WW and Super Hard Recipes

[cbrick]

I bought 5 pounds of Roto Metals Super hard alloy to play around with the Sb percentages of WW alloy. I have around 800 pounds of SWW that is too soft for most (but not all) of my shooting and this is a viable fix. Here are a few examples of what I came up with. I mixed 16.5 pounds of the first recipe listed below yesterday and cast some 30 cal boolits with it. I'm hoping for around 15-16 BHN air cooled with it, I'll give it another day or two and see how close that is. A higher percentage of Sb decreases the time curve of age hardening so a few days should tell the story.


Hope this is some help for some you.


Rick


Clip-on WW
+ Roto Metals Super Hard
15 Lb CWW / 1 Lb Super Hard

Lead = 107275 Gr. @ 92.75%
Antimony = 4200 Gr. @ 3.64%
Tin = 4165 Gr. @ 3.61% (or 9.5 ounces)
This formula is based on the assumption that CWW has 2% Sb and 0.5% Sn. Additional tin added as pure bar tin.


Stick-on WW
+ Roto Metals Super Hard
15 Lb SWW / 2 Lb Super Hard

Lead = 114800 Gr. @ 92.6%
Antimony = 4200 Gr. @ 3.7%
Tin = 4200 Gr. @ 3.7% (9.6 ounces)
This formula is based on the assumption that SWW has 0% Sb and 0.5% Sn. Additional tin added as pure bar tin.


Stick-on WW
+ Roto Metals Super Hard
15 Lb SWW / 1 Lb Super Hard

Lead = 109900 Gr. @ 96.3%
Antimony = 2100 Gr. @ 1.85%
Tin = 2100 Gr. @ 1.85% (4.8 ounces)
This recipe is very close to straight CWW with about 1 1/2% added tin.

This formula is based on the assumption that SWW has 0% Sb and 0.5% Sn. Additional tin added as pure bar tin.


*Roto Metals Super hard = 70% Pb / 30% Sb
*Roto Metals bar tin = 99.9% Pure
http://www.rotometals.com 800-779-1102

CWW = Clip-on Wheel Weight
SWW = Stick-on Wheel Weight

[lwknight]

If you want harder as cast , you need to get the antimony to about 6% and keep the tin below 2.5% to prevent any age softening. Also with 6% or more antimony you will cast larger and be harder to drop out of the molds but , what beautiful boolits it makes.

[cbrick]

If you want harder as cast , you need to get the antimony to about 6% and keep the tin below 2.5% to prevent any age softening.

So your saying that a 4% Sb alloy isn't harder than 2% Sb alloy? Your not really saying that are you?

Age softening is a very slow process. Anyway the point is not to use a higher Sn percentage than Sb, equal Sb/Sn or less Sn.

Rick

[lwknight]

So your saying that a 4% Sb alloy isn't harder than 2% Sb alloy? Your not really saying that are you?

How did you get that? Of course 6% sb will be harder than 4% sb and and 4% will be harder than 2%.
There is not a big difference between 2 and 4 percent that I can tell , but 6% seems to make a lot of difference.

None of my observation is very scientific but I could not get a boolit to be fingernail resistant with less then 5 to 6 percent sb
What I had cast with 3% sb did not seem any harder than plain lead with a little tin added.
I was trying to match the commercial cast hardness ( touted 15 to 16 bnh) before I actually got technical and bought some rotometals superhard and got the full 6% sb.

I will be very interested in reading your final report. I always find stuff to learn here.

[sagacious]

Anyway the point is not to use a higher Sn percentage than Sb, equal Sb/Sn or less Sn.

Rick
Rick,
Very interesting. Keep us posted.

If the goal is alloy hardening through Sb addition, less Sn than Sb is far better than an equal percentage. The function of Sb and Sn are very different, and the two need not be kept at some general ratio.

Sn percentages are kept low(er) because one should not rely on Sn for hardening. That's the primary role of the Sb in the alloy. Sn content only diminishes the hardening effect of the Sb during both air-cooling and quenching, as some free Sn will combine to form the PbSn intermetallic, and that compound will age-soften far faster than the Pb/Sb alloy will. Also, the PbSn component is not amenable to quench hardening.

The Sn content should only reflect the need for decreased drossing and increased fluidity (easier pouring). I can easily discern the effect of 0.5% Sn addition to ww alloy, and never need to add anywhere near 2% to get good pours. Add Sn only to increase 'pourability' and decrease melt maintenance and drossing control-- and never to "balance" an alloy.

Additional Sn in ww alloy is not mandatory. Only add when actually needed, and add only enough to remedy pouring deficiencies, and not more than a measured 2%-- regardless of the % of added Sb.

Good luck, and looking forward to your test results! :drinks:

[303Guy]

Also, the PbSn component is not amenable to quench hardening.
Interesting! I have just been mixing up some lead sheeting and a bit of plumbers solder. The plumbers solder hardened the lead quite a bit (toughening it is the aim) but just to see, I water quenched one casting and it made no difference to the immediate hardness. Now I know why.:)

[Changeling]

Interesting! I have just been mixing up some lead sheeting and a bit of plumbers solder. The plumbers solder hardened the lead quite a bit (toughening it is the aim) but just to see, I water quenched one casting and it made no difference to the immediate hardness. Now I know why.:)

You need arsenic in the mix to harden. Just a minute amount, add some lead shot (arsenic is in it).

Good luck.

[lwknight]

Another reason to use 2% or so tin is that it helps a lot to keep the antimony from coming to the top and drossing up. Probably not a concern with WWs 3% but at 6% or more you will notice it without tin added.

[cbrick]

You need arsenic in the mix to harden. Just a minute amount, add some lead shot (arsenic is in it). Good luck.

Actually that's wrong. Arsenic in itself will add very little hardness (strength) to lead alloy's. Antimony is what both hardens the alloy AND enables it to HT whether by quenching from the mold or oven HT. Arsenic acts like a catalyst with the Sb and enables hardening well above what the percentage of Sb would suggest.

Rick

[cbrick]

Interesting! I have just been mixing up some lead sheeting and a bit of plumbers solder. The plumbers solder hardened the lead quite a bit (toughening it is the aim) but just to see, I water quenched one casting and it made no difference to the immediate hardness. Now I know why.:)

The why is because of a lack of antimony in either the sheet lead or the plumbers solder. No Sb and no benefit to HT.

Rick

[sagacious]

Another reason to use 2% or so tin is that it helps a lot to keep the antimony from coming to the top and drossing up.
Yes, correct. This is partly what I was referring to by saying that the Sn content should only reflect the need for decreased drossing and increased fluidity (easier pouring).

[felix]

Actually, Rick, arsenic does harden lead on its own, but most especially with antimony. Typical magnum shot is 8 percent antimony with 2 percent arsenic. It would be interesting to put some in the oven and soften it and compare that with that from the shotshell. This difference might be significant as you suggested. ... felix

[cbrick]

Actually, Rick, arsenic does harden lead on its own, but most especially with antimony.

Yep, that's what I said. The actual hardness increase of the alloy from trace amounts of As is minimal though.


Typical magnum shot is 8 percent antimony with 2 percent arsenic. It would be interesting to put some in the oven and soften it and compare that with that from the shotshell. This difference might be significant as you suggested. ... felix

The As is added to the magnum shot not so much for the hardness, that's what the Sb is there for but because dropped shot doesn't drop round without it and thus the 2%.

I did low velocity (800-850 fps) 45 ACP HP expansion tests a few years ago using magnum shot. Melted a pot full of it, added a trace of tin and cast Lyman Devastators. They were 8-9 BHN and expansion was dramatic though air cooled CWW at 850-900 fps held together somewhat better with similar expansion. Too much Sb in the shot for HP expansion without fragmenting even though the shot BHN was a few points lower. I didn't try to HT the shot Devastators, I was looking for malleable for the HP tests, not hard.

Magnum shot is quenched for the increase in hardness (Sb again) and in effect my melting and recasting it into boolits had the same effect as annealing dead soft in the oven. No idea what the BHN of the shot was before melting.

From what I've read in metals industry papers it shouldn't make any difference in the effect of hardening Pb/Sb alloys with 1/4 of one percent As or 2% As, as long as there is some there it works. There are several metals besides As that can be used for the same purpose but arsenic is far away the more common in industry and therefore boolit casting.

Rick

[cbrick]

Three days ago I blended 16.5 pounds of the first recipe listed in post 1 of this thread. I didn't check the BHN on the day of casting but in two days they were 14 BHN and today (day 3) they are 15 BHN with 5 samples tested each day. That's about what I was looking for, 15-16 so I'll see how much more if any increase there is.

I may experiment with this alloy by adding about 2 pounds of SWW to dilute the Sb and Sn and see what the result is.

To me this is pretty interesting stuff to play around with and Roto Metals introduction of the 70/30 Super hard opens up a whole new world of posibilities.

Rick

[lwknight]

To me this is pretty interesting stuff to play around with and Roto Metals introduction of the 70/30 Super hard opens up a whole new world of posibilities.

Rick
Absolutely so. You can make just about any alloy you wish with that and some pure tin.

[357shooter]

Great topic. I had some alloy (left from loading 45acp) that was a mix of range-lead and pure lead one to one. The range-lead casts to 10BHN and the mix casts to 8.7.

After buying 5 lbs of superhard (great stuff) I took 10lbs of the 8.7 alloy, added 1lb of superhard and 3oz of solder for tin. This cast some great looking bullets, a little lighter by 3-4 grains and .001 smaller diameter. They air cooled to 11BHN, which was less than I expected. They do heat treat great with 1hour at 450 degrees producing 21BHN (after 2 days).

The results at the range suprised me a bit. I had water-dropped the 8.7 cast bullets which also hardened to 21BHN (taking 10 days to get there) and had a very accurate 357 magnum target load worked up. That was a .3585 diameter bullet.

The softer 11bhn .357 diameter air cooled bullets are more accurate from my 6 inch Taurus 66. It seems to like them better. This is with a light load (still more than +P though). The accuracy improvement was slight, but at 10yards shooting from a rest it was noticable.

Wow, that was a rambling info dump. Hope it made sense. The superhard made this very easy to do, pretty awesome stuff.

Now gotta test the HT .357 Roto-mix at 21BHN tonight to see how it does.

I have 50lbs of the 8.7 allow left over, I thought just water dropping would be good enough but this test changed my mind. Since I only shoot at the range this exercise and using the superhard is important to me in finding the best shooting target boolit for my revolver.

And it's all fun too. Hopefully these results make sense, I'm too new at this to know if this typical or way out there.

[357shooter]

Just read a great article at LASC about using Superhard. But my results seem to be 180 degrees out of sync. I just cast my second batch, which confirms the results of the first batch.

I have a bunch of 50/50 range lead with pure lead alloy that checks out at 8.7BHN, they cast at a diameter of .3585 and a weight of 160 grains. It's a Lee 158 grain 357 tumble lube mould.

For each 10llbs of the above alloy I added 1lb of superhard and 3oz of solder.

With the Roto Superhard they are smaller and lighter and not bigger and heavier. Did I misunderstand what should have happened? They are .357-.3575 and 156 grain. I'll check hardness tomorrow but it should be at 11 like last time.

Maybe I'm just casting better and making sure the mould is firmly closed, with little pressure on the sprue plate handle.

Gotta admit they cast beautifully, even at a lower temp. This is the size and weight that shot so well at the range with 5.1 grains of HP-38.

Is there a reason they could be smaller and lighter other than improved casting technique? Note: I used to put more pressure on the sprue cutter handle which may have forced the mould open just a bit. That could explain the diameter and weight change, I think.

Any thoughts from folks w/lots more experience than me? I've cast abouth 8-9 thousand boolits in the past 8 months, which is nothing when compared to some of you guys who have cast 100's of thousands.

[lwknight]

prgallo , the mix you described is 94-4-2 and not "hardball" (92-6-2) lead/antimony/tin
You will need 2 pounds superhard to get 6% antimony.

The 1 pound SH would have made 92.5-5.4-2.1 if you had 10 pounds of WWs and 3 oz tin added.

Add 1 more pound SH to 11 pounds of what you alreadey mixed and you should theoretically get about 15 hardness. Even air cooled boolits will harden up after a time when the SB content is 6%

[357shooter]

Thanks for the great info. I'm looking forward to trying the 1lb more of superhard.

The superhard is pretty handy, however there is a bit of a learning curve when mixing alloys.

[cbrick]

Just read a great article at LASC about using Superhard. But my results seem to be 180 degrees out of sync. I just cast my second batch, which confirms the results of the first batch.

The page you referenced is: http://www.lasc.us/SuperHard.htm

I cast Lyman #311672 out of Alloy #1 from the above page, 159.9 gr (av 10 boolits), .3082" on the front band where it contacts the chamber. 15 BHN.

CWW w/2% Sn added. Same mold (same cavity) 162.2 Gr (av 10 boolits), .3078" front band. 11 BHN.


For each 10llbs of the above alloy I added 1lb of superhard and 3oz of solder. With the Roto Superhard they are smaller and lighter and not bigger and heavier.

lwknight could well be right but I didn't do the math on your alloy, range scrap would be prettty tough to figure the Sb unless you know what the majority of the shooting is. For example, 22 rimfire would contain little to no Sb, center fire stuff could be most anything.

Let us know what your new results are.

Rick

[357shooter]

The page you referenced is: http://www.lasc.us/SuperHard.htm

I cast Lyman #311672 out of Alloy #1 from the above page, 159.9 gr (av 10 boolits), .3082" on the front band where it contacts the chamber. 15 BHN.

CWW w/2% Sn added. Same mold (same cavity) 162.2 Gr (av 10 boolits), .3078" front band. 11 BHN.



lwknight could well be right but I didn't do the math on your alloy, range scrap would be prettty tough to figure the Sb unless you know what the majority of the shooting is. For example, 22 rimfire would contain little to no Sb, center fire stuff could be most anything.

Let us know what your new results are.

RickI will let you know the results. The range lead was purchased so I don't have any info on the range it came from, so that's just makes the starting point a bit unknown as far as the breakdown of the alloy.

[Bluehawk1]

I use WW and Linotype mixtures...50/50 for pistol bullets and 60/40 for my .45-70 rifle using a hollow point bullet which was recommended by Lyman for that particular mold,
(WW's are clip-on)
How do these two alloys compare to the ones using Super Hard?

[lwknight]

Bluehawk , I'm not exactly sure I understand your question. The superhard can be mixed in any ratio the user desires.
If you are referring to the "Hardball " (2-6-92 ) you are very close.
50/50 WW/lino would be about 2-7.5-90.5
the 60/40 WW to lino would be 1.9-6.6-91.5 SN/SB/PB

[cajun shooter]

Rick, It seems to me that you are short of things to do. A BHN of 15 is very easy to make as it is the standard for Lyman #2. There are many ways to make it with what alloys you have on hand. You have however made a good reading thread. It just seems as you are taking the long way home.

[cbrick]

Rick, It seems to me that you are short of things to do. A BHN of 15 is very easy to make as it is the standard for Lyman #2. There are many ways to make it with what alloys you have on hand. You have however made a good reading thread. It just seems as you are taking the long way home.

Your missing the point(s). One is as repeatable an alloy as possible, alloy something that works well now but cannot duplicate it later and? The learning curve, I'm always experimenting/testing with something or another. It's the curiousity of "what if"? I don't consider any of these experiments with Super Hard a failure, they have been (to me) interesting, educational and usefull but even a test or experiment that does fail is worthwhile if something is learned. As I said earlier in this thread, what started me out with this project is 800 pounds of SWW and what/how to make it more useable for my calibers, type of shooting.

The main reason for all of my experiments, alloys or anything else, it's all about the education of Rick and in this case I now have 800 pounds of usable/repeatable alloy. The long way home? Perhaps but I think I'm just a bit smarter now and I've had fun. I hope others also got something from this.

Rick

[geargnasher]

OT quesion for you metalheads. I have an assayed range scrap alloy that is 2% Sb, .25% Sn and trace anything else. It age hardens over a two-three month period from 7 BHN to 9.2 BHN. If I add more tin, say 1.5% or so I will have an alloy with the intermetallic SbSn and a little bit of free Sb, right? Now what effect does having most of the Sb soaked up by Sn have on brinell hardness readings? I know SbSn is a "toughener" and tends to keep a bit of "malleability" whereas the SbPb alloy without Sn is very brittle, but from a hardness tester's standpoint, what would adding the tin do?

Gear

[lwknight]

Maybe a real metalurgist will come by and give us the real tin to antimony ratios.
I think that could get really complicated between the tin alloying with lead and sharing a bond with the antimony. Which one has the priority?

I have some 44 cal boolits that I cast for PP that have very little if any antimony and do have 2.5% tin. These have hardened over the last couple of months to harder than I wanted.

From a hillbilly metal melters viewpoint: pure lead can obsorb about 2% antimony without tin. After that tin is needed and I suspect that as the SB % increases and the lead % decreases the need for tin % can also decrease slightly.

I'm talking in extremes like 9-27-64 or in lighter extreme 4-12-84 (linotype) and the popular 2-6-92 . The 3 alloys I used as examples are the same ratio and they just work good.
I did an experiment one time with 27% SB to 30% SN and the balance of lead and the result was a soft ductile alloy. Yea , it was no different than 2-6-92 . Thus proving that entirely too much tin can counteract the SB hardening.

I wanted soft tough boolits and they were at first. Now I need to do a live fire water test to see if I still get expansion like the earlier tests proved.

So , in answer to the question: I think that adding up to 2% tin will do nothing from the hardness testers viewpoint.

I sooo really need good hardness tester. I also need a paying job , so the tester will just have to wait.

[Bluehawk1]

50/50 WW/lino would be about 2-7.5-90.5
the 60/40 WW to lino would be 1.9-6.6-91.5 SN/SB/PB

What would they each work out to be in Brinell hardness?

[lwknight]

You would in theory be in the 15-16 or a little harder range. It always varies at least some depending on your mold temp and how fast the alloy cools.