Figuring out BRN.

[Changeling]

I'm having trouble figuring out the BRN I should be using in a Ruger Black hawk in 45LC (no practical experience) . I would really like to use a BRN of about 18 to 20 witch would be WW water dropped. I figured this out (BRN) by reading all the forums, especially this one.

My intent is to use cast bullets from 260 to 300 gr from 1100 to the upper velocity range maybe 1250 depending where I get the best accuracy for a given bullet , hell, who knows!

Question. Will a BRN of 18-20 perform alright in this velocity/pressure range or is there other things I should consider. Not talking about hollow points at ALL.

I"m doing this so I can get a better handle on the things i should be getting.

[Angus]

What is the purpose of the boolits? If it is for hunting, what do you want to see, some expansion or no? Are you just punching paper/steel? If so, then you are looking for zero leading and best accuracy. If you have wheel weights to use, use wheel weights. Try them air cooled, water dropped, and heat treated... Figure out what does what YOU want, because there is no way any of us can do that for you...

(It's BHN btw... Brinell Hardness Number)

[targetshootr]

Dont bother water dropping or heat treating at those speeds. Air cooled is all you need with a bhn of about 11-13.

[GSaltzman]

I just shot some RCBS 270 SAA boolits today which weigh 280 grains when cast of wheel weights and some 50/50 bar solder added. This is to duplicate the Lyman formula. Air cooled they measure 9 BHN. If water quenched they test out at 19 BHN. Today's load was used with 296 and although I did not chrono them I have chrono'd a lesser charge at 1250 fps. My problem is oversized cylinder throats and I'm trying to make a 454 boolit fit the throats by hiting it with a hard enough charge. Get a proper fit for your throats and I believe you can use air cooled boolits for your velocity range. As mentioned before try air cooled and try some water quenched. Good luck.

[44man]

My .45 shoots best with water dropped WW's or harder, 22 to 25 BHN. The WLN or WFN needs no expansion on game at 1100 to 1200 fps. They are deadly on deer.
Although air cooled shoots OK, accuracy is twice as good with harder boolits.
Besides, water dropping is so easy. Try both in your gun.
Remember that a harder boolit allows better case tension without sizing the boolit when seating.

[Whitworth]

I agree with 44man. There's no real extra work involved in water dropping your bullets, but much to gain.

[Bret4207]

FORGET BHN!!! Hardness doesn't matter until you're refining your ultimate fit. You need to start with fitting the boolit to the gun. Hardness is 8 or 10 steps away at this point. In most guns at the speeds/pressures you're talking straight WW is MORE than hard enough IF the boolit fits.

The greatest disservice ever done to cast shooting was the idiot that first coined the term "HARDCAST"!!!!

[9.3X62AL]

I'm in line with Bret on this subject. Fit of the boolit to throat is paramount. I've found a whole lot of "cheat" in that old formula "BHn x 1,422" to get the max pressure a lead alloy can contain behind it before yield strength allows gases past the base and up past the boolit sidewall. This depends on the fit--critically.

With well-fit boolits, I've run the NEI copy of Lyman #356402 to 1250 FPS in 9mm with ZERO LEADING--200 rounds plus. Same story in the 40 S&W, Lee 175 TCs to 975-1000, and with Lyman #429421 @ 1100 FPS in the 44 Special. All these were 92/6/2 metal castings, BHn about 14-15.

[yondering]

Changeling, seriously man, don't you try anything for yourself without asking here first?

You need to get out and shoot that Ruger some, and find out for yourself what it likes. Anything you read here is just a suggestion on what "might" work in your gun, but is no substitute for finding out for yourself!

Cast yourself some 50/50 ww/pure, some ACWW, and some WDWW (or heat treated), and shoot them all with the same load. That will give you an approximate idea what hardness is needed for that load; you can fine tune from there. If you change your load (bullet, powder, crimp, case tension, etc), you'll need to repeat this test if you want to find the best hardness.

Keep in mind that hardness is not dictated only by velocity, but by case neck tension, crimp, bullet fit, bore/throat dimensions, cylinder alignment, and I'm sure a bunch of other stuff.

FWIW, I find that WDWW gives the best accuracy in my Blackhawk, but the lightest load I use is 10gr Unique with a 250gr boolit. This may not be the same for your gun.

Also, in this context, there's no such thing as BRN. I know you're talking about BHN (Brinell Hardness Number).

[Bucks Owin]

Waterdropped straight WW is a fine alloy, plenty hard but not overly so, IMO (and John Linebaugh and 44man!). Hit them with enough W296/H110 and be happy! :Fire:

[44man]

I'm in line with Bret on this subject. Fit of the boolit to throat is paramount. I've found a whole lot of "cheat" in that old formula "BHn x 1,422" to get the max pressure a lead alloy can contain behind it before yield strength allows gases past the base and up past the boolit sidewall. This depends on the fit--critically.

With well-fit boolits, I've run the NEI copy of Lyman #356402 to 1250 FPS in 9mm with ZERO LEADING--200 rounds plus. Same story in the 40 S&W, Lee 175 TCs to 975-1000, and with Lyman #429421 @ 1100 FPS in the 44 Special. All these were 92/6/2 metal castings, BHn about 14-15.
I hate when they come out with those formulas. I don't give a darn about yield strength, all I care about is that the alloy takes the twist without skidding past the base. That is what opens gas paths. If you can shoot softer lead or a better alloy without skidding that is fine.
That might be called yield strength but no book figures will tell any of us where it will occur with our guns or lead.
All of us here know boolit fit comes first but then comes the task of trying this hardness or that hardness and looking for the exact spot where the boolit takes the rifling and leading stops with the load you want to use. I consider that a tight rope because no two batches of lead is going to be the same so you can slip back into skidding again.
It is so much easier to just water drop WW boolits and be done with it. The boolits not only get hard faster but they also expand more for a better fit. Just let them age enough. Lap the sizer to just remove excess lube, just barely touching a few high spots on the boolit. This is most likely the biggest problem. Guys cast a nice .432" boolit and run them through a .429" or .430" die so that now the harder boolit has gone to waste. Then they hear to make the boolit softer so the base expands but if that does not stop the skid, it is another waste.
I can shoot down to a 50-50 mix of WW and pure but they must still be hardened and a gas check MUST be used or shots scatter all over the target. I do not own and have never owned any revolver that would shoot that mix with accuracy when it is a PB boolit.
With the exception of BP, I have not found any use for boolits too soft at the driving bands in any revolver.
I have tried 1,000 times to get air cooled WW boolits to shoot the groups I shoot with no luck at all. I gave up long ago.

[cptinjeff]

50/50 pure/ww water dropped plus some tin. Harder than air cooled WW.

[runfiverun]

this should be the flagship thread for this sub forum.
these are the two sides of the alloy question.
are they too hard or too soft?? the only thing agreed on is the size,and throat realtionship.
the hard talks about the front of the boolit engaging the rifleing and the soft talks about filling the throat/bore and being pushed from the rear.
maybe we have been doing the two part boolits backwards.
and we really need a soft base with g/c and a hard driving band.
whatever we need depends on our performance expectations either on paper on an animal.
i use what works for me,and james has a completely different outlook.
on paper and on game.

[Changeling]

I hate when they come out with those formulas. I don't give a darn about yield strength, all I care about is that the alloy takes the twist without skidding past the base. That is what opens gas paths. If you can shoot softer lead or a better alloy without skidding that is fine.
That might be called yield strength but no book figures will tell any of us where it will occur with our guns or lead.
All of us here know boolit fit comes first but then comes the task of trying this hardness or that hardness and looking for the exact spot where the boolit takes the rifling and leading stops with the load you want to use. I consider that a tight rope because no two batches of lead is going to be the same so you can slip back into skidding again.
It is so much easier to just water drop WW boolits and be done with it. The boolits not only get hard faster but they also expand more for a better fit. Just let them age enough. Lap the sizer to just remove excess lube, just barely touching a few high spots on the boolit. This is most likely the biggest problem. Guys cast a nice .432" boolit and run them through a .429" or .430" die so that now the harder boolit has gone to waste. Then they hear to make the boolit softer so the base expands but if that does not stop the skid, it is another waste.
I can shoot down to a 50-50 mix of WW and pure but they must still be hardened and a gas check MUST be used or shots scatter all over the target. I do not own and have never owned any revolver that would shoot that mix with accuracy when it is a PB boolit.
With the exception of BP, I have not found any use for boolits too soft at the driving bands in any revolver.
I have tried 1,000 times to get air cooled WW boolits to shoot the groups I shoot with no luck at all. I gave up long ago.


Thats exactly what I wanted to know, it just didn't make a lot of sense to see all the different alloys being used here when one would be shooting a hard bullet designed to create the wound channel in its original form without expansion. The one thing that was worrying me was if the bullet would catch the lands at those velocities alright.
Thanks Jim.

Yondering. To answer your question about don't I try anything for myself, the answer is no, not while I'm so busted up from a wreck that walking to the mail box is a major endeavor with pain worse than you can imagine.
I use this forum to get the information I need to purchase the components I will need when I get better/cured and so I will know what I'm doing instead of starting then and taking months to learn and get things done. Understand.

Bret4207. I am taking steps to assure that the revolver has everything mechanical done to it that is considered by the experts as necessary for putting the revolver in perfect condition for shooting cast. Your reply had nothing to do with the question.
Understanding BHN is entirely necessary at this point, not 10 steps from now since it is a large part of a perfect fit.

[9.3X62AL]

No disagreement with that, 44 Man. Your thrust is why I favor slower twist rates for the 9mm and 40 S&W than the insanely-fast 1:10" or 4 turns/meter those calibers often feature in OEM barrels. It is also why I favor 92/6/2 in the 9mm and 40 S&W over ACWW--lots less skidding.

In the CZ-75B with its 1-16" twist, I can run ACWW Lee 175 TCs to 950 FPS without leading. If I had tried that in the Beretta 96, it would be a lead mine inside 20 rounds. One other attribute of 92/6/2 is that the harder alloy gets along better with autopistol feedramps than do softer alloys. In high-pressure autopistol rounds, life is easier with alloys a little harder than ACWW.

[tonyb]

c.u.p.s. /1279.9= BHN
20,000/1279.9=15.63 or 16 BHN

I think

[Frank]

Changeling says
I'm so busted up from a wreck that walking to the mail box is a major endeavor with pain worse than you can imagine.
I use this forum to get the information I need to purchase the components I will need when I get better/cured and so I will know what I'm doing instead of starting then and taking months to learn and get things done. Understand.

Nothing wrong with that. Best way to pass the time. Keep asking the questions. Then we can all learn. :coffee:

[Bret4207]

Bret4207. I am taking steps to assure that the revolver has everything mechanical done to it that is considered by the experts as necessary for putting the revolver in perfect condition for shooting cast. Your reply had nothing to do with the question.
Understanding BHN is entirely necessary at this point, not 10 steps from now since it is a large part of a perfect fit.

No, it isn't a large part of fit. It's a small part of ultimate fit. You need to fit the boolit to the gun first, then see what various loads indicate it wants, then determine how you want to approach meeting those wants. BHN is one way of addressing SOME of the ultimate fit of the boolit with that particular load in that particular gun. It's hardly the biggest issue.

Do as you wish,. but if you're serious about fitting the boolit to he gun you're barking up the wrong tree and more importantly you're doing a great disservice to the newer guys here who might read your BHN ideas and assume it's as simple as going to harder boolit.

[yondering]

Do as you wish,. but if you're serious about fitting the boolit to he gun you're barking up the wrong tree and more importantly you're doing a great disservice to the newer guys here who might read your BHN ideas and assume it's as simple as going to harder boolit.

That's my beef too, Changeling. You've been repeating other's ideas here as things you "know", but without any actual experience, which can be a real disservice to others, as Bret said.

A bunch of us here have given you good advice on this and many other aspects of shooting the 45 Colt in a Blackhawk; there's just not that much more to say until you do some shooting on your own.

I understand if a guy's laid up; I've been there myself (although if you can type as much as you are, you sure aren't experiencing "worse pain than I could ever imagine"). I certainly understand taking advantage of your "time off" from shooting to learn as much as possible, but there's a point where you just have to figure it out for yourself. This is one of those times, especially given how this subject has been debated countless times on this forum.

There's several schools of thought on this subject, so without finding out what works in your gun, all you're doing is getting a bunch of people to argue about the best boolit hardness, again.

Rant over.

[44man]

No ranting, please. Everything here has merit and are opinions that work for some but not for others.
I only offer what I have found for my revolvers over the last 56 or 7 years messing with them.
I have found soft boolits never worked for me or gave the accuracy I want but I will never hold a whip over anyone and tell them it is the only way.
I just offer options to try, it is still up to everyone to experiment, most of which I have already done for myself. I know what my revolvers like best and have studied a ton of recovered boolits to see what is going on.
About the hard front drive band, I have cast gas checks on the front band many times and plan on trying putting them on all the bands some day to see what happens, or at least top and bottom bands. Too expensive yet with the stupid prices they are charging.
But yes, you could use softer lead if you get the boolit to grip rifling right off.
Bret, when the boolit fits the gun, sometimes it IS just that easy by making the boolit harder. My opinion is that if you get great accuracy with a jacketed bullet, why not try to approach that with cast? What happens to lead between the throats and rifling in the revolver is our enemy.
If I could get just the outer skin of a cast boolit as hard as copper without spending money, I would be like a pig in a corn field! [smilie=1:

[Lloyd Smale]

im with 44 man here. First ill address bullet fit. 90 percent of shooters dont have the time or the knowlege to do anything about it. tell most there going to have to spend money gettting there cylinder cut or a forcing cone recut and they will run like the wind. Ive got probalby 75 sixguns and have owned and sold that many more. I can honestly say that ive had only a couple that did better with softer alloys. Those were so far off in fit that they went down the road. sure it helps to match bullet size to throat size but bottom line is if you shoot a soft alloy its going to bump up to fit and my opinion varys from alot of so called experts in that i dont thing thats a good thing. How can you expect accuracy like that. You take a bullet that you lovingly craft you cast it to insure theres pefect fillout with no rounded edges size it to true it up and then about slam a hammer against it and distort it to fill the bore of an ill fit gun. Will it shoot? Maybe, if your idea of accuracy is a 2-3 inch group at 25 yards. What will shoot is a properly machined sixgun with a hard bullet. Why do you think jackted bullets shoot so well. There 10 times harder then the hardest cast bullet.

Ive posted this on a number of occasions but i will agian here. My buddy and i once took 6 1911s and 4 smith 25s in 45acp and did a test We casted 4 different bullet designs out of 5050 ww/pure, ww, 5050 ww/lyno and lyno and loaded them with 3 differnt powders. In every case with the exception of one load in one gun the harder the bullet the better they shot. Im not talking small differnces either im talking groups shrinking from 3-4 inch to one inch. the only thing i will add to this is that when we got to 5050 ww/lyno the groups didnt shrink very much going to straight lino. Now this is just a test of one caliiber but what it shows is even a low pressure round like the acp benifits from harder alloys.

Im not a big fan of water dropping. Ive seen to many bullet fail (fracture) made from water dropped wws. Swcs are a big problem they shear off right at the nose driving band juncture. Now i know for a fact that my days of unlimited linotype are over and i know that water dropping is going to be a nessisity so ive been doing a bit lately. what ive been doing is water dropping #2 alloy. It has quite a bit more tin and it seems to be more ductable. I guess another way would be to go with 5050 ww/pure but i just dont get the hardness im looking for out of that alloy. Yup 44 man make mine as hard as a jackted bullet and id be in heaven.

[Bret4207]

My problem with the whole "hardness" thing isn't the BHN per se, it's that way too many people immediately assume that a harder alloy WILL AUTOMATICALLY shoot better. So first thing they do is juice that 500 lbs of WW they have with a bunch of expensive additions. No checking first to see how that alloy they had works, no time spent playing around a bit to see if good old straight WW alloy might work just fine by itself. They ignore all their fit issues, undersize boolits, undersized expanders and low quality boolits and jump on the "harder is better" band wagon. Plain truth is for probably 75% of the average guys shooting WW alone are more than hard enough. Some people forget not everyone shoots balls to the wall with every shot. Why use an exotic alloy for a 32 Long at 800 fps punching holes in paper? For the high pressure stuff then you get into the harder alloys.

I will stand by my opinion of working with what you've got and fitting the boolit to the gun instead of immediately jumping to harder alloys which simply won;t solve fit problems. I'm also not a fan of bumping/obturating the boolit. Fit the boolit to the gun and then see where things go.

[Bret4207]

Bret, when the boolit fits the gun, sometimes it IS just that easy by making the boolit harder. My opinion is that if you get great accuracy with a jacketed bullet, why not try to approach that with cast? What happens to lead between the throats and rifling in the revolver is our enemy.
If I could get just the outer skin of a cast boolit as hard as copper without spending money, I would be like a pig in a corn field! [smilie=1:

Yes, but you fit the boolit FIRST. You didn't jump to a harder alloy to "fix" your fit issues. That's the same as the guys that intentionally "bump" a boolit to "make it fit". Fit the stupid thing first and you won't need to bump it and you won;t have 3 fliers out of 10 shots either. Start reading 45 2.1's and Starmetals stuff on the 6.5 Swede. Once you get past the ego you'll find out it's all about fit and it all goes for handguns too.

You've stated your opinion and that you "gave up" on soft alloys. That's fine. I didn't give up. I'm too cheap to add expensive Sn/Sb to WW and haven't found a thing those alloys do yet that can't be done with WW- YET. I'm up over 2200 fps with WW in rifles and 1500 in revolters.

If I was shooting a gun that demanded a hard alloy, especially at higher speeds and longer ranges then I'd do it. But just how many guys are actually doing/needing that? In my mind it's like the town boys I see driving a 1 ton dually diesel PU that never USE the truck- they're doing it for appearances and bragging rights. My wife says it's to make up for something else they lack, but I won't go there. The bed of that truck never saw anything heavier than a set of golf clubs or bags of clothes from the mall. Same thing with some people that love to talk BHN- harder is more better in their minds. I'm just saying that it makes zero sense to jump to a harder alloy without first determining if you NEED a harder alloy. Same thing for the guys that start adding tin to their WW because they don't get good fill out. They never believe you when you tell them it's as simple as cleaning the mould and getting the mould HOT. Some people can;t make the differentiation between alloy temp and mould temp. "How hot should I run my pot?" It doesn't really matter as long as it pours freely- what matters is MOULD TEMP.

Rant off.

[Lloyd Smale]

problem is brett in most cases your just sizing a bullet to a differnt size because the gun isnt right in the first place. Fix the gun instead of putting a bandaid on it by varying bullet size or alloy. Ive yet to see a gun that was right that didnt shoot hard better then soft.

[Bass Ackward]

I don't know. I seem to have better luck with new to cast fellas with harder bullets. Seems to me that they are easier to load and perform better over a wider range of guns. Same as rifles.

But a trend does not make a fact. I am pretty flexible too. Meaning that I am not of a single focus or purpose for my cast loads either. Some cast is for light practice while a few others might be for wide open replacements for jacketed stuff. Each requirement is different and needs to be treated differently. I shoot lino for 38 Special. HTWW for 45 and 10 BHN for wide open 44. I also shoot 14 BHN for 44. I also shoot 24 BHN for 44.

Accuracy is where I find it.

[BABore]

problem is brett in most cases your just sizing a bullet to a differnt size because the gun isnt right in the first place. Fix the gun instead of putting a bandaid on it by varying bullet size or alloy. Ive yet to see a gun that was right that didnt shoot hard better then soft.

Lloyd, You've admitted many times in the past that you prefer hard boolits because they are easier to get to shoot well without alot of fuss. No looking high and low for that perfect alloy and load for each gun. That's fine and well. I don't know your accuracy requirements and this isn't meant to be negitive, but is your current load thee most accurate that that particular gun will shoot? Have you wrung out every possible combination to see, or are you satisfied enough with what you get? I pretty much know the answer to these questions and also know you are a high volume shooter that doesn't really want to spend that kind of time per gun.

The whole point of this is a person has to ask himself what his goals or accuracy standards will be. Many have pointed out that boolit fit is king and that's true. Bret pointed readers to the 6.5 thread to wad thru the BS and see what proper fit is. There's also another important lesson in that same thread. There are posters that want an instant recipe for sucess from those that had to do all the hard developement work (i.e. instant gratification). More and more common in todays world. I personally think I'm just the opposite. I like the developement work. I also quest for the best accuracy possible in all cases. Gives me good reason to burn up components and get out of the house every Sunday.

I only have about a half dozen wheel guns I load for. All are 7 1/2 to 9 1/2" DA and SA revolvers geared towards hunting. I only shoot very limited amounts of soft loads in these guns. Even though I go about load developement the same way, everything that follows deals with high end hunting loads. Since I make boolit molds, I am constantly trying out new designs. Some of my gun prefer only hard boolits from 22 to 28 bhn. Some only soft ones that are 10-13 bhn. Some don't care which. Now I could just take a new boolit design for a given gun and cast them to the hardness it has preferred in the past. That would seem the most logical and easiest path to success. Being very stubborn and constantly bored, I do it the hard way. I treat every new design as if I don't know what it will like for hardness.

I work up loads with 10, 20, and sometimes 30 bhn boolits. Five rounds at each powder charge and shoot them at 50 yards. I might be using 2 or 3 different powders during developement. If I find something that catches my eye, I will go back and load 20-30 rounds of it and try it at 50 and 100 yards. If accuracy holds and it meets my fancy then I'm done for now. I use a good lube that has proved itself over and over for accuracy first and leading second. If for some reason I do try another lube, then the whole process gets repeated. The same thing if I try a new powder. Bottom line is I don't like to leave anything on the table and never assume that a gun's previous performance of a given load will carry over to a new one. Sometimes it does, sometimes not. For me, that is the fun stuff. Once a load is set in stone, I look for other designs to try or maybe the latest wiz-bang powder so I can do it all over again. Alot can be learned by the doing instead of the following. Again, this is my way for my requirements. It may be very well too much trouble for you. But you did want to know which alloy/hardness would work best in YOUR GUN!

[Bret4207]

To try and make my opinion clear- If a guy wants to use 35 BHN boolits and wants to add the ingredients to produce 10 tons of that alloy, fine. It's his money. It's his gun. Those 35 BHN boolits will still lead like crazy and give lousy groups if they don't fit the gun.

Lloyd, and I do have guns that are "right" that shoot nicely with softer alloys and others that are right that want a harder alloy. "Fixing the gun" as you put it is fitting the boolit to the gun in reverse, isn't it? Regardless, you'll still need a proper fitting boolit before you get good results. THe hardest alloy in the world won't work for snot if it doesn't fit now will it?

[44man]

Bret, that was a good post. I want to add that I only add antimony and tin to WW metal for long range like out to 500 meters or to the revolver that shoots best with it.
Almost all of my shooting is with water dropped WW metal. No need for me to go harder unless I am looking to shoot under 1/2" at 50 yards. Most times WW's alone will keep me at 1" or less at 50. No, I don't do it every time either but I do it enough to admit me and my vision is the weakest link.
WW's are all different and it is not possible to duplicate anything and even some of my better alloys are not as hard one time as the next. One batch shoots very good but the next opens groups and in every case, the harder lead has been the most accurate, whether just WW's or something else.
Now I don't want harder and brittle boolits either, only enough to take the rifling. I have never had a boolit break unless I shot steel. All of my recovered boolits still look like boolits.
One point you miss though is that lighter loads of faster powder will require a HARDER boolit for accuracy then a hefty load of slow powder. Yes, I might run a lot higher pressure in my hunting and long range loads but the pressure curve is spread out down the bore.
I would like to change this thinking that lighter loads are OK with dead soft lead when the opposite is true. Every single problem ever posted about leading and poor accuracy with any gun has been with fast powders and low velocities with a fella thinking low velocity does not harm a boolit so it can be soft.
Has anyone taken a .38, fit a wad cutter to the gun and cast it very hard? Not many, it might open your eyes if you try it. Bullseye is VERY hard on a boolit. And what revolver leads more then a .38??? Why do loads need to be changed by 1/10 of a gr when a wad cutter should shoot decent from minimum to maximum loads having just a small change in group size?
Bass has admitted that he shoots Lino for the .38 and he is absolutely correct but they can be made a little cheaper.
His statement that accuracy is where he finds it is one of the best ever said.

[44man]

Now along comes Babore with one of the best yet. Wonderful post!
This is what it is all about, get out of the rut from all the stuff printed in the rags and manuals for years.
You have to do the work, there is no easy way. Never believe everything you have ever read and never stick with stuff done 50 or 100 years ago.
Cast boolit shooting has always been too narrow minded.
The big problem was to apply BP thinking and boolit forms to modern powders and guns.
Babore has sent me boolits to try and some have put all shots touching at 50 yards but others need an alloy change for my guns and loads. Never seen a poor boolit from Bruce but even he can't predict the alloy I need.

[9.3X62AL]

One VERY FINE discussion here.

A lot of food for thought throughout the texts, and I don't mind having my prejudices autopsied. MANY THANKS for pushing me out of my comfort zones politely and with logical progressions of thought & experience.

Cast Boolits, at its best. I'm still a "fit first" believer, but the case for harder alloys in selected venues seems well-founded, a thing I wasn't very attuned to prior to this thread. What I took for "laziness" previously turns out to be a valid response to specific conditions that--admittedly--I seldom venture into. Thanks for the wake-up call, y'all!

[Bucks Owin]

Yes, but you fit the boolit FIRST. You didn't jump to a harder alloy to "fix" your fit issues. That's the same as the guys that intentionally "bump" a boolit to "make it fit". Fit the stupid thing first and you won't need to bump it and you won;t have 3 fliers out of 10 shots either. That's all well and good if one has the money to have a new cylinder fitted, which is the right way to address oversize throats. In the meantime, those of us with such sloppy chambered guns can gain an improvement in accuracy by "doing the bump". Works as Linebaugh said it would, accuracy gone from 4-6" to 1.5" (with flier!)....JMO, Dennis

[Lloyd Smale]

your right and weve talked about this in the past. I dont have time to try every powder and primer and bullet and reloading die and bulelt lube and bullet size. I shoot to many differnt guns and shoot to much and if i did id be spending half my life on the bench and i prefer shooting on my feet thank you. My point is why fool with it all. Buy a good gun or fix the one you have. If you start with a good piece half the battle is won. Now in about any handgun caliber i can give you a load that has performed well in a number of guns. Is it a guarantee absolutely not but 9 times out of ten it will be a real good starting point. My accuacy standards are one inch at 25 or two at 50. I dont shoot groups any farther as even with the experience i have with handguns i consider 50 yards about it for an open sighted handgun under feild conditions with the pressure that goes along. Most times if im father then that i can stalk and get closer. Now a guy that owns only one or two sixguns can get all wrapped up in queezing the last minute bit of accuracy out of it but i dont see the point. ANy sixgun that will shoot 3 inch groups at 25 yards will do for big game hunting at 50 yards. Now a sixgun for small game hunting may need a bit more but most are really capable of shooting that well anyway. To many people spend to much time shooting and bragging about how good of groups they can shoot. Ive seen it a thousand times. A guy will bring a target up to me and show me a one inch group he shot at 50 yards and ill sit a pop can out at 50 and his group around it looks like a shotgun pattern. Bottom line is the heart of any guns accuracy is the man pulling the trigger. Me id rather pull the trigger and tighten my real world groups then sit at a bench so i can brag about how good my gun shoots. Now i know ive gotten way off topic but one way i insure i can spend time on the trigger is by eliminating uneeded testing and yes you may find a load that will shoot better with a soft alloy once a year but me im not wasting my time looking for it. Ill be the one shooting the beer cans.
Lloyd, You've admitted many times in the past that you prefer hard boolits because they are easier to get to shoot well without alot of fuss. No looking high and low for that perfect alloy and load for each gun. That's fine and well. I don't know your accuracy requirements and this isn't meant to be negitive, but is your current load thee most accurate that that particular gun will shoot? Have you wrung out every possible combination to see, or are you satisfied enough with what you get? I pretty much know the answer to these questions and also know you are a high volume shooter that doesn't really want to spend that kind of time per gun.

The whole point of this is a person has to ask himself what his goals or accuracy standards will be. Many have pointed out that boolit fit is king and that's true. Bret pointed readers to the 6.5 thread to wad thru the BS and see what proper fit is. There's also another important lesson in that same thread. There are posters that want an instant recipe for sucess from those that had to do all the hard developement work (i.e. instant gratification). More and more common in todays world. I personally think I'm just the opposite. I like the developement work. I also quest for the best accuracy possible in all cases. Gives me good reason to burn up components and get out of the house every Sunday.

I only have about a half dozen wheel guns I load for. All are 7 1/2 to 9 1/2" DA and SA revolvers geared towards hunting. I only shoot very limited amounts of soft loads in these guns. Even though I go about load developement the same way, everything that follows deals with high end hunting loads. Since I make boolit molds, I am constantly trying out new designs. Some of my gun prefer only hard boolits from 22 to 28 bhn. Some only soft ones that are 10-13 bhn. Some don't care which. Now I could just take a new boolit design for a given gun and cast them to the hardness it has preferred in the past. That would seem the most logical and easiest path to success. Being very stubborn and constantly bored, I do it the hard way. I treat every new design as if I don't know what it will like for hardness.

I work up loads with 10, 20, and sometimes 30 bhn boolits. Five rounds at each powder charge and shoot them at 50 yards. I might be using 2 or 3 different powders during developement. If I find something that catches my eye, I will go back and load 20-30 rounds of it and try it at 50 and 100 yards. If accuracy holds and it meets my fancy then I'm done for now. I use a good lube that has proved itself over and over for accuracy first and leading second. If for some reason I do try another lube, then the whole process gets repeated. The same thing if I try a new powder. Bottom line is I don't like to leave anything on the table and never assume that a gun's previous performance of a given load will carry over to a new one. Sometimes it does, sometimes not. For me, that is the fun stuff. Once a load is set in stone, I look for other designs to try or maybe the latest wiz-bang powder so I can do it all over again. Alot can be learned by the doing instead of the following. Again, this is my way for my requirements. It may be very well too much trouble for you. But you did want to know which alloy/hardness would work best in YOUR GUN!

[BABore]

See! I knew you'd take offense to that post and miss the whole point.:bigsmyl2:

You know what you want and I know what I want. Neither of us know what the thread starter wants.

And I only use the bench for finding my most accurate load. My hind legs work pretty good too. :Fire:

[Lloyd Smale]

I know they do pal. I wasnt insinuating that you couldnt. Thats the thing here everybodys right and everybodys wrong. Depends on which way your looking at it. Just because we dont agree on everything dont think i havent learned from you.
See! I knew you'd take offense to that post and miss the whole point.:bigsmyl2:

You know what you want and I know what I want. Neither of us know what the thread starter wants.

And I only use the bench for finding my most accurate load. My hind legs work pretty good too. :Fire:

[cbrick]

Interesting to say the least. My take on it?

No one in this thread is wrong. I'm with Bret 110% on the boolit fit and I'm with BABore on the testing and I'm with Lloyd on the shooting.

Boolit fit is king, I doubt there is anyone here that will argue that. If your measured revolver groove diameter is larger than your measured throat diameters you'll never be a happy CB shooter. Fixing this isn't all that expensive, if you can afford the gun you can have the cylinder fixed to match the groove diameter for the cost of a day or two at the range and your future days at the range will be much happier.

I have worked up loads for others revolvers because they couldn't get it to stop leading or shoot well. Once the boolit actually did fit the gun things were much improved and sometimes that's all it takes. I've worked up revolver loads with 9 BHN to 22 BHN alloys and in mid range loads the gun didn't seem to care much at shorter distances (to about 50 yards) but the boolit fit the gun properly. If the boolit fits the gun the most important thing with BHN is that it be consistent, in other words all boolits within a group were 11-12 or 17-18 BHN etc, no mixing BHN's within a group. I've done plenty of testing to prove what that does to grouping.

Lloyd is 100% correct about the shooting vs. the testing. Better to say that he is 100% correct "for him". If that is how he prefers doing it, if he is happy with the results from his various firearms it would be very wrong for him to do it differently. However, everyone is not Lloyd, some of us enjoy the testing and experimenting and the "what if" just as much as the shooting. Can anyone say that these people are wrong for doing it that way? Hardly! In fact this is where much of the progress and improvements in the art of boolit casting has come from in the last 30 years or so and boolit casting has moved forward about a light year in that time.

The term "hardcast" has done more to discourage new casters and purchasers of commercial cast boolits than anything and causing many to stop shooting boolits completely. New casters because of this term fully believe that if they aren't shooting diamonds it'll never work and the gun will lead up. If they don't stick with it and learn correct methods they will spend the rest of their shooting lives bad mouthing boolits as inaccurate and leading up the gun. The term should be removed from the art of boolit casting completely. For one thing it is a relative term, what is hardcast for one person may be middle of the road ho hum for others. So what exactly is "hardcast"?

I have learned a great deal from many people on this forum simply because they are posting what works for them or in some cases what doesn't work. I don't always agree with everything but there are nearly as many ways of doing things in this hobby as there are people doing it, are any of them wrong? Only if they are not getting the results that they are willing to accept. If they are happy with the results they are getting they are doing it right for them.

Rick

[Changeling]

No, it isn't a large part of fit. It's a small part of ultimate fit. You need to fit the boolit to the gun first, then see what various loads indicate it wants, then determine how you want to approach meeting those wants. BHN is one way of addressing SOME of the ultimate fit of the boolit with that particular load in that particular gun. It's hardly the biggest issue.

Do as you wish,. but if you're serious about fitting the boolit to he gun you're barking up the wrong tree and more importantly you're doing a great disservice to the newer guys here who might read your BHN ideas and assume it's as simple as going to harder boolit.

I've tried to be civil to you sir because I see you have a tremendous amount of posts, but you are ranting about something, I'm not sure what.
I see things one way and you evidently don't agree whatsoever with what I have to say or think in any way shape or form in a rational manner that I can understand.
You attack what others say without anything to back up your comments.

If my posts bother you so much, please don't reply:confused:

[Bret4207]

Changeling- Read the posts here, listen to what is being said. We're trying to get the point across to all who read this that FIT (boolit fit) comes first. Read what EVERYONE is saying- fit comes first. There's a very large area to cover involving fit. Once you get the basic fit issue figured out then you start working up and observing, assuming you want to go hotter or at longer ranges or strive for that last bit of accuracy. You may find that due to the particular guns mechanical limits that you're stuck at some point. Or you may find that your guns will suddenly become a ray gun when you change one little thing- that might be BHN, or COAL, or brand of brass or lube, it can be most anything. As your increase your pressure you MAY find you need to change your BHN or you may not. Jumping to the conclusion that BHN alone is a major player in good cast shooting has lead to a lot of heartache and bad mouthing of cast boolits.

Yes, I do have a HUGE issue with the whole HARDCAST issue. It's mostly advertising hype, a ploy to sell commercially cast bullets. Harder alloys have their place but it's not the answer it's sold as being. We've been fighting this battle for years and we keep seeing it come up again and again.

As far as backing up what I'm saying- find a single solitary post or thread anywhere on this site that successfully and correctly refutes my claim that fit is the single most important factor in successful cast shooting. Please, go right ahead and find that. You'll be looking for very long time with no success because it's one of the very few hard and fast rules in this game- fit is king. And to be clear, your post's don't bother me, I just hate to see a guy make the same mistakes I did that cost me so much time and frustration because I believed exactly as you seem to, that I could solve all my problems by going to HARDCAST. It just isn't so.

As I said, if you prefer to use a hard alloy be my guest. It can work fine. But it isn't the end all to the problems. If you want proof take a 357 or 44 or 9mm or even a good old 38 Spec. and obtain some Lazercast or other reputedly HARDCAST boolits .001 undersize for your gun and kick them with a nice hot load. Make sure you pick up a supply of 4/0 steel wool too because you'll be cleaning the lead out of the barrel after you shoot shotgun like groups.

So please don't take offense to my attempts to get you past the HARDCAST hype. Your posts seem to indicate you're making a mistake and I'm trying to get you beyond that. My apologies if my attempts somehow irritated you.

As for my post count- it means nothing, simply that at one time I had a passion for this place and this subject. I'm out here on a farm in the middle of nowhere with little contact beyond my family. So I talk here. Doesn't mean I deserve any respect whatsoever beyond that displayed in the normal course of everyday life.

[44man]

Now Bret, you know darn well that store bought boolits from some outfits are just wrong while others offer better designed boolits at the sizes you need. I will not even talk about Laser cast, none ever shot for me. Good thing they were free samples. :bigsmyl2:
Buy a bulk box of under size, bevel base boolits called "hard cast" and suffer. it is not the hardness that gives the problem.
Now cast your own with the right mold with a harder boolit and you will see better accuracy as you make them even harder.
I have shot too many LBT "HARD" boolits that plunked 5 shots into an inch at 75 yards and I would keep buying them if I could afford them.
You know darn well I agree with fit but making a bad boolit softer is not going to make the gun shoot.

[Bret4207]

Making a good boolit harder won't make it fit either. I repeat- you gave up on softer stuff, fine. Maybe if I had access to a ton of harder alloy than my ton or so of 20-30 year old WW I'd use them. It still won't make them fit.

Make it easy on Changeling before the guy blows a gasket- Do you deny or agree that fit comes before all else? You know the answer and so do I. You dance around it in most of your posts. You have settled on a harder alloy, I've settled on a softer 11-13 Bhn alloy. Both of us take care of fit before we worry about hardness.

[Edubya]

Bret4207, I don't respect you for your posts quantity, I respect you for your logic and very good explanations of that logic. After reading your posts, I never feel that you've said, "Just do it my way because I've said so!" But I must say that I've experienced some of the same frustrations as some of the others here, and still am looking for the right combinations. My boolits are sized even .0005 larger than the cylinder throat.

I've used up almost a full pound of 2400 with my loads of varying charges from 17 gr to 22.5 gr trying to develop a load for my several moulds that will not lead and are accurate. The moulds are RCBS430-250K, SAECO #428 and #445HP'ed. I'm shooting a 4" 629 and looking for a cast boolit that I can shoot as accurately as my expensive Fiocchis w/o leading. I can shoot plenty of 17-18 gr before the lead start interfering with accuracy or even 7.5-8.5 of Unique. These loads are what I've mostly stuck with but I know, in the back of my head, that I'm "settling for"!

I have not tried very much H110 or W296. I'm wondering if the slower launch would more gently present the head to the lands and therefore be less likely to strip? BTW, I have cast several hundred of each of my moulds in about every BHN from 10 to 22 in attempting to find the "magic boolit"!
Thanks for your consideration,
EW

[44man]

Making a good boolit harder won't make it fit either. I repeat- you gave up on softer stuff, fine. Maybe if I had access to a ton of harder alloy than my ton or so of 20-30 year old WW I'd use them. It still won't make them fit.

Make it easy on Changeling before the guy blows a gasket- Do you deny or agree that fit comes before all else? You know the answer and so do I. You dance around it in most of your posts. You have settled on a harder alloy, I've settled on a softer 11-13 Bhn alloy. Both of us take care of fit before we worry about hardness.
Of course, of course, go back and read every single post I ever made, even the one right above your last post and you will see me saying the boolit MUST fit---FIRST. :cbpour:I agree 100% with that. Then the gun MUST be correct in dimensions.
However from that point on, any boolit that gets damaged or skids the rifling when shot is a waste of time, money and energy.
I have also stated that water dropped WW's are as good as you need but you keep saying I always use harder which is not true. I only use harder for certain guns and certain applications. For instance with fast powders and light loads or when I want to shoot extreme ranges. Even for the longer ranges, WW's work good.
Now look at one test done with my .44 and Unique powder. First is 22 BHN boolits at 25 and 50 yards. Next is 30 BHN, same load, same boolit. One of many tests over the years, do you see any difference?

[44man]

Kind of amazing, isn't it? And this was done with an RCBS Keith boolit that I hate for accuracy. Notice the patch too---NO leading.
The accuracy improvement is DRAMATIC and can't be denied.
I will also tell you a secret, this boolit is only .429" out of a .430" bore and .4324" throats----OOOOH MY GOD! It just can't be----OR CAN IT?
Now fit the boolit and choose the right nose shape for the forcing cone plus make them HARD and this is an average 50 yard group.
Gee, I don't know what to say! [smilie=p:

[9.3X62AL]

Since we're talking about boolit fit (among other things) here, let's not forget about tooling and processes in the assembly of ammunition that can cause unintended reduction of boolit diameters that we strived so diligently to achieve. This bears directly on the question of softer vs. harder alloys as boolit material.

1) Undersized expander spuds/balls. Fact of life--most die sets "assume" usage of jacketed bullets, and their case mouth expander dimensions hew to that prejudice. If you are using ACWW, an expander that is .004"-.005" under your boolit's diameter will almost certainly reduce its diameter during the seating operation. MUCH better to use an expander .0015"-.002" under your boolit's size with those softer alloys.

An exception to this rule would involve slow-burning powders that benefit from strong bullet pull. Fuels like WW-296, H-110, maybe 2400 and the 4227s. Here, a harder alloy and/or a gas check can benefit you in a couple ways--

a) The hard boolit or the gas check is far more resistant to the diameteric reduction effects of tight case mouths on the boolit sidewalls, and

b) Borrowing from thoughts expressed above--the harder boolit or gas check does a better job of taking the rifling under the higher pressures present in such loads.

I am of the opinion that hard alloy and gas check popularity is largely based on their abilities to defeat the effects of diametric bullet reduction during the seating process, and not so much from their benefits accrued after the primer functions. It would be difficult to sort through that chicken-or-egg supposition to get a firm answer one way or another, but that's my view of it in light of the tooling we deal with to assemble cast boolit handloads.

2) Over-application of taper crimping. Taper crimp dies are from the devil, as far as cast boolits in autopistol calibers are concerned.

a) There is no way to apply a taper crimp at the same time you seat a boolit without its sidewall being marred. Period. And marring equals diametric reduction, only varying in degree dependant upon case mouth compression being exerted during the taper-crimping/seating step.
MUCH BETTER, if you insist on taper-crimping, to do so as a seperate die step after the bullet is fully seated.

I prefer the old-school roll-crimp dies my RCBS 9mm Luger and 45 ACP die sets came with. Just a light "kiss" from the crimping shoulder to straighten out the case mouth flare, and you're good to go. A close second to this is to remove the decapping assembly from a tungsten-carbide sizer die, and have the tapered/radiused sizing ring just "kiss" the flared case mouth to straighten it out.

Did I mention that taper-crimping seater dies ARE FROM THE DEVIL? Here again, we can see a potential benefit accrued from use of harder alloys, to counter-act the effects of over-compression by taper-crimping over-enthusiasm. Maybe.

[44man]

I think I will continue to instruct Changeling and hope his back gets better so he can come here and shoot. I will not give him a plate full of stuff to try, only what works.
Now please Bret, c'mon, show us. Don't hide, post group pictures. Show a pile of dead deer or SOMETHING! I will even take my gun, go down right now and shoot a group for you if you ask. I am open and show everything I do and also what my friends do.
This argument can go on forever but without proof either way, it is just a lot of talk.
Just never ask me to shoot soft boolits! :holysheep

[Bucks Owin]

Kind of amazing, isn't it? And this was done with an RCBS Keith boolit that I hate for accuracy. Notice the patch too---NO leading.
The accuracy improvement is DRAMATIC and can't be denied.
I will also tell you a secret, this boolit is only .429" out of a .430" bore and .4324" throats----OOOOH MY GOD! It just can't be----OR CAN IT?
Now fit the boolit and choose the right nose shape for the forcing cone plus make them HARD and this is an average 50 yard group.
Gee, I don't know what to say! [smilie=p: Another fine group 44man. I'm curious as to the powder charge? Looks like "the bump" in action here...;) Best, Dennis

[Bret4207]

I must say that I've experienced some of the same frustrations as some of the others here, and still am looking for the right combinations. My boolits are sized even .0005 larger than the cylinder throat.

I've used up almost a full pound of 2400 with my loads of varying charges from 17 gr to 22.5 gr trying to develop a load for my several moulds that will not lead and are accurate. The moulds are RCBS430-250K, SAECO #428 and #445HP'ed. I'm shooting a 4" 629 and looking for a cast boolit that I can shoot as accurately as my expensive Fiocchis w/o leading. I can shoot plenty of 17-18 gr before the lead start interfering with accuracy or even 7.5-8.5 of Unique. These loads are what I've mostly stuck with but I know, in the back of my head, that I'm "settling for"!

I have not tried very much H110 or W296. I'm wondering if the slower launch would more gently present the head to the lands and therefore be less likely to strip? BTW, I have cast several hundred of each of my moulds in about every BHN from 10 to 22 in attempting to find the "magic boolit"!
Thanks for your consideration,
EW

Ed, not having access to your particular gun or being familiar with the 2 SAECO numbers I can only speak in generalities. If you have determined that there are no physical limitations with the gun- constrictions, timing, rough barrel, etc.- and you've found another boolit or bullet that shoots great (Fiocchi- jacketed or cast?) then I would start with the basics and go from there. If I'm reading it right you have leading issues over a variety of BHN and velocity. A slower powder may help, but I'm betting you'll find it takes more than just a powder change. Read Al's post above as he brings up some good points about dies, etc. That seems to come up more and more often as a problem issue.

My suggestion would be to start at a level where you're successful and work up from there, taking copious notes and see if you observe a trend that will lead you to the problem area.

Thx for the kind words.

[Bret4207]

Of course, of course, go back and read every single post I ever made, even the one right above your last post and you will see me saying the boolit MUST fit---FIRST. :cbpour:I agree 100% with that. Then the gun MUST be correct in dimensions.


Good, as long as we're on the same page. I think I'm somehow, inadvertently, coming across as saying harder alloys don't work. I'm most definitely NOT saying that. I'm saying fit comes first and if you take the tack that I did of working with what you have instead of going off "grailing" (apologies to Mark Twain) you can usually find a workable solution with WW alloys until you get up into the true high pressure/long range/extreme penetration area.

[Frank]

44man said
I will also tell you a secret, this boolit is only .429" out of a .430" bore and .4324" throats----OOOOH MY GOD! It just can't be----OR CAN IT?

In this month's Handloader, it was recommended that a BH of at least 14-15 was needed for the 1911 due to it's shallow rifling. Montana bullet woks offers .45 ACP bullets 14-15 BH, and even harder for larger calibers. So others do understand the importance of a harder alloy. No need to spend extra money for special dies to accommodate "soft". Soft is kind of like liberalism. You spend more to make things worse. [smilie=p:

[Bret4207]

I think I will continue to instruct Changeling and hope his back gets better so he can come here and shoot. I will not give him a plate full of stuff to try, only what works.
Now please Bret, c'mon, show us. Don't hide, post group pictures. Show a pile of dead deer or SOMETHING! I will even take my gun, go down right now and shoot a group for you if you ask. I am open and show everything I do and also what my friends do.
This argument can go on forever but without proof either way, it is just a lot of talk.
Just never ask me to shoot soft boolits! :holysheep

I'm not asking you to shoot soft alloy. It doesn't work for you, that's okay. I'm not arguing with YOU, I'm arguing with the progression of options people tend to take.

[Bret4207]

Since we're talking about boolit fit (among other things) here, let's not forget about tooling and processes in the assembly of ammunition that can cause unintended reduction of boolit diameters that we strived so diligently to achieve. This bears directly on the question of softer vs. harder alloys as boolit material.

1) Undersized expander spuds/balls. Fact of life--most die sets "assume" usage of jacketed bullets, and their case mouth expander dimensions hew to that prejudice. If you are using ACWW, an expander that is .004"-.005" under your boolit's diameter will almost certainly reduce its diameter during the seating operation. MUCH better to use an expander .0015"-.002" under your boolit's size with those softer alloys.

An exception to this rule would involve slow-burning powders that benefit from strong bullet pull. Fuels like WW-296, H-110, maybe 2400 and the 4227s. Here, a harder alloy and/or a gas check can benefit you in a couple ways--

a) The hard boolit or the gas check is far more resistant to the diameteric reduction effects of tight case mouths on the boolit sidewalls, and

b) Borrowing from thoughts expressed above--the harder boolit or gas check does a better job of taking the rifling under the higher pressures present in such loads.

I am of the opinion that hard alloy and gas check popularity is largely based on their abilities to defeat the effects of diametric bullet reduction during the seating process, and not so much from their benefits accrued after the primer functions. It would be difficult to sort through that chicken-or-egg supposition to get a firm answer one way or another, but that's my view of it in light of the tooling we deal with to assemble cast boolit handloads.

2) Over-application of taper crimping. Taper crimp dies are from the devil, as far as cast boolits in autopistol calibers are concerned.

a) There is no way to apply a taper crimp at the same time you seat a boolit without its sidewall being marred. Period. And marring equals diametric reduction, only varying in degree dependant upon case mouth compression being exerted during the taper-crimping/seating step.
MUCH BETTER, if you insist on taper-crimping, to do so as a seperate die step after the bullet is fully seated.

I prefer the old-school roll-crimp dies my RCBS 9mm Luger and 45 ACP die sets came with. Just a light "kiss" from the crimping shoulder to straighten out the case mouth flare, and you're good to go. A close second to this is to remove the decapping assembly from a tungsten-carbide sizer die, and have the tapered/radiused sizing ring just "kiss" the flared case mouth to straighten it out.

Did I mention that taper-crimping seater dies ARE FROM THE DEVIL? Here again, we can see a potential benefit accrued from use of harder alloys, to counter-act the effects of over-compression by taper-crimping over-enthusiasm. Maybe.

This post should be a sticky! Excellent Al, just outstanding!

[44man]

1) Undersized expander spuds/balls. Fact of life--most die sets "assume" usage of jacketed bullets, and their case mouth expander dimensions hew to that prejudice. If you are using ACWW, an expander that is .004"-.005" under your boolit's diameter will almost certainly reduce its diameter during the seating operation. MUCH better to use an expander .0015"-.002" under your boolit's size with those softer alloys.
You are on top of almost everything except this. What you said is a gun writers favorite too but it is NOT TRUE.
Keep the case neck tension and make the boolit harder to withstand seating. If you NEED expansion, make the nose softer or hollow point the boolit but keep the drive bands HARD.
I have NEVER had a softer boolit shoot to the accuracy I demand from a revolver. I don't care if it is .050" over bore size, soft does not belong in a revolver.

[44man]

Another fine group 44man. I'm curious as to the powder charge? Looks like "the bump" in action here...;) Best, Dennis
That is the RD 265 gr boolit, about 22-24 BHN, 22 gr of 296 and the Fed 150 primer. The slower powder lets me get accuracy with a softer boolit then Unique or 231 does. The boolit is water dropped WW's only.

[44man]

Bret4207, I don't respect you for your posts quantity, I respect you for your logic and very good explanations of that logic. After reading your posts, I never feel that you've said, "Just do it my way because I've said so!" But I must say that I've experienced some of the same frustrations as some of the others here, and still am looking for the right combinations. My boolits are sized even .0005 larger than the cylinder throat.

I've used up almost a full pound of 2400 with my loads of varying charges from 17 gr to 22.5 gr trying to develop a load for my several moulds that will not lead and are accurate. The moulds are RCBS430-250K, SAECO #428 and #445HP'ed. I'm shooting a 4" 629 and looking for a cast boolit that I can shoot as accurately as my expensive Fiocchis w/o leading. I can shoot plenty of 17-18 gr before the lead start interfering with accuracy or even 7.5-8.5 of Unique. These loads are what I've mostly stuck with but I know, in the back of my head, that I'm "settling for"!

I have not tried very much H110 or W296. I'm wondering if the slower launch would more gently present the head to the lands and therefore be less likely to strip? BTW, I have cast several hundred of each of my moulds in about every BHN from 10 to 22 in attempting to find the "magic boolit"!
Thanks for your consideration,
EW
Bret made a good point about fit and you really need to know the dimensions of your gun. Any of those boolits should shoot but I have a little misgivings about the 220 gr in the S&W. They shoot better in the 250-265 gr range.
Notice the groups I shot from an under size RCBS boolit the same as the one you have.
296 works great in a S&W, 2400 is OK but not as accurate.
A poor lube can cause leading too. I can not shoot Alox.
But I wonder if your throats are smaller then groove to groove of your barrel????? Is there a constriction at the barrel threads? Is the bore a lot smaller then standard? Is it choked backwards?
Actually, there is a very large range of boolit hardness that will NOT lead a barrel and some soft ones can remove leading if shot slow.
Hard boolits will not cure something that is wrong and neither will soft boolits which can make things worse.
Have you removed all the copper from jacketed bullets? Many say you don't have to but why take a chance?
I have a funny way of looking at things and believe any decent alloy, soft to hard or pure lead with black powder is not the cause of leading. It is something else. A gentle start to pure lead will leave you a clean bore.
Accuracy is an entirely different thing with hardness so that once the leading problem is figured out, harder CAN be more accurate.
Bore leading and accuracy are two different things to work out. Cure leading first and then you are free to find accuracy. Don't ever try to work out both problems at the same time.

[Bass Ackward]

Having a side arm that is convenient enough to have with you even when you don't anticipate needing or using it and having it perform accurately enough to meet the unsuspected need that causes it to be unholstered and employed is the historical definition (200 years or so) of hand gunning. If you take a handgun out for a purpose you are sport shooting.

Doing the extra effort to include things like lubing with ones finger to produce superior quality handgun ammunition is not going to get the vast majority of people new to the weapon class proficient at hand gunning little alone to 50,000 rounds in any one's lifetime.

The point that has been proven over and over by 44man here is that if a handgun is loaded, bagged, scoped, while weighing, shot, and employed like a rifle, it will perform like a rifle. That is sort of breaking new ground because historically, handguns have NOT BEEN shot in this manner. And that is absolutely great.

My problem is ................ why carry a 7 pound handgun when you can have a 7 pound rifle in a more powerful caliber with more powerful glass that's ultimately more accurate to longer ranges with less hold over when the same time is allocated to loading the rounds?

Bottom line is that we all have to load to learn to shoot first and some styles take more rounds and have different standards than others. My plan is to try and remember all the different things we discuss when I am ready to employ any certain style of shooting where .... different / more accuracy may be required.

[45 2.1]

1) I don't care if it is .050" over bore size, soft does not belong in a revolver.

OK, lets go here: English Webley MkVI- 455 Webley; Colt revolver- 41 Long Colt; S&W Top break #3- 44 American, 44 Russian, 45 Schofield, etc. I can keep going........... All revolvers also. Soft does belong there......... Your stuck on big boomers loaded hot............

[9.3X62AL]

45-2.1 made the point for me--not all calibers and venues really require Iron Boolits.

44 Man, my statement is based on a lot of years of shooting--not on something parroted from a gunzine. Much of that shooting has been with revolvers close to 75 years old, and a few over 100. I have my share of Magnums, and once in a while run them at full-tilt.......but not often.

BHn 14-15 boolits have no place in a 32 Pocket Positive, or a Police Positive 38 S&W. My M&P in 38 S&W shows no real preference for either pure lead or 92/6/2 boolits--both shoot well. Now, when it's time to run #358156 past 1500 FPS in the BisHawk--92/6/2 alloy AND gas checks get the tasking. Can/do boolits obturate/"slug-up"? I don't know. Seems to me that if they're soft enough to slug-up, they're likely soft enough to skid in the rifling and allow blow-by gases past the boolit sidewall. Blackpowder and lead or lead-tin alloys probably allow obturation--smokeless and tri-metal alloys......dunno. I have my doubts.

[Bret4207]

The last 3 posts bring up something I hadn't wanted to really go into. The second we mention the suitability of "softer" alloys to lower powered/older guns will almost certainly push the noobie towards harder alloys. It's that monster truck/small reproductive organ thing. "Harder HAS to be the way to go because softer is somehow less manly and virile!!!" You tell a noob he has a choice between a 300 Mag with a 4-12x scope and a Steven 44 1/2 in 30-40 Krag for a deer hunt and which one will he take? Doesn't matter that he'll be in brush where the longest shot might be 75 yards, he'll take the big gun because it's GOT TO BE BETTER. After all, it's bigger, faster...it's a MAGNUM! Same thing with harder alloys, simple as that.

Selling HARDCAST is easy. Selling the idea of using an appropriate alloy for the purpose is much, much harder to do.

[44man]

Now both of you are entirely correct. There are many guns that will work with soft because of the small amount of pressure developed, the age of the gun (Weak) or dimensions inside the older guns.
True, all of my loads are geared to hunting as the final use.
I shoot very, very few light loads and do not own any old guns and calibers.
Some things still work if you have boolit skid, bad leading, poor accuracy, etc, so you need to work with the gun you are shooting.
Bret, I love the thing about the .300 mag, how right you are and I can tell you right off that I would take the Stevens with a soft boolit.
We are all on the same page and always will be because it all depends on the gun you have, what you use it for and on and on.
I am not against soft lead and sometimes wish my guns COULD shoot softer but this must be determined by the gun owner himself.
This is a good topic and a healthy discussion so a new fella has a lot of things to try. He just has to do the work and not rely on one solution.
I don't think we confuse a new revolver owner, as soon as he has the gun in hand, he is confused! ;-)
I wish we could make a complete list as a sticky for every single step needed to work out a revolver of every kind.
Let me show you a couple of boolits. One one the left is a .45 Colt, 347 gr, shot at 1167 fps, the right is a 420 gr .475 shot at 1329 fps. Both are the same hardness. Take a look at the land marks. Both of these shoot under 1" at 50 yards because the land marks on the .475 boolit do not exceed rifling dimensions at the base, no leading, extreme accuracy, but it could benefit from a harder lead.
You just need to read your gun.

[Lloyd Smale]

carefull bass your starting to sound like me. I totaly agree and the day my eyes wont allow for hunting accuracy with open sights ill pick up a lever gun with a scope on it before a pack around a 5 lb sixgun. Personaly i could care less that a certain gun and load will shoot into one inch at a 100 yards. theres not a man alive that is good enough with a sixgun to take advantage of that level of accuracy anyway. At least not standing on his own two feet. If your idea of handgun hunting is sitting on a ridge with a scoped handgun waiting to pot at deer 200 yards away you and i dont agree on what handgun hunting is. I will crawl on my knees to get withing 50 yards and even 44man himself said in a previous post that most of his deer shot are shot so quickly that a guy doesnt have time to barely think to pull the trigger. Now what the heck do you need a gun that shoots one inch at a 100 yards for shooting in thick woods like that. Personaly i think a guy is much better off working up a load until you can get somthing to group around 3 inch at 50 yards and say the hell with it and start shooting off hand or in field positions. Like was said in a previous post some guys get there handgun enjoyment on the bench but for the average guy you can spend all the time in the world shooting tiny groups off a bench but wont hit **** in the field when you dont have your precious bags. Me id take a hell of alot more pride in shooting a nice buck at 20 yards that i snuck up on then one at a 100-200 that i shot with some wiz bag 10 inch barreled gun with a 6x scope and a tripod on the sling swivel. that my friends is a rifle without a but stock. Dammed pain meds! here I go again rambling!!
Having a side arm that is convenient enough to have with you even when you don't anticipate needing or using it and having it perform accurately enough to meet the unsuspected need that causes it to be unholstered and employed is the historical definition (200 years or so) of hand gunning. If you take a handgun out for a purpose you are sport shooting.

Doing the extra effort to include things like lubing with ones finger to produce superior quality handgun ammunition is not going to get the vast majority of people new to the weapon class proficient at hand gunning little alone to 50,000 rounds in any one's lifetime.

The point that has been proven over and over by 44man here is that if a handgun is loaded, bagged, scoped, while weighing, shot, and employed like a rifle, it will perform like a rifle. That is sort of breaking new ground because historically, handguns have NOT BEEN shot in this manner. And that is absolutely great.

My problem is ................ why carry a 7 pound handgun when you can have a 7 pound rifle in a more powerful caliber with more powerful glass that's ultimately more accurate to longer ranges with less hold over when the same time is allocated to loading the rounds?

Bottom line is that we all have to load to learn to shoot first and some styles take more rounds and have different standards than others. My plan is to try and remember all the different things we discuss when I am ready to employ any certain style of shooting where .... different / more accuracy may be required.

[cbrick]

Wow Lloyd, ya got me kind of confused. Your post comes across as "use your handguns as Lloyd does or it's simply not handgunning".

Is it only handgunning if it is to be used for deer at under 50 yards?
Is it only handgunning if the sole intent is hunting and nothing else counts as handgunning?
Is it only handgunning if it is to be used in heavy woods?
Is it not handgunning if it's accurate or is it not handgunning if ya enjoy making it accurate?
Perhaps it's not handgunning if the handgun is used for a type of shooting that Lloyd doesn't do.

I've shot primarily handguns for the past 30+ years and a lot of that was from the bench but only one day did I use a handgun for hunting, an OMBH 3 screw 7 1/2" 44m. No, no scope, no tripod, yes, offhand and a perfectly placed shot on a trotting pig at 40 yards. So I need to know, have I only been a handgunner for one day and completely wasted three decades?

Your type of handgunning is perfect for you but it is a light year from the only legit form of handgunning. Others enjoy different purposes and forms of handgunning every bit as much as you enjoy yours and other forms of handgunning are every bit as legit as yours.

While this post comes across as caustic it is actually meant to drive home the point that whether your sitting at the bench or out in the bush it's all handgunning. Yes, even if Lloyd doesn't approve. [smilie=1:

Rick

[Lloyd Smale]

notice how the post started out with "Personaly I could care less" well that statement covers it all. It shows that my ideas are for myself and not for everyone. I stated my opinion and my opinion is obvoiously going to cover the way I hunt. If you knew me at all youd know that i would be the last man on earth to tell you what gun to use what load to use what distance to shoot at or where and how to hunt. As long as what your doing is leagal its not my bussiness. But in the same aspect i sure do have my right to voice my opinion and not sugar coat it. personaly i think you have taken what i consider handgunning and what i consider handgun hunting and twisted it around to make my statement look like i have blinders on but then thats your right to your opinion. I shoot handguns. I shoot them as much as ANYONE on here. I shoot them hunting i shoot them at the range at every kind of target you can think of from paper targets to cans to rocks to about anything. I even shoot them off the bench. At least enough to work up a couple good loads for them. I buy alot of guns so even if i preach against shooting on the bench i still no doubt have to do it as much as someone on here that likes doing it. I guess i just get tired of the constant posts of my guns are better and im better or my loading and casting ideas are better because i can shoot one inch groups at a 100 yards. Maybe my thoughts are wrong but ive been told i can stand toe to toe with just about any handgunner in the country so i guess i would be scarry if i learned to load and cast properly so my ill shooting sixguns would be up to the task.

[44man]

Many good points fellas, my accuracy is not really needed for hunting and I am the first to admit that, but what kind of excuse is that? But I LOVE accuracy first and foremost and feel it has made me a better off hand shot. We shoot about 95% of the time off hand and yes I have killed some deer at 100 yards or a little over. A deer looks awful small from a tree stand even at 20 yards and I never shoot if the deer is coming my way until it is as close as it will get, hunting first, shooting last.
I shoot off hand when hunting and will not shoot if I can't hit the deer.
Like Lloyd, I shoot at all kinds of stuff, an old pot, cans, rocks, even found a wheel cover in the woods that we turned into scrap. Fun is the name of the game.
However, we never shoot 25 yards either and keep putting stuff to shoot farther and farther. This is where accuracy comes in because it does no good to spray boolits and try to get to be a better shot.
Of what use is it to have your sights dead on at the trigger break only to hit a few feet from the target? :kidding:
But finding accuracy is also a problem solver and based on a million posts about problems, why not help? I feel a responsibility to make suggestions to try.
I do not think there is a single person on this entire site that does not want his revolver to shoot tiny groups and hit where it is aimed off hand. There is not a single person that does not want to cure a leading problem. There is not a single person with a gun problem that does not want help.
Face facts, if everyone was happy, there would be NO cast boolit site with all of the knowledge open to all shooters.
To say you don't care if your gun can shoot 1" at 100 yards is dancing around the fact that you sure do wish it could, don't try to fool me! :!:
When your gun shoots the best it can and your vision or shooting ability is the limiting factor, you will still be very happy.
I never see anyone removing the sights from their revolver because they are happy making the gun "go bang."
When the gun can shoot and you miss, you can do what we do, laugh and say "it was my fault."
I am not the best shot and can not do what I used to. I am old and shaky now but when I shoot at a can at 100 yards off hand, I can tell my spotter that I hit right or high, he will confirm it because the boolit goes to the sights even though I can't hold on the target.
Now fellas, don't lie to me that you are happy with 3" at 50 yards from the bench because you are looking at a huge group off hand. Like me, you will find you can't steer the boolit into the target when it leaves the muzzle.
Why is there so much resistance to accuracy? Why is bore leading the only problem to solve? Good old Elmer would also ask why you are shooting something that does not hit where you aim it.

[Bucks Owin]

Only accurate guns are any fun to me. Otherwise they are simply trading fodder for a different gun that IS!.....JMO, Dennis

[Lloyd Smale]

point taken and i agree with you with the exception of 3 inch 50 yard groups being bad. For the most part you arent going to get much better with a production gun. Sure you might get lucky and get an exceptional gun but if your getting 3 inch 50 yard groups with open sights that aint half bad. At least for these old eyes. To be honest i doubt my eyes are capable of much better even if the gun is and im not going to by a ransom rest to find out and like i said in the previous posts im not going to put one of those big tubes on top of my beautiul vaquero either! I guess with some good eyes and a couple months to play with each individual gun in the safe i might see a bit better but i doubt either of those two things is going to happen any time soon. To many guns and not enough time and i like it that way ;)
Many good points fellas, my accuracy is not really needed for hunting and I am the first to admit that, but what kind of excuse is that? But I LOVE accuracy first and foremost and feel it has made me a better off hand shot. We shoot about 95% of the time off hand and yes I have killed some deer at 100 yards or a little over. A deer looks awful small from a tree stand even at 20 yards and I never shoot if the deer is coming my way until it is as close as it will get, hunting first, shooting last.
I shoot off hand when hunting and will not shoot if I can't hit the deer.
Like Lloyd, I shoot at all kinds of stuff, an old pot, cans, rocks, even found a wheel cover in the woods that we turned into scrap. Fun is the name of the game.
However, we never shoot 25 yards either and keep putting stuff to shoot farther and farther. This is where accuracy comes in because it does no good to spray boolits and try to get to be a better shot.
Of what use is it to have your sights dead on at the trigger break only to hit a few feet from the target? :kidding:
But finding accuracy is also a problem solver and based on a million posts about problems, why not help? I feel a responsibility to make suggestions to try.
I do not think there is a single person on this entire site that does not want his revolver to shoot tiny groups and hit where it is aimed off hand. There is not a single person that does not want to cure a leading problem. There is not a single person with a gun problem that does not want help.
Face facts, if everyone was happy, there would be NO cast boolit site with all of the knowledge open to all shooters.
To say you don't care if your gun can shoot 1" at 100 yards is dancing around the fact that you sure do wish it could, don't try to fool me! :!:
When your gun shoots the best it can and your vision or shooting ability is the limiting factor, you will still be very happy.
I never see anyone removing the sights from their revolver because they are happy making the gun "go bang."
When the gun can shoot and you miss, you can do what we do, laugh and say "it was my fault."
I am not the best shot and can not do what I used to. I am old and shaky now but when I shoot at a can at 100 yards off hand, I can tell my spotter that I hit right or high, he will confirm it because the boolit goes to the sights even though I can't hold on the target.
Now fellas, don't lie to me that you are happy with 3" at 50 yards from the bench because you are looking at a huge group off hand. Like me, you will find you can't steer the boolit into the target when it leaves the muzzle.
Why is there so much resistance to accuracy? Why is bore leading the only problem to solve? Good old Elmer would also ask why you are shooting something that does not hit where you aim it.

[44man]

I understand. I just bought a pair of those reading glasses yesterday, found them at Ollie's for $3. They are 2-3/4 power. I still need to be 10-12" from something. :holysheep
I had EYES when I was young and could shoot 1/2" groups with an open sighted S&W at 50 meters and 200 meter targets were clear along with both sights. It is all gone now.
Most of my work was done then and since the guns I have are accurate, I accept my failings but I still feel a gun that is not accurate still has a huge effect.
If you add a 3" group to my shaking and wiggles along with failing eyesight, shooting is not as much fun. As long as I can say my guns shoot better then I can shoot them, I am happy.
If you are shooting 3" at 50 with open sights, who is to say if it is you or the gun. The gun might just out shoot each of us by a mile but we can't see good enough to make use of the accuracy.
I still say accuracy first. Nothing is better then to have confidence in your revolver.
Never, not a single time have I questioned how anyone shoots and I don't care if you miss your foot if you point the gun down. I can't help for that. My only concern is the gun itself and making it the best it can be. When I ask someone to show what their gun can do, I am not asking what they can do. I don't care if the gun is locked in a vise or on bags or if someone else shoots it.
My goal is to promote accuracy and to make a fella do work on his own to find what his gun likes. No more, no less. I am NOT the best shot and there are many here much better then I am. My goal has been a one hole group at 100 and I would love to see someone here do it, I have been close, so C'mon guys, never be satisfied, keep working.
Now Lloyd, don't ask why I need that kind of accuracy when hunting, ask why someone DOESN'T! [smilie=l:
Look what a single shot does at 100 and 200 yards! Notice I put 5 shots in 3/8" with one bullet with the MOA. Why is a revolver considered inferior?

[44man]

You might have to save the picture and expand it to read it. Just don't ask me to do it now, I don't know if there are sights on the guns! :bigsmyl2::bigsmyl2::bigsmyl2:
I used to take the Wichita and shooting Creedmore, bust a 1-1/2"X3" square steel swinger every shot at 150 meters. How I miss those days! :groner: I am just an old has been.

[Lloyd Smale]

Im not going to argue that greater accuracy isnt a benifit. theyd have to lock me up if i made a stupid statement like that. I guess my point in this whole thing is I just dont have the time to tweak every load for every gun. to be honest ive been meaning to do something differnt for me. I was thinking on taking maybe two sixguns a summer and loading for and shooting just them. It sometimes gets overwelming when you have 4 or 5 guns you havent even had time to pop a round off in. You tend to take generic loads and just live with it. Ive got enough go to loads that a guy can get away with it but with so many guns a man never really gets a hold on any one of them in particualar. the only ones ive really worked the **** out of are my linebaughs. Ive got a new 3 inch 629 and an aniversary super that dustin cut the barrel to 4 5/8s. Maybe ill just shoot them for a while. It sure must be easier for the people that just have 3 or 4 handguns to fool with.

[Bass Ackward]

Sorry, I was busy loading and shooting most of the weekend, so I didn't have time to come back.

You guys make my point. Hand gunning is the most diverse firearm class. If you can't agree on a definition, then an accuracy standard ain't going to happen either. And this isn't a slant on anyone. I bag loads to test for myself cause I know my limitations, but most of my shooting is off hand or snap. It's just WAY SO much more fun to blaze away at something besides paper. And if it splashes, why that can be better than sex.

The interesting thing is to look at historical definitions for accuracy. In a Lyman manual from the 50s, the designer of the 429215 described it as an amazingly accurate long range bullet because another fella was able to put 11 shots in a 2" group at 50 yards. And that is almost a quote. So that makes it sound like that didn't happen to often to me. (For me either :grin:)

So this isn't a new argument only to us, we just have to keep it in perspective and apply those things that might work for us. I must admit that I am considering getting into the handgun accuracy game one day just to get the T-Shirt. :grin:

[Bret4207]

I understand. I just bought a pair of those reading glasses yesterday, found them at Ollie's for $3. They are 2-3/4 power. I still need to be 10-12" from something. :holysheep
I had EYES when I was young and could shoot 1/2" groups with an open sighted S&W at 50 meters

Well. No wonder you come down on the rest of us so hard.

[Bucks Owin]

3" @ 50 yds with open sights, falls into the dang accurate catagory IMO! It takes a very good day for my eyeballs to do that anymore....FWIW, Dennis ;)

[Frank]

Bass Ackward said
In a Lyman manual from the 50s, the designer of the 429215 described it as an amazingly accurate long range bullet because another fella was able to put 11 shots in a 2" group at 50 yards. The standard in communication is to make note of what is exceptional, like the reloading book mentioned above. Have we losted ground over 50 years? Technology has improved. Is the operator getting worse? :confused:

[montana_charlie]

I used the search feature till I wore it out, but didn't find the specific information I seek.
The title of this thread originally led me to think it might be in here, but it isn't.

I am jumping in primarily because the people participating have probably used 50/50 WW/pure, and some of them (likely) have hardness testers.

I have almost two hunderd hundred pounds of alloy that is probably straight clip-on WW. It's in large ingots...real large...so it's not convenient to melt a small amount for a trial.

What is the BHN of 50/50 WW/pure?

Answer this simple question for me if you can...to help me decide if I want to mess with the stuff, or trade it off.

CM

[9.3X62AL]

Charlie, most of my WW metal runs about 8-9 BHn. Unalloyed lead is 5 BHN. I would estimate 50/50 to be in the 6.5-7.0 BHn range. I would rate that as VERY usable pistol/revolver alloy in standard pressure 38 Special or like/similar pressure ranges in other calibers.

My next ideation of #358477s for the Police Positive in 38 S&W will be in 50/50 WW/Pb alloy.

[Bass Ackward]

What is the BHN of 50/50 WW/pure?

Answer this simple question for me if you can...to help me decide if I want to mess with the stuff, or trade it off.

CM


50/50 WW / pure depends on where you live in the country. If you are in an area that has WW mostly 2% antimony and you dilute it 50%, you should be around 6 BHN. If you live where WW is mostly 4% antimony 12 - 14 BHN and you mix 50/50 then you are where the 2% folks were before they diluted and you should be around 8-9 BHN.

If you are from an area that gets WW from both smelters, then guestimate.

That is the language barrier again as what did we start with?

[44man]

50/50 WW / pure depends on where you live in the country. If you are in an area that has WW mostly 2% antimony and you dilute it 50%, you should be around 6 BHN. If you live where WW is mostly 4% antimony 12 - 14 BHN and you mix 50/50 then you are where the 2% folks were before they diluted and you should be around 8-9 BHN.

If you are from an area that gets WW from both smelters, then guestimate.

That is the language barrier again as what did we start with?
This is true. Even water dropping or oven hardening them can vary from 18 to 22 BHN.

[Bass Ackward]

Bass Ackward said The standard in communication is to make note of what is exceptional, like the reloading book mentioned above. Have we losted ground over 50 years? Technology has improved. Is the operator getting worse? :confused:


Operator getting worse? Could be. :grin:

Course it could be that was all they had and they had to learn how to use it. Remember, jacketed handgun bullets didn't come into vogue til the 60s. And remember, guys were more one gun men in that time. So they knew their equipment better than we do today.

No matter how dumb a person is, if you shovel **** against a wall long enough, pretty soon something is going to stick.

Back in that day even less handguns saw a telescopic sight. Today, with all the advances, we have maybe 2% of all handguns ever get scoped. Age does the same things to us today as it did back then. And you can't hold on to what you can't grip. (arthritis)

We often want to think we are ahead. yet who knows. At the same time that Elmer was preaching about lead / tin in Six Guns, he was recommending lino for his 45 designs because the drive bands were so narrow. In the 50s WW was 9-11% antimony. So we often assume that we have access to more today when in fact, it isn't so.

Our big advantage is not spending a life time to finish Cast 101. Now we can try for a degree.

[yondering]

50/50 WW / pure depends on where you live in the country. If you are in an area that has WW mostly 2% antimony and you dilute it 50%, you should be around 6 BHN. If you live where WW is mostly 4% antimony 12 - 14 BHN and you mix 50/50 then you are where the 2% folks were before they diluted and you should be around 8-9 BHN.

If you are from an area that gets WW from both smelters, then guestimate.

That is the language barrier again as what did we start with?

This is true. My ACWW alloy is ~ 12-14 BHN. Bass' estimate of hardness for 50/50 is right on the money too.