10 Spot Terminator
06-01-2012, 01:04 AM
Got to vent here just a bit after delving into what is supposed to be the premier cast loading referrence guide made by the folks who have had a commanding part of the bullet casting market for decades. My earliest Lyman 44th edition an those afterwards wer unique in that both rifle and pistol data was compiled using Lyman #2 alloy which had a harder bhn rating than most casters commonly use , plus being more expensive and in "MANY" cases overkill for performance needs in many lower pressure pistol calibres and lite target loads . Now I go to the pistol section in my Lyman 3rd editin bulet castin handbook and find all published data using linotype . What the ??? I have some lino and have paid dearly for it as have many of us and am not willing to use it for cannon fodder. I do use a #2 alloy clone where I feel necessary in some rifle loads but as dont shoot hand cannons have no need to cast that hard in handgun bullets. I am now questioning how relevent their load data is even as a staring point based on my own expieiriences with 100% lino casts. The only casts I make using pure lino are for my 223 and belive the pressure values to be reduced vs. other alloys much as when loading moly coated jacketed bullets. Have you evre tried to pick up pure lino bullets with your bare hands ??? They are slicker than greased pigs in a rodeo and just one step ahead of trying to pick up quicksilver. I welcome any insight or comments as always enjoy brain storming on things like this and input from those who have expierience on the subject. Just seems like Lyman is leaning away from what we need and prefer to try to dazzle us . I am just a meat and taters guy at heart, paying 4 times as much for a fancy Chatueabriand doesnt do it for me. :violin:
10 Spot
10 Spot