Optimum BHN for 45LC 11 to 1300 fps?

[Changeling]

This is an alloy question, pure and simple. Interested in hard cast bullets for the Ruger 45 LC with a 1 in 16 twist. Bullet weight will be 260 to 300 gr. I can get the bullet length for you witch means more than the weight if necessary or wanted, even though they basically go hand in hand.
I would like information on BHN 18 (water quench WW) and stronger/harder, above all things accuracy is foremost of my considerations!

I am not interested in Fryxel's formulas that are considered (by them/some) to be the best for a given caliber.
I am also not interested in high antimony content bullets above 4% give or take.

I have no problem with heat treating bullets as some do, it is no big deal.

So the question comes down to "Hard" bullets and accuracy, in the velocity range of 11 to 1300 fps.

Now find fault with me for asking a question, that I am really tired of!


I was going to delete one of these (duplicate), but no way to do it under "Edit".

[44MAG#1]

Okay I'll take a shot, pot shot or whatever you want to call it.
You ask questions that you know no one will ever get a concensus on no matter what.
Everyone will have answers all over the map.
Everyone can supply the reasons for their answer.
None can agree.
You have the main jist of the thread dominated by maybe a couple of shooter that I think may be aliens sent here by a superior race that breeds phenoms in the shooting world.
After all the smoke has cleared nothing has been settled.
You know that and I think you get a joy from all of it.
This analasys is from a guy that is standing on the sidelines looking at both sides that doesn't have a dog in the fight and is trying to be objective.
That is not to mean finding fault with you actually I just believe you are horse laughing while all this is going on.

[jh45gun]

Okay I'll take a shot, pot shot or whatever you want to call it.
You ask questions that you know no one will ever get a concensus on no matter what.
Everyone will have answers all over the map.
Everyone can supply the reasons for their answer.
None can agree.
You have the main jist of the thread dominated by maybe a couple of shooter that I think may be aliens sent here by a superior race that breeds phenoms in the shooting world.
After all the smoke has cleared nothing has been settled.
You know that and I think you get a joy from all of it.
This analasys is from a guy that is standing on the sidelines looking at both sides that doesn't have a dog in the fight and is trying to be objective.
That is not to mean finding fault with you actually I just believe you are horse laughing while all this is going on.


With the questions asked in the past I think you hit the nail on the head! Then when some one does say something he gets all indignant and self righteous.

[MT Gianni]

Deleted the duplicate. I get good groups with my Ruger 45 with air cooled ww. Sorry I can't help.

[Bass Ackward]

I am going to approach this from a different angle. I know this fella has rifle experience cause I read his stuff. Sometimes we make things so very difficult here when it isn't really. Let's forget penetration or killing power for a second. Just accuracy. Here is THE biggy!

There is no "real" difference for accuracy potential from a rifle or a handgun with cast. Digest that for a minute. Sure, you deal with harmonics in a rifle and a revolver creates alignment issues if the gun is bad, but let's assume perfection. The only difference is that a handgun is harder to shoot well for most people. But there is no real accuracy difference unless you have mechanical issues. Zip. Nada ........... none.

Back to rifles: Barnes bullets are solid copper. That is 40 BHN. Most conventional bullets like Remington bulk bullets are pure lead with a full length GC covering. Will Barnes bullets always be more accurate compared to every other (softer) brand that are NOT solid copper in every rifle ever made? The answer obviously is no. You simply have to try different brands until you get one that the rifle likes with the powder selections you want it to perform with. In fact, the solid copper foul more for me too don't they? That's why Barnes cut down on the bearing surface with the tripple shock (grease grooves)

Guess what? Same with a handgun. If your handgun doesn't like the bullet design you selected, is that shape in 40 BHN Babbitt going to shoot? Or 18 BHN WW? Or 22 BN lino? Maybe, I can't answer that because I don't know the gun. See every handgun, like a rifle, is different. And neither can anyone else. People here recognize rifles as individual guns. Handguns too unless you are going to cast. And then for some darn reason, all handguns are all supposed to be and perform the same. THAT'S why you read the entire gambit here. :grin:

What hardness you need depends on the powder speed and lube you select to get it to that velocity level without causing bullet deformation and if the barrel will handle that combination. If you have a 12" barrel and can reach that velocity level with a full case of RL#7, then you can shoot pure lead if you have a good lube. If you use LLA, you may still need 30 BHN cause a hard bullet uses less lube. If you have a 2" barrel and have to spank it with Red Dot and high pressure, then you might need 40 BHN Babbitt. Then you may still be screwed if all you have is LLA.

Now lets go to impact even though you didn't ask about that. Guess what? It's the same as a rifle again!

So humor me: Let's select a HUGE deer. What is the most common shot you were taught? Broad side behind the shoulder, right? Let's pick a HUGE deer and see what the bullet sees. That's fur, hide and bone on the way in that amounts to about 3/4". Then 14" of air, (no problem with air, right?) and then 3/4" of bone, hide and fur on the way out. If you hit the heart, you have the consistency and size of about a grapefruit. Any real problem there? So total material to penetrate on a World Record Class buck is about 1 1/2". Can be, and often is, done with a 22 and pure lead.

Under that scenario, if I could shoot and recover 10 shots of a 12 BHN bullet and 10 shots of a 28 BHN bullet at 1300 fps, (bullet could be made of Monotype, 16% antimony or 2% HTWW) I will bet that I could lay them side by side and you couldn't pick the hard out from the soft if your life depended on it. Maybe if I fired 1000 of each, you could see a few broken up Monotype, but just how many rifle bullets perform text book all the time either? And does it really matter? Guess what? Same with a handgun.

See why you get so many different answers. Help any?

[missionary5155]

Good afternoon
I do not know what the hardness really is.. BUT... I just mix WW with Pure and shoot it to any speed I want and go on. I use alot of 25-75 (WW-Pure) , and a bit less 50-50, and even less 75-25 . I use WW in my Supermags. I generallly use the softest brand until I see a need to get to the next harder.
I my 45 Ruger I use the 50-50 with 19-20 grains of 2400 for whatever. If I am gonna hunt I switch to the 25-75 and have no worries about leading as so far I have only needed one shot.
So whatever hardness they are they are fine with me.

[Lloyd Smale]

Bass has the right answer, I THINK, sometimes i have problems with my little mind decifering his posts. Any alloy of ww hardness or harder will work fine at those velocitys on any game animal in the US. I like them a bit harder but mostly because i tend to get a bit better accuracy. But for accuracy every gun is its own animal and experimenting with differnt hardnesses can effect accuracy just as much as powder charge weights and primers can once youve found a bullet your gun likes. I find like bass (i think) that if a gun doesnt like a certain bullet theres not much gain to be found it hours of testing and switching components to make it shoot. You may find a good load in the bunch but most times your better off if the first group you shoot with a bullet is 3 inch or worse just to switch bullets. If i had to pick one alloy for all of my mag pistol shooting that has served me best id say try #2. I actually prefer 5050 ww/lino but lino is getting to hard to find and if a guy works up a load for a bullet cast out of it and cant get more hes stroked. I tend to save my 5050 for 454, 475 and 500 bullets that may be called on to hunt bigger animals.

[44man]

In the .45 I find plain old WD WW's work just fine. Since the heavier boolits are around 1160 fps, no need for harder and they kill deer just fine too. Would not hurt to add some pure either, just back off on the amount if you get fliers.
There is no need to shoot faster and it is pretty hard to shoot 300 gr and up boolits fast anyway. Groups will open as you keep adding powder beyond where it is accurate. No way I am going to try for 1300 fps.
Ok with lighter boolits and then a little harder alloy helps with accuracy but so far WW's work. I always water drop because it just makes casting easier and they shoot good.
The .45 is not real fussy about alloys and as you make them harder they will shoot better but there is no need to go beyond a certain point. 20 to 22 BHN water dropped WW's do what I ask and I won't even waste tin on them. Some WW's might only reach 18 and that's fine too.
I don't like air cooled that much, seems to be a place where I start getting some leading.
Now the .44 is different and WD WW's are my low end for hardness and for some strange reason, annealed gas checks improve accuracy. If I add a tiny bit of antimony and tin accuracy improves and I no longer need to anneal the checks.
Now adding some pure and oven hardening them will bring them to 18 or 20 BHN and they shoot good until velocity gets too high, then you will get fliers, maybe 1 out of 5 shots, sometimes 2.
Strange that an air cooled WW boolit can lead but an oven hardened 50-50 WW and pure will not.
No need for expensive alloys in the .45.
One reason water dropping is best is the boolit will not be sized when seating and you can get good tension. They are less prone to rifling skid too.

[44man]

I do not agree with Bass!
A deer's lungs are NOT air, sacs are full of blood like a million water balloons and they offer a lot of resistance, enough to stop a 240 gr XTP at 1400 fps from full penetration.
A hard boolit with a good meplat at the proper velocity will turn lungs to mush and penetrate all the way from almost any angle, even through bones.
Too slow or too fast and some expansion will be needed. Slower is nowhere near as bad as too fast where a flat meplat moves tissue out of the way of boolit passage. (Pressure wave.)
Slow just cuts but does less damage from energy. Need some and any expended beyond an animal is not a waste, it already did the job. An expanding, slow boolit just cuts a larger hole.
I find around 1300 to 1400 fps is ideal for a hard cast WLN and lean towards the center figures. At 1100 or so, it just takes a few seconds longer for the deer to die. At 1600 or more, you can lose deer unless you slow the boolit with expansion. A WFN at high velocity is actually worse then a WLN. Piles of deer have shown this.
Anyway, don't let Bass tell you lungs are just air! :bigsmyl2:

[cptinjeff]

Just to stir the pot and try again for some participation in the postal match!:bigsmyl2::bigsmyl2:


44man,

How is it that your finger is swollen too bad to shoot but it seems fine to type these LOOONGGG posts?:kidding::kidding:

not that the posts are not very educational.

:veryconfu:veryconfu:veryconfu:veryconfu

[jh45gun]

Just to stir the pot and try again for some participation in the postal match!:bigsmyl2::bigsmyl2:


44man,

How is it that your finger is swollen too bad to shoot but it seems fine to type these LOOONGGG posts?:kidding::kidding:

not that the posts are not very educational.

:veryconfu:veryconfu:veryconfu:veryconfu

You can type with one finger if need be and maybe he has one of those speak and the puter types programs. :)

[44man]

Just to stir the pot and try again for some participation in the postal match!:bigsmyl2::bigsmyl2:


44man,

How is it that your finger is swollen too bad to shoot but it seems fine to type these LOOONGGG posts?:kidding::kidding:

not that the posts are not very educational.

:veryconfu:veryconfu:veryconfu:veryconfu
I can't type with more then one finger of each hand! :mrgreen: It only takes me a half hour to type a post. :Fire:

[44MAG#1]

It's getting there. I see.

[Changeling]

In the .45 I find plain old WD WW's work just fine. Since the heavier boolits are around 1160 fps, no need for harder and they kill deer just fine too. Would not hurt to add some pure either, just back off on the amount if you get fliers.
There is no need to shoot faster and it is pretty hard to shoot 300 gr and up boolits fast anyway. Groups will open as you keep adding powder beyond where it is accurate. No way I am going to try for 1300 fps.
Ok with lighter boolits and then a little harder alloy helps with accuracy but so far WW's work. I always water drop because it just makes casting easier and they shoot good.
The .45 is not real fussy about alloys and as you make them harder they will shoot better but there is no need to go beyond a certain point. 20 to 22 BHN water dropped WW's do what I ask and I won't even waste tin on them. Some WW's might only reach 18 and that's fine too.
I don't like air cooled that much, seems to be a place where I start getting some leading.
Now the .44 is different and WD WW's are my low end for hardness and for some strange reason, annealed gas checks improve accuracy. If I add a tiny bit of antimony and tin accuracy improves and I no longer need to anneal the checks.
Now adding some pure and oven hardening them will bring them to 18 or 20 BHN and they shoot good until velocity gets too high, then you will get fliers, maybe 1 out of 5 shots, sometimes 2.

Strange that an air cooled WW boolit can lead but an oven hardened 50-50 WW and pure will not.
No need for expensive alloys in the .45.
One reason water dropping is best is the boolit will not be sized when seating and you can get good tension. They are less prone to rifling skid too.




Thanks Jim & Loyd, I am going to start off with WD WW, since I am setting up the revolver on the tight side for bullet fit. Especially after hearing what you guys had to say before. Moving up in hardness shouldn't be a problem if I have to, I can always go harder by heat treating. However with the "Tight" fit and hard bullet (18 or so) I think things will be OK. I still think the forcing cone creates a bigger problem than everyone realizes, but I have not established a way to approach it yet.

I do think that doing anything to the forcing cone angle might be a mistake, but it is also relative to the cylinder to bore alignment. If this alignment is off much it could make a difference in my opinion and very well might explain some accuracy problems. Meaning, the bullet gets the Hell beat out of it at this one crucial point. Could explain why Jim does not get the accuracy problems that seem to plague everyone else!
He automatically goes into hard bullet mode with any new/whatever revolver, just stop and think!

As for bullet velocity what I should have said is I would like to have a velocity range of something in the 1100 to 1300 fps with the 260/280 gr bullets, but as always whether in a rifle or revolver, the velocity/accuracy is a factor that "ONLY" that particular barrel/bullet combination knows, you adjust to it or fail in the best accuracy for the combined factors. Ive been there to many times (rifles) to not understand this.

I really do not believe that bullets over 280gr are necessary for deer or a lot of other critters, 265/280 WFN (240/260 meplat) will absolutely penetrate any deer from any angle (including bone) without ever slowing down enough to basically change the size of the wound channel. There is just not enough resistance to the bullet. Velocity of the bullet/wound channel is something that Jim is still teaching me, and I am having a hard time with it because it is contrary to everything I have ever been taught in the "J Rifle" field. But it is something I have observed and a lot of others who just don't want to admit it.
For instance, if I ever take another game animal (Rifle) for any reason (rifle J's), it will be with a "Barnes" or "Noslar partition", if you don't know why you better learn.


However, revolvers as you have pointed out Jim , accuracy is everything also, absolutely no argument from me! Thats where I come up real short. My lack of experience with revolver bullets and there accuracy potential has been a new learning experience that probably will be ongoing.
Revolvers are just (currently) so much more complicated in understanding (CORRECTLY).

Some of you want to "chase" the hardness scale up the velocity ladder for some reason thinking obturation is the answer to all prayers relative to your revolver. However when someone comes along and says, HEY, why not try this, you balk! This is exactly what I did in the "Rifle' world !

Then without even changing stride you will say, but the rifle world is different! NO, it's different because YOU think it is, it's the same.


Me thinks you are missing a lot, by not giving the hardness thing a chance

[Bass Ackward]

Me thinks you are missing a lot, by not giving the hardness thing a chance


I think that you make a mistake to believe that hard / wide is a new strategy.

I think that you make a mistake to believe that nobody tries anything else before they recommend what they recommend.

And I do believe that there are folks that shoot just as well as Jimmy with a rig built up the same.

See some people hunt deer with a handgun. And then some people shoot deer during hunting season with a handgun rig. There is a very real difference, and a difference in what is required.

Lyman recommended lino for the 44 Mag across the board in 1971. Lino has been around for over a century. In the 50s / 60s WW were 9% antimony. (18BHN) We had Babbitt at 40 BHN. The choices for 30 years were hard or hard. That's what was free. Pure you had to buy.

So what Jimmy is telling you ain't nothing new. Or gone untried. Just like Nosler Partitions that came out in the late 40s. My first LBT mold was in the early 70s. And I pioneered hot Colt loads back in the mid 60s.

Nothing new under the sun. And there ain't just one way.

[MT Gianni]

No one has brought up Waksupi's load rule of bullet hardness = velocityK + 2 BHN. 1200 fps then = 14 bhn.

[Bret4207]

Thanks Jim & Loyd, I am going to start off with WD WW, since I am setting up the revolver on the tight side for bullet fit. Especially after hearing what you guys had to say before. Moving up in hardness shouldn't be a problem if I have to, I can always go harder by heat treating. However with the "Tight" fit and hard bullet (18 or so) I think things will be OK. I still think the forcing cone creates a bigger problem than everyone realizes, but I have not established a way to approach it yet.

I do think that doing anything to the forcing cone angle might be a mistake, but it is also relative to the cylinder to bore alignment. If this alignment is off much it could make a difference in my opinion and very well might explain some accuracy problems. Meaning, the bullet gets the Hell beat out of it at this one crucial point. Could explain why Jim does not get the accuracy problems that seem to plague everyone else!
He automatically goes into hard bullet mode with any new/whatever revolver, just stop and think!

As for bullet velocity what I should have said is I would like to have a velocity range of something in the 1100 to 1300 fps with the 260/280 gr bullets, but as always whether in a rifle or revolver, the velocity/accuracy is a factor that "ONLY" that particular barrel/bullet combination knows, you adjust to it or fail in the best accuracy for the combined factors. Ive been there to many times (rifles) to not understand this.

I really do not believe that bullets over 280gr are necessary for deer or a lot of other critters, 265/280 WFN (240/260 meplat) will absolutely penetrate any deer from any angle (including bone) without ever slowing down enough to basically change the size of the wound channel. There is just not enough resistance to the bullet. Velocity of the bullet/wound channel is something that Jim is still teaching me, and I am having a hard time with it because it is contrary to everything I have ever been taught in the "J Rifle" field. But it is something I have observed and a lot of others who just don't want to admit it.
For instance, if I ever take another game animal (Rifle) for any reason (rifle J's), it will be with a "Barnes" or "Noslar partition", if you don't know why you better learn.


However, revolvers as you have pointed out Jim , accuracy is everything also, absolutely no argument from me! Thats where I come up real short. My lack of experience with revolver bullets and there accuracy potential has been a new learning experience that probably will be ongoing.
Revolvers are just (currently) so much more complicated in understanding (CORRECTLY).

Some of you want to "chase" the hardness scale up the velocity ladder for some reason thinking obturation is the answer to all prayers relative to your revolver. However when someone comes along and says, HEY, why not try this, you balk! This is exactly what I did in the "Rifle' world !

Then without even changing stride you will say, but the rifle world is different! NO, it's different because YOU think it is, it's the same.


Me thinks you are missing a lot, by not giving the hardness thing a chance

IMO those that seek and depend on obturation to establish dynamic fit are making a mistake in some ways. Yes, it can work, but it can also give problems. Better to fit things properly at the start and then see, yes, OBSERVE what your alloy does with a particular charge in your particular gun. I don;'t believe there is a "one size fits all" alloy, Bhn, load or boolit. Ambiguous terms like "hard" just complicate the identification of variables leading to success or problems.

[44man]

More good things from Bass and Bret! :lovebooli
I would not worry about or change the forcing cone. The right toughness boolit and nose shape takes care of it.
The idea is to keep the boolit from slumping or expanding enough to ruin it and have the nose pull the cylinder into alignment.
It is a fact that all revolver boolits show some skid at the front of the boolit, just keep skid from reaching the base band and that is all the hardness you need. I do not like super hard, nothing is gained once the boolit can take the rifling and align itself.
I like a boolit that engages the rifling closer to the nose and is one reason I don't like the Keith with a large shoulder. The boolit has to travel farther, does not align the cylinder when the shoulder is mashed off center and is going a little faster when it reaches the rifling.
A super tight revolver needs to be perfect for every chamber and is why I don't like them either. I prefer a little slop. How a gun feels when playing with it is different then when you are shooting it.
A friend has a super tight gun that every chamber shoots to a different place and I told him I can fix it by stoning the cylinder latch a little on each side for a few thousandths play but he loves the tight lock up. Whitworth has a custom revolver that is a little loosey-goosey and packs boolits where you want them.
Now to dispute a "FACT", I shoot the Lyman 452651 from WD WW's and have a pile of recovered boolits. Try as I might, I can not find skid on the nose no matter how I measure them. Rifling marks are perfect for the length of the boolit. Marks start .10" from the end of the nose. The ogive starts the boolit straight.
They came out with a mold for the .44 and before I could buy one, they dropped it because nobody could make it shoot----I have to wonder why? Bet I know, the molds were dropping .429" boolits. Lyman never learned that most .44's are not .429".
Mold makers should be on this site, they might learn something! [smilie=2:

[Changeling]

More good things from Bass and Bret! :lovebooli
I would not worry about or change the forcing cone. The right toughness boolit and nose shape takes care of it.

I'm not going to change it, the cylinders align pretty well in this Revolver, not like the other one. However I would have gone with the other one also, if not for the other major problem.

The idea is to keep the boolit from slumping or expanding enough to ruin it and have the nose pull the cylinder into alignment.

That is what I mean/meant by setting this gun up tight, I meant it relative to bullet fit. That is why I worried about the forcing cone, it is the only link in the bullet fit scenario (tight) that is basically out of ones hands unless you have a new barrel installed and control all aspects.
If you check some of the diameters of the forcing cones it will astound you ( I'm sure you are aware) In NO way could one consider those diameters necessary unless you are dealing with a mass produced revolver witch the Roger is. When discussing bullet fit no one will ever get me to believe that all other dimensions can be perfect but it doesn't matter with the forcing cone, that's impossible. However there is not a heck of a lot (but some things) we can do about it without spending $$$$$ (read that as a lot)


It is a fact that all revolver boolits show some skid at the front of the boolit, just keep skid from reaching the base band and that is all the hardness you need. I do not like super hard, nothing is gained once the boolit can take the rifling and align itself.
I like a boolit that engages the rifling closer to the nose and is one reason I don't like the Keith with a large shoulder. The boolit has to travel farther, does not align the cylinder when the shoulder is mashed off center and is going a little faster when it reaches the rifling.
That is something that makes perfect sense (now). I didn't know it at all in the beginning but you finally got it across![smilie=l:
That's why I put in the "forum question" about what nose lengths give the longest bearing length, but that post was a flop and the questions about the "meplat" diameter.
It made sense to me that for a given bullet weight (whatever), a large meplat would also help a designer in increasing the overall bearing length, if designing meant anything to him/her.
Also I do believe a meplat in 45 LC should be .350/.360, this is like saying a 44 cal bullet should have a .330/340 meplat, relatively about the same thing, except the 45 would be the bigger hammer.
Would you want to take your .475 meplats down to .420/.430 like most are telling me is OK?

A super tight revolver needs to be perfect for every chamber and is why I don't like them either. I prefer a little slop. How a gun feels when playing with it is different then when you are shooting it.
A friend has a super tight gun that every chamber shoots to a different place and I told him I can fix it by stoning the cylinder latch a little on each side for a few thousandths play but he loves the tight lock up. Whitworth has a custom revolver that is a little loosey-goosey and packs boolits where you want them.

This is not what I meant by a "Tight Revolver", However with all your experience and looking at it logically it makes good sense.

Now to dispute a "FACT", I shoot the Lyman 452651 from WD WW's and have a pile of recovered boolits. Try as I might, I can not find skid on the nose no matter how I measure them. Rifling marks are perfect for the length of the boolit. Marks start .10" from the end of the nose. The ogive starts the boolit straight.

I don't think it was me talking about bullet (452651), must have been someone else. If this is a RFN, from what you've taught me, would sound about right, long bearing length relative to bullet length. However I will check it out and see if it make sense.
This is the kind of thing I wished to find out when I posted about bearing length and meplat size.


They came out with a mold for the .44 and before I could buy one, they dropped it because nobody could make it shoot----I have to wonder why? Bet I know, the molds were dropping .429" boolits. Lyman never learned that most .44's are not .429".
Mold makers should be on this site, they might learn something! [smilie=2:

This has been great, my thanks to you Jim, Loyd, Bret, and Ass Backwards.

I think that probably I didn't make my intentions to clear in my other posts and for that I am sorry. However i don't feel sorry about any thing else I have said or done. When someone tries to jump my donkey, or instigate a fight/bad feelings, you might as well expect a dam hard ride
Foe those that have come over from other web sites to try and instigate problems, I believe others are on to you.

[Changeling]

I found the 452651 bullet, I could not find reference to a 44 version.

http://www.opticsplanet.net/picture-1-lyman-pistol-bullet-mould-45-colt-45-casull-452651-2660651.html

However this brings up a question. It seems that you definitely like "Truncated Cone" bullets because all your references to bullets I have seen have all been "Truncated cone" . Is there some reason why, is it a longer bearing surface, it appears to be. But I don't know.

[44man]

I found the 452651 bullet, I could not find reference to a 44 version.

http://www.opticsplanet.net/picture-1-lyman-pistol-bullet-mould-45-colt-45-casull-452651-2660651.html

However this brings up a question. It seems that you definitely like "Truncated Cone" bullets because all your references to bullets I have seen have all been "Truncated cone" . Is there some reason why, is it a longer bearing surface, it appears to be. But I don't know.
Seems like the .44 version was only out about a year or less. I had it in one old Midsouth catalog, gone from the next one.
But truncated cone is not exactly right. They work and so will about any RNFP. As long as the meplat blends into the front band with a nice ogive.
I make the noses on my cherries with a file and when it looks right, it works. I do not work from pictures or with angles.
Even a Keith style will work if the nose engages the cone and rifling before the shoulder, small, small shoulder. I don't think the shoulder should be any larger then the rifling depth.

[bigdog454]

I use BNH of between 12 and 13 for hunting, measured with a lee tester. Every deer I've lung shot with a 45 cal bullet has never gone over 50 yard, most less. A 45 rnfp makes a big hole, going in and going out I've used 230, 250, 255, and 310 gr 45 bullets and they all killed deer well. I've used XTP bullets also and will not use them again, I've found that lead bullets will
1. make a big hole
2. crush or splinter bone
3. make an inner and outer hole
4. totaly destroy the lungs
I;m too old to chase wounded deer, for me lead means dead.
BD

[44MAG#1]

Isn't this just a rehash of the same posts that have been posted aong the same lines as before?
See nothing has been settled. Nothing has changed. No concensus on any of it.
It just boils down to who one wants to side with as all have compelling examples of why they believe the way they do.
Any subject on bullets as to how they perform in impact, accuracy, meplat size, alloy, hardness, number of lube grooves, ogive shape, bearing surface, Plain base or gas checked are things that will never be ironed out no matter what one does or says or believes.
Most people with ideas believe they are right with no compromise in sight.
Kinda like a politician with a bill he wants to push through the Houses. His bill is always the best.
If you don't believe it just ask him.

[Changeling]

Seems like the .44 version was only out about a year or less. I had it in one old Midsouth catalog, gone from the next one.
But truncated cone is not exactly right. They work and so will about any RNFP. As long as the meplat blends into the front band with a nice ogive.
I make the noses on my cherries with a file and when it looks right, it works. I do not work from pictures or with angles.
Even a Keith style will work if the nose engages the cone and rifling before the shoulder, small, small shoulder. I don't think the shoulder should be any larger then the rifling depth.

Hi Jim, do you happen to have any pictures of your favorite bullets in the 44, 45 and 475 that you could post with some sort of brief description?

What I am trying to do is find or have made a bullet with a meplat of my choosing that comes off into the ogive and then into the main body of the bullet that will be sized according to the sizing die.

I want to make it long enough to chamber in the Blackhawk with very little room left in the throat. Thats basically it except for some things I already have figured out.
The thing I'm unsure about is the nose. Not the length from crimp groove to meplat. but from meplat to start of rifling depth witch would be the starting of the ogive.
I don't understand if there is a necessary length of this measurement that is necessary relative to type of ogive, Graceful ogive,Truncated cone, whatever.

This is not a EK bullet as I'm sure you know.

[44man]

Hi Jim, do you happen to have any pictures of your favorite bullets in the 44, 45 and 475 that you could post with some sort of brief description?

What I am trying to do is find or have made a bullet with a meplat of my choosing that comes off into the ogive and then into the main body of the bullet that will be sized according to the sizing die.

I want to make it long enough to chamber in the Blackhawk with very little room left in the throat. Thats basically it except for some things I already have figured out.
The thing I'm unsure about is the nose. Not the length from crimp groove to meplat. but from meplat to start of rifling depth witch would be the starting of the ogive.
I don't understand if there is a necessary length of this measurement that is necessary relative to type of ogive, Graceful ogive,Truncated cone, whatever.

This is not a EK bullet as I'm sure you know.
Yes, these are what I shoot. The Lee, Lyman, LBT and my own PB. They all shoot as good as I can make the gun shoot.

[Oyeboten]

How effective would we guess a 230 Grain, 'SAECO' # 453 Bullet or Boolit, going at say 865 FPS for Deer?

Bullet looks like this, is this ( the one on the right of course ) -

http://inlinethumb01.webshots.com/28160/2087790530067835264S600x600Q85.jpg (http://family.webshots.com/photo/2087790530067835264iIUhVo)

Some I load forwards, some I load Backwards.

I can get right on about 1000 or even 1100 FPS in the Longer Barrel Revolvers.

Mid 800s in the .45 Snubby having 2-1/4 inch Barrel.

I am asking not for Deer proper, but, because I had elected this Bullet as the SD round for occasions of carrying my Colt Snub Nose .45

I have zero Hunting experience to have the judgement you fellows do for these things.

[Bass Ackward]

How effective would we guess a 230 Grain, 'SAECO' # 453 Bullet or Boolit, going at say 865 FPS for Deer?

I am asking not for Deer proper, but, because I had elected this Bullet as the SD round for occasions of carrying my Colt Snub Nose .45

I have zero Hunting experience to have the judgement you fellows do for these things.



Muzzle velocity is never the proper thought process cause it will fail you eventually. Might take another cartridge, but fail it will.

Strike velocity is the always the best way to look at a cast situation to achieve good results. It allows you to define too close and then too far. When to harden or soften based upon your goals. In this case there isn't a too close but definitely a too far.

With good placement, and a strike of 800 or better, I've done'em in. IF ..... you kept it no more than 8 BHN. (50-50 WW/pure or 20-1) Want to lower that to about 700 and drop it to pure (5BHN) I wouldn't go below that and 800 is better with pure.

Harden it and go lower, and it will depend on the emotional state (adrenalin level) not only before the shot, .... but after. And how do you project that?

Survival instinct can give them wings sometimes which is why you are always taught to wait the longest 30 minutes of your life before you pursue and don't get excited in your movements either. I have seen guys do everything from a circle dance to run a few steps towards the deer to jump up and down with their hands in the air imitating Rocky Balboa.

Believe it or not, that last paragraph can be the reason some guys need a howitzer.

[Bret4207]

Isn't this just a rehash of the same posts that have been posted aong the same lines as before?
See nothing has been settled. Nothing has changed. No concensus on any of it.
It just boils down to who one wants to side with as all have compelling examples of why they believe the way they do.
Any subject on bullets as to how they perform in impact, accuracy, meplat size, alloy, hardness, number of lube grooves, ogive shape, bearing surface, Plain base or gas checked are things that will never be ironed out no matter what one does or says or believes.
Most people with ideas believe they are right with no compromise in sight.
Kinda like a politician with a bill he wants to push through the Houses. His bill is always the best.
If you don't believe it just ask him.

A lot of what goes on here is rehashing the same old problems, theories and opinion. It takes time to get ideas across and for people to try things and see if what works for someone else works for them. Having a closed mind doesn't help of course, but sometimes what works in one gun with one load or at one temp simply doesn't work in another set of circumstances.

[44MAG#1]

a lot of what goes on here is rehashing the same old problems, theories and opinion. It takes time to get ideas across and for people to try things and see if what works for someone else works for them. Having a closed mind doesn't help of course, but sometimes what works in one gun with one load or at one temp simply doesn't work in another set of circumstances.

and??????????

[Frank]

44man said
The .45 is not real fussy about alloys and as you make them harder they will shoot better but there is no need to go beyond a certain point.
Here's an 7-shot offhand group at 50 yds with the .45 Colt. What did I use? :coffeecom
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/picture.php?albumid=123&pictureid=2377

[cptinjeff]

44man said
Here's an 8-shot offhand group at 50 yds with the .45 Colt. What did I use? :coffeecom
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/picture.php?albumid=123&pictureid=2377


A LOT of tape????[smilie=1:

[Frank]

This is close. 5-shots off the bench, 50 yds, DA. What kind of hardness?
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/picture.php?albumid=123&pictureid=2396

[44man]

I figure 22 to 25 BHN which is what I like for target. But I use full hunting loads for target and when I load lighter for play, about anything does OK and about any alloy works on deer too. I have lighter boolits for plinking.
Being the bore is larger, has less pressure and velocity, it is just a little less fussy then a .44.
I never tried it but a load of black powder and a pure lead boolit would do a deer in fast.
For those tiny 50 yard groups, I still go harder.
This is what I got at 50 with the Lee boolit and Felix lube. 21.5 gr of 296 and a Fed 150 primer.

[Changeling]

I figure 22 to 25 BHN which is what I like for target. But I use full hunting loads for target and when I load lighter for play, about anything does OK and about any alloy works on deer too. I have lighter boolits for plinking.
Being the bore is larger, has less pressure and velocity, it is just a little less fussy then a .44.
I never tried it but a load of black powder and a pure lead boolit would do a deer in fast.
For those tiny 50 yard groups, I still go harder.
This is what I got at 50 with the Lee boolit and Felix lube. 21.5 gr of 296 and a Fed 150 primer.

Thanks for the pictures, I appreciate it. I believe you have finally convinced me on a 300gr + bullet for some occasions, like in accuracy/hunting. However, I am still up in the air on even a bullet of that magnitude relative to the correct meplat/ogive/length. If I am going build one than it will take some more thought. That's just the way I am.

My thanks to everyone else , except for the person (forgot his name/not important) that keeps squealing like a pig about how wrong/offensive my posts are, "to him" .
There is a great cure for your frustration, DON'T REPLY, listen to what Bret said! Find yourself a woman or significant other, or make up with whichever one started you on your witch hunt! But please stop following me from post to post.

[Oyeboten]

Thanks Bass Akward,


Appreciate it...

I do have about 15 Lbs of 20-to-1.

Still seeking Molds...( and better dies! )

[BCB]

Ain’t sure about this thread, but from reading it quickly, it appears this subject may have been hashed over with mixed results…

So, I am just going to post what I shoot in my Blackhawk 45LC…

I shoot the RCBS 45-270-SAA that weighs in at about 283 grains. That boolit is a “Keith” design and plain base…

I am using an alloy of 2-1 (Wheel Weights to Lyman # 2). I just tested the hardness with a SAECO tester and it reads 7 on the SAECO scale which converts to about 12 on the BHN scale…

I add the Lyman # 2 (I make it myself from a well know recipe and it tests very close to what it is supposed to be) just to get a bit of tin and antimony. The tin helps it fill the mold out better. The end result is a very nice boolit that is a bit harder than just plain wheel weights…

Maybe that is a bit tedious, but I don’t shoot thousands of them so I can “spare” the time…

I am shooting these at a velocity of 1218 fps (average) and I get very minimal leading—some, but not enough to change things and start over again. I don’t know the twist of the Blackhawk handgun, but it might be less steep than 1-16. I don’t know, but someone might chirp in and give that information…

Lil’Gun or H-110 are the powders of choice…

What it boils down to is I ain’t doing any more testing of other powders and boolit alloys or primers or whatever. This load is what I want and I like it—period!...

Hope that bit of info might help as I don’t know what you are shooting, but you did say Ruger…

Good-luck…BCB

[Frank]

BCB says
What it boils down to is I ain’t doing any more testing of other powders and boolit alloys or primers or whatever. This load is what I want and I like it—period!...

I know what you mean about testing. Unfortunately, something changes and you have to make the adjustment. Blackhawk is 1/16 twist.

[Bret4207]

and??????????

And what works in one gun for one guy may not work for another guy in a different gun. There are so many variables involved in this stuff that asking someone else for the answer is often a complete waste of time. Start with the basics, observe, record, change one thing at a time and find out what works in your particular situation.

[Frank]

Bret said
And what works in one gun for one guy may not work for another guy in a different gun.
Yeah? Well I read today a post of 44man back from 2006 where he said "in 50 years of making boolits a hard boolit has always been more accurate." I tend to agree with that assessment based on my own testing. I think it's too simplistic to state that "everybody is different, everything is different, etc", and needs a different approach. Actually, it's to the contrary I believe. Some things work better than others more often than not. Therefore, start with what works most often. Then if they all fail, move on down to the lesser possibility until finally when all fails, you have an exception and are different from the norm.

[Bass Ackward]

Actually, it's to the contrary I believe. Some things work better than others more often than not. Therefore, start with what works most often. Then if they all fail, move on down to the lesser possibility until finally when all fails, you have an exception and are different from the norm.


Amen Frank. Trash all those PB mold designs if they require hard bullets.

[Bret4207]

Bret said
Yeah? Well I read today a post of 44man back from 2006 where he said "in 50 years of making boolits a hard boolit has always been more accurate." I tend to agree with that assessment based on my own testing. I think it's too simplistic to state that "everybody is different, everything is different, etc", and needs a different approach. Actually, it's to the contrary I believe. Some things work better than others more often than not. Therefore, start with what works most often. Then if they all fail, move on down to the lesser possibility until finally when all fails, you have an exception and are different from the norm.

Frank, as usual you completely miss the point and have made a ******* out of yourself yet again. The tone of your post is argumentative and insulting. A fine example of "different from the norm" would be YOU, the guy who can't get along with anyone else and who has to be contrary and bull headed and ends up being a bore and a boor. You are about as close to a useless poster here as I've come across yet.

For those that aren't in some sort of a urinating match- Asking for the optimum Bhn or perfect load or "best" anything with cast are seeking less than optimum results. The only way you find "the best" anything for your gun, with your alloy and your powder, primers, cases, elevation, relative humidity, etc., etc., etc., is to start with the basics and observe, record and test. The basics included boolit fit, as close to perfect boolits as we can get, excellent reloading practices and excellent bench techniques. Those are the "things that work better more often than not". OTH if you're satisfied with less than optimum performance then you can get away with much less work. But the OP and title mention "optimum". That requires more than recipe book loading.

[44man]

Amen Frank. Trash all those PB mold designs if they require hard bullets.
But Bass, the harder you thump a PB, the harder it needs to be.
Basic mechanics.

[44man]

Bret, I tend to agree with frank where if something does not work, then move on to find something better. It is also true that if anything works in a SBH, it will also work in every SBH and the SRH or a Freedom or a S&W with just a load change to match twist. Most times it is with only 1/2 gr of powder. If all have the same twist, the same load will work in every gun.
There are exceptions like the RH that loved H110 but would not shoot 296 but the boolit was the same and so was the load amount. Don't ask, I can't answer!
Soft boolits can be made to shoot but they always open a can of worms with other problems and everything will affect them from powder choice to dies used. The huge amounts of problems will never be made to match all guns in the same caliber.
If I told you I was shooting a one hole group with pure lead from my .44 at 50 yards at 1450 fps, you would call me a nut. And you would be correct. But when I say I can do it with a certain hardness, then everyone jumps in and says they do it with soft boolits and hard is not needed. Get real!
Every caliber, every powder, every primer needs different loading procedures and BOOLIT HARDNESS.
Yes, you can shoot a softer boolit from the .45 then you can from the .44. But raise the pressure in the .45 and you better harden the boolit. Go to BP and pure lead will work and the same thing holds with a fast powder in that harder lead is needed then with slow powder. The slowest powder we use in a revolver is a whole lot worse then BP on a boolit.
The main problem with shooters is that they fail to realize that what a boolits hardness does is a mechanical problem and no voodoo or magic will change it.
JUST BECAUSE YOU GET MECHANICAL FIT DOES NOT MEAN YOU HAVE MECHANICAL MATCH WITH ANYTHING ELSE.
The gun is only a machine, a tool. Does anyone use a hammer to install bolts or a wrench to install nails?
How many of you screw 1/4-20 nuts on 1/4-28 bolts?
It amazes me that some think a gun can do every single thing they want.

[Frank]

Bret said
The basics included boolit fit, as close to perfect boolits as we can get, excellent reloading practices and excellent bench techniques. Those are the "things that work better more often than not".
Be specific. What is excellent? You don't indicate. Just general phraseology. And post pics too. Let's see who backs up their words with proof. [smilie=1:

[Bret4207]

Bret, I tend to agree with frank where if something does not work, then move on to find something better. Yes, I think I said that.It is also true that if anything works in a SBH, it will also work in every SBH and the SRH or a Freedom or a S&W with just a load change to match twist. Most times it is with only 1/2 gr of powder. If all have the same twist, the same load will work in every gun.


Okay, that lat part about what works in one gun will work in every other gun of the same type- no- freakin'- way. Sorry, that's a no go.

[Bret4207]

Bret said
Be specific. What is excellent? You don't indicate. Just general phraseology. And post pics too. Let's see who backs up their words with proof. [smilie=1:

Frank, would you like me to post pictures of some one hole groups shot off hand at 100 yards with a Jennings 25 Auto? I've got bunches of them.:veryconfu

You are once again going way off the mark and trying to be insulting and argumentative.

[cajun shooter]

What everyone here seems to forget is that when you get into internal and external ballistics there is nothing written in stone. As far as saying that one load that works in my gun will work the same in yours ; that is "HOGWASH" You have way too many varibles involved. The biggest one is the shooter. The next would be the gun used. If I have a SBH that has severe end shake, .018 cylinder gap, will not pass a range rod test and the bore is .434. It will shoot the same as a brand new gun. You say wait a minute that's not what we said. Oh yes it is. Your statement was what works in one gun will work the same in another. Then you have weather conditions. Temperature and humidity have an effect on combustion. I'm sorry also as I grew up where you took a man for his word. But after 15 years on the streets as a cop it has changed my mind. I would like to believe that a picture shown with 100 yds written under it was shot from that distance. It could have been 50 instead. I shot a nice 9 point deer at my hunting camp and when I returned a older member ask how far away did you shoot him? I said that he came out at about 250yds but turned and came towards me. I finally shot him at about 60 yds as he was going back into the woods. The old hunter shook his head and said "REMEMBER SON WHEN YOU ARE BY YOURSELF YOU CAN PUT HIM AT ANY DISTANCE YOU WANT"

[44man]

Cajun, sorry, but after shooting IHMSA for years and working with many, many revolvers, I found a good load for one shoots the same in another.
Now that I only hunt and have moved into the big bores like the 45-70 and .475, loads for mine work perfect in all of my friend's guns too.
You confuse a bad gun with the norm.
How did you get so much end shake? How did you get such a large gap? What have you done to the gun? Did you fail to lube it and wear it out? Your dimensions are so out of line I can not believe it came from the factory like that.
My SBH has around 60,000 rounds through it and it started with a .430" groove and still has a .430" groove. I have zero end shake and no increase in side shake. It is as tight as the day I bought it.
Then you say IF I had a gun like that which means you are making it all up just to dispute something.
If you REALLY have a SBH, bring it over and I will have you shooting targets you can't believe at ranges you will not believe, with my loads. Bring your brass and you can load them here too. You are welcome to my boolits and powder.
You sound like you are accusing me of lying about distances shot!
Ask Whitworth, he works at NRA and shoots with me. He is a published writer in several magazines including American Hunter. HE will show you what a revolver will do, he does not need me to prove it. Bioman will also set you in your place, I defy you to shoot against each. How about starting at 100 and moving to 200? I will stay in the background. I promise not to giggle---REALLY, I will not giggle at you. [smilie=1:[smilie=1:

[Bret4207]

44 man, I'm not trying to start a war or anything, but your last post goes against everything I've ever seen in cast and jacketed. Sorry, I don't buy it at all. That's all I have to say.

[Frank]

Bret said
Frank, would you like me to post pictures of some one hole groups shot off hand at 100 yards with a Jennings 25 Auto? I've got bunches of them.


How about something that demonstrates what you can do with a cast boolit? What you're working on. Obviously, you are here because you like casting boolits. And boolits are made for shooting. And you also like to talk about it a lot and obviously have strong opinions on what others are doing wrong, or the claims that they are making. But they show their pics and how they got to their results. So at least as a minimum I would expect instead of you attempting to disprove others without proof, you at least do something on your own and show proof. It can be any revolver that you cast for. :coffeecom

[crabo]

Ask Whitworth, he works at NRA and shoots with me. He is a published writer in several magazines including American Hunter. [smilie=1:[smilie=1:

Was that Whitworth's picture in this month's American Huinter with the SRH?

[Bass Ackward]

But Bass, the harder you thump a PB, the harder it needs to be.
Basic mechanics.



Absolutely. That is what often gets missed in discussions.

Not every caliber or situation requires thumping. So it is again definitions and usage that separates us as much as the individual characteristics of the gun and load. But that is almost never taken into account.

Therefore people have to learn the poster as much as the knowledge or their gun / load. And this takes time.

The positive is that it clearly identifies the people who can help you the most based upon what or how they are shooting. I try and do cover everything because I shoot many ways and calibers. It helps keep Lloyd off balance too. :grin:

[Oyeboten]

Trying to understand...


In Revolvers, I am confident that unless too hard, a Bullet will upset as it is being accelerated when this is within normal or higher Velocities.

Upsetting permits the Bullet to 'mush' somewhat, and widen, to adapt to the far diameter of the Cylinder Bores, and, then to the major diameter of the Barrel, for the Rifeling to be engauged.


Alloy or Hardness, in relation to initial fit of the Bullet to the Cylinder Bore, and, to the major diameter of the Barrel, with the rate of acceleration, combine to manage the Bullet's behavior up to and including it's moment of leaving the Barrel...as for how well it may do this.

Forcing Cone shape can also be a factor for being amenible to or indifferent to the particular Bullet/Boolit we may have in mind.


This I can imagine as a mental model of conditions.


If we take an interest in this with a view of optimizing these relations for any given purpose, I think it will have to benifit the FPS and Accuracy of the Bullets or Boolits we shoot, in the Revolvers we shoot them in.





So it is really these critical details and or their ways of relating, which underlie what anyone may finally find to be a Load combination they are satisfied with, or had arrived at by experiment, whether they happen to understand the details critically, or not.


Am I correct?

[Bret4207]

Bret said
How about something that demonstrates what you can do with a cast boolit? What you're working on. Obviously, you are here because you like casting boolits. And boolits are made for shooting. And you also like to talk about it a lot and obviously have strong opinions on what others are doing wrong, or the claims that they are making. But they show their pics and how they got to their results. So at least as a minimum I would expect instead of you attempting to disprove others without proof, you at least do something on your own and show proof. It can be any revolver that you cast for. :coffeecom

Frank, let me put it real plain since you don't seem to grasp subtle hints very well- a lot of pictures are pure bull, shot at 20 yards instead of 100, 3 shots instead of 5, etc. I'm not a picture guy Frank. I don't carry targets around in my wallet either. And these days I can't see well enough to try and make bragging groups and I have posted that for at least 3 years. So lets say I do luck out and get some good groups and I post them. Then you will bring up old posts where I said I couldn't see anymore and you'll make more ignorant posts questioning my veracity. So why bother Frank? You're as stubborn as I am and we'll get no where.

The fact is the OP question was concerning OPTIMUM results. OPTIMUM results don't come from recipes grabbed off the internet except by pure luck. The poster may find he does well with a somewhat softer alloy or a somewhat harder alloy or may achieve his goal with his current alloy. But he'll never figure it out with shooting, recording, observing and coming to his own conclusion about what works best for him in his particular gun. That, along with boolit fit, is one of the few hard and fast rules I'll cling to. Anything else is just a generality.

[44man]

Was that Whitworth's picture in this month's American Huinter with the SRH?
Yes, Jack Huntington converted it to a 5 shot .475. He shoots my boolit and load but he needs 1/2 gr more powder because of the slower twist. He does an inch at fifty with it and I watched him shoot a beer can at 100 off hand.
Now I get Rifleman so I did not see the picture yet so he might have shown the .500 Linebaugh with the fluted barrel. That thing is a wild beast and leaves rubber on my palm! :bigsmyl2: We are having a little trouble with vertical stringing because of the fierce barrel rise. All we have so far are BB factory loads but I made some molds and he has dies now. We have a lot of work to do. There is just no need to shoot such hot loads in a .500. You could shoot those boolits out of a slingshot and knock a deer over! :veryconfu
Every single person I know uses my loads with one exception, some need 1/2 gr more powder for the slower twist in some revolvers. Every Ruger .44 uses the exact load, every .45 Colt and every BFR in .475 and 45-70. Only the SRH and Freedom in .475 uses more powder to compensate for twist. Just off the top of my head I could list 20 guns that are using the same loads. Even when we shot IHMSA together, we all used the exact same loads with jacketed and cast.
I do not understand why one gun needs something different over another. Since 1956, every Ruger and S&W .44 always shot the same loads and I have had at least 9 myself, can't count all my friends had. Even Whitworth's carry .44 S&W uses the exact same load I use in the SBH.
When each gun that is the same caliber and twist needs a different load, boolit or powder charge, something is not right from the start and none are giving groups to be expected. It is a tail chase!
If I tell you to use Hornady dies, The RD 265 gr boolit, 22 to 25 BHN with Felix lube, sized .432", 22 gr of 296, the Fed 150 primer or the Hornady 240 gr XTP or 240 SIL bullet, and 24 gr of 296 with the Fed 150 primer and they do not shoot from your .44, you better look at your shooting.
I can add the Hornady 300 gr with 20.5 gr of 296, Fed 150. Lee 310 gr and 21.5 gr of 296 and the LBT 320 gr with 21.5 gr of 296 both with the Fed 150.
These will shoot from every Ruger, S&W and Dan Wesson ever made. Just do not go over 265 gr in the S&W, recoil will damage the gun, not pressure, just recoil.
If anyone tells me these loads will not shoot, they just can't shoot anything.
Step down to the RCBS Keith with 7 to 10 gr of Unique. Make the boolit at least 28 BHN and poke tiny holes at 25 yards.
How simple can I get? [smilie=s: There, I just saved you years of wasted work.
"Hogwash" means you have been chasing your tail! [smilie=p:

[44man]

Frank, you can plainly see some of us are accused of lying about distance. Kind of hard to take really. My range is open to anyone at all times to come and see and I will have all of them doing it too.
All Bret or anyone has to do is ask Whitworth or Bioman for confirmation as to how far I shoot. But some will not believe how far THEY shoot either.
It just comes down to the fact that since they can't do it, nobody can, so we must not be telling the truth. That has to be the lowest blow a man can make.
Long ago I won Ohio state IHMSA, International class, production revolver, with my Ruger SBH shooting 79 out of 80. They do not realize that the rams are 200 meters and turkeys are 150 meters. I cleaned 20 chickens, 20 pigs, 20 turkeys and only missed the last ram.
I also took Ohio state .22 with 59 out of 60 without a single sight setting using a new Ruger Mark II. I also shot all of the 100 yard shoot off targets, chickens.
And those are all with open sights.

[44man]

Now if I could do that with RUGER'S, what does that tell you?
I will not even mention the TC, XP100, MOA or Wichita single shots where you had to get rid of the 40 targets and won the match with the 200 meter shoot off targets.
Has anyone here ever seen a shoot off chicken at 200 meters over open sights? This is one of my practice targets that has 6 shots on it from my Wichita and two from my .44 on it at 200 meters.

[Bass Ackward]

Am I correct?



When ever I need a lesson in humility, I try and project what is needed.

If I can use wide open, then hard can make you look good by playing the averages. Besides, once you are there, where else you got to go? Your only choice is to cut back until it begins to work again. The minute that you want to come off the top, predictions seldom work for me. Lube or crimp or a thousand other things can change everything.

I will say that we get conditioned to talk or think about upset. If bullet base expands because the pressure on it exceeds the strength of the metal, then you get obturation until the steel stops it. If a bullet slumps because of acceleration, it gets shorter until the steel stops it. You change / alter the bullet center of balance that will make it either easier or harder to stabilize.

Either way, chamber throats smooth up more slowly than a barrel, forcing cones are constantly in flux, and a bore's condition is changing until it stabilizes and then it still changes, just slow enough not so you would notice.

Depends on the design as much as anything. Reloaders are patient enough to try to find it. Shooters just mold it hard and watch where it is the best with a few choice selections, then they go get a beer. I don't have a good enough handle on that process to project in my own guns, just to know that sometimes I benefit from both. The longer the process, the better that beer tastes.

[44man]

Trying to understand...


In Revolvers, I am confident that unless too hard, a Bullet will upset as it is being accelerated when this is within normal or higher Velocities.

Upsetting permits the Bullet to 'mush' somewhat, and widen, to adapt to the far diameter of the Cylinder Bores, and, then to the major diameter of the Barrel, for the Rifeling to be engauged.


Alloy or Hardness, in relation to initial fit of the Bullet to the Cylinder Bore, and, to the major diameter of the Barrel, with the rate of acceleration, combine to manage the Bullet's behavior up to and including it's moment of leaving the Barrel...as for how well it may do this.

Forcing Cone shape can also be a factor for being amenible to or indifferent to the particular Bullet/Boolit we may have in mind.


This I can imagine as a mental model of conditions.


If we take an interest in this with a view of optimizing these relations for any given purpose, I think it will have to benifit the FPS and Accuracy of the Bullets or Boolits we shoot, in the Revolvers we shoot them in.





So it is really these critical details and or their ways of relating, which underlie what anyone may finally find to be a Load combination they are satisfied with, or had arrived at by experiment, whether they happen to understand the details critically, or not.


Am I correct?
There are all phases of expansion, bump, slump and obturation "seal" when shooting cast. None are useful for accuracy. Proper size and hardness always takes president over everything. A cast boolit should never change when shot. It should be exactly the same as when you loaded it. Even a round ball from a muzzle loader should be the same as when you set it on the powder unless it hits something.
This has been a thorn in my side when someone says the boolit must be softer to "obturate." Can't a proper fitting boolit also obturate? Too soft creates problems in any revolver with any powder or velocity. A pinch of Bullseye is so destructive on soft lead that it gets silly.
To spend years trying to get soft to shoot, then finding one load in one gun is a waste of time.
If you bought jacketed and they won't shoot, you buy some other bullet. But cast shooters will fool around for years with the wrong alloys. They do not study or picture what happens when the trigger is pulled. BANG and no leading seems to be the only thing looked at. No one realizes that a cast boolit can shoot better then most jacketed. But they work backwards, thinking pure lead is supposed to shoot. Oh, adding a little tin will work! :kidding:
Cast shooters live in a fantasy world, putting a hex on the wrong stuff over and over. The definition of insanity is to do the same things over and over expecting a different result.
I look for what works and that is the end. No way I will go backwards trying to shoot what does not work. 5 bad shots and that stuff goes in the trash. I will not post for years telling you how to shoot dead soft lead at 1800 fps because I would be crazy to even suggest it.
Hard boolit shooters take a lot of heat, told they take the easy way out. I have to ask what do I shoot my guns for? They shoot and I don't need to fool around until the gun is worn out.
Why in the world would anyone work for years and years with the wrong stuff to prove a point that is pointless?
I want to get a good group, sight in and go shoot deer in as little time as I can make it. If it only takes 10 shots I am so far ahead of those fooling for years with no results it just can't be explained.

[Changeling]

This has been one of the best posts I have ever read on this forum, hands down! Everyone likes to see facts listed as best they can be, well this has come to a grinding STOP with the latest replies from Jim (44Man).
He has laid it right on the line as to loads, the man has laid it right on the line as to hardness, he's showed targets to back up his remarks and teachings.
He explains everything he does and unlike a Hell of a lot of others I have never seen him openly "Bash" any shooter here whether an established expert or a rank beginner like myself. Something I haven't learned yet!
He always seems to try and be polite as much as possible (even under attack) and is forever trying to get his ideas across. However for this he gets continuously bashed except for a few close friends that have stuck by him,

In a nutshell he has backed up everything he says, HAVE YOU!

From me, a sincere thanks Jim, I take pride in considering you a friend. I will continue listening to you and taking your advise (90 % anyway, LOL) .

Thanks, Changeling.

[Bass Ackward]

I do not understand why one gun needs something different over another. [smilie=p:


:groner: OH MY! I had to step out of the room on this one it smelled so bad.

Earth to Jim, Earth to Jim. Come in Jim...................................

If your theory that a certain twist rate / velocity combination is needed for each caliber and bullet weight combination, then it is impossible with a single load. Why? 4" revolvers to to 24" rifles. Some calibers with different twist rates.

In fact, just a single variable like BC gap can have a 4" shooting harder than an average 6" or less than a 2"er.

And one gun that has throats that were .432 sizing .432 would have a better seal and more velocity than one with .433 throats sizing .432 that was leaking gas. What about a gun that has .4315 to .433 throats?

Would you like for me to go on? :kidding:

Then of coarse, factory ammo would always out shoot everything we develop because it is derived from multiple gun sources? If you yourself are so interested in accuracy, why hand load? You can't beat factory ammo.

Warning: Don't sniff the beer foam! :grin:

[44man]

:groner: OH MY! I had to step out of the room on this one it smelled so bad.

Earth to Jim, Earth to Jim. Come in Jim...................................

If your theory that a certain twist rate / velocity combination is needed for each caliber and bullet weight combination, then it is impossible with a single load. Why? 4" revolvers to to 24" rifles. Some calibers with different twist rates.

In fact, just a single variable like BC gap can have a 4" shooting harder than an average 6" or less than a 2"er.

And one gun that has throats that were .432 sizing .432 would have a better seal and more velocity than one with .433 throats sizing .432 that was leaking gas. What about a gun that has .4315 to .433 throats?

Would you like for me to go on? :kidding:

Then of coarse, factory ammo would always out shoot everything we develop because it is derived from multiple gun sources? If you yourself are so interested in accuracy, why hand load? You can't beat factory ammo.

Warning: Don't sniff the beer foam! :grin:
Of course I understand you but with revolvers, I have seen nothing you describe. 4" to 10-1/2 " revolvers, Ruger, BFR, S&W, Dan Wesson, all shoot the same loads. Gap means so little it is not even figured in. I never chrono loads when working them, waste, only use it to see final velocity. By the way, my .44 loads have a mean average deviation of 9.9 fps and an ES of 29 fps.
Yes Bass it is true, you just can't put all kinds of stuff in to confuse the issue. Every single .44 I ever shot will shoot my loads better then I can shoot them and so will all the other calibers.

[DanWalker]

44man What's your load for 45 colt? I'd love to try it in my blackhawk.

[Oyeboten]

This is such a good Thread, I am printing it out to pour over in times to come as well as between now and then.

Thanks very much for those elaborations on my question, in my trying hard to learn about all this.

[Bass Ackward]

Of course I understand you but with revolvers, I have seen nothing you describe. 4" to 10-1/2 " revolvers, Ruger, BFR, S&W, Dan Wesson, all shoot the same loads. Gap means so little it is not even figured in. I never chrono loads when working them, waste, only use it to see final velocity. By the way, my .44 loads have a mean average deviation of 9.9 fps and an ES of 29 fps.
Yes Bass it is true, you just can't put all kinds of stuff in to confuse the issue. Every single .44 I ever shot will shoot my loads better then I can shoot them and so will all the other calibers.


I didn't want to confuse the issue. What I wanted you to do was reinforced the point you just made. And you did.

What you just did was throw your twist rate theory under the bus. Not only did you run over it, I got you to back over it again.

If loads that produce different velocities and RPMS all shoot the same. Otherwise, it would take much different loads to produce that magic combination. Just wanted you to be clear on that.

Thanks :grin:

[Lloyd Smale]

I resemble that remark! One thing ive learned in many years of casting and loading is that there is no cast in concrete rules for anything. John Linebaugh told me once that every gun is possessed with gremlins. Little people that work all day to make a gun act just like it shouldnt. Everyone has a differnt gremlin with a differnt personality. Unlike 44 man ive never found loads that work in every gun in a certain caliber. I have found some molds that cast a bullet that is better then most and is less finiky when it comes to finding a good load but even those bullets sometimes just dont work in a certain gun. John said that he can build to identical guns made from the same barrel stock with the exact same dimentions and one will be a tack driver and the other be mediocure. The same goes for any smith or ruger ive owned. I have owned to consectutive numbered rugers on a couple occasions and they were totaly differnt guns to load for.

Im one that allways preaches harder lead. Its what ive learned to work with and do better with it. I will sure wont claim though that good results cant come with soft lead. It just takes a diffent mind set to get to work. Same with bullet designs. I have my prefernces and there not the same as some others but i make them work and everytime i say that a certain design sucks someone steps up to prove me wrong. NOBODY here has all the answers. If someone did this would just be a internet sight with a recipe on how to make your gun shoot well and whoever figured it out would surely be hired by rem win or federal to head up there ammo dept as im sure any of them would just love to be able to sell say a 44 mag load that shoot one inch at a 100 yards out of every 44 mag it was put into. I kind of think that ammo would sell pretty well!!!

Im also one that puts absolutely no store in a picture of a group someone shot on the internet. Its to easy to be dishonest. I believe what i see with my own eyes and the problem with that is im not heading to VA or PA or any other A to just see someone shoot. I couldnt afford to even if i wanted to. Another very big variable in this is some guys just cant shoot and think they can. Ive been at this for MANY years and have had the fortune to know and to see some of the best handgun shooters in the country shoot and I about know what a typical handgun is capable of and when i hear about all those guys shooting one inch groups at a 100 yards routinely with a sixgun i know something is a miss. Many times there just lies or a guy does it once and puts the gun away claiming its a moa gun when the six times he shot it previously it shot 5moa. Other times guys are doing it with 10 inch barrels wtih 8x scopes (and even then its doubtful to me). I guess i just cant see how one or two guys can do it routinely and the other million of us can never seem to manage it and im talking very experienced shooters not guys that shoot 10 boxes of shells a year. Granted there may be an exceptional shooter or two on here and a few more then that that are better then me and still have eyes that can see that well but its tough enough for me to shoot moa with a good bolt gun with a scope let alone a sixgun with 6 chambers that are all out of alignment shooting a bullet that has to jump into the air before it slams into a forcing cone that guides it into a barrel. I have to take my hat off to those few but find after taking the hat off its best served as a container to catch the ********!
Absolutely. That is what often gets missed in discussions.

Not every caliber or situation requires thumping. So it is again definitions and usage that separates us as much as the individual characteristics of the gun and load. But that is almost never taken into account.

Therefore people have to learn the poster as much as the knowledge or their gun / load. And this takes time.

The positive is that it clearly identifies the people who can help you the most based upon what or how they are shooting. I try and do cover everything because I shoot many ways and calibers. It helps keep Lloyd off balance too. :grin:

[44man]

I didn't want to confuse the issue. What I wanted you to do was reinforced the point you just made. And you did.

What you just did was throw your twist rate theory under the bus. Not only did you run over it, I got you to back over it again.

If loads that produce different velocities and RPMS all shoot the same. Otherwise, it would take much different loads to produce that magic combination. Just wanted you to be clear on that.

Thanks :grin:
Not really Bass, most every .44 mag revolver has the same twist. Where things differ is like the .475 where mine is 1 in 15, the Freedom is 1 in 18 and the Ruger converted has 1 in 18-3/4. The boolit I use 26 gr of powder in will require 26.5 gr in the others. That will be the only change. Now the load that shoots from the Ruger will also shoot from the Freedom. It is also still accurate in mine but reducing the 1/2 gr shows better accuracy.
Lloyd makes a good point and there are some revolvers that just won't do it but in the end, they will not shoot any load good.
I just sell those if I have the bad luck when I buy one. If a Ruger .44 won't shoot my loads and I can't find the problem I will not spend a year looking for another boolit or load, chances are good there isn't one. Most will come around if there is a tight spot or I have to time it but many just will not improve.
Where I lucked out is with the pile of model 29's I owned, every single one would shoot but I could never make the grip work. Yeah, I tried different ones but there is something about the angle and the way it pushes my hand. I can shoot them off hand but from Creedmore I would hit the first 5 silhouettes dead center and after they reset them I would miss the next 5, even at 50 meters.
Now the Ruger hog leg did not do that and as elevations of the targets changed I would shift my grip all over the place and still knock down steel. I can not do that with a Bisley either, they MUST be held the same.
A Ruger or BFR with a Pachmeyer grip will group if you squeeze the life out of it and then if you shoot a group with a lighter hold it will only change around an inch at 50, never enough to worry about. A S&W can change 10". :killingpc Guys wonder why they can't group a S&W and search forever for a load but 99% of the time it is your hand and you COULD be shooting a 10" pattern with a super accurate load.

[Bret4207]

I resemble that remark! One thing ive learned in many years of casting and loading is that there is no cast in concrete rules for anything. John Linebaugh told me once that every gun is possessed with gremlins. Little people that work all day to make a gun act just like it shouldnt. Everyone has a differnt gremlin with a differnt personality. Unlike 44 man ive never found loads that work in every gun in a certain caliber. I have found some molds that cast a bullet that is better then most and is less finiky when it comes to finding a good load but even those bullets sometimes just dont work in a certain gun. John said that he can build to identical guns made from the same barrel stock with the exact same dimentions and one will be a tack driver and the other be mediocure. The same goes for any smith or ruger ive owned. I have owned to consectutive numbered rugers on a couple occasions and they were totaly differnt guns to load for.

Im one that allways preaches harder lead. Its what ive learned to work with and do better with it. I will sure wont claim though that good results cant come with soft lead. It just takes a diffent mind set to get to work. Same with bullet designs. I have my prefernces and there not the same as some others but i make them work and everytime i say that a certain design sucks someone steps up to prove me wrong. NOBODY here has all the answers. If someone did this would just be a internet sight with a recipe on how to make your gun shoot well and whoever figured it out would surely be hired by rem win or federal to head up there ammo dept as im sure any of them would just love to be able to sell say a 44 mag load that shoot one inch at a 100 yards out of every 44 mag it was put into. I kind of think that ammo would sell pretty well!!!

Im also one that puts absolutely no store in a picture of a group someone shot on the internet. Its to easy to be dishonest. I believe what i see with my own eyes and the problem with that is im not heading to VA or PA or any other A to just see someone shoot. I couldnt afford to even if i wanted to. Another very big variable in this is some guys just cant shoot and think they can. Ive been at this for MANY years and have had the fortune to know and to see some of the best handgun shooters in the country shoot and I about know what a typical handgun is capable of and when i hear about all those guys shooting one inch groups at a 100 yards routinely with a sixgun i know something is a miss. Many times there just lies or a guy does it once and puts the gun away claiming its a moa gun when the six times he shot it previously it shot 5moa. Other times guys are doing it with 10 inch barrels wtih 8x scopes (and even then its doubtful to me). I guess i just cant see how one or two guys can do it routinely and the other million of us can never seem to manage it and im talking very experienced shooters not guys that shoot 10 boxes of shells a year. Granted there may be an exceptional shooter or two on here and a few more then that that are better then me and still have eyes that can see that well but its tough enough for me to shoot moa with a good bolt gun with a scope let alone a sixgun with 6 chambers that are all out of alignment shooting a bullet that has to jump into the air before it slams into a forcing cone that guides it into a barrel. I have to take my hat off to those few but find after taking the hat off its best served as a container to catch the ********!


Lloyd, you (and Bass) just said what I've been saying. Maybe it will be accepted and get through to a few people when you say it.

[44man]

44man What's your load for 45 colt? I'd love to try it in my blackhawk.
There seems to be a magic number for the .45 with boolits from 300 to 335 gr. That is 21.5 gr of 296 with a Fed 150 primer. I use the same load with all of my heavy .45 boolits. Tweaking the charge 1/10 gr has never shown a difference. Neither has changing the boolit as long as they are in the weight range. Lee, LBT or my own boolits.
For plinking I use the Lee 255 gr and 7 to 8 gr of 231 or Unique and they shoot very well. Nothing special done but I only use Hornady dies.
The .44 is the same with 300 to 320 gr boolits, 21.5 gr of 296, Fed 150 primer, Hornady dies. When I get to 330 gr I drop to 21 gr.
Again, nothing special. With a Hornady 300 gr I use 20.5 gr of 296, Fed 150.
For a S&W .44 do not load heavy boolits, make 265 gr the top weight with 22 gr of 296, Fed 150. The RD 265 is exceptional in them. Anything over that will peen parts and unlatch the cylinder.
How you load and choose the alloy is where you find accuracy so if you start at, say, 19 gr of 296 and work up 1/2 gr at a time you will see a large group slowly shrink to the best at 21.5 gr and when you get to 22, they will start to open again. Just plain and simple load work.
Good and even case tension and an alloy good enough to withstand what the boolit will go through. I have no voodoo dolls of boolits! :bigsmyl2:

[44man]

Something happens when you shoot a revolver that most do not know about. You need to see some photos to catch it. It can depend on loads, etc but we need to do more with it to find out because it is VERY hard to get a picture at the right instant.
At the instant of firing, the hammer can rebound almost to full cock. (Pay attention all of you that like to change mainsprings.)
This happens before recoil even starts to move the gun and whether the boolit has left, we don't know but there will be gap and muzzle flash. We see it on both large caliber single actions and also on the S&W. It is so hard to catch that we don't know about other calibers or guns.
The cylinder can unlatch briefly and you can find a double strike on a primer if the cylinder moved at all before locking again.
We can't afford high speed movie equipment so it is up in the air whether a reduced mainspring will unlatch a cylinder before the boolit leaves the cylinder or whether the rebound has any affect on aim and hold.
We also don't know if it is the case coming back and throwing the pin into the hammer but there appears to be a lot of force, enough to compress a mainspring.
Here is a case from a S&W 29 that shows it.

[felix]

Lots of times you see primer indents that are not round enough, and not necessarily two distinct strikes. Even when this occurs with mild loads, then the springs, or guidance mechanisms, need attention for sure. Your picture, Jim, is worth a thousand words. ... felix

[44man]

Lots of times you see primer indents that are not round enough, and not necessarily two distinct strikes. Even when this occurs with mild loads, then the springs, or guidance mechanisms, need attention for sure. Your picture, Jim, is worth a thousand words. ... felix
That is true, I have seen many out of round dents.
We just do not know at what point a cylinder unlatches, things happen so fast. Many times either the boolit in transition might hold the cylinder in place or it does not turn enough and the pin hits the same spot.
I also use over power mainsprings because they are more accurate and often wonder if rebound is not the reason.
I had to change the mainspring on my SBH every year when shooting IHMSA, Ruger factory springs take a set and groups fell off.
Whitworth has a picture from when we were trying to get a muzzle flash picture with a brand new gun. The hammer is back.

[felix]

That's why BR guns are so overly built in the action area. Inertia, both static and dynamic, to the hilt. ... felix

[44man]

OOPS, the .22 state shoot was 57 out of 60 because I missed the first pig, turkey and ram because of the new gun with no sight settings. I said 59 and that is wrong, sorry.

[tek4260]

If the hammer rebounded to almost full cock, would it not rotate the cylinder to the next chamber and possibly double depending on how far it rebounded? I can imaging the hammer moving back a fraction and striking again in recoil, but not full cock without the cylinder rotating. Otherwise it would destroy the pawl unless the pawl moved back away from the ratchet as well.

[bigboredad]

I'd like to know the answer to that as well. Back in the 80's I had a 629 that would hit the primer twice and not just barely it would hit it hard the second time. I sold that 629 and haven't owned a smith and wesson since. Not sure why I didn't even realize how long it's been til now guess I just found ruger was stronger and more pleasing to my eye

[Frank]

44man said
Good and even case tension and an alloy good enough to withstand what the boolit will go through. I have no voodoo dolls of boolits!


All this 'obturation' talk is telling me I must be getting leading and poor accuracy because my boolits are too hard. They tell me I need a high pressure, over max load to get it to properly function. But the results tell a different story. The results are a tight group and no leading with a hard boolit and a moderate load. And 'fit'? Some drop thru and some a little snugger, mixed together!
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/picture.php?albumid=123&pictureid=2375

[Changeling]

In regard to the over power mainsprings you use in you SBH I suppose they are the same spring used in the BH. Is this correct? Is it just the mainspring that is suspect of possible problems, are there any other springs in a "BH" I should change?

I have used some wolf brand springs in a Ruger Mark 1 .22 Bull Barrel, but didn't notice much difference, however it could very well be the trigger, not to hot!

[44man]

In regard to the over power mainsprings you use in you SBH I suppose they are the same spring used in the BH. Is this correct? Is it just the mainspring that is suspect of possible problems, are there any other springs in a "BH" I should change?

I have used some wolf brand springs in a Ruger Mark 1 .22 Bull Barrel, but didn't notice much difference, however it could very well be the trigger, not to hot!
Yes, just go to Wolfe springs for mainsprings. No other springs in the gun need attention. The trigger spring can be fixed without buying any, just to lighten the pull.
BFR springs are the same too. However, any springs made for rifle primers are stronger at 28#.

[44man]

If the hammer rebounded to almost full cock, would it not rotate the cylinder to the next chamber and possibly double depending on how far it rebounded? I can imaging the hammer moving back a fraction and striking again in recoil, but not full cock without the cylinder rotating. Otherwise it would destroy the pawl unless the pawl moved back away from the ratchet as well.
It is hard to tell from a picture just how far the hammer comes back but it is sure far enough to unlatch the cylinder and start the turn.
Maybe the boolit is starting into the forcing cone and stopping the cylinder from turning, we just don't know. You will not hurt the pawl or "hand."
I have to see if I can get the picture from Whitworth.

[Bass Ackward]

Well, I would have to see it on a case by case basis.

A hammer can be bounced billions of times while the trigger has been pulled and held and no mechanical advancement takes place on a Smith.

On my single actions, each bounce of enough significance to dent a primer would require partial rotation.

So if the bounce was on a Smith and you could see it on a primer, then that would tell me that movement had to occur after firing to allow the bullet to leave the cylinder. The more, the worse. That could be either from cylinder rotation or frame movement.

[45r]

Good read.The most accurate midrange load I've shot in my 45colt redhawk is 9.2 grains power pistol under the rcbs 270saa.The best full power load is 21.5 grains 296 with a 315GC lbt custom mold boolit.I've also got good accuracy with the saeco 255GC and 2400.The redhawk was difficult to get the trigger right with a light pull and I went to fed primers and make sure the primers are seated right.It has a 3 pound pull.I might put a heavier spring in it someday.It will shoot 2 1/2 inch groups at 50 yards with all 3 boolits which is good for me with iron sights.I use air-cooled WW,it might do a little better with harder boolits but thats good enough for me.I've found any revolver that is 41 and over to shoot well without a lot of hassle.My 357 only like GC boolits.I have pac rubber grips on my S&W N frames and my redhawk to get the same grip.I shoot the power pistol,270saa load the most.Easy on the ears when hunting and it works well on game.If the cylinder throats match the barrel boolit BHN hasn't been a big accuracy issue in my revolvers.

[Bret4207]

44man said
All this 'obturation' talk is telling me I must be getting leading and poor accuracy because my boolits are too hard. They tell me I need a high pressure, over max load to get it to properly function. But the results tell a different story. The results are a tight group and no leading with a hard boolit and a moderate load. And 'fit'? Some drop thru and some a little snugger, mixed together!
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/picture.php?albumid=123&pictureid=2375

Well, there ya go boys. Forget the work we've done here over the past 10+ years. Just throw together whatever load you want and use whatever sized boolits you want, none of it matters. Just use HARD LEAD!!!! Frank posted a picture.

That's all the proof I need.:violin:

[44man]

Well, I would have to see it on a case by case basis.

A hammer can be bounced billions of times while the trigger has been pulled and held and no mechanical advancement takes place on a Smith.

On my single actions, each bounce of enough significance to dent a primer would require partial rotation.

So if the bounce was on a Smith and you could see it on a primer, then that would tell me that movement had to occur after firing to allow the bullet to leave the cylinder. The more, the worse. That could be either from cylinder rotation or frame movement.
Just don't know when it occurs. This is different then a heavy boolit unlatching the cylinder from recoil. We started to get that with 310 gr boolits in the S&W. The latch has too much inertia and too weak a spring and it is in a position where it wants to stay in place as the gun recoils away from it. The cylinder will rotate to the next chamber and we just get a click because the fired chamber winds up under the hammer again. This happens later in the firing cycle after recoil has moved the gun back.
The hammer bounce we seen happens before the gun moves and the barrel is still on target. I can only say it was a very big surprise to actually see it.
The gun is a new custom shop BFR with a 23# spring. I changed it to 26#. We have no further pictures since the change, too hard to catch it just right but we will try movies next.
I don't think it can be eliminated but just reduced. I still feel it is the case slamming back to fill the head space and maybe it is internal pressure at the primer that is slamming the firing pin back into the hammer.
It does look like the boolit has left the gun because of the muzzle flash and flash at the gap. But this is not a given because the hammer also has inertia and might have started moving back sooner and unlatched the cylinder before the boolit left the brass and was still moving back when the flash occurred. The hammer could be in a transition stage before going forward again and recoil will also make the hammer go home faster but it has not started yet.
If you dry fire, the hammer does not bounce.
Bass, it is not easy to guess at, we really need high speed movies to study this.
Could this be one reason a revolver is harder to get accuracy from? You will not have a problem with a bolt gun or single shot because there is nothing to turn but I am sure the firing pin is rebounding.
However it is a proven fact that a BR rifle must have a strong mainspring for accuracy. Felix is 100% correct about over built BR actions. Just making a primer "pop" is not enough.
Now I have been accused of shooting 10 yards and saying it was 100. I will never lie, not ever and consider my job is to help everyone with my limited experience but you can see, I do more thinking then shooting and little gets past me even if I can't solve it.
When you stop asking about stuff and are happy with a gun that goes "bang" you are in a rut. I figure there is another 100 years I need and maybe that is not enough.
This site and the accumulated knowledge does help everyone but I still enjoy throwing a wrench in the works now and then.
Never rely on theories, sit and think, then test. The military has it down pat but they don't work with revolvers.
How I would love to go through sniper training, our boys really do know voodoo and are unreal. Thank a soldier today, past and present.
Heck, forgive my rambling! [smilie=l:

[Bass Ackward]

I have personally seen lever hammers bounce even on a cross bolt safety. So recoil could move that as well. And they have reputations for either good accuracy or terrible accuracy, so it would be hard to pin down.

Some militaries will improve with titanium firing pins. The logic is decreased lock time from a lighter pin. But that would also mean less rebounding mass under recoil too. So which is it?

Chicken or the egg.

[Changeling]

For me, relative to revolvers, the amount of information contained in this post is astounding! Both from the Negative and Positive side on several different aspects of revolvers to include not only there accuracy potential but possible internal problems that I have "NEVER" seen discussed anywhere on any revolver forum!

It was obvious that it was also a complete shock to a lot of individuals with vast experience and expertise in the handgun field as well as practically everyone listening/reading! HELL, I was literally blown away by revelations that are not/ever have been discussed on this forum.

It appears that Jim (44man) and his side kick/friend " Whitworth" have been continuously experimenting with revolvers unknown to everyone here to find the truth behind accuracy and mechanical problems!
He has been maligned, accused of possibly lying , and so on , and so on!
In every instance he has come back to the forum (without bad feelings) and tried to spread his expertise and findings with out any animosity in his heart, but simply to try and educate everyone on his "Validated" findings.

It's my opinion you have no idea the level of "Teachers" you have in Jim and Whitworth!!

[Lloyd Smale]

one thing ive learned on here is to have some grit! Lots isnt still known about cast bullet shooting and cast bullet shooting in revolvers especially. everyone has there opinions and alot of them are differnt but still right. If you post your GOING to find someone who disagrees with you because they had differnt results. I give Jim credit too he sticks behind what he says. I dont allways agree but i have respect for him because he writes about what he sees not something someone else saw or found on the internet. Lots of what some so called experts have put in print about cast bullets is nothing but hogwash. theres even a few gun writters i know personaly that have there heads up there ***** when it comes to casting knowlege and write about it anyway. Jims is what he actually saw and i like it because its differnt them mine and i learn from it like i do from many on here. It erks me to no end when someone posts something about getting accuracy out of a handgun and then go on to say they never bench a gun. There idea of accuracy is hitting a coffee can at 25 yards 4 out of 6 times.

[Bret4207]

I would just like to point out that I never said anyone was lying, was shooting at 10 yards and claiming 100. I said it happens, that some people exaggerate. My issue is with people who claim to be able to shoot smaller groups than any one else here ever did (quote), can put together a load that works in any gun (goes against everything I've ever seen in cast or jacketed) and mixes terms so they don't mean what they mean elsewhere.

My main issue is that we spent since at least 1997 figuring out that "HARD CAST" is nothing but pure, unadulterated advertising hype. Months and months were spent by a lot of guys here trying to get people past the "it's gotta be HARD to work!". We were finally getting people to start thinking in terms of fit and pressure balance and looking beyond the STUPID Bhn reading. And then what happens? The new king of HARDCAST comes along and blows over 10 years of freakin' work outta the water by continually talking about how HARD CAST is the only way to go. Well thanks a lot Jimbo, you undid all that work in a couple months. And then, to top it off, he isn't even talking about hard cast. He's talking water quenched WW. But do the noobs know the difference? Nope, so we got a whole new slew of "How can I make my lead harder" posts. And now he's got a cheering section that completely missed all that work we did and just see's the great god of HARD CAST posting pictures so he must be absolutely correct.

Jim may well be able to do everything he claims. That's great. More power to ya. But by using the wrong terms, pushing his ideas using those terms and not mentioning all the other variables that act in the game he's screwing up a heck of a lot of our work. HARD CAST can work fine, so can softer alloys. That's been proven. But the ego trip is covering that up and closing minds instead of keeping them open.

[Bass Ackward]

Jim may well be able to do everything he claims. That's great. More power to ya. But by using the wrong terms, pushing his ideas using those terms and not mentioning all the other variables that act in the game he's screwing up a heck of a lot of our work. HARD CAST can work fine, so can softer alloys. That's been proven. But the ego trip is covering that up and closing minds instead of keeping them open.


Maybe Bret. Maybe not. I see the problem more as one along the lines of application. Or when we think that there is a right or wrong way to use a handgun.

And I could care less about who shoots bench better than I do. Whether it is real or not. It only matters to what I can learn and being able to translate that into something I can use.

Guns are tools. Same as knives or an ax. If somebody wants to sharpen an ax and say that an ax can be sharped as well as any knife ever made. He offers proof. Then to be different, he turns around and uses that ax to cut his steak, that's great. For him. I will still use a knife.

I am in triple digits for deer with a handgun. So not only do I have the T-shirt, but it has long been worn out. As poorly as I bench, I only ever had one go far enough to be claimed by somebody else. (that I can remember anyway) So what many people have to actually learn is how important is .... benched accuracy, hard bullets, high velocity, ultra power, ultra wide meplats and on and on?

80% of my hand gunning today doesn't even require sights. But I hit what I discharge at often enough that I am happy. Tomorrow I might become crippled or my interests change again and it will be nice to have this to fall back on. Or not.

Point is that if I can get someone else to think and do the work, we get more results of things to try. And here is the key, everyone eventually learns that there ain't one way. Or they sell the gun. I lose no skin either way. Neither should anyone else.

[44man]

Come now Bret, I thought we came to terms on that. I have explained a thousand times that I hate the word "HARD" and I also hate "BHN" readings because neither is right.
But what other way can it be described?
I can tell you what to look for with a revolver booit but have no way how to tell you how to make your alloy with what you have.
Hard cast and BHN was designed to drive us all nuts.
Then even you have to admit that water dropped WW's are "hard."
I would like a boolit with a 40 BHN skin but a soft core. Strange that the problem was solved long ago, it is called jacketed bullet!
Come up with better terms and explanations and we will all follow you.
I have proven over and over that the faster the powder in a revolver, the "HARDER" a boolit needs to be for accuracy. How else would I describe it? I gave up long, long ago just making a revolver go "BANG" without any lead in the bore and decided I want boolits to hit where shot.
I will give you a challenge. Take a .44 and use 10 gr of Unique and a 240 gr. Now start with pure, then add tin, then some antimony, go to air cooled WW's, then water dropped, then add more tin and antimony, air cooled to water dropped to oven hardened.
Post bench shot groups at every stage. Yes, I will allow you to shoot 25 yards too. :groner:
This is not a shooting competition, it is between you and the boolits.
Will you accept that?
Then jump to 296, say 24 gr with a 240 gr boolit and do it again.
Over the last 54 years I have done the work, all of this work, over and over along with powders and primers. And most of all, BRASS.
The ONLY things I can't control is the brass and what is in my WW's.
Now just how do I know you will refuse and make excuses? :holysheep

[Bret4207]

Jim, you're missing the point. You've created a new set of definitions, undone our work and you don't mention all the other garbage it takes to get something shooting good. That's above and beyond your claim to be able to give text book loads that will work superbly in any gun. That's nothing I've seen happen before. We had another guy here that refused to acknowledge the variables. Fortunately you're far better natured than he is but the result is the same- confusion, people jumping to conclusions and harm to the work done here.

You want better terms? How about referring to WQWW as WQWW instead of "hard"? If you're juicing your WW with 2% tin and 3% antimony say so. I've taken WW and juiced them and WQ to way over 32Bhn. That is hard for a lead alloy and it was useless to me.

All I ask is to show a bit pf respect for the work we've done here instead of screwing it up. Harder alloys can work, but if you're going to tell me fit plays no part in it then we do have a veracity issue. Softer alloys, easily available, can work too. It's just different, not better or worse as you've lead your followers to thing. I'm in the camp that espouses using what you have and making the best of it. If that's too much to wrap your mind around with your super magnums and ego trip, that's your problem.

[44man]

Jim, you're missing the point. You've created a new set of definitions, undone our work and you don't mention all the other garbage it takes to get something shooting good. That's above and beyond your claim to be able to give text book loads that will work superbly in any gun. That's nothing I've seen happen before. We had another guy here that refused to acknowledge the variables. Fortunately you're far better natured than he is but the result is the same- confusion, people jumping to conclusions and harm to the work done here.

You want better terms? How about referring to WQWW as WQWW instead of "hard"? If you're juicing your WW with 2% tin and 3% antimony say so. I've taken WW and juiced them and WQ to way over 32Bhn. That is hard for a lead alloy and it was useless to me.

All I ask is to show a bit pf respect for the work we've done here instead of screwing it up. Harder alloys can work, but if you're going to tell me fit plays no part in it then we do have a veracity issue. Softer alloys, easily available, can work too. It's just different, not better or worse as you've lead your followers to thing. I'm in the camp that espouses using what you have and making the best of it. If that's too much to wrap your mind around with your super magnums and ego trip, that's your problem.
But I have not looked for followers. Every single post I have made is to let a fellow try different methods if he is having trouble.
Is what I say different then someone else telling a guy he should use dead soft lead and it will work?
99% of questions are about poor accuracy and leaded bores.
Just what work have I ruined? I think anyone can read and test everything for themselves since every opinion is here for all.

[Bret4207]

Look, you weren't here through the countless "how hard does my lead need to be", "how can I harden my lead", "my bore is leaded, I need harder lead right?" posts. We fought that for years, literally, and then it tapered off and guys were finally starting to get the idea right off that fit came first and then you worked on the other stuff, that you didn't need HARD lead to shoot 800 fps loads out of a 38. If YOU, as a frequent poster, don't make the distinction then you become just like that other guy I mentioned that refused to accept that there were any variables in this game, and he "wrote" 2 books about it! He's a "leading authority" in the game and all he preaches is hard, hard, hard and at that he never shoots over 16-1700 fps by his own admission! Meanwhile there are everyday Joes here taking straight WW over 1800 fps with no prob. SO what I'm saying is that there's nothing wrong with giving the info, but for goodness sake, explain the whole thing or all you do is take us right back to square one. You already had one poster claiming fit doesn't matter as long as it's HARD.

Honest to God, it's like watching someone blow the foundation out from under your house.

[Lloyd Smale]

Brett im another believer in hard bullets. Im also far from a follower of 44man and argue with him as much as the next guy and was a believer in this long before i even showed up at this forum. Years of shooting many many thousands of rounds off a bench into a target was boring as hell but it taught me one thing. In most cases in a gun that all the dimentions are perfect or at least what i consider right a hard bullet will outshoot a soft bullet. Theres surely nothing wrong with pushing the fact that a gun needs to be made right or fixed if it isnt. It also is very true that a gun thats right will shoot soft bullets better then a gun that isnt but the only real advantage i see to softer bullets other then if its all the lead you can find is that they may deform, notice how i use deform and not bump up because thats what they do, and work better in a gun that is out of spec. I own and shoot alot of differnt handguns and have yet to see at any pressure level where soft bullets outshot hard bullets in a gun that is right. I guess i cant say never but its very rare. I also have never saw a properly built gun lead up because bullets i shot were hard at any pressure level. No doubt the most important thing here is to have a gun that is right to begin with. But shooting soft deformed bullets out of a well made gun is like running 87 grain gas in a high compression motor to me.

[Bret4207]

I agree Lloyd. Harder can work fine. And I'm not a fan of the "obturation" system as I've said a number of times. But what are you saying in your post? A "properly built gun", IOW- fit. Fit comes first, fit is KING. Ignoring fit and using terms "HARD" or "HARD CAST" with no qualifiers as to what you mean by hard just adds to the myth that a boolit has to be hard to work at all! You shoot a lot of big guns at high pressures. Do you ever ignore fit? Do you ever throw an undersized boolit in and get best results? Nope, ya don't.

The other issue we're having is we're using the term "soft". What does that mean? Pure lead? ACWW alloy? Linotype? WQ Linotype with copper added? No, we just say "soft" and assume the readers will be able to differentiate. Add in that we have people assuming all WW is the same and it just gets worse. Someone gets some leading or casting problems and the first thing people say is either you need tin or you have zinc in there. Come on! We can do better.

There are quite a few guys here shooting truly soft alloys (under 9 Bhn) with good results. That's great. There are others shooting what I consider ultra hard (20+ Bhn) with success. Great. Both sides owe it to the readers to establish the specs of what they are using. Both sides need to give the whole story.

[44man]

Brett im another believer in hard bullets. Im also far from a follower of 44man and argue with him as much as the next guy and was a believer in this long before i even showed up at this forum. Years of shooting many many thousands of rounds off a bench into a target was boring as hell but it taught me one thing. In most cases in a gun that all the dimentions are perfect or at least what i consider right a hard bullet will outshoot a soft bullet. Theres surely nothing wrong with pushing the fact that a gun needs to be made right or fixed if it isnt. It also is very true that a gun thats right will shoot soft bullets better then a gun that isnt but the only real advantage i see to softer bullets other then if its all the lead you can find is that they may deform, notice how i use deform and not bump up because thats what they do, and work better in a gun that is out of spec. I own and shoot alot of differnt handguns and have yet to see at any pressure level where soft bullets outshot hard bullets in a gun that is right. I guess i cant say never but its very rare. I also have never saw a properly built gun lead up because bullets i shot were hard at any pressure level. No doubt the most important thing here is to have a gun that is right to begin with. But shooting soft deformed bullets out of a well made gun is like running 87 grain gas in a high compression motor to me.
Right on Lloyd. Deformation is hard to beat into guys even when proof is shown.
Then what is worse is lead squirting out of the gap with soft boolits and Bullseye powder in a .38 special. I guess lead all over the front of the cylinder and frame along with filled grooves is supposed to happen because the velocity is low and so is pressure. All is good even though a lot of the boolit is missing. Well, a wad cutter can't change shape much, can it? Have to wonder what happened to the grease grooves and the lube!!!! Magic must make it jump ahead of the boolit and lube the bore.
Funny that as I made the wad cutter harder and harder, accuracy increased, leading stopped and the little .38 turned into a tack driver.
But I have to be sorry and apologize because pure lead is the correct lead for a .38-----WELL, ISN'T IT? After all, they sell tons of swaged boolits.
Even water dropped WW boolits will out shoot air cooled and in every single case, low velocity and fast powder rounds have needed harder lead, harder then can be shot in slow powder hunting loads.
The only way I have found soft works is with BP.
A boolit that obturates is far different then deformation.
A pretty boolit out of the mold and loaded in a case is indeed nice to look at but when something else entirely comes out of the muzzle, why not just load a hunk of lead wire?
I can not retract until proof is shown I am wrong. I have been here about 5 years now and have never, ever seen proof.
All I ask is to test for yourself. Start with any load in any revolver and work up through the alloys with a proper fitted boolit until you find exactly what your gun and load likes. Work your lead like you do a powder charge.
I will never tell a beginner that he can make dead soft lead shoot with any more then a bang. The can of worms you make him open will force him back to jacketed.

[Lloyd Smale]

cant argue with a thing you said Jim and i dont like that ;)

[44man]

cant argue with a thing you said Jim and i dont like that ;)
Hey, we never really argue! [smilie=l:
I am the laziest loader you ever seen. I never start with less then WD WW's. I take a new gun out of the box, do a trigger job, pick a boolit and work loads. It might take me 20 to 25 shots. Then I move to another boolit and do the same and I probably have 5 to 7 boolits for each gun and all shoot the way I want them.
I can increase accuracy with my better alloy but it gets expensive that way.
Now my 45-70 is deadly but I NEED a softer boolit for deer so I used Babore's boolits at 50-50 alloy, oven hardened. With a gas check I can put 4 in almost one hole but always have a flier. Sometimes 2. Now if I shoot the exact same boolit but made as a PB, they are useless because of boolit skid and if I made them hard, they would group but then they are no good for hunting. Recovered boolits show a lot of skid at the base yet they do not lead the bore too much. PB just needs to be harder.
Do I simplify things? Of course, isn't that what every shooter wants? I am not going to wear out a gun trying 15 different molds and rejecting them because the boolit is no good. It is so rare to find a boolit that refuses to shoot decent it is silly. Some shoot better of course but all will shoot.
Match alloy to what you want to do and go shoot, stop working.
My hardest job is when I need to cast. I look at a pile of molds and most times I just close my eyes and grab one because I can't decide. All of them shoot, I do not have a specific boolit for any revolver. Only certain Keith styles cause me trouble. Yet they are still good enough for most shooting. That is the point I say "They shoot good." Not great.

[44man]

My very most un-favorite boolit--a KEITH at, holy smokes, 25 yards.
On the left are WD WW boolits at 22 BHN.
On the right, a tad of tin and antimony that takes them to 28 BHN.
231 and Unique.
One shot on the right was from a clean gun but the rest cut a tiny group, so much for barrel seasoning! :veryconfu
Am I missing something???
The hundreds and hundreds of targets shot with softer lead went in the burner barrel. Unlike some, I can't make soft work.
WD WW's work with 296, no need to go harder.

[Bass Ackward]

I have been here about 5 years now and have never, ever seen proof.
All I ask is to test for yourself.


Are you kidding?

Every new member / group sees your pictures and reads your stuff gets excited. Why they run out and go hard as a rock right off. Rifle or handgun.

So after 5 years, it ain't because folks aren't trying hard, or ultra hard depending on how a person defines it.

[Changeling]

Jim, I went to Wolf springs and purchased the "spring pak" for the Ruger "Black Hawk" (3 different springs). They listed the springs as heavy, 24, 25, 26 lbs. Actually they listed them as 24,25,26, and a 28 lb spring. So, when I ordered I referenced the fact that a 28lb spring was also listed in the "Pak". and if it was a available I would like it also since it was listed.
Never received any comment back so I just went back to there web site to have a look and all reference to the 28 lb spring had disappeared, So I guess I will be getting the 24, 25, 26 lb hammer springs.
I guess they just "sprung" into action and deleted reference to the "28", LOL.

[44man]

Jim, I went to Wolf springs and purchased the "spring pak" for the Ruger "Black Hawk" (3 different springs). They listed the springs as heavy, 24, 25, 26 lbs. Actually they listed them as 24,25,26, and a 28 lb spring. So, when I ordered I referenced the fact that a 28lb spring was also listed in the "Pak". and if it was a available I would like it also since it was listed.
Never received any comment back so I just went back to there web site to have a look and all reference to the 28 lb spring had disappeared, So I guess I will be getting the 24, 25, 26 lb hammer springs.
I guess they just "sprung" into action and deleted reference to the "28", LOL.
It was a screw up, packs only come with three.
Only need the 28 if you shoot something like the .450 Marlin.

[44man]

Are you kidding?

Every new member / group sees your pictures and reads your stuff gets excited. Why they run out and go hard as a rock right off. Rifle or handgun.

So after 5 years, it ain't because folks aren't trying hard, or ultra hard depending on how a person defines it.
Now what is wrong with water dropped WW's Bass. Works fine for 98% of applications.
Have I mentioned I hate super hard like those funny laser Cast thingys. I can't get those things to shoot!
But Cast Precision, BB and all the good boolit makers use the right stuff.
But if you go buy those boxes of bulk boolits or those swaged things, you ask for problems.
And those 28 BHN bullets I tested with fast powder are not brittle, don't shatter, they are just tough.
I just dumped my boolit trap and repaired it. Boolits were going through the back. Most boolits were found around 30" deep in the rubber mulch and I have some of those Keith boolits. I will get some pictures later.

[Bret4207]

Forget it Bass, you're talking to the wall...

[jh45gun]

Guess I do not know what I am doing I shoot air cooled WW for ALL my cast bullet shooting and it works fine. Guess them bullets don't know they are supposed to be harder????

[Bass Ackward]

Now what is wrong with water dropped WW's Bass. Works fine for 98% of applications.


You misread. Hat must be on too tight. I just answered your question about people trying hard in some form.

If it makes you feel any better, I will bet that without a doubt, you are the man with the big bore, wide open, PB or death crowd. At least the ones with glass on the guns.

I shoot the entire hardness gambit and have stated so many times often going the reverse of common logic. A GC frees me from bondage and lets me do that you know. :grin:

How much is a load of sand in your area? Old rubber helps too. After you figure it all out, slowing down when you don't need wide open is a big plus too. Going bang as you like to put it, is therapeutic. And the neighbors will love you for it.

[44man]

You misread. Hat must be on too tight. I just answered your question about people trying hard in some form.

If it makes you feel any better, I will bet that without a doubt, you are the man with the big bore, wide open, PB or death crowd. At least the ones with glass on the guns.

I shoot the entire hardness gambit and have stated so many times often going the reverse of common logic. A GC frees me from bondage and lets me do that you know. :grin:

How much is a load of sand in your area? Old rubber helps too. After you figure it all out, slowing down when you don't need wide open is a big plus too. Going bang as you like to put it, is therapeutic. And the neighbors will love you for it.
Can't get a truck into my valley of death. Sand would have to be hauled down a little at a time. I tried old tires stacked but shot them to pieces and only saved a few boolits. Had steel belting all over the place.
So far the rubber mulch trap is the best and I need another one at 100 yards.

[Changeling]

I absolutely don't want to leave no stone unturned, because I have been really amazed at a lot of things that have been said on this posting.

So, all my reloading books call for the 45LC to have a case length of 1.285 in there diagrams at the heading of each cartridge.
In Rifles I have always cut back this figure back by 10 thousands (.010). This usually leaves me with no cases under that figure so I get a good clean up.

Is this the practice with revolver cases such as the .44 and .45 calibers. I realize it might seem a small thing to a lot of people, however small things add up!

[44man]

OK, I have a picture. Notice the factory loads on the left still have some lube in places in the grooves after going through the bore, 50 yards of wind and 30" of rubber. Then look at the Keith boolits that look the same as I loaded them but I can pick out the softer ones because the land marks are larger.
Even the Lee TL designs still have all of the grease grooves.
Bass, you say you picked up 500# of boolits yet you never showed a single boolit. Could all of the soft boolits be distorted? I am not talking about impact damage. Most of mine hit other boolits but the entire boolit was still there except for a couple that smeared some lead off. I think I found two little pieces.

[44man]

Darn, I post so many pictures, I am out of room again and will have to delete a bunch.
Why is it all of you that dispute things never post a picture? Is it because you can't do what you say you do?
Show and tell has more impact then hiding behind words. Why don't any of you show a guy that asks questions?

[44man]

I absolutely don't want to leave no stone unturned, because I have been really amazed at a lot of things that have been said on this posting.

So, all my reloading books call for the 45LC to have a case length of 1.285 in there diagrams at the heading of each cartridge.
In Rifles I have always cut back this figure back by 10 thousands (.010). This usually leaves me with no cases under that figure so I get a good clean up.

Is this the practice with revolver cases such as the .44 and .45 calibers. I realize it might seem a small thing to a lot of people, however small things add up!
Too much with the small things mean nothing in the end. I trim new brass to the shortest case I can find and never trim again unless some go over max length but even then there is leeway. Depends on the chamber length. Got space? Good to go. If anyone can show proof that cases .010" under shoot better then .020" under or right at the end of the chamber, I will eat the boolits. Just keep them all the same length.
Back away from the small, meaningless stuff and go to the important things. If you think reaming primer pockets or chamferring the insides aids you, go for it but if you find a better group size you are just fooling yourself. Only BR shooters need all of those things, revolver shooters will never shoot as good as the gun can.

[Bass Ackward]

Then look at the Keith boolits that look the same as I loaded them but I can pick out the softer ones because the land marks are larger.
Even the Lee TL designs still have all of the grease grooves.
Bass, you say you picked up 500# of boolits yet you never showed a single boolit. Could all of the soft boolits be distorted? I am not talking about impact damage. Most of mine hit other boolits but the entire boolit was still there except for a couple that smeared some lead off. I think I found two little pieces.



Never considered that you wanted to see some. I can get a picture. I gathered them up and decided to smelt while I had helpers. :grin:

You know a lot of your wider with softer issues would disapear if you would set that barrel back and cut down on the jump. But it will take you seeing that before you let go of it as universal fact.

Will take until I get my camera back. Holiday you know. Probably next weekend sometime.

Anything else I can get for ya?

[Lloyd Smale]

Bass probably 90 percent of the handgun shooters even on this fourm and its one of the better ones dont have 10 differnt molds and are going to take the time to try each with a bunch of differnt alloys and most probably arent good enough with a big bore sixgun to really even shoot consistantly enough off a bench to even tell the differnce. Id bet that most have one or two molds, look on here for alloy and lube recomendations and in some cases even load suggestions and load some ammo and if they can hit a can at 25 yards they think they have it whipped. When they hit that can fairly consistantly they will claim that that mixture is hands down the best. This hard vs soft argument has gone on forever and will allways be there. Some guys also will believe some article they read in a magazine or an old book like its the word of God because someone with a name wrote it. Even if there gun leads and only shoots a 4 inch group at 25 yards there thought has to be right because so and so said it is. I know some of those so called experts personaly and I know that there idea of shooting enough ammo to really test a theroy is alot differnt then mine. I know if i was to school a new caster and shooter to find the best load for his gun id surely tell them to start with the hardest lead they can make up and work backwards toward the soft side till they found the best not start with soft and work to harder. sure the definition of hard is sketchy. To me hard cast starts at air cooled ww and goes up from there or about 10bhn. Most of my best accuracy has come between 16-20 bhn. Now im talking sixguns not rifles. I will allways bow to the more experinced on here when it comes to cast rifles. Ive done alot of it but never sat and shot 10s of thousands of rounds that my sixgun advice is based on. Problem to with giving advice is that maybe one out of 10 guns will like something a bit softer and when you give advice you have to keep that in mind and keep your mind a little more open to other peoples opinions. Another thing you will run into is about the time you tell someone hard is the only way and he shoots his load with a soft bullet and the only powder and primer he has and it shoots better then the hard bullet you suggested he calls you a idiot and if he would have took the time to try 5 differnt powders and a few differnt primers he would have found his groups were cut in half by using the hard bullet or that that one load was the only load that prefered softer bullets Again theres only a few of us on here that have the time, paitents, ability and can afford the cost of shooting thousands of rounds to get an opinion and to be frank not everyone is capable of shooting well enough or even needs a sixgun to be that accuate in the first place. If all your using a sixgun for is to knock over beer cans a load thats minute of beer can is plenty accurate enough. Bottom line is someone that owns one 44 mag or one 45 colt and shoots a 1000 rounds a year and claims he gets better accuracy with soft bullets has an opinion that means very little to me. Its the guy that does that every month and does it with many differnt bullets in differnt guns that finds out the truth on this.

[Bret4207]

Darn, I post so many pictures, I am out of room again and will have to delete a bunch.
Why is it all of you that dispute things never post a picture? Is it because you can't do what you say you do?
Show and tell has more impact then hiding behind words. Why don't any of you show a guy that asks questions?

Probably because most of us have a life beyond posting pictures! It's a major chore for me to post one pic, much less make daily updates. If you think we're all lying because we don't take pictures of every group we've ever shot or boolit we've recovered...then I just don't know what to tell you.

[Bret4207]

Bass probably 90 percent of the handgun shooters even on this fourm and its one of the better ones dont have 10 differnt molds and are going to take the time to try each with a bunch of differnt alloys and most probably arent good enough with a big bore sixgun to really even shoot consistantly enough off a bench to even tell the differnce. Id bet that most have one or two molds, look on here for alloy and lube recomendations and in some cases even load suggestions and load some ammo and if they can hit a can at 25 yards they think they have it whipped. When they hit that can fairly consistantly they will claim that that mixture is hands down the best. This hard vs soft argument has gone on forever and will allways be there. Some guys also will believe some article they read in a magazine or an old book like its the word of God because someone with a name wrote it. Even if there gun leads and only shoots a 4 inch group at 25 yards there thought has to be right because so and so said it is. I know some of those so called experts personaly and I know that there idea of shooting enough ammo to really test a theroy is alot differnt then mine. I know if i was to school a new caster and shooter to find the best load for his gun id surely tell them to start with the hardest lead they can make up and work backwards toward the soft side till they found the best not start with soft and work to harder. sure the definition of hard is sketchy. To me hard cast starts at air cooled ww and goes up from there or about 10bhn. Most of my best accuracy has come between 16-20 bhn. Now im talking sixguns not rifles. I will allways bow to the more experinced on here when it comes to cast rifles. Ive done alot of it but never sat and shot 10s of thousands of rounds that my sixgun advice is based on. Problem to with giving advice is that maybe one out of 10 guns will like something a bit softer and when you give advice you have to keep that in mind and keep your mind a little more open to other peoples opinions. Another thing you will run into is about the time you tell someone hard is the only way and he shoots his load with a soft bullet and the only powder and primer he has and it shoots better then the hard bullet you suggested he calls you a idiot and if he would have took the time to try 5 differnt powders and a few differnt primers he would have found his groups were cut in half by using the hard bullet or that that one load was the only load that prefered softer bullets Again theres only a few of us on here that have the time, paitents, ability and can afford the cost of shooting thousands of rounds to get an opinion and to be frank not everyone is capable of shooting well enough or even needs a sixgun to be that accuate in the first place. If all your using a sixgun for is to knock over beer cans a load thats minute of beer can is plenty accurate enough. Bottom line is someone that owns one 44 mag or one 45 colt and shoots a 1000 rounds a year and claims he gets better accuracy with soft bullets has an opinion that means very little to me. Its the guy that does that every month and does it with many differnt bullets in differnt guns that finds out the truth on this.

And to me hard starts around 18-20 Bhn. Soft is under 9. See what I mean? We're not speaking the same language. What's more the make up of the alloy for a given Bhn can vary tremendously.

Good post though Lloyd.

[Bass Ackward]

Lloyd,

It all depends on how the gun is to be used. And that will establish how you define accuracy.

One of the biggest points is where the accuracy is supposed to come. Pure lead, or pure lead and tin will generally be a better balanced bullet for long range. So you may get bigger groups up close with harder lead but then come out ahead farther out. Elmer didn't develop his design for 25 yards, but way out. It is still hard to beat for that purpose.

Usage and definitions divide us. I define soft as up to 10 to 11 BHN. Medium has changed some from there up to 20 BHN with hard defined above that. My ACWW mix with 2% tin is 14/15 ish.

So even when we are talking, (many consider this arguing, I call it pumping for information) we are shooting the same thing. Do other people understand this? Likely not.

I have started guys off hard now. Less they have to know. And quite honestly, the faster I get them out of here. Sad, but generational differences are showing and most young guys expect the free ride.

The best results I have starting people out with cast is:

1. GC designs
2. Hollow pointing
3. Hard(er) bullets

In that order. Almost any design will be easier to shoot and certainly much more flexible if hollow pointed. The problem with PB is getting guys to understand that they can't go by pressure in a book. What pressure is with a gun with perfect, rifle like alignment can increase greatly with roughness in a cone or misalignment. Especially with faster powders.

Then they say my hardness should be able to handle way more than this. So they get better performance with slower powders ..... and harder bullets. Bullet hardness has to be sufficient for the worst cylinder. Not the average one. When the gun breaks in, this comes closer together. Then we get the syndrome listed below.

Guns define everything. If everyone here would put 2000 rounds through their guns before they started load development, posting would dry up.

Based upon the above, you get a guy with a new gun. Or a used gun that is still new. He makes a list of things to try. He starts down his list and all of a sudden accuracy comes right in. Till his dying day, that will be his go to method. Or bullet. Or lube. Try and get him to go back and test again and his results may be way different. But he won't because he knows.

Guns break in or shoot in generally before 2000 rounds. Reality was that he hit the break in point and the gun started to shoot. So there are a lot of issues. Bottom line, you have to know who you are talking to so that you can speak the same language.

Think that this was some of your multiple 44 problem? :grin:

One last point is glass. If a fella wanted to hand me a championship world record setting benchrest rifle with open sights I would turn him down. Cause it would be a waste of the gun. Same with a handgun. Trying to sell the 98% of guys not using glass, on what they need for maximum accuracy is a waste if they will never see it. kinda what you said.

[44man]

Never considered that you wanted to see some. I can get a picture. I gathered them up and decided to smelt while I had helpers. :grin:

You know a lot of your wider with softer issues would disapear if you would set that barrel back and cut down on the jump. But it will take you seeing that before you let go of it as universal fact.

Will take until I get my camera back. Holiday you know. Probably next weekend sometime.

Anything else I can get for ya?
JUMP!!!! What are you talking about? It means nothing at all with the proper alloy. I know you are being funny suggesting I change my gun to shoot soft lead, not gonna happen! [smilie=l:
Thinking the boolit has to be right at the end of the cylinder and a small gap with a short forcing cone is just plain silly and most guns need tossed out. Those revolvers that can't take all boolits and need short loaded are the worst to work with.
Can you explain why the revolver with the most jump is my most accurate?

[44man]

Break in is also a myth. If I buy a gun that needs 2000 rounds before it will shoot cast, it will be gone after 100 rounds.
Any decent revolver will shoot cast right out of the box, never to see a jacketed bullet.
Seasoning a bore with lube is a myth, one shot is all that is needed if the bore is clean. You can also shoot a group with one lube and then another lube and see results right away. If I have to clean between lubes and shoot 200 rounds to "season" a bore, I will throw the gun downrange.
The confusion some of you create with a new shooter is astounding, WHY DO YOU DO THAT?
Shooting cast better then jacketed is so stinking easy that I will never understand why some of you have to post a million posts that only confuse
If cast was so bad, I would buy all of my bullets.
I follow a few simple rules when loading, loading is the key. It works in every single revolver of any caliber.
When you tell me every .44 mag needs something different, YOU are wrong. You are fooling with stuff that does not work. Your years and years of fooling around is a huge waste of time and you never shoot any better. I am willing to bet that what you did 50 years ago has never, ever changed and you shoot the same today.
Yet all of you insist on complicating it so bad that you can turn shooters away.
I want a new shooter with a new gun and mold to shoot the best he can right at the start so you can argue with me forever, but you are WRONG!
Funny that there are only two or three that disagree and cause the most friction. Funny also that some that never agree with me will repeat what I have posted as their own findings and then disagree with me again.
I have seen many, many of the things I have said repeated by those that say I am wrong. Flip-Flop! :kidding:

[pmeisel]

All this blather has me thinking of just buying a bunch of j-word bullets.... :-)

[Bass Ackward]

JUMP!!!! What are you talking about? It means nothing at all with the proper alloy. I know you are being funny suggesting I change my gun to shoot soft lead, not gonna happen! [smilie=l:
Thinking the boolit has to be right at the end of the cylinder and a small gap with a short forcing cone is just plain silly and most guns need tossed out. Those revolvers that can't take all boolits and need short loaded are the worst to work with.
Can you explain why the revolver with the most jump is my most accurate?



Ahhhhhhh. I just got chewed out by you cause all 44s are equal. For me to suggest otherwise was wrong and deceptive on my part.

Therefore there is no such thing as a more accurate revolver. Or more or less accurate mechanicals.

One load, with one hardness, with liberty and justice for all.

Did I get it right .... or are you trying to confuse me? :grin:

[giz189]

44man, I have always shot Keith style bullets in my 41 magnum, however, I wonder if you could suggest a mould that would cast bullets of the type you shoot in your 44's for a 41. I would really like to try the WFN or RFN in my 41. Can you suggest a mould or bullet style? I would like to start out about 12-1300 fps. Maybe you could suggest a, for lack of a better word, hardness for this bullet. The will be used on our whitetail deer and hogs. Deer are smallish in size. Thanks.

[Lloyd Smale]

Well i find big differnces in differnt 44 mags or differnt 45 colts. As a matter of fact i see very few times when any two like the same load. Im up in the air about breakin but still shoot a 100 jacketed bullets through a gun when its new. dont really know if it helps or not but it just an old habbit. As to seasoning a bore ive seen just to many times where a gun shot like **** till it had about a 100 rounds through it and have even noticed that when changing lubes it accuracy seems to improve after about 5o rounds so i have to cheer on the side of guys that claim it does help. John Linebaugh knows more about revolvers then most of us and he also will tell you a bore needs to be seasoned before a gun will settle in. Problem is with all of the things like these is its impossible to really prove one way or the other. A guy has to go by his experiences shooting thousands of rounds and like weve allready proved, change any one variable and the results an individual gets can change drasticaly. thats why theres disagreements on here. Its just that some guys realize different results can happen and some think that its there way or the highway. I guess i fall in the middle of those two personalitys. Ask my wife though and she will tell you i go more toward the latter ;)

[Bret4207]

some folks refuse to venture out side their little comfortable area. If it works for them, that's fine. Messing with everyone else is not the way to do things IMO.

[44man]

44man, I have always shot Keith style bullets in my 41 magnum, however, I wonder if you could suggest a mould that would cast bullets of the type you shoot in your 44's for a 41. I would really like to try the WFN or RFN in my 41. Can you suggest a mould or bullet style? I would like to start out about 12-1300 fps. Maybe you could suggest a, for lack of a better word, hardness for this bullet. The will be used on our whitetail deer and hogs. Deer are smallish in size. Thanks.
The Keith is OK as long as it does not distort. WD, WW's should be OK. The meplat must be large enough for hunting.
The big problem with the .41 is the lack of molds in all forms. It is a wonderful caliber but never took off like the .44.
Cast Performance has some great boolits so I would buy some and work with them. Once you find a load and boolit, maybe Babore will cut you one of his wonderful molds.
The only mold maker that has any kind of selection is Saeco, No. 415 and 410 should work but the meplats are small and I would not hunt with them. They need to be softer for some expansion. They are getting into .357 territory.
If you get a meplat equal to a WLN on the .44, you can kill game with a fairly hard boolit. Keep the weight up for penetration.

[Lloyd Smale]

hands down best shooting 41 bullet ive found is the lbt 250 lfngc. Im not fan of lbt molds as i think you can find a better constucted mold at the same price but that bullet shoots good enough that id buy it. Ive yet to find a 41 that wouldnt shoot it well.

[44man]

I season cast iron cookware! [smilie=l:
A clean bore needs ONE shot.
Now if the lube is bad and the bore leads up, I have no answer as to what it takes to become stable.
I only have one example to show you.
The group on the left was shot with a poor lube followed immediately by 5 shots with a good lube.
This has been my experience forever.

[Bret4207]

Many smallbore shooters would disagree with your assessment.

[44man]

Many smallbore shooters would disagree with your assessment.
Do I look like a small bore shooter?
Now when I shot IHMSA with small bore single shots and jacketed bullets, the same thing held, ONE shot before going to the match. NEVER go with a clean gun. You will miss the first chicken and lose the match with 39 out of 40.
It is also funny that when testing an Anchutz .22 that I could move from make to make of bullets to the best without a change. I put 13 shots in one hole with RWS loads after shooting a dozen other loads.
Same with my Mark II's, never needed to do a thing between makes.
Never seen shooting one bullet or boolit in a rifle made another shoot bad until the barrel was "seasoned."
Hoopla, old wives tales or excuses. If you tell me I need 50 shots to "settle" a bore I will tell you that you are out of your mind.

[Changeling]

In the article by "Fryxel", he made a statement about LBT bullets coming to close to the end of the cylinder, and further that if about 50 thousands clearance wasn't between the face of the bullet and the end of the cylinder throat there was a possibility of "Flash Over" witch could melt some of the face of the next bullet in line!

Has anyone ever experienced this, I had never heard of it.

[Bret4207]

Do I look like a small bore shooter?
Now when I shot IHMSA with small bore single shots and jacketed bullets, the same thing held, ONE shot before going to the match. NEVER go with a clean gun. You will miss the first chicken and lose the match with 39 out of 40.
It is also funny that when testing an Anchutz .22 that I could move from make to make of bullets to the best without a change. I put 13 shots in one hole with RWS loads after shooting a dozen other loads.
Same with my Mark II's, never needed to do a thing between makes.
Never seen shooting one bullet or boolit in a rifle made another shoot bad until the barrel was "seasoned."
Hoopla, old wives tales or excuses. If you tell me I need 50 shots to "settle" a bore I will tell you that you are out of your mind.

I've been out of my mind for years, nothing new there. But the fact remains many of us, myself included, have seen a difference among lubes. Again, just because you don't see it or can't make it work for you doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

[Bret4207]

In the article by "Fryxel", he made a statement about LBT bullets coming to close to the end of the cylinder, and further that if about 50 thousands clearance wasn't between the face of the bullet and the end of the cylinder throat there was a possibility of "Flash Over" witch could melt some of the face of the next bullet in line!

Has anyone ever experienced this, I had never heard of it.

I suppose it's possible for some gas erosion to happen. I think "melt" is a poor choice of wording since there isn't time for any melting to take place.

[44man]

In the article by "Fryxel", he made a statement about LBT bullets coming to close to the end of the cylinder, and further that if about 50 thousands clearance wasn't between the face of the bullet and the end of the cylinder throat there was a possibility of "Flash Over" witch could melt some of the face of the next bullet in line!

Has anyone ever experienced this, I had never heard of it.
That depends on the gun, most have enough room between chambers.
If you really want to see this happen use boolits in a Rem cap and ball instead of round balls. the next chamber is almost under the cone edge. The boolit nose will be eroded badly.
I don't think they melt but are sure gas cut from pressure. Time of heat is too short to melt them.
I have not seen it on a Freedom with boolits right to the end of the throats. Might depend on how the gas is steered across the front of the cylinder.