BruceB
05-10-2006, 10:08 AM
During the present run-up to the Nevada Cast Bullet Shoot, I've been paying a lot of attention to certain moulds I own, and their bullets, of course..
Prominent in the group are several rifle-bullet moulds, namely (all 4-cavity types) our famous 311291, the old spire-point 311413 (and this mould itself is OLD, being Ideal-marked and rather badly pitted in places) and a 311467, the nominally 180-grain Loverin design.
Casting roughly a thousand or so of each design in straight wheelweights, and water-dropping them from the mould, I found something interesting which had not drawn my attention before this prolonged exposure to the group of 4-cavity moulds, AS A GROUP.
My inspection routine is entirely visual, but it became far more stringent after I bought one of those pivot-mounted lights with a 4" magnifying lens. I have never seen cast boolits so clearly, with all their naked imperfections laid bare! This lamp may be the best $10 I ever spent in casting gear. Previously, I'd quote my reject rate at a couple of per cent, if that. I now reject a good many more than that, but it's just because I can REALLY see the flaws, now.
So, back to these four-cavity moulds. Under strong light and magnification for 100% inspection, and with each design represented by about 1,000 bullets, I rejected only THREE 413s, SIX 291s, and ELEVEN 467s (the 467s really surprised me, as it's a very "busy" design with many grooves and bands).
Having all three moulds giving these results in close sequence, I have to think there's something about them which gives more-consistent casting results than smaller blocks. Even with bullets coming from four different cavities, the weight range of each design is barely one grain extreme spread, in ALL THREE moulds. Dimensions are also very, very close among bullets from the four holes, in all three moulds.
My rejection rate from smaller-block moulds is a good bit higher than the numbers above, even in my much-favored RCBS double-cavity examples. I suspect that my standard routine of hot/fast casting (870 degrees) gives me a hefty heat-sink in those big blocks, which also would tend to allow excellent fill-out before the alloy freezes.
I'm commencing to think that even with whatever variables are introduced by using four separate cavities, the end results are better than I get from smaller moulds!
Prominent in the group are several rifle-bullet moulds, namely (all 4-cavity types) our famous 311291, the old spire-point 311413 (and this mould itself is OLD, being Ideal-marked and rather badly pitted in places) and a 311467, the nominally 180-grain Loverin design.
Casting roughly a thousand or so of each design in straight wheelweights, and water-dropping them from the mould, I found something interesting which had not drawn my attention before this prolonged exposure to the group of 4-cavity moulds, AS A GROUP.
My inspection routine is entirely visual, but it became far more stringent after I bought one of those pivot-mounted lights with a 4" magnifying lens. I have never seen cast boolits so clearly, with all their naked imperfections laid bare! This lamp may be the best $10 I ever spent in casting gear. Previously, I'd quote my reject rate at a couple of per cent, if that. I now reject a good many more than that, but it's just because I can REALLY see the flaws, now.
So, back to these four-cavity moulds. Under strong light and magnification for 100% inspection, and with each design represented by about 1,000 bullets, I rejected only THREE 413s, SIX 291s, and ELEVEN 467s (the 467s really surprised me, as it's a very "busy" design with many grooves and bands).
Having all three moulds giving these results in close sequence, I have to think there's something about them which gives more-consistent casting results than smaller blocks. Even with bullets coming from four different cavities, the weight range of each design is barely one grain extreme spread, in ALL THREE moulds. Dimensions are also very, very close among bullets from the four holes, in all three moulds.
My rejection rate from smaller-block moulds is a good bit higher than the numbers above, even in my much-favored RCBS double-cavity examples. I suspect that my standard routine of hot/fast casting (870 degrees) gives me a hefty heat-sink in those big blocks, which also would tend to allow excellent fill-out before the alloy freezes.
I'm commencing to think that even with whatever variables are introduced by using four separate cavities, the end results are better than I get from smaller moulds!