314299 Purchase = Disappointment

[35 Whelen]

Well after mulling over the idea of ordering an NEI mould, (see post "NEI Mould for .303 British?") I decided to feed my craving for instant gratification. "I'll just buy a 314299...surely it'll cast bullets in the .315"-.316" range." Neither Grafs, nor Midway, nor Mid-South had the mould in stock...all backordered. So, while I was in Tulsa on business Friday, I dropped into a local gun shop there and found that they had 3...that's three of these moulds in stock!! So, I snatched one up and fired up the ol' Saeco pot as soon as I got home. I eagerly cast a few and miked them....SIGH ....around .314" some a little less. What a huge disappointment. The nose of the bullets easily drop into the muzzle of the Maltby Enfield, but the slightly tighter bore of the Savage Enfield grabs the nose of the bullet. Maybe they'll shoot in the Savage...

I also tried a Lee 312185 and it was even worse dropping bullets out at .312". I used wheelweights in both moulds.

Does anyone think Lyman or Lee might do something about this or is this typical bullet diameter for these moulds? It seems silly to me to design a mould that throws undersized bullets for a specific cartridge when it is common knowledge that the rifles that chamber the cartridges have notoriously large bore diameters.

Thanks for letting me vent.
35W

[Jumptrap]

What did you have to pay for this mould and/or what would you have to have for it shipped?

.314 is the target diameter and if it is casting close or at .314 it is doing as advertised. You might try enriching your alloy with tin which might bring it up to .315. Or if you have any, try straight lino and see what results.

[StanDahl]

You're lucky. My 314299 casts at about .312". Beagling it makes it put out a bullet that's .313 on one dimension and .312 in the other. My Lee 312-185 casts at about .311". They just weren't working for my 0.313" 1891 Mauser. That's why I jumped on the Fat 30 buy a while back. The solution that made both of those undersized moulds instantly useful was to get a 1898 Krag. Stan

[35 Whelen]

What did you have to pay for this mould and/or what would you have to have for it shipped?

.314 is the target diameter and if it is casting close or at .314 it is doing as advertised. You might try enriching your alloy with tin which might bring it up to .315. Or if you have any, try straight lino and see what results.

I had to give $59.99 (the price for instant gratification). I'd like to at least try the bullets. I've water-quenched the bullets I cast tonight, lubed, checked & sized them a little later, so I'll shoot them tomorrow. If they don't shoot in my Savage, I'll likely sell the mould and put the money towards an NEI #86. I thought about casting with Linotype or adding tin to my mix, but I'm into simplicity...straight wheelweights.


You're lucky. My 314299 casts at about .312". Beagling it makes it put out a bullet that's .313 on one dimension and .312 in the other. My Lee 312-185 casts at about .311". They just weren't working for my 0.313" 1891 Mauser. That's why I jumped on the Fat 30 buy a while back. The solution that made both of those undersized moulds instantly useful was to get a 1898 Krag. Stan

Funny thing is, my old Ideal 311291 drops wheelweight bullets at a whopping .315" at the seam and .314" 90° from the seam. Guess I just figured bullets from a 314xxx would be even larger.

With regards to the Fat30, if there's already been a "Fat30" order from Lee, why would we have to pay the $100 set up fee again? Couldn't we just get another order together for the same design?
35W

[Buckshot]

...............35W, With these moulds what you're seeing is just the way it is. It's one of the hazards of buying a production design vs a custom one. I'm sure Floodgate could probably give the dates but at one time Ideal was given a hard time about producing cavity's with overly generous measurements. The early 311284's casting almost .314 and ditto it's brother, the equally old 311291.

"....................Funny thing is, my old Ideal 311291 drops wheelweight bullets at a whopping .315" at the seam and .314" 90° from the seam. Guess I just figured bullets from a 314xxx would be even larger."

And also having to do specificly with the 311291, I think there are 4 guys onboard whose 311291's are different in some small way from each other's.

At some point Ideal or Lyman (I can't recall the regime in control) began reducing the diameters to be what they were touted as being. You could fudge a bit either side by tinkering with alloys and casting temps, but if they said 314" that was their target.

Lee is just known for moulds dropping slugs a bit smaller then most people would like, for thier particular purpose. Using a Lee C312-185R would be a gamble in a SMLE or a M-N. My first mould for any of the 'Fat 30's would be the Lyman 314299. On the other hand if you DID have a nice tight Argentine, M-N, Jap, or SMLE there IS the Lee in addition to the Lyman.

There are lots of people who use both the Lee and Lyman to create .310 & .311" slugs to feed old Krags or maybe some of the Savage-Stevens 340's in 30-30, or just worn 30 cals.

I have an article by Henry Beverage where he was going through the steps of getting some old 30-06 ready for bench shooting. He went out and bought 5 Lyman 311284 double cavity boulds (10 holes total) to try and get exactly, or as close as possible to what he was wanting. He said he'd sell off the ones he didn't want.

There definately IS a derth of moulds dropping .314"+ slugs. That's one of the reasons to my knowledge there have been a total of 3 custom fat 30's done. Mainstream mould makers are going to hit the common ones that produce the volumn sales. Very similar to most sporting goods or full on gunshops just carry the top 10-15% of the best sellers. I'd bet that 95% of the members here only spend half their time messing with anything in the top 10-15% of "Run of the Mill" 8).

Grab a couple beers and flop down in the "Group Buys" forum and commence scrolling backwards. Then go to the old Aimoo site and do the same, and you'll get a good idea of what a lot of cast boolit shooters are wanting to see.

"...............With regards to the Fat30, if there's already been a "Fat30" order from Lee, why would we have to pay the $100 set up fee again? Couldn't we just get another order together for the same design?"

I think the tooling/setup fee would still be applicable. They might still have the design stored, but they might have to grind new tools, but without a doubt they'd have to install the tooling and index it in their lathe to make the run. Around here, most automotive shops sport signs notifying you that shop labor is $82/hour. If they spend an hour or a bit more, there's your $100.

If you check the 'Group Buys' I think you'll find someone who was wanting to crank up another "Fat 30" buy.

.....................Buckshot

[9.3X62AL]

Good info above.

Why the mainstream moldmakers hover at their target diameters--or under them--is a mystery from the dawn of time. The same companies sell sizing dies, too. Go figure.

I got a MM Fat Thirty a while back, a 190 grain flat nose that falls out ~.3155" or thereabouts. It shoots well sized at .314" in my No.1 Mk III, and at .313" in the M-44 carbine. These are going to be "twice-resized" to .311" for the 30-06, the second M-70 to have a .311" throat. My #311291 mold BARELY makes .311" with sweetened wheelweights. The Lee 312-185 did pretty well from the '06, sized at .311".

Fatter is better. MUCH better.

[Blacktail 8541]

The easy route would be to order a custom mould from Dan at Mountain moulds. It will take a little while as he is moveing his site or is it his buisness, but you will get what you want.

[floodgate]

35W, Buckshot:

"...............35W, With these moulds what you're seeing is just the way it is. It's one of the hazards of buying a production design vs a custom one. I'm sure Floodgate could probably give the dates but at one time Ideal was given a hard time about producing cavity's with overly generous measurements. The early 311284's casting almost .314 and ditto it's brother, the equally old 311291.

"....................Funny thing is, my old Ideal 311291 drops wheelweight bullets at a whopping .315" at the seam and .314" 90° from the seam. Guess I just figured bullets from a 314xxx would be even larger."

And also having to do specificly with the 311291, I think there are 4 guys onboard whose 311291's are different in some small way from each other's.

At some point Ideal or Lyman (I can't recall the regime in control) began reducing the diameters to be what they were touted as being. You could fudge a bit either side by tinkering with alloys and casting temps, but if they said 314" that was their target."



Thanks Rick, but I don't have any real info on Lyman's "strategies" regarding bullet as-cast diameter. One would have to have access to their correspondence files to find out what - if any - their response was to coutomer complaints on this topic; AND, I suspect, any "adjustments" they may have made would be lost in the "noise level" of cherry wear, alloy choice and casting technique. The #314299 was introduced in 1991, presumably in response to the influx of .303's, 7.65's and 7.62x54's. The #311299, which dates back to 1907, had been dropped in 1980, and was returned to the line in 2002. But, as we see, they actually overlap in "as-cast" diameters. To paraphrase: "What you mike is what you got".

floodgate

[Underclocked]

http://www.buffaloarms.com/browse.cfm/4,1555.htm another place to check for moulds.

[bruce drake]

Beagle your mold. Aluminum Tape can be found at Lowes or Home Depot if you ask. I beagled a LEE 150GR Flatnose for one of my older Win 94s in 30-30 which preferred a fat 30.

Bruce

[Dutch4122]

Another option might be to keep an eye on Ebay for the old Ideal/Lyman moulds made for the 8mm .318 bore rifles. Their were a dozen or so of them at one time or another, the 319295 seems to turn up from time to time. Maybe one of these "319's" could be sized down to meet your needs.

Hope this helps,

[Blackwater]

Just speculating here, but I've got a Lyman 311291 that, in ONE set of handles I have, throws at .314+. Depending on alloy, this can even run .316+.

How many of you have tried your moulds with different handles? It was just luck that I found I'd actually "Beagled" my 311291, in effect, by using a different set of handles.

Ain't this just a FASCINATING hobby! [smilie=l:

[PatMarlin]

I have found that different handles do change how some of my molds work Dennis.

Once I was having trouble with a mold only to find it was the damn handles the whole time.. :roll: :drinks: