Question re: Alum checks

[30calpal]

What is your experience with aluminum checks? Do they tend to leave 'traces' behind any more or any less than copper? I considered ordering some since the copper ones are scarce. There are chemicals to remove copper but I don't know of anything to remove aluminum traces in the bore. Other's experience in this area is appreciated before I fire a bunch of alum based slugs and lay down something in my barrel that I can't get out. Thanks

[Jim]

There's a bunch of guys here that have been using aluminum checks for years. I figure if aluminum turned out to be a bad material for checks, that would have been established long ago.

I started using aluminum checks awhile back and haven't had a bit of problem with them.

[ph4570]

I use them for 22 and 30 cal with no issues.

[30calpal]

There's a bunch of guys here that have been using aluminum checks for years. I figure if aluminum turned out to be a bad material for checks, that would have been established long ago.

I started using aluminum checks awhile back and haven't had a bit of problem with them.

Thanks Jim. I hope a bunch more will chime in and give their experiences too. I'm guessing you have a check maker from one of the guys who makes and sells them ?
Which one do you have and pros and cons of it. thanks

[Jim]

..... I'm guessing you have a check maker.....

Nope. I buy 'em.

[dragon813gt]

I haven't shot a high volume of them, yet. But I haven't experienced any issues as far as wear or accuracy goes. The tools will pay themselves by the end of the summer. It's also really nice to not have to look for them.

[Le Loup Solitaire]

In the beginning there was a lot of concern about aluminum oxide (since it is used as an abrasive in the making of sand paper and grinding wheels) being a factor that would harm the bores of guns. This has not proven to be decisive in any way that is visible or measurable. I have made and used a lot of 30 cal checks made out of soda pop cans over the years and never had a problem with the aluminum oxide issue or any deposits in the bores, or effects on accuracy. Folks usually prefer thicker aluminum material for making GC's than beverage cans; whatever your choice of material or GC maker you can and will make perfectly good checks and save a lot of money over paying Lyman and Hornady prices. It just takes a little savvy and practice to fabricate large numbers of checks in minimal time. Sources for check material are numerous; just do a little reading. LLS

[FLHTC]

I couldn't get them to seat properly or stay on my 22s. Copper and brass is more malleable then aluminum and cuts cleaner as the checks are punched. I hate to be the odd man out but i don't have any use for aluminum checks because they're torn as opposed to being cut from the sheeting. They also have a bowl like shape with rounded edges, not square 90 degree edges on the base. Just my experience

[Dan Cash]

I couldn't get them to seat properly or stay on my 22s. Copper and brass is more malleable then aluminum and cuts cleaner as the checks are punched. I hate to be the odd man out but i don't have any use for aluminum checks because they're torn as opposed to being cut from the sheeting. They also have a bowl like shape with rounded edges, not square 90 degree edges on the base. Just my experience

I observed that too but by annealing the aluminum flashing that I use, the mentioned issues are largely eliminated. I also form checks from copper and can not definitively determine any accuracy difference.

[tchepone]

I couldn't get them to seat properly or stay on my 22s. Copper and brass is more malleable then aluminum and cuts cleaner as the checks are punched. I hate to be the odd man out but i don't have any use for aluminum checks because they're torn as opposed to being cut from the sheeting. They also have a bowl like shape with rounded edges, not square 90 degree edges on the base. Just my experience


FLHTC: I have been using aluminum for quite some time and have not experienced the problems you outline, at least not to the degree you indicate. I make gas checks for 31, 32, 35, 38 and 40 caliber. I do not make 22 caliber checks, do they require a different approach or material? I don't think they should be any different than other calibers.

Several questions come to mind, what type of aluminum have you been using? Do you know what specification it is, 1000, 3000? Is it soft, half hard, hard? Some works better than others. Is the material consistent in thickness, in hardness? Does it have a plastic coating on one side? Is it clean?

What type of tool are you using? Are you using the correct thickness for the tool; for the bullet? If your tool is a Freechex, are you using the correct diameter mandrel? Charlie will advise you on this.

If it is a PatMarlin too, have you polished the male and female parts of the forming mechanism? That was necessary on the PM tool I have. I used 600 & 1000 grit paper to polish.

You indicate copper and brass cut cleaner as the check is punched, I have found very little difference in the “cut” with any material. Is your tool sharp? Both Charlie and Pat talk about tool sharpness. Does the tool have ragged edges, dings or scratches? Are you “short punching” or do you run the tool completely through its cycle? Charlie advises about this in his instruction. PM advises the same thing. Don’t get in too much of a hurry to make a ton of checks. Be methodical and consistent in your operation. If you’re making them for your own use they will produce better results. If you are making them to sell, the buyer will appreciate the quality.

I have used many different types of aluminum, copper and brass. I find very little difference in the finished gas check with either material. All have a definite radius around the outer edge. I don't think it matters as long as the radius is consistent around the entire circumference. I don't think it is possible to get a perfectly square, 90°, outer edge, even the commercial product from Hornady has a radius. My tools do not create "bowl shapes", do not tear the check from the material or have a rounded bottom.

I tried all the cheap and free materials, roof flashing, cans, bottles, aluminum siding, etc. I found all have their own issues. Some work fine, others not so much. I’m sure others have experienced the same thing. I tried material from various suppliers, same story. I now exclusively use material from www.coilandfoil.com. I find that material consistent in thickness and hardness, and there is a large variety available. With it, I can select the thickness and hardness that works best for each of my tools/bullets. Charlie, from Freechex recommends it for use with his tools because he has tested it and found it acceptable.

It takes some experimenting to find the correct combination that produces acceptable results. Do not pick up just any old aluminum and think you won't have some issues. Charlie will tell you to experiment with material. I will say the same. Happy chexing! G

[30calpal]

tchepone, you are just the person I was looking for in this post. Since you've used the Freechex and PM's maker, what are the pros /cons of each and if you were limited, which would you choose. I intend to use gas checked boolits in .375 (rifle) .45 (45-70), .45 (45 Colt) and even though I don't shoot 1000's per year, I will probably invest in a maker so I can be self sufficient as long as I can scrounge the materials. Thanks

[dragon813gt]

Freechex unless you are looking to put checks on plain base bullets. The two step process just adds to much time. Buy a Freechex and don't look back.

[tchepone]

30cal: I own both tools, 2 PM Checkmakers and 4 Freechex. Three of the Freechex are Freechex III and one is a Freechex II.

I will give you my personal experience with all of them. You can deduce the pro’s and con’s from that. I do not make checks to sell, just for my own personal use. I experiment a lot with handguns so that is my main use. I do use one in rifle, a 32 Win Spl.

I began with a Checkmaker™ from PatMarlin, in 32/8mm caliber. It works fine. It is slower to use because of the two step process. I have made approximately 1500 checks with it. It required a bit of work before it was trouble free. That work consisted of polishing the forming parts with 600 & 1000 grit paper to smooth the working surfaces. I also polished the feed slot so I could get reliable feeding without the material jamming in the slot. I learned it works very well with materials in the range of .012" - .016", anything thinner, not so much. That tool took 10 days to arrive. That was about 2 years ago.

I purchased a second Checkmaker™ from PatMarlin, in 40 caliber. That one required 15 months to arrive. From the beginning, it was a problem child. I tried everything I could think of to make it function as it was supposed to. I never succeeded. I worked with Pat on that one without success. Pat finally replaced the tool with another. It worked somewhat better but I still had more problems than I felt were appropriate. I still have the tool but have not used it for a long time.

Pats tools are fine, I will not say otherwise. Pat does warrant his product. Many use them with great success. The two step process is just not my cup of tea. Be aware, they are not hardened and wear will show up in time.

I became aware of Freechex tools manufactured by Charlie Darnall. I ordered a Freechex III tool in 40 caliber. It arrived in about a week. It came with 4 mandrels, (Note: Charlie no longer supplies them with multiple mandrels. I’m sure the cost of doing so was prohibitive. He now provides them with the correct mandrel for the material and bullet you plan to use. He will supply extra mandrels for additional cost.)
That 40 caliber tool was the answer to my problems. I have punched out approximately 4000 checks with it and it continues to amaze me. I have used material from .006” to .020” without any problems, (assuming I use the correct mandrel.) It is fast and produces a quality check. (It does require an arbor press, drill press or a fixture to adapt it to a loading press.)

I have three other Freechex tools in various calibers. All arrived in less than 10 days after receipt of order. All of them digest material of all types and thickness. Together they have produced in excess of 4500 checks. I have used aluminum, copper and brass, and do not prefer either over any of the other. If you plan to make just a few checks now and then, get the Freechex II. It uses a mallet, is slower but still single step, economical and it makes a quality check. I have one and find myself reaching for it quite often. All of Charlie’s tools are hardened. I don’t think I can discern any wear on any of mine. James Sage, of Sage’s Outdoors uses Freechex tools in his production, he would be able to better tell you about their longevity.

When the correct thickness of material is used, my checks crimp on to the bullet very tightly. I very seldom find any laying on the range. I use a bullet trap and find bullets with the check still attached. I have been able to achieve consistent accuracy with all guns in which I have used them. I require all my handguns be able to shoot 2” groups, from a rest, at 50 yards. I have usually been able to accomplish that without too much work. I have pushed some loads near maximum and leading has not been a problem.

I agree with dragon813gt. You will never be disappointed with a Freechex tool. Charlie is great to work with and a wealth of knowledge. Also he delivers very fast. I can not speak to plain base bullets. I have never tried them. As far as I am aware, PatMarlin is the only person who makes and sells the tools to produce them.
When it comes to material, I will leave that up to you. As I stated in my previous post, I have tried all of them and have settled on coils of aluminum and copper material from www.coilandfoil.com. Coiled material is so much nicer than scrounging cans and using some type of device to cut strips. It has a cost but your time has value too. Good luck in your decision. G.

[30calpal]

tchepone, thank you sir for your time and your insight.

[tchepone]

Yw. G

[Smoke4320]

I was wondering about checkmakers myself .. This answered all my questions as well

Thanks tchepone for the very insightful and informative posts

[.30/30 Guy]

tchepone has given outstanding advice on check making material. Whatever check maker you are using it will be a better experience if you use good material. Yonky's (coilandfoil) material is so much easier to work with than the roof flashing stuff.

[lead chucker]

I have three free check II 44,30, and 22. I like them. Charlie is a first class guy. I use aluminum flashing that I anneal with a propane torch. It works for me and takes all the spring out of the check and they grip the boolit pretty good. I would not hesitate buying another one if needed. Nice thing about charle's check makers you don't have to wait forever to get one.

[tchepone]

lead chucker: Instead of all the hassle with aluminum flashing; cutting, annealing, inconsistencies, etc., why don't you just order your material from Yonky (a vendor on this site). He has a large variety of aluminum types, thicknesses and widths. He can supply anything you need or desire. It is first class material, is consistant in thickness and width and is available in 1000 (soft) & 3000 (half hard) series aluminum. He ships from the USA in USPO flat rate boxes and the cost is very reasonable and fast. Charlie of Freechex highly recommends his material. Go to his website, www.coilandfoil.com for the particulars, plus a lot of other helpful information. He also has a limited amount of copper available. Read his buyers comments, they will tell you he's an up and up guy. Save the time you spend cutting and annealing for more shooting practice to become a better shot. You won't regret going the Yonky route!! G

[338RemUltraMag]

I buy enough of yonky's metal that I get it sent right from the UK, it is top notch stuff and much better than the roof flashing fecal matter that some pawn off here.