Casting Softnose Bullets From ANY Conventional Moulds

[BruceB]

This is the final distillation of how to use my results to cast your own SOFTPOINT boolits from any conventional (i.e.: base-pour) Lyman, RCBS, Lee etc mould.

1. Decide how much of your boolit will be pure lead, and conjure a way of measuring that amount of pure lead. This can be via ladling liquid lead with a fabricated tiny dipper, perhaps a pistol cartridge case of the proper volume with a wire handle added. It can be via a "donor" pure-lead bullet of the correct weight, cast for this purpose, which will fit in the cavity of the mould to be used for making the softpoints. It can be a measured length of lead wire. It can be....?


2. Get the full melting pot as HOT AS IT WILL GO, assuming an electrically-heated pot. Place the mould IN THE POT, in contact with the melt, and wait for it to get as hot as possible....several minutes at least. Then place the pure-lead component in the mould. We want it to melt and take on the form of the bullet nose.


3. REMOVE the mould from the heat source, and ALLOW THE NOSE TO SOLIDIFY. THIS IS IMPORTANT, because it prevents the alloys from mixing, as they might do if the base is poured while the nose is still liquid.


4. Once the nose is solidified, ADD THE HARDER SHANK METAL, leaving a generous sprue puddle on the plate, and again allow the alloy to solidify.


****************************************

-----We now have two completely-separate hardnesses of alloy in the cavity, with a probably-weak attachment to each other and a visible joint or crease where the metals meet. This is where most earlier types of softpoint cast bullets run into possible trouble. To fix the potential weak point, we will......MAKE IT INTO A ONE-PART BOOLIT!!!!!

*****************************************


5. Place the filled mould, with its pure-lead and harder-alloy contents, IN CONTACT WITH THE TOP OF THE MELT IN THE FURNACE AGAIN. Watch until the entire sprue has remelted, maybe a couple of minutes or more, and then wait a minute or two after that sprue-melting occurs, before removing the mould from the heat. Waiting a bit longer ensures that everything in the cavity is DEFINITELY melted, and that's what we need.


6. With a minimum of disturbance, agitation, vibration etc., place the bottom of the mould on a wet cloth pad and watch closely until the sprue solidifies again. Then, WAIT A MINUTE OR TWO LONGER before opening the mould, to absolutely ensure that the boolit has solidified in the cavity.


*******************************


We now have a harder-based, soft-nose cast boolit. It does NOT have a weak point at the juncture of the alloys, because we melted them together WITHOUT disturbing their orientation in the cavity. That is, the pure lead is still up-front, and the harder alloy is still in the shank.

Production is obviously fairly slow, but we only need a handful of the softpoints for actual shots at animals. This is because our practice and zeroing can be done with NON-softnoses cast from exactly the same cavity. The minor weight difference due to the pure-lead component has no effect on zeroing or anything else.

My current thinking is that about 1/2 of the length of the nose (of a bore-riding design) should be pure lead, on normal-weight for-caliber boolits (180-220/.30, 150/.270, 250-300/.338 etc.) With modern cartridges, where cast boolits normally aren't used (or useable) at the max speeds attainable in the cartridge, I suggest leaning to the heaviest possible cast bullet for best effect on game. Ergo, I'd use 220 grains in '06 or .300 Mags, 300 grains in .338, 300+ in a .375 H&H, etc. As we get up to .40-plus caliber, "normal" speeds for jacketed bullets can often be reached with cast loads as well. The .45-70 is the classic example, but the .404, .416, .458 and many others are equally adaptable to the cast softpoint for hunting purposes.

The distribution of proportions of pure-lead to hard alloy is entirely under the control of the maker, of course. Some testing of personally-cast boolits on wetpack or water jugs will prove very interesting. My preference is to have a LOT of shank metal left if the softpoint should destroy itself on bone or whatever. This way the shank will keep penetrating due to decent remaining sectional density. Hence, my belief that having about half of the nose length in pure lead will be in the right area.

Once decent accuracy is achieved in the 1800-2000+ fps speed range, the rifle will have enough reach (flatness of trajectory) to make 200 yard shots quite practical. My .416 with 365 at 2100 fps drops three inches at 200 yards from a 160-yard zero, and lands three inches high at 100 with the same sight setting. That is a highly-useable 200-yard load for elk, moose, deer, or whatever.

I'm quite excited about the success of this development work. Cast softpoints have suffered an 'iffy' reputation for years, because most of them were in fact TWO-part bullets, and although some decent successes were reported with such bullets, there were also reports of the bullets coming apart on impact, meaning that the two "parts" would separate. I believe the tribulations of the earlier versions were avoidable by the simple procedure described above....get the two different alloys into proximity and in their correct locations, and re-melt them together. THEN, by George, we have a ONE-PIECE boolit, and no mistake.

Look at the wide variety of nose shapes used in jacketed bullets, and realize that whatever the shape, almost all except the monometals such as Barnes use PURE LEAD (or nearly-so) to initiate their controlled expansion. To me, this also indicates that a pure-lead nose on a cast boolit of almost ANY shape will also expand easily on impact. I don't believe that "slumping" of the softnose under acceleration forces will be much of a factor at speeds up to 2000 fps. I believe that with boolits made as described here, my cast projectiles have arrived at a point where they don't give up much at all to the "more-modern" jacketed bullet in the hunting fields. I do however think that BIGGER cast bullets are better than smaller ones for hunting, and prefer to start my candidate rifles for CB hunting with the .338 and go up from there.

I'm posting this so that newcomers to our Board don't have to trudge through the entire story of how I arrived at where I ended up on this search. Dare I say, it might warrant a sticky or "article" status, due to the fact that the topic comes up so frequently?

[Glen]

Ross Seyfried outlined a similar (and simpler) method for making this kind of bullet several years ago in Handloader. His approach requires having two lead pots -- the first filled with pure lead (or at a soft alloy) and the second filled with a harder alloy (like WW). A small dipper is made with a small caliber pistol case and piece of coat hanger (for the handle), and the dipper was filled with lead and poured into the mould cavity. As soon as the lead solidified, then the mould was placed under the pour spout of the second lead pot and topped off with the harder alloy. By casting the second alloy when the first is still hot, the two alloys form a solder joint and fuse together. This approach makes good hunting bullets, and obviates the need to heat the mould up and wait for it to cool back down, etc.

[Nrut]

Ross Seyfried outlined a similar (and simpler) method for making this kind of bullet several years ago in Handloader. His approach requires having two lead pots -- the first filled with pure lead (or at a soft alloy) and the second filled with a harder alloy (like WW). A small dipper is made with a small caliber pistol case and piece of coat hanger (for the handle), and the dipper was filled with lead and poured into the mould cavity. As soon as the lead solidified, then the mould was placed under the pour spout of the second lead pot and topped off with the harder alloy. By casting the second alloy when the first is still hot, the two alloys form a solder joint and fuse together. This approach makes good hunting bullets, and obviates the need to heat the mould up and wait for it to cool back down, etc.

Glen ...you will see in that Handloader #222 article by Seyfried that there IS a joint and or wrinkles where the bullets fuse....He says there is no problem with this.....maybe so, maybe not, that is speculation.....If you follow the method outlined above by BruceB there will be NO visable joint or wrinkles....maybe just a slight change in color.....I have tested the nose and bases on bullets casted like BruceB suggested on my LBT hardness tester and you can see that there is no complete mixing of the base alloy and the pure Pb nose materail like you get when you pour the base alloy into a mold with unsolidified pure Pb nose....
Try it for yourself and see........:)

[BruceB]

Howdy, Glen.

I'm a great fan of Ross Seyfried's writings, and I remember that article very well. Still have it here somewhere.

His article about cast softpoints was one more nudge in the direction of doing it myself, and so were some others dating back right to the dawn of the smokeless era.

If you look at the photos of his cast softpoints, you can actually SEE the area of my greatest concern. There are clearly-visible joints between soft and hard, with creases, wrinkles and other imperfections. Cosmetically, this doesn't bother me. FUNCTIONALLY, it concerns me a good bit, and this is why I set out on my personal campaign.

By the visible surface imperfections, it is clear that the internal bond may not be as secure and uniform as "I" like. Therefore I set out to see if it could be improved to meet "my" requirements. I have succeeded, and can make two-alloy bullets with NO IMPERFECTIONS, and with only the differing colors of the alloys to show the differentiation.

Yep, Ross has a "simpler" system. I don't think that the degree of simplicity has much implication when only a dozen or so bullets will take care of several hunts, at least. What DOES have serious implications for me, is that I want any bullet I fire at an animal to be the very best I can obtain, and in the case of cast bullets, that means a bullet that is as good as I can possibly make, with the minimum possibilities for failure on a game animal. I'm not happy with cast bullets (for any purpose) which plainly show imperfections, and PARTICULARLY so, if I intend to fire them at game which deserves the cleanest, fastest death I can inflict.

Hence my campaign to do BETTER than the cast softpoints about which I've occasionally read over the course of four or five decades. Mine look better than those with which Ross illustrated his Handloader article, and they look better than any others I've seen illustrated over the years. By "better", I mean that there are no imperfections around the area where the alloys meet.

It's as simple as that...if I can't make softpoint bullets which are satisfactory to me, I won't take them hunting. Others are free to do as they will, of course.

[jhalcott]

I got considerally LESS than the amount of linotype back when I fired these bullets into DRY phone books and about 8-9" of penetration. 1 1/2" wound channels with about an inch damage beyond where the bullets stopped. Starting weight was 240+gas check and lube,recovered weight was 107+ and 114+ grains.These same bullets of lyman #2 went 19+" in WET phone books at 25 yards.(the 2 alloy bullets were shot at 50 yards). 358318 lyman mold.

[rebliss]

BruceB: I'd enjoy seeing a picture of one of your 'finished' soft-points, if you could get one to show the color difference you're talking about. Also, if you have any of spent bullets, that would be good too.

Thanks for posting this thread.

-Rob

[9.3X62AL]

I'm hoping to try this "Version 2.0 Method" of Bruce's in the next little while. My earlier efforts with the first method worked well--tested molds were the Lee 405 grain and the Mtn. Molds 9.3mm x 270 grains. Even with pouring the hot shank metal into melted nose portions, there is a definite demarcation between the two alloys. After 2 weeks of "aging", the transition is more pronounced, but there is no visible "seam" per se.

[Vly]

Nice write up, Bruce. I think that deserves to be a sticky so folks can find it easily.

My only question is, do you think there is the potential to damage the mould by leaving it in the melt for that length of time? I stick a corner of the mould in to warm it up, but this method goes beyond that. Also, does the mould material - iron/aluminum/brass - make a difference?

Thanks

[BruceB]

Howdy, Vly. Nice to see your handle again.

So far, I've only used three or four moulds to make softpoints. None were brass, but I have used both aluminum and iron moulds for the job. I haven't noticed any problems so far (and I have been watching closely).

I believe the heating takes place rather uniformly when the entire mould is half-submerged in the melt (I generally get the furnace FULL and immerse the blocks right up to the bottom of the handle "prongs").

No warpage or other damage has come to light so far.

Our digital camera is mammaries-to-the-sky right now, and I haven't mastered the art of posting photos yet, anyway. Maybe what I'll do is make up an assortment of shapes and sizes in softpoint form and ship the boolits to someone to photograph and post on this thread. Maybe Buckshot would be willing, or someone else???

[felix]

I tend to think that warpage comes from different metals expanding at different rates, as well as a single metalic item not being made homogeneous enough when different elements are involved (i.e., any alloy). In very particular to this discussion, warpage can be promoted by having tight fitting screws because different whole metals are in direct contact. In general, make sure there is some obvious slack between all unlike parts like mold handles, screws, and the blocks. In other words, all fairly loose fitting between them. ... felix

[Vly]

Thanks Bruce and Felix for the responses. What Felix says about warpage makes sense. I think I'll have to give this a try as cabin fever sets in.

[BruceB]

A picture really is worth a thousand words....sometimes.

I went out back and cast a few softpoints in hopes that some kind soul will volunteer to take pictures of 'em, and post them on this thread.

There are four bullets all wrapped-up and ready to mail:

1. A Lee .338-220, with softpoint poured via a dipper made from a .32ACP case, about 80 grains of pure lead.

2. A PAIR of NEI 421-390s (for my .404 Jeffery), cast simultaneously in a 2-cavity mould as an experiment. It worked, and I have two good softpoints cast at the same time. The dipper was made from a 9x19 case, and throws about 120 grains of pure lead. I have high hopes for this design, as it will run just as fast as the famed African factory loads for the .404, used on everything up to and including elephant......no, I'm not over-run with pachyderms, but JUST IN CASE....it should kill an elk, anyways!

3. A 457125 Lyman 500-grain roundnose, with 180 grains of pure lead from a .40 S&W "dipper". This one was cast some weeks ago, and the pure lead has darkened very noticeably...today's boolits have very shiny softpoints.

The bullets are all just as they fell from the mould, with no cosmetic work or anything else.

I hope the pictures, if we can get some, will show the color demarcation. It's very plain to see with boolits in hand....in photos, I dunno.

Anyone?

[Vly]

I'm not a photographer - I'm just a guy with a digital camera and a Fototime account. But the macro function works reasonably well and I would be happy to give it a shot. If someone who is a real photographer pipes up, I would be happy to defer.

Bruce - I will send a PM with address, but if you line up someone more qualified that is fine with me.

[BruceB]

Stand by here; Daughter has been assisting, and I MAY have a photo!

.338 on the left, two 421-390s, and the 457125. damn, they look ugly when blown-up this big.

I'll get this figured out to use a smaller-size photo, but this will give y'all a REAL close-up. The shinier pure lead can be seen on the noses of the first three, and the darker oxidized stuff is plainly visible on the 500 RN.

Even under this much magnification, note that there are NO FLAWS OF ANY DESCRIPTION around the juncture of pure lead to wheelweight alloy!

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p126/BruceB_album/CIMG2307.jpg

[NVcurmudgeon]

Bruce, been watching the growth of your SP technique for months and you've really got something. Every objection I could think of has been met with your method. Makes me wish I had one of those rifles that starts with the number "4" to try it in. Great pictures, too. (I see you went with the conventional wisdom on the high-tech photography-get a young 'un to do it for you!)

[Johnch]

In a Lee 6 gang mould .
Do you think I could do all 6 or just try 1 or 2 cavitys ?

I was going to try it with a 8mm GB and 44 Ranch Dog mould

If I did 2 cavitys , would there be a better 2 ?

Johnch

[BruceB]

NVcurmudgeon: "Makes me wish I had one of those rifles that starts with the number "4" to try it in."

(Ahem) NVC; You will note, dear Sir, that the left-hand softpoint boolit in the photo is a .338, and it's my understanding that you still own and treasure a .35 Whelen...... which is larger-bored than said .338....meaning that you don't need a ".40-plus" rifle to try the softpoint method.

I'm going to try making some .30 softpoints soon, but as I've already stated my preference is to start my cast-bullet hunting calibers with the .338 bore and go upwards in caliber from there. The smaller the caliber, the better such things as using lead wire or pure-lead donor bullets look to me. I suspect that pouring from a makeshift dipper into a .30 mould might be a bit more awkward than in .338-and-up moulds.


Johnch; I'm at a bit of a loss to answer your query about using the 6-banger for this softpoint procedure. I've never owned one myself. The only reservation I have is whether or not the bigger blocks could be gotten up to high-enough temperature. I think if I were going to try it with the big LEE mould, the first attempt would be made with only the first cavity, the one furthest from the handle end. This is due to the difficulty of immersing the entire block for heating. This will be a chance for 6-cavity owners to try something different, for sure.

[Nrut]

In a Lee 6 gang mould .
Do you think I could do all 6 or just try 1 or 2 cavitys ?

I was going to try it with a 8mm GB and 44 Ranch Dog mould

If I did 2 cavitys , would there be a better 2 ?

Johnch

Johnch... I have'nt tried using a 6 cav. for BruceB's version2 softnose boolit.....but I'm thinking a hot plate mite work for reheating....I used a propane camp burner to reheat my two cav. molds but would probably set an old Skill Saw blade over the flame to distribute the heat better if using a 6 cav.....If you try a hot plate please post if it works or not......:)

[Johnch]

Tonight I used my 6 gang Ranch Dog 44 and a .360 180 gr GB mould to make soft points at the same time
I used a old 9" SS frying pan and a 1000 watt single burner for the soft lead and the 20 lb bottom pour pot for the WW
I filled the frying pan 2/3 full of almost pure lead

I followed BruceB's directions
But I did all 6 cavitys at a time
I was able to put both moulds in the pan to preheat or remelt the slug at the same time
I then sat the mould with the remelted slugs on a piece of wood to cool enough .
That gave me enough time to use the other mould

I did then water drop the bullets , but only to cool them and keep the limmited work area clear of clutter


I probely got 200+ of each tonight , not sure how long it took .
I was casting other stuff before and after I did the soft points
Not bad IMO

Johnch

[Nrut]

Boy John it's going to take alot of killin' to use up 200 softnose cast boolits!.:Fire:

[Johnch]

I have to work up loads in several guns .
I don't want to find I am out of Boolits to load :drinks:

Johnch

[Marlin Junky]

So, is anyone going to shoot those boolits into ballistic gelatin at 2300, 1800 and 1300 fps, or thereabouts?

OK, how about wet newspaper?

MJ

[garandsrus]

Bruce B,

With all the heat you used, I was surprised that the boolits aren't frosty. Any idea why?

My thought is that you allowed them to cool long enough in the mold before opening it. When I get frosty boolits, it seems like they are shiny when dropped and then turn frosty as they cool. By letting the boolits cool in the mold longer before opening it, they don't get frosty.

John

[BluesBear]

I think I see a faster way to get the better results by combining the Ross Seyfried method with the BruceB method.

Use two pots with different alloys ala Ross Seyfried.
Pour the nose with a small dipper from the softer alloy in pot #1 ala Ross Seyfried.
Fill the mould with the harder alloy from pot #2 ala Ross Seyfried.
Then, once the sprue has solidified reheat the mould until the sprue melts ala BruceB.

Since you don't have to heat the mould in order to melt the nose and then wait for it to solidify before pouring the base section, production, while still slower than a standard boolit, will be much faster than BruceB's original system.
Hopefully you will still wind up with a boolit with a nose that is solidly "joined" to the base.

Due to the reheating of the boolit, there should be some "marrying" of ther two alloys in the area of the junction between the two.
I would think that this more gradual transformation of alloys should hold together better upon expansion than just simply soldering a soft nose to a soft base.
Hopefully the nose will upset until the deformation reaches the transition area and then gradually stop without breaking off. Creating what we consider a "classic mushroom".


Upon further thought it could actually be done with only one lead pot.
If one were to simply pour the nose using a soft alloy and a small, precise dipper and then drop the nose portions from the mould for later use.
Later on the nose portions could be reinserted, the mould closed and the harder bases poured on top.
It would be slightly slower than the two pot method but for those of us who don't have two pots it would still be doable.

[jwhite]

BluesBear,

I do exactly what you described in the last part of your post. I cast my noses in one session, I took and drilled a stepped hole in a piece of flat bar that my bullet tips fit into nose first then I file the base's flat, this gives me soft tips that are all the same size. After getting a bunch of tips that a of a uniform size I just drop them back into the mold, reheat the mold and then pour in the harder alloy following BruceB's method which does make a better looking bullet. I used to make these bullets following Ross Siegfried method and while they do have a visible seam they always shot fine and performed just like the "prettier" seamless bullets. I use these softnose bullets in my .348 for deer hunting and they are devastating.
Jerry

[BluesBear]

Great Minds Think Alike ;)

[robertbank]

Ummmm! I dipper my nose then pour in my shank. To date, provided mold is hot enough, I have had no problem creating a weld between to the two alloys. That said my efforts to date with my 38 spl have been lame at best with little to no expansion when shot into water jugs. Will try to see if results can be improved using my .357 mag.

Have not got to my rifle boolits yet.

Take Care

Bob

[BluesBear]

I dipper my nose then pour in my shank.Ya know, it takes one helluva man to admit that in public.
[smilie=1:



Sorry Robert, that was just too good to let pass.


Seriously, are you letting your nose portions cool completely before you pour your bases? Are you using dead soft lead for your noses?

[robertbank]

Ya know a fella ought to re-read what his fingers typed and make sure it is what the mind was thinking!:mrgreen: Darn near fell off my chair when I read your post with the quote.

Yes I use pure lead for the nose portion. I get the mold very, very hot and pour in the nose followed immediately by the shank. The shank alloy is just WW. At around 800 fps my .38spl boolits didn't do much in milk jugs filled with water. Boolits just started to muchroom. I am going to try some .357magnum loads with the same boolits. You can actually see the difference in the metal. The pure lead portion is very shiny while the WW alloy is more grey in colour.

I use a cut down 9MM shell as a dipper wired to a portion of cloths hanger wire. The nose portion takes up all the nose to where the boolit starts the curve of the olgive. I suspect the .357 mag loads should work and I am hoping to see some good results using my .311291 boolit.

Take Care

Bob

[BluesBear]

Robert, you might be getting a little too much mixing of the two alloys since the nose hasn't completely cooled.
If it were me, I'd try letting the nose cool a little more.
If that still doesn't work then perhaps a little larger nose and smaller shank might.

[robertbank]

Maybe you are right but I have to say you can see a distinct layer differentiation between the soft nose and the shank. I will do some more testing with the .38spl. to see if I can get them to work.

Take Care

Bob

[BruceB]

The whole point of "my" method to date is to ENSURE that little to no mixing of the two alloys can take place. Earlier in the experiments I did cast the bullets with both alloys molten, but the possibility of mixing was raised, and I have been trying to avoid it ever since.

On reading the recent posts on this thread, I believe I may have a new refinement. What I intend to do is this:

-Cast the nose portion of pure lead and let it harden. Pot should be set at the LOWEST temperature which will allow casting. Dipping from a small container of pure lead floating in the pot will still suffice for this.

-With the furnace set at the LOWEST possible setting that still keeps the WW molten, cast the shank portion.

-Drop the ugly, wrinkly SOB from the mould.

By using the MINIMUM heat for casting the shank on top of the pure-lead nose, we also MINIMIZE any mixing of the alloys due to the WW melting some portion of the pure lead, keeping the maximum amount of pure lead right where it belongs. I really don't want both metals in contact in the molten state while they're being cast.

After casting as many of these unfinished bullets as we want, crank up the furnace heat to the maximum. Return each bullet to the mould in turn, and remelt them in the cavity with a small lump of WW on the sprue plate to supply metal if the bullet "needs" more. When everything has melted, we WILL have a jointless softpoint bullet with no significant mixing of alloys at the contact point.

This may sound odd, coming from one who has studied high-production casting almost as a hobby, but the relative speed of casting softpoints is absolutely meaningless to me. The number of softpoints I'll ever need can probably be counted on my ten fingers. Therefore, time is not a factor.

Note that we DO NOT have to zero with the softpoints! The variation from a regular, one-alloy bullet is so small that normal practice and zeroing is perfectly valid using the same bullet from the same mould, WITHOUT the softpoint. My .416 puts both softpoints and non-softpoints in the same group from 200 yards, without any variation in impact at all. Success at 200 yards is plenty good enough for me....

[robertbank]

With respect to all I really think we are making this a much harder process than it needs to be. Using a mold that is dropping well cast boolits (Mold is desribed to be at casting temperature), I have found that between the time I have poured my nose and the time I pour the shank the nose portion has already started to harden but the nose and shank seem to weld just fine. The two alloys are very distinct visually. To test the weld I have place a boolit in a vice and found it took a great deal of effort to separate the two but with enough pressure they will separate cleanlyat the weld. That suggests to me that little to no mixing of alloys takes place.

I will try taking some pictures of the completed rounds to show the weld and the colour distinction of the alloys.

Take Care

Bob

[BluesBear]

To test the weld I have place a boolit in a vice and found it took a great deal of effort to separate the two but with enough pressure they will separate cleanlyat the weld.Ah, there's the rub.
When that boolit hit it's intended target (dinner) there will be considerable forces in play. The soft nose therefore has a good chance of abandoning the base.

Remelting the completed boolit, without aggitation, will allow the two entities to slightly meld with each other in the joint area. This melding will be much stronger than any simple soldering of the two halves.

Some melding or merging of the two alloys IS desirable as it will prevent the soft nose from shearing away from the shank upon impact.
You can always increase the quantity of the nose pour if the soft portion of the soft point is too small.

With the utmost respect to BruceB, I see no advantage in dropping the finished boolits and then reinserting the entire boolit into the cavity.
Time isn't even in the equation since the goal is a better projectile, not faster production. However eliminating wasted motion is a good thing.


The reasons I advocated dropping the nose portion were two fold.
First is about inspection. By dropping the nose you are assured that the pour has settled into the nose and not left a slight "tail" up the side of the cavity.
Also a noticible longer nose casting would also indicate the presence of a void.
A void that may or may not evaporate during the remelt.
Secondly, you then have a totally cold nose. While the mould will still be quite warm when you reinsert it (watch those fingertips) the nose will be cold.
Both Bruce's and Ross' methods have a warm nose meetting a hot base in a preheated mould.
My theory has a hot base meeting a cold nose in a preheated mould.


Upon reflection perhaps pouring the shank section at it's hottest temperature onto a completely cold nose might cause just enough melding of the two sections as to make the final remelting redundant.



So it would appear that we have derived several different methods of accomplishing the same end. Only trial and error will determine if one is any better than the other.

Since I've moved and my casting setup won't be functional until hopefully sometime in June, all I can contribute at this time is theory and conjecture, perhaps I should just back out of this discussion and leave it to those who can actually singe some pinkys.

[Ron.D]

Quick question. Has anyone noticed any evidence of the soft nose portion slumping, when driven at high speed? Just wondering about a pure lead nose accellerating to over 2000'/s in a 22" barrel. I've read BPCR shooters discussing it. If the pure lead started to slump and caused the front of the boolit to widen a bit, I was thinking perhaps it could cause a smear of lead down the barrel. I'd appreciate someone shedding some light on this. I've been using 30-1 alloy in my soft noses, in my .358 just in case, maybe unecessarily. They still expand very well. Ron.D

[Lloyd Smale]

I guess i look at it as I wouldnt really care if the nose came unglued from the bullet after it expanded. Isnt that about the way a nosler partition works. At least they have for me. They shed there noses and the shank keeps penetrating. I guess my only consern with the process would be if the visual flaw deteriorated accuracy at all.

[Jailer]

Tried this for the first time tonight. Results look pretty good.

One thing others should know, this makes a mess of your mold so plan on casting all that you want in one session. The mold clean up is going to be a pain.

110gr of soft lead with 280gr of wheel weight air cooled. Should be devastating out of the 45-70 at 50 yards.

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b180/Jailer/Gun%20stuff/Softpoints.jpg

[superior]

I would like someone to put my softpoints to the test. So far none have failed in the vise.
I float a ladle on top of the melt, then add 1 stick-on w/w (pre-weighed for uniformity). When it melts, I quickly pour it into the cavity, and immediately follow with harder alloy from the pot. I make both pours within 5 seconds. I get boolits with no visible seems, other than the color difference between the two metals. I developed this method to give better killing power to the spitzer shaped boolits I use in the sks paratrooper. Now, rather than pencil right through the animal, these soft points make gruesome wound channels. I've since made 45-70's ( I'm not sure that was necessary), Lee 312-185's and Lyman 314299's as well for the 303Brit.
I would recommend this practice of spitzers above all. I believe that regular air-cooled w/w is all that's needed in a large calibre flat-nose boolit.

[jhalcott]

I have a 'spitzer 459 NEI mold and a couple .30 caliber "pointy" bullet molds. I have used these "soft point" methods to make them more viable game bullets. I have tested them on wet newspaper stacks and phone books. I would use a leg bone from moose or cow from a butcher shop stuck in the bale! Once in a while a bullet would skid off the bone and exit the side of the bale. SOME times the bullet would punch thru the bone and often LEAVE the nose portion behind. Those flat nosed bases would go some 2 feet thru the paper/phone book stacks.. I have tried ACWW bases and also Linotype bases, with various hardness of the nose portion. While I have been TOLD that LINO will not shatter on bone, this has NOT been MY finding. Occasionally a bullet HAS apparently exploded on contact with the bone. I tried these penetration tests with Nosler and hornady bullets to compare the results. I believe the "soft nose" bullets to be as effective on large game as the Nosler partitions BUT,they are almost as costly when adding the value of time to make them. It is FAR easier to BUY (gasp!) a box of Noslers then to MAKE a box of "soft noses"!
About the apparent exploding Lino bullets. The "wound" channel of those slugs were QUITE short from the impact of bone but very large in circumference compared to the pass thru type "wounds". Lead shrapnel was also found throughout the surrounding media.

[jhalcott]

I should add that Velocities were as much as 2300 fps and as low as 1300 fps. The calibers were 24" 45-70 bolt rifle and 16" TC Contender. the 30 calibers included 30-30 .308 and 30-06. Some deer and sheep bones were used in the .30 caliber tests. Targets were set at 50 yards from the muzzles. Tests were conducted through out the winter and spring. Guns were cleaned after each days shooting and little to zero leading was found in them. All the bullets were gas checked

[sixshot]

I've been shooting softnose cast for about 6 years now & they really seem to be working great, we've taken deer, elk & 3 moose with them using sixguns, none were shot more than once. Wish I would have known about them when I handgun hunted in Africa.
I use the Ross Seyfried method but have a dipper in each hand at the same time, my small 380 case carries the pure lead & my regular dipper has the WW alloy, that I water quench . Pouring the WW alloy over the pure lead from 1/2" away doesn't cause me any concern about mixing. My mould is sitting level on a piece of steel plate between the 2 lead pots.
Keep the "seam" above the ogive on your slugs & you won't have any accuracy problems & you can't pull the 2 pieces apart, I've tried it. As Lloyd mentioned, if the nose shears off, big deal, the works already been done just like John Nosler designed his bullets.

Dick

[StrawHat]

I have followed this and other similar threads with interest. I originally used Nosler Partitons and when I graduated to larger bores, cast boolits. I tried various soft nose methods and eventually came to the conclusion that for my style of hunting and for the firearms I use, a bore diameter boolit is all that is necessary. A good hit with a 45 or 50 caliber boolit is all it takes. Now with my 405 WCF, I may have to try softpoints again!

[jhalcott]

You will be pleasantly surprised, I hope. They are cheaper than Noser partitions and about as effective. While I have NOT tried to magnumize them, I have managed some higher than 2400 fps loads. Most of these are Linotype based. A BIG problem is the soft noses deform in the sizing operation. I normally use a pointy bullet for soft nosing for the better ballistics. A flat nose works quite when cast from wheel weight or Lyman #2 alloy. The pointy soft nose can be used at some what longer range with LESS drop and wind effects. The lack of pointed bullet molds in .405 MAY be a hindrance to you.

[StrawHat]

... The lack of pointed bullet molds in .405 MAY be a hindrance to you...

Not so much, I prefer the blunter styles of boolits for hunting. 412262 is not a bad boolit for my uses. Currently casting it at 30/1 and it works well. I do not depend on expansion, just cutting a large caliber hole. I am just not sure if 40 if large enough!

[sixshot]

Use a flat top punch to size them & do it within a couple of hours of casting, they get quite hard after a while.

Dick

[jhalcott]

Strawhat, IF 40 cal holes from your 288 grain slug ain't enough, you are hunt the wrong critter! I've found the Lee push thru sizer to be a workable solution,but some times the gas checks hang up prior to sizing! Those SOFT noses will smash if run into a lubrisizer. My hope is to find a pointy mold that drops Lino at the correct diameter so sizing is eliminated.

[jhalcott]

Strawhat, I received your PM.but I am unable to figure how to reply on the PMs. Anyway , NO I do not have a .405 but have shot one years ago. I'm guessing that is YOUR varmint gun,like my 22'250 is to me! I've got to believe that BIG round nose of soft lead backed by a 200 grain body of wheel weight or Lyman #2 moving along at 2100 fps is a real killer! Perhaps on BOTH ends!

[Sonnypie]

"Perhaps on BOTH ends!" :lol:

Shooting High Power (30-06 since I was a kid,) I sure can relate to that statement. :twisted:

I was wondering if anyone had tried simply dropping something like a buckshot in your mold cavity, and pouring your lead alloy over it encapsulating the buckshot in the nose of the boolit?
Just something I was pondering. Pure lead, nose-coning a harder alloy jacketing, in an easy to use "drop-in" form. :coffee:

Thought I'd ask before firing up the furnace. (OK, plugging in the pot...)

[MT Gianni]

Yes to dropping buckshot. i have tried it and gotten poor adherence of the molten alloy to the PB shot. I have used 32 cal shot to make boolits as per BruceB's method.

[Sonnypie]

Yeah. I tried it today and it was awful.
I pinched the 00 buck out and remelted the 45's and re-ingoted it. :cry:

[StrawHat]

You could use the buckshot as a dose of pure lead but would need to heat the mold with the ball in it for better adhesion.

[BruceB]

From my very earliest experiments, I learned this:

ANY oxidation whatsoever on the "donor" soft-lead component is disastrous to the final product. The bullet will have ugly black patches and POOR ADHESION between the hard and soft sections. My first attempts used .490 round balls which had been cast years earlier. Yuck!

It's important to use metal which has not had an exposure to air for any length of time.

Casting NEW pure-lead buckshot or bullets for the softpoint will work.