COWW at 15,4 BHN hardness???

[Balta]

I recive 2 days ago a Lee hardness tester..
So yesterday i tested almost all of my boolits ,ingots ,lead,alloy..etc....
To be sure that i read correct hardness i first test my Lyman #2 alloy and result was 15,2 Bhn so i did it right ...i test some boolits that before was tested by friend of mine and i read same hardness ..
I tested my new supple of lead that shod be 5% antimony and 2% Tin and result was 12,5 Bhn ,i was expecting around 15 Bhn so i was Little disappointed when i figure at that this alloy DON'T HAVE this percent of antimony..But deal was good so i just gonna WQ this alloy for my 9 mm.
Biggest surprise was when i test my last batch of COWW .I bought about 50 lbs and melt this in Ingots..I cast some 45 bullets i did notice that HP dont expand..i was assuming hardness around 11 BH but....i tested ingots,bullets a couple time,different ingots and result was constant 15,4 Bhn..
Is this possible ? Anyone have similar experience ?

(No, i didnt melt zink WW:)) [smilie=s:

[375RUGER]

Not long ago I was given a bunch of Mercedes and VW branded COWW and SOWW. I have not tested the hardness of them but some of them were real hard and some were real soft. It wasn't one brand or the other some of each brand were hard and some soft. These COWW had also been sitting in this guys garage for 15 years or more.
I seperated the soft from the hard when i melted.
I can see it being very possible to be that hard.

[40Super]

When I got a couple pails of COWW that I was able to pick out myself from a big bin so there was 75% over 2.5oz. I started bending them to break them in littler chunks for in my small pot,certain types would break right away before even bending 70degrees, others I could almost tie in a knot. I started seperating several brands so I can now have a consistant idea what bhn my ingots will be. There were others that had a certain shape that I seperated out about 15lbs, they melted at 640F - 650F best I could measure. They were lead not zinc because once melted they acted just like pure lead and no oatmeal. There are some big differences in makeup with WW.

[evan price]

I tested my last batch at 14 bhn so yea, no problem seeing that number.

[cajun shooter]

While the Lee tester has been proven in testing to be an accurate means of telling about alloy hardness, it is also the one with the most problems. The Lee depends on several variables from the readings taken by different people but assumes that every user did it the correct way. It leaves a big hole in the control part of any test. Eyesight being the main culprit along with the amount of pressure put on the press.
Now in the USA, I have seen that for what ever reason, the WW's that are from the North are much harder than those from the South.
My only theory over the years has been because of the snow and salt on the highways. I have no proof of this and is only a idea.
With one person in the North and the other in The South we have both seen readings with your numbers. We use the same make of tester called the Cabin Tree. His WW's read 15 BHN and mine read 10-12 BHN.

[Griz44mag]

Wheel weights come from many different suppliers, who get their lead from many different places. Anyone who casts should be aware that "expecting" a wheel weight to have a specific hardness is a false expectation. Cast your ingots and test them. This is the only way of knowing what you really have.

[Roundnoser]

Most of my COWW ingots are averaging 11 - 12 BHN on a Cabine Tree. I haven't had any yet that exceed 12.

[Boyscout]

I have been casting bullits for testing from each of my smelts. My wheel weights have been running from 11-12 pretty consistantly. That is probably within the range for my ability to read a Lee Hardness tester. I use a calculator to figure how much Roto Super hard to get it to where I want using 2% lead with SH being the variable calculated for. So far, I have been getting to within 1 BHN of my goal.

[ROGER4314]

I was a Calibration Tech for McDonnell Douglas Aircraft for 5 1/2 years. Gauges told production and test personnel if an aircraft or component was within standards so those gauges HAD to be right! We used a Deadweight tester to calibrate super accurate gauges then tested our gauges against those standard gauges. Periodically, the deadweight tester was sent to a calibration shop to get National Bureau Of Standards (NBS) certification. Everything was then traceable to NBS.

I bought the Lee Hardness tester but was disturbed that the BHN measurement was not traceable to any known standard. I figured out a way around that. I ordered some samples from RotoMetals (see upper right of this page for link) which keeps firm control over their alloys. I know the composition and Brinnell hardness of each alloy. An ingot weighs 4-5 pounds but I ordered one pound of each alloy as a sample. They cut ingots for me and very kindly stamped the alloy content on them by request. I printed out their composition page for each alloy and compare unknown samples against my standards with the Lee penetration device, by scratch tests or fingernail grooving. As a quick check, I can use a spring loaded center punch to compare impressions with my standards. That gives me a baseline for hardness tests that I can refer back to. The whole scheme cost me about $12 and I put the standard samples away for safe keeping.

The system isn't perfect and is not very scientific but it's better than a WEG (wild eyed guess) and it's plenty cheap!

Here's a link to their bullet alloy page:
http://www.rotometals.com/Bullet-Casting-Alloys-s/5.htm

Flash

[Balta]

So when you compare the know hardness alloy with your result using Lee Hardness tester ,is there differences?
Lee tester its not so easy to work with...

[evan price]

Check out the pencil tests in the stickies above. It's accurate and repeatable. And it does work.

[ROGER4314]

Using the known samples is a very recent experiment so the jury is still out on whether it works. I ordered several samples and the information I gained was so encouraging that I ordered samples of every alloy they offer. Those have not arrived, yet.

I have cataracts forming in both eyes so the Lee kit is very hard for me to use. Add to that the darned microscope positions in reverse. Every way that you move is backwards! That's why I resorted to using the spring loaded center punch for a quick check. I plan on impressing each sample with the Lee ball penetrator so I can check unknown alloys against each sample.

Now I have samples of known composition to compare to. It's a well accepted practice in Geology to have a scratch plate to scratch a known sample of the Moh's scale of hardness (Talc, gypsum calcite, flourite, andesite, orthoclaze, quartz, topaz, diamond) and compare the hardness of an unknown specimen to that scratch. It gives you a good idea of the sample hardness. The Moh's test uses a ceramic scratch plate and there is some hope that a similar scratch test could be applied to lead alloys.

The second round of samples have not arrived yet so I'll update later. All totaled, I have about $30 in this experiment and I'm learning a lot.

Incidentally, Rotometals is a super fast shipper. The speedy record holder in my experience is Midway, USA. Rotometals is #2. Those folks are serious about getting their orders out the door!

Evan......
Will do on the pencil tests. I taught drafting for many years and did design work in industry so I have about every lead hardness imaginable. I just need to dig them out of storage. As I recall, some drafting supply places will sell you one stick of a certain lead hardness so you don't need to buy a whole box full. Add a cheap lead holder and a sharpener and you're good to go!

Flash

[fredj338]

Be aware that the Euro groups have been putting zinc ww on their cars for about 7-8yrs now. THose really hard ww may just be zinc.

Not long ago I was given a bunch of Mercedes and VW branded COWW and SOWW. I have not tested the hardness of them but some of them were real hard and some were real soft. It wasn't one brand or the other some of each brand were hard and some soft. These COWW had also been sitting in this guys garage for 15 years or more.
I seperated the soft from the hard when i melted.
I can see it being very possible to be that hard.

[montana_charlie]

The Lee depends on several variables from the readings taken by different people but assumes that every user did it the correct way. It leaves a big hole in the control part of any test. Eyesight being the main culprit along with the amount of pressure put on the press.
Have you used the Lee tester?

[cajun shooter]

MC, It seems that you have nothing more to do than question my postings, what gives? I'm 65 years of age. I started working in a full service gun store at the age of 20. I was taught by the owner my mentor, reloading in 1969, casting several hundred bullets a week which were sold under the store name. I used Lyman and H&G moulds.
I went to LSU and studied Criminal Justice and at the same time I joined the EBR Parish Reserve Deputy Program.
I became very interested in teaching others and took many different classes that pertain to shooting and guns during my full time service of over 15 years.
I have been to 5 S&W Armorer Schools, Ruger, Sig, Ithaca, Remington and to at least 3 National FBI Schools in Sniper, SWAT, And Firearms Instructor.
I was the lead POST Firearms Instructor for the State of Louisiana for many years. I trained other instructors for all the other departments in the state. I also taught at LSU in the LAW Enforcement Institute Firearms training section. I was involved with training with DEA, FBI and Several other departments.
Many of these classes had reloading and casting classes which I taught and had lesson plans and visual aids for use on the overhead projector.
I have maintained my reloading and casting equipment since those first lessons from my mentor. I still have my first Lee Loader in 38 special that was purchased in the fall of 1968.
I have used several types of lead testers with the first being the Lee as it was inexpensive and gave me what I felt at the time were reasonable results. My body aged and my eyes were no longer 20 and I had to use Walley World glasses.
This is where the Lee has a weakness. You have to measure the impression made by the tension made by a ball into the lead. That result depends on your ability to hold flush with the top of a die and not allow it to go above or your reading will change for one. You then have to see it quite clearily to have a accurate reading.
YES Mr. MC I have used and owned Lee lead hardness gauges. I even installed one on a old Microscope to help with my age problems.
Now you have made statements for many years on this forum and I have always taken a mans word as being true when talking about our various subjects.
Just what training have you had in the Firearms field other than OJT?

[Larry Gibson]

Wheel weights come from many different suppliers, who get their lead from many different places. Anyone who casts should be aware that "expecting" a wheel weight to have a specific hardness is a false expectation. Cast your ingots and test them. This is the only way of knowing what you really have.


This exactly the situation and why COWW BHN will vary from very soft at 10 - 11 upards of "hard" at 15 - 16 BHN. Has to do with the amount of antimony and tin in proportion to each other that are alloyed with the lead. I find if the WWs BHN at 10 - 12 a very good thing to do is to add 2 % tin. This brings the BHN up to 14 - 17 and in my area mostly into the 16 - 17 BHN range for AC'd cast with 7 - 10 days aging.

Also having BHN tested numerous different alloys including many different "lots" of COWWs I've found there can be as much as 4 BHN difference of the BHN taken on the same sample. Therefore taking a BHN reading of one bullet just gives you the BHN of that bullet alone and it probably won't be the same for the next bullet of the same alloy. As with velocity and psi readings we must get a representative sample to have a valid BHN. Testing a minimum of 5 bullets or 5 places on an ingot will give a much better idea of the BHN of the alloy. To be statistically valid a 7 bullet or place test should be done. Ten bullets or places measured on and ingot will give a pretty good assurance of the true BHN. Testing one bullet for BHN will give us pretty much a valid answer as shooting one shot groups for accuracy.

Larry Gibson

[Nocturnal Stumblebutt]

Well I just typed out a well thought out response to this, hit post, and it evaporated.

[Nocturnal Stumblebutt]

Anyway, 5-6% antimonial lead is the cheapest form of lead I have seen most foundries offering, and who knows if one of the wheel weight manufacturers took delivery of a few tons of scrap mono- and linotype. It's not like they would save the mono and lino, thinking "this is too nice for WW."

[375RUGER]

Be aware that the Euro groups have been putting zinc ww on their cars for about 7-8yrs now. THose really hard ww may just be zinc.

They've been doing it longer than that. the bucket I got, as mentioned, was about 15+ years old. They guy ran across it while cleaning up his garage, he hadn't seen the bucket for a long while. Out of 60# probably 20# were zinc and the plastic ones and they were Euro branded too. He told me he has another bucket in there somewhere and I can have it too if he runs across it.
Those really hard ones were lead, I checked all with side cutters.

[montana_charlie]

The Lee depends on several variables from the readings taken by different people but assumes that every user did it the correct way. It leaves a big hole in the control part of any test. Eyesight being the main culprit along with the amount of pressure put on the press.
Have you used the Lee tester?
MC, It seems that you have nothing more to do than question my postings, what gives?
I just asked a question. Wasn't trying to start a fight.

But, see your comment above. You said the Lee tool depends on severable variables to return a result. Several?
I use the tool often, and the only 'variable' is the size of the indentation, which is a function of the metal being tested.

You say there is a 'big hole' in control, but attribute that failing to 'eyesight' and 'pressure put on the press'.

The press position required for reliable results is a very precise spot in the movement of the ram, and it is clearly explained in the instructions. Therefore, the operator's eyesight is the only factor which is not 'controlled' when operating the tool.

Considering how much you said as opposed to how much is valid, it seemed to me that you were basing your remarks on the postings of others, rather than personal experience.
So, I asked if you had used one.


Just what training have you had in the Firearms field other than OJT?
Just OJT. Been using guns, reloading for them, and repairing them since I was 19. I'm 67, now.

CM

[Balta]

Well i did just that..i test a ingot ,cuople of ingots 4,5 time each,I run test at 15 bullets .(AGAIN) And avrege BHN is 15,4 !
And yes its a lot of zink,steel WW hiere..And not just that there ar guys that do manufacturing of WW and when sell new WW to tire shop there buy the old,used one WW from tire shop and remelt them again mixing COWW with SOWW so hardness of this is less "normal" COWW.But thiese WW is easy to seperete and there run at 10 Bhn at max...
I was lucky to know the guy that have scrap yard and buy some ...There was all a BIGGER COWW!