Boolit hardness?

[MikeS]

Hi All.

I know that most BPCR shooters (or at least many) shoot boolits cast from 20:1 or 30:1 rather than harder ones. I can understand using pure or near pure for a muzzleloader, as it would make it easier to push the boolit down the barrel, but since we don't do this, what is the reason for using fairly soft boolits? I understand back in the day when it was thought a smaller diameter boolit was needed to 'slug up' to the bore due to the BP fouling, but since we now know that it's better to have a properly sized boolit, is there any reason not to use a harder alloy? I ran out of easily cast pure (I still have some 26lb blocks, but they need to be melted down on my turkey fryer), so I cast some 457125's and 457193's out of range scrap that tests to around 10BHN, can I shoot them, and if so, what (if anything) will be different than shooting softer boolits?

[NickSS]

I personally have shot numerous alloys in my BPCR over the years and have had good accuracy with many of them. For practice ammo I still use range scrap and WW bullet metal and get good accuracy but for competition bullets I mostly use 30-1 alloy as I find it is more consistent at long ranges and gives me repeatable results. I have not had as good luck with unknown alloys.

[MT Chambers]

Better accuracy and much better performance on game, at the velocities used, soft is best. Harder then 30-1 has failed on game for me at around 1200fps mv and the pointed or round nosed bullets offer complete penetration but no expansion.

[cajun shooter]

It has to do with the bullet base filling the bore and sealing the hot gases from going pass the bullet while it is going down the bore. A very hard bullet will not upset and seal the bore so it will lead to leading and bad down range results. This process is called OBTURATION.
I have shot BP since 1970 and I always use cast bullets in the 10 BHN range. A bullet that is 11 or 12 may work but not as well.
I shoot 45-70 loads that are compressed as much as possible and have no problems when using the 10 BHN bullets.
It seems to me that after seeing some of your questions the last few days that you may have not yet read the very good book that is offered to us for free.
It is on the forum to be downloaded and printed out, which is what I did.
It is named " From Ingot To Target" and was written by Glen Fryxell and Robert Applegate. he book is 178 pages from start to finish and should be on any casters reference section. I printed my copy out and put it in a nice large three ring binder that would stand up to much use.
Even after casting since 1970, that book gives me information every time I open it up.
There is nothing wrong with asking questions in fact it is the correct thing to do when you don't have the answer. This book will help you understand all about alloys, with several mixtures included and tell you what is best for each type of shooting.
I think that these two men should be given some strong recognition for the service they have provided to the casting world. Take care David

[Chill Wills]

Hi All. I know that most BPCR shooters (or at least many) shoot boolits cast from 20:1 or 30:1 rather than harder ones. I understand back in the day when it was thought a smaller diameter boolit was needed to 'slug up' to the bore due to the BP fouling, but since we now know that it's better to have a properly sized boolit, is there any reason not to use a harder alloy? I ran out of easily cast pure, so I cast some 457125's and 457193's out of range scrap that tests to around 10BHN, can I shoot them, and if so, what (if anything) will be different than shooting softer boolits?

Mike, For sure shoot them. They will most likely be great!
Most of us shooting higher Bc bullet designs need/use the higher BHN bullets (like 12-15BHN) to keep the nose from setting back and causing very poor accuracy. The old dead guys used hard –for the time- alloy and Sharps Rifle CO sold 1-14 tin – lead bullets for PP target shooting and 1-14 is not all that much harder than 1-20.

A soft bullet for hunting is good. A soft bullet for target accuracy is not. Hitting a bull broadside does not require the accuracy of a LR target bullet. But, oft repeated wisdom about the need for soft bullets persists.

Mike, you are on exactly the right track with a hard, full size bullet working well with black powder. Make your bullet fit the chamber and throat and you are ahead of the game. Antimony IS what I want in BP alloy because tin is expensive and as a hardener it returns less and less as you increase the % tin to lead to make lead alloy hard. In other words, the first bit of tin added makes a big difference and as the percent goes up the effect drops off to the point of no return in hardness. Your range-scrap unknown-alloy tested on a BHN tester is fine because it is repeatable (and adjustable). Knowledge is power :drinks:

Once for fun and to prove a point I cast bore diameter PP bullets from Lino. They shot well. Recovered bullets, cases and the target told me they expand completely to seal the bore and had rifling engraved for the full diameter body of the bullet. But why use the high $ metal? It is not needed!

Mike, shoot, experiment, see for yourself what works.
Good luck, I hope this helps.

[MikeS]

David, actually I have read Glen & Robert's book. I understand about obturation somewhat, I just wanted confirmation that shooting boolits from 10BHN range scrap would in fact obturate in a BP rifle. As I said originally, I've cast up some boolits, what I didn't say, and I suppose I should have, is that I haven't sized them yet because I've yet to slug the bore in my rifle. Also I didn't want to waste the time & lube IF that alloy wasn't appropriate for BP. In the smokeless world 10BHN isn't considered a hard alloy, but I was thinking perhaps it is in the BP world.

As for the expense of my alloy, I get the range scrap from the private range of the club I belong to, and the shooting there is probably 50% cast handgun, 15 - 20% jacketed handgun, and the rest .22 rimfire. The range has been around since the 1920's, and they used to shoot lots of bullseye matches, so the scrap is pretty consistant. I buy the lead from the range caretaker for around $0.30/lb which is much cheaper than buying pure lead. Unfortunately around here the sources for free lead have pretty much dried up.

Knowing I can shoot the same stuff for BPCR that I use for casting handgun boolits is a good thing. I'm not a hunter, so most of my shooting is at paper. The longest range around here is 100 yards, I wonder if I could get away with shooting fairly light weight boolits, as these 457125's are huge! Cast from my alloy they weigh 520gr. What is the lightest weight boolit that can be shot from a 45-70? Two boolits I have in mind (because I already have the moulds) are the 457130 collar button, and the BigLube 210gr ROA boolit (as cast it's right at .457).

[montana_charlie]

In the smokeless world 10BHN isn't considered a hard alloy, but I was thinking perhaps it is in the BP world.
The Money bullet was developed for longrange target shooting. The design leans toward optimum ballistic coefficient and ignores suitability for hunting.
To get the long range stability, the shape of the long, fairly fragile nose is the key factor.
To prevent slumping, those who use it most successfully cast their bullets from 16-1 lead/tin alloy ... which is considered pretty 'hard' in BPCR circles.

The actual hardness of 16-1 alloy (after three days to stabilize) is 8.2 BHN.

The age-old hardness charts show 20-1 as 10 BHN. Actual hardness of 20-1 is 7.8 BHN.

Which tool do you use to measure hardness?

CM

[mehavey]

Charlie, you and I have had this discussion before and I am now in total agreement that there are any number of sources claiming numbers that are totally out of whack w/ reality.

(Note the chart HERE (http://www.pnjresources.com/Hardness%20of%20Lead%20Alloys.htm))

I know for a (recently-tested/repeatable) fact that pure lead is closer to 4.4-4.6 than 5, 1:30 is ~5.6, 1:16 is ~8.2 (thus lending credence to your 1:20=7.8 number), and Lyman#2 is 14.9/15.

Does anyone have real numbers somewhere?

[Chill Wills]

A round ball but you do not want to do that. The problem with going very light is that accuracy drops off ( if accutacy is your goal) with the faster twists found in 45 cal rifles. Is your 45-70 a 20" twist of maybe a 18" twist? if so I would guess you maybe happy using something in the 350gr to 500 gr class bullet. The little guys likely will not shoot as well, accuracy wise. -Michael Rix[/FONT]
Two boolits I have in mind (because I already have the moulds) are the 457130 collar button, and the BigLube 210gr ROA boolit (as cast it's right at .457).
.......-------

[MikeS]

I use a Saeco tester to get actual BHN (or at least what it thinks is the actual BHN), but like you guys, I'm starting to doubt lots of the accepted values for lead hardness.

Another thing I kind of find interesting, normally when I order a custom mould from Accurate Molds I specify the mould to be for #2 alloy, and the moulds usually cast lighter than the specified weight with my home blended #2. Recently I've started using more of the range scrap, and the last mould I bought I specified WW+2%tin as the alloy, and when I cast some boolits with the mould using the range scrap the boolits were right on the specified weight. In all cases the boolits cast from the moulds were right on the specified diameters.

Another thing I've been kind of concerned about is boolit lube for BP. More specifically if the lube grooves in the moulds I have will hold enough. I have the Lee 405gr HB mould which I think will hold enough lube, but I have 2 Lyman moulds, the 457125 and 457193 both are fairly recent production, and the lube grooves seem real small. This is especially true of the 457193 as it has 3 relatively shallow rounded grooves, and I suspect it might be a fairly new designed boolit for smokeless. Would using a lube cookie underneath it add enough lube to make it not a problem? I'm sorry about all the questions, but shooting BPCR is new to me, and I would rather look silly by asking too many questions, than look silly telling sob stories of my failures because I didn't ask questions if that makes any sense. I've bought Mike Venturino's book 'Shooting Buffalo Rifles of the Old West' as well as SPG's 'BP Cartridge Reloading Primer' and have just started reading them, so hopefully they will also answer lots of my questions.

[John Boy]

I understand about obturation somewhat, I just wanted confirmation that shooting boolits from 10BHN range scrap would in fact obturate in a BP rifle.

Harder bullets will obturate also and produce good to excellent groups ... Bhn 15.4 + 1/2% Tin .... 14 bullets in the ragged hole out of 25

http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd220/Meadowmucker/Targets/LymanPostell100Yds.jpg

[Jeff Houck]

My Pedersoli .38-55 has a 1:12 twist. It shoots well with bullets from 10 to 16 BHN. Above or below this and accuracy drops off. Bullets are sized at .382. I load them in an unsized case and they are a snug slip fit, the nose is seated out to touch the lands. The bore is .379 so these bullets don't need to upset to fill the bore. It doesn't matter if the bullets are tin/lead or an antimony/lead/tin. I use the LBT tester to determine hardness.

I regularly shoot sub-MOA groups at 700 yds in our gong shoots.

My previous gun was a Uberti .45-70 with a 1:20 twist. Loaded in the same manner it too would shoot bullets that ranged from 10 to 16 BHN.

I have constantly been told by other BP shooters, some of whom are national champions, that antimony bases bullets would never shoot well and "hard" bullets would never shoot well either. They all maintained that I was wasting my time with them. To this day they still refuse to believe that my bullets shoot well.

There are always those folks who don't want to be confused by facts after they have already made up their minds. It's all fine and good to ask others what their experience has been, but until you test your gun under your conditions with your loads you'll never really know how it will perform.

I had always been told that antimony and black powder don't mix. I questioned why would and antimony alloyed bullet shoot well with smokeless powder when loaded to black powder pressures, yet supposedly not do well with black powder. So I tested it and found out it was just a strongly held, cherished and revered belief that was nothing more than a truism.

That last statement marks me as an infidel! So in the end my advise to newbies is to test everything and see for yourself.

Jeff Houck

[montana_charlie]

I use a Saeco tester to get actual BHN (or at least what it thinks is the actual BHN), but like you guys, I'm starting to doubt lots of the accepted values for lead hardness.
Copied and pasted this from http://www.redding-reloading.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=84:saeco-lead-hardness-tester


The SAECO Lead Hardness Tester measures alloy hardness by determining the depth of penetration of a hardened steel indenter into a bullet. Relative hardness of the bullet is read off a vernier scale.

Relative Hardness
SAECO Brinell
(Approx.)
Pure lead . . . . . . . . . . . 0-1 5
1:20 tin: lead . . . . . . . . 6-7 10
5:5:90 tin:
antimony: lead . . . . . 7-8 15
2:6:92 (taracorp) . . . . . 8-9 16-17
(magnum alloy)
5:10:85 (linotype) . . . . 9-10 22

The vernier scale is calibrated in arbitrary units from 0 for pure lead up to a SAECO hardness of 10. We have found that a SAECO hardness of at least 6 is required for medium velocities in handguns and a SAECO hardness of over 8 for Magnum handgun and gas check rifle bullets. As a point of reference, wheelweights vary in composition and hardness but usually test between 7 and 9, while linotype registers approx. 10.

As you can see, the Saeco tool provides the user with a "Saeco hardness" number between 1 and 10.
20-1 alloy (it is said) should return a Saeco hardness of 6-7, which (according to the conversion chart) is the equivalent of 10 BHN.

There again is that 'derived data' (or 'estimated' data, or just 'wrong' data) which populates the lead/tin portion of the old standard tables.

CM

[Chill Wills]

Jeff, I enjoyed your post. We have much the experience and approach to this. Early on in my casting-shooting history I asked the same questions. If alloys and fit would work well for smokeless powder why would they NOT be good for BP.
I tried the same alloys and bullet fit as I did in my best smokeless loads had great accuracy!

All,
I too have used an LBT hardness tester for decades. They are fine. The values my is calibrated to agree well with published norms, also the used handbook of metallurgy. Testing it with known samples sent to me from Rotometals
Pure Lead reads between 4 and 5 BHN
95-5-5 reads 15 +/- .5 BHN
Fresh cast +24 hours 30/1 = 9.5
Fresh cast +24 hours 20/1 = 10.5 Both loose a little with months of age.
Old time WW fresh cast are 9 BHN aged past two weeks are 12-13 BHN

I made a chart and have been tracking samples for years.

Dan T and I met in my motel room at a match a few years ago with our testers, His Lee and my LBT and lead samples and tried it all out. We agreed our testers showed a tractable but consistent difference through the middle of the lead tin range but nailed the low and the high. Who holds the standard for this.. US bureau of weights and measures?????? I have tried a number of times to find this info but it wasn't as easy as a Google away and I gave up. Does not matter except for a trivia contest. I know how to make my alloy and test it.

Mike, It does not mater as long as your tester gives you the same/consistent readouts every time. You will know what number you want for your loads/alloy.
Life is good.;-)

[MikeS]

Well, I just tested one of the 457193's I cast the other day, and got a saeco #6. When not casting with the range scrap, but rather the home made #2 (made from 26lb pure lead, 20lb linotype, and 3lb of 50/50 lead/tin which I sent a 1lb ingot to a guy with a niton tester, and it came back pretty close to #2, I think it was something like 4.8% tin 4.5% antimony, 89% lead, with the remainder being small amounts of other metals, copper, zinc, iron, etc.) they regularly test at saeco #8 which loosely corresponds to 15BHN. I really try not to get too hung up on hardness, but rather will the alloy work. I mean there are several ways to make an alloy with a BHN of either 10 or 15, and one alloy can be very malleable and another of exactly the same hardness can be more brittle. So, now that I think I know that my range scrap alloy work, the next step of course is to get to the range, and shoot them, then I'll know for sure. I've got 50 rounds loaded up, and ready to go, now I'm just waiting for my sights to arrive so I can install them, then go shoot.

[MT Chambers]

Back in the old days, Buff. hunters wanted to use pure lead, it expanded more, killed quicker, and quite often would stop under the skin on the far side and they could re-use the lead. Harder bullets would penetrate completely. My experience with big moose and Buffalo and anything harder then 30-1 was not good in the 50/90 Sharps, going to 30 or 40-1 or even pure lead puts 'em down, right now.

[KHA]

When I was still a working stiff I had use of a Starrett Benchtop about a $ 4000. unit the DOT used and I took some samples in to check the accuracy of the Lee and Saeco testers and both where way short of the actual hardness.

I use the Saeco and a Lee tester but I only use it for comparison between two batches of ingots for the hardness of the alloy hardness not the actual BHN. Even then I make a big batch so it is consistent and not get two batches mixed even though the tester showes the same hardness.

As far as what hardness to use for a bullet, well that depends on what type of ogive it has. A round nose can be cast softer then a long nosed elliptical. A alloy to hard will raise hell with a bullet to small in diameter for the bore.
Antimony in a bullet has a place, but remember a little antimony goes a long way and can make a bullet brittle and it might make a difference when you want to knock that ram down at 500 mtrs in a smaller caliber.

[texasmac]

I think you guys will find some interesting information in the following article.
http://www.texas-mac.com/Evaluations_and_Recommendations_for_Lead-Alloy_Hardness_Testers.html

Wayne

[montana_charlie]

When I was still a working stiff I had use of a Starrett Benchtop about a $ 4000. unit the DOT used and I took some samples in to check the accuracy of the Lee and Saeco testers and both where way short of the actual hardness.
The Saeco returns 'Saeco numbers', the Lee provides Brinell numbers, and the Starrett gives Rockwell numbers.

To say the Saeco and Lee "were way short of the actual hardness" - as indicated in one of the many Rockwell hardness scales - doesn't say anything useful to a bullet caster.


Dan T and I met in my motel room at a match a few years ago with our testers, His Lee and my LBT and lead samples and tried it all out. We agreed our testers showed a tractable but consistent difference through the middle of the lead tin range but nailed the low and the high. Who holds the standard for this.. US bureau of weights and measures?????? I have tried a number of times to find this info but it wasn't as easy as a Google away and I gave up. Does not matter except for a trivia contest. I know how to make my alloy and test it.
You and Michael Rix not only both live in Colorado, you have both had very similar associations with Dan Theodore.
http://www.shilohrifle.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=19887

CM

[mehavey]

My (Lee) BHN experience mirrors MT's and CM's from looking at real data
over multiple timeframes & conditions


Pure lead: 4.4 (reactor-grade)
1-to-30: 5.6
1-to-20: 7.8
1-to-16: 8.2
50/50: 9.0 (bar solder)
True#2: 14.9 (Roto Metal)

All (with the exception of #2) test much "softer" than promulgated on the 'Net'
I've tended to stay with Lead/Tin as it stabilizes quickly and ages little compared to Antimony mixes
Ditto #2 (specifically real #2, only)

[KHA]

MC

Those Lab Boys can test just about anything, I was just a grunt. It will just about test anything from plastic up and it has the Brinell, Rockwell. Rockwell Superficial, Vickers in a bunch of different scales.
What they tell me I will take their word for it :coffeecom

[cajun shooter]

Mike, I was not trying to say that you knew nothing about the loading and shooting of BPCR. I was just giving you information about a very nice book to have for reference.
As far as lead testers go, I read a test result about 5 years ago and the results were almost predictable. It depended on how the person using the tester did the test as to what result they received.
The Lee was the most error prone as it relies on a person seeing and measuring the indention the same each time. Being human is not going to allow that.
John Boy and I had a conversation about using WW's in bullet making. He advised that the ones he used in the North East were reading around 15BHN or more. I have never seen a WW with that high of a reading in Louisiana. The ones we have are in the 9-10BHN range. Why this difference, I have no idea unless it has to do with the snow and salt on the roads.
I use the Cabin Tree Deluxe model and it is very handy with me buying my lead from several sources.
I myself have used lead between 10 and 15 BHN with the same results for the type shooting I do.
I shoot SASS and my longest 45-70 rifle shots are between 500-600 yards.
As I stated before, the fit to each gun is the biggest hurdle to overcome, BHN plays a part but not as much as some shooters try to make it.
I think if you try both a bullet that shows a 10BHN which is said to be a 20-1 mix and a bullet of a higher BHN, say 16-18 you will use the softer of the two.

[MikeS]

Well, right now I have 50 rounds of 45-70 loaded up with the Lee 405gr HB boolit cast from nearly pure lead. I also have 25 Lyman 457125's and 25 457192's cast from the range scrap that tested at 10BHN waiting for to be loaded once I shoot the Lee boolits, so I guess I'll see how the 2 batches compare. I finally got my rolling block ready for use, so now as soon as I have the energy to go to the range I'll check them out.

I put a Marble's tang sight on my rolling block, but the screws for mounting it were out of stock. I waited a couple of weeks till I finally got the screws. But I had ordered the screw set for a Remington rolling block, and mine is a Spanish rolling block, so of course the screws I got didn't fit! After doing some digging on the internet I found that apparently either the Spanish didn't always use the same screw size, or over the years people have rethreaded the tang hole, so I took the screw that was in the rifle, and went down to the local Ace hardware store, and quickly found out that the screw I needed was a common 12-24 thread! So now I have the sight mounted, but had to use a round head machine screw so it sits higher on the sight body than the correct one, and it's got some kind of shiny plating on it (cadmium?) that doesn't match anything else on the rifle. I also mounted a pistol grip on the lower tang, so didn't bother cutting off any excess screw that stuck out from the bottom (about 3/16"). For a front sight it has a Lee Shaver #17 type sight, which also gave me pains getting it installed! Between the sights, the pistol grip, and giving the wood a good coating of JPW, it's starting to look ok. Without serious work to the metalwork of the gun to remove the over 100 years of dents and dings this is about as nice as I'll be able to get it. Now to take photos to 'show off' the roller.