0007 inch?
3. Were I to use 10:1 what will Brinnell range be?
4. Would this alloy drop from my mold with a variance - from .731 inch I drop with 30:1 - of more than ± .0007 inch?