What's wrong with nose pour molds?

[sixgunner452]

I have heard all my life that nose pour molds are inferior, but some of the most expensive target molds are only offered in nose pour design. Somebody please enlighten me, Randy.

[Bucks Owin]

Beats me. Only one I ever used was a Lee .58 cal "improved minie" with the built in hollow base "plug" back in the 70's...
That mould was my introduction to casting and I seemed to get good results from it. I wonder why more hollow point molds aren't built the same way. Sure beats a seperate nose plug inserted into the mould it seems to me....(at least for convenience)

I'm curious too,

Dennis

[Flash]

The nose pour moulds are the best for casting a uniform base which has a tremendous effect on accuracy. With a nose pour mould there isn't a sprue tit on the base and shrinkage from cooling won't cant the base. Who cares about the nose?

[D.Mack]

One more vote for nose pour molds being better ( if properly cut) , actually better is the wrong word, they have more potentil for accuracy, for the reason flash mentiomed. Any defect in the nose has less effect than one than one in the base. I am not a machinist, but it appears the cherries on nose pours would be harder to make, and more delicate, due to the diamater of the shaft where it exits the mold. DM

[sixgunner452]

Thanks for all the reply's. The reason why I am thinking about this subject is, I won a bid on an old Cramer, 45 swc, adjustable cavity "nose pour" mold. Just wanted a few opinions from you guys. Thanks again, Randy.

[Buckshot]

............Most nose pour slugs are bored or cherried from the base and have a swinging plate to seal the base of the mould. Like a Hoch, they're connected to the sprueplate with both moving at the same time.

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

[floodgate]

Sixgunner:

I suspect you will be happy with that Cramer adjustable; I don't have a Cramer, but they have a fine reputation. The old - pre-Lyman - "Perfection" adjustable moulds were very useful, and examples are much in demand these days. If you have heard anything negative about nose-pours, it may have been with reference to the Lyman #457676, a "special" made for Paul Matthews and offered in limited nuumbers in 2002. Back on the old "Shooters" board, it was reported to give poor fill-out, but this was attributed to the very thin metal left at the base of the mould with this long bullet. The Hoch dual-plate moulds follow a design by Harry Pope back in the late 1800's, and they are truly FINE moulds - both the Popes and the Hochs, as well as those by other modern makers using this system. Both these and the Ideal Perfections WERE cherried through the base; if the Cramer was made like the Ideals, it was also cherried through the base, avoiding the problem D. Mack mentioned. I'd sure like to see photos of your Cramer posted here.

floodgate

[kodiak1]

I just got a .403 RCBS paper patch mould haven't used it yet hope to in a couplew of weeks looks like a good mould to me, will have to try it before I can comment.
Ken

[wills]

"A nose-pour mould will produce a more uniform bullet. The base of a bullet is the steering end. With a nose-pour mould you always get a good, flat base, square with the sides."
Harry Pope

http://www.hochmoulds.com/

[sixgunner452]

I can't wait to see the mold either, unfortunately I will not be able to for 13 more months, because I am an American soldier stationed in Korea. The mold was delivered to the US. Here is a link to the url where there is the photo that was shown by the origional owner..... You will have to copy and paste into your browser.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7232812566&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWN%3AIT&rd=1

If nose pour molds are superior, why is it they are not more popular. I have the Veral Smith book, and he claims nose pour molds suck, or something to that effect. Unfortunately, the book is also in the US, so don't quote me on that. Any input is welcome, and I appreciate all the help, Randy.

[Dale53]

I have both nose pour and base pour moulds. the nose pours have perfect bases. However, if you wish to have a true spitzer, you obviously cannot. I use a spitzer in my schuetzen rifle and it is a base pour. Base pours in my schuetzen bench rifle are 1/2 minute rifles. So-o-o, bottom line, is they both work, and work well.

I have no more trouble casting with the nose pour than I do base pour. Nose pours are more expensive. In theory the nose pour should be MUCH more accurate. In the real world, it is not.

Dale53