No leading? Really?

[fourdollarbill]

Okay I'm pulling the rip cord.
I have been trying to make a cast bullet work without leading for a long time. I have tried every suggestion you can find on these forums and I still get some leading. I tried near every sized bullet factory made and every bullet I made from #2 alloy to 50/50 ww/lead mix to "hardness optimized" and I still get leading.

I hear shooters claiming "i shot 62 billion rounds and never had an inky of leading"

Is this bull or not? Do you have some leading but don't claim it?
Is this a case of "one up" that got out of hand.

Swear on a stack of ingots - you get no leading. :killingpc

[303Guy]

I had a 44mag that never had any leading. I did not shoot brazzillions of shots through it though. A friend had a Rossi 357 that never showed any leading and I once loaded up and fired eight cast boolits through my 303 Brit and got no leading then one single errant shot from another boolit type put some leading in it. The nature of this rifles leading leads me to believe it's due to a bore condition.

[wallenba]

I rarely get leading. I use a fairly hard alloy. even in my low velocity handgun target loads. Yesterday I put 50 rounds through my M38 Mosin-Nagant with 19BHN cast 200 gr bullets lubed with LLA. It literally was cleaner when I got it home than when I left the house. It was previously packed with dried cosmolene and I had spent many hours trying to get it out. Satisfied that it was safe to shoot, I shot it. My load was a reduced load of TrailBoss and velocity was probably under 1700 FPS. Boolit hardness, bore fit and load pressure is the key IMO.

[Char-Gar]

YOu fail to give enough information for an intelligence reply. YOu do not mention whether you are talking about rifle, pistol or revolver, gas check or plain base. So, I will just give you a stab in the dark.

In a rifle with a good smooth bore, using a gas check bullet of proper temper for the pressure, being a proper fit to the barrel, with a good quality lube and the barrel having the correct twist for the bullet rpms, I get zero leading. I experience this in several dozen rifles in my possession.

Change any of the above, and you might get a different answer, but that is the best I can do with what I have to work with. I don't know what you have done or what you are trying to do, but gas check cast bullet loads that don't lead are not very difficult to find. You are making a fundamental error somewhere.

[fourdollarbill]

YOu fail to give enough information for an intelligence reply.
Good point...
I shoot revolvers from 2" to 6". Model 10, 642, 637, Victory, GP100, SP101.
All are 38spl or 357 mag.

[Pirate69]

$4,
I understand your frustration. I am new to casting and suffer the same problem somewhat. I am slowly learning how to eliminate leading with a number of calibers and loads. I started out with low charges and worked up. I still do not shoot anything that approaches a standard load. However, each time I get leading, I go back to where I was not getting leading see what is different. I think it is all a matter of gaining experience. Some of our members here have done it so long that it is second nature to them and they have trouble understanding the newby mistakes.

[lwknight]

I'm seeing a pattern here. Always check the exit of the cylinder to see that it does not squeeze your boolits to undersize.
I have a GP-100 and SRH that both do not lead up whatsoever with medium loads.

[Moonie]

Ok, you do have a good point. I do not have any leading with my current 45 acp load in either my 1911 or my sons 1911. HOWEVER, with this boolit and load I did initially have leading. The boolit I'm using is the Lee 230TC with normal lube grooves. The original load was ACWW with straight lee alox and crimped using the lee TCD. I adjusted my technique a bit and now use WCWW instead of air cooled, 45/45/10 instead of straight alox and while I still run them through the TCD I no longer apply a crimp on them. As I do not size the boolits the TCD does iron them out the loaded round enough to slip fit in the chamber perfectly. Without the TCD the loaded rounds wouldn't go into the chamber without coaxing.

Sometimes it is all about finding what the gun prefers. Lots of variables involved, the fun is in finding it.

[fredj338]

Well there is leading & appreciable leading. If everything is right, I get very little leading, most cleans out w/ normal brush & patches. Some tougher cases need ChoreBoy. Some bbls just won't shoot lead bullet w/o leading regardless of what yo udo, they are just too rough. Shooitng lead after jacketed can also be the culprit.

[405]

I had a 44mag that never had any leading. I did not shoot brazzillions of shots through it though. A friend had a Rossi 357 that never showed any leading and I once loaded up and fired eight cast boolits through my 303 Brit and got no leading then one single errant shot from another boolit type put some leading in it. The nature of this rifles leading leads me to believe it's due to a bore condition.

303Guy,
That's pretty much what I've found. It's by no means an absolute but seems to be the most overriding factor.

fourdollarbill,
I'll swear on a stack of gold plated latinum ingots, that in some guns with some loads I do not get any leading. Some guns no matter how good the bore looks, minus microscopic inspection with a scope that I don't have, I get some leading no matter the load, bullet, alloy, bullet design, loading technique, etc. My gut tells me it's the bore, chamber, throat.... something to do with the gun.

I shoot a lot of cast in a Colt 45 ACP 1911. I put a new Storm Lake barrel in it. While the bore shows some tool marks.... it does not lead. I have a Marlin Micro Groove 357 carbine I shoot cast in..... it does not lead. My 3 Sharps, one Shiloh, one CSA and one original..... do not lead. On the other hand a couple of S&W revolvers that have, visually, excellent bores.... do lead. While a couple of other S&W revolvers that may not have as good of bores, visually, do not lead. There are many more examples.

Then there is amount of lead? Even the guns that do not lead, do show evidence of a smear or trace amount along the bore surface. It's not visible and doesn't seem to increase shot after shot but it's there. The only reason I know is because a solvent patch run through and after all the powder fouling is removed.... shows the tell tale dark gray stain of lead. I can easily live with that if it is called leading. :)

[geargnasher]

I'm seeing a pattern here. Always check the exit of the cylinder to see that it does not squeeze your boolits to undersize.
I have a GP-100 and SRH that both do not lead up whatsoever with medium loads.

Glad I'm not the only one to see the pattern! The other pattern is Ruger and Smith & Wesson! Several long periods of manufacture of both brands had HUGE dimensionality issues as far as shooting cast is concerned.

If you're getting leading I'll bet that stack of ingots you want me to swear on that you have awful, raggedy forcing cones that look like they were cut with a dull nail, and your main issue is undersized cylinder throats.

Get that straightened out, use a GOOD lube, correctly fitting boolit, correct crimp, expander ball dimension, powder, primer, pressure/velocity/alloy ratio, and I can almost guarantee you will see no lead galling in your guns.

NOW, back to that stack of ingots: I have a brand-new, unmodified, Uberti 1872 open-top in .45 Colt 7-1/2" bbl. That gun won't lead. It just flat won't leave ANY lead ANYWHERE, not even in the cylinder forcing cone where the boring marks are rough. The reason it doesn't lead is that everything is right. I'm shooting it at around 850 fps at (est.) 12-13,000 c.u.p. with ACWW+2% tin (bhn 13), sizing .452" to fit the .451" groove and .4545" cylinder throats, being an open top there is ZERO restriction at the barrel forcing cone from being threaded into a frame, the barrel, forcing cone, and cylinder throats are nice and smooth. Oh, and it groups very well.

Compare that to a Ruger New Vaquero .45 Colt, 7-1/2" bbl. It leaded the barrel like crazy from one end to the other when it was brand new, and was pie-plate-at 25 accurate. First, I found the cylinder throats were .451", just like the barrel groove. Not the end of the world, but borderline. Then, I found that while the groove was .451", the forcing cone was a smidge under .450"!! After reaming the forcing cone and firelapping, I got that restriction AND the rolled-lettering/front sight restrictions burned out. Still got a little leading in the first part of the barrel, so I opened the cylinder throats to .452, same as the boolits. Now it shoots, and doesn't lead at all.

My wife has a S&W Model 36-2 in .38 spl. When she got it slightly used, it was leaded up like crazy. I cleaned it, measured it, and found the cylinder throats were all about .3555" with a .357" groove (as best I could measure the 5-groove rifling). I immediately reamed it to .358", made a lap and polished the terrible forcing cone, loaded it with the right stuff, and it shoots like a champ now.

Ruger GP100, cylinder throats .3560-.3585", got it super cheap because it had no rifling left due to lead buildup, and it wouldn't hit a barn from the inside. Reamed, firelapped, polished, now it shoots pretty good. Zero leading, but I never got it to really drive tacks, 2" at 15 yards is about it, although very consistent. Maybe it needs a different boolit or powder, some day I'll dope it out.

I could go on and on, but hopefully you get the point. Folks that are having leading problems often shouldn't be, it's just that the factories don't make guns to shoot lead, they make them to some hypothetical accuracy spec with jacketed bullets, and don't care about us casters. It's up to YOU or your gunsmith to correct the guns to work with cast, and IME most gunsmiths have more misconceptions about proper dimensionality with lead boolits than most brand-new casters do. It's a real mess trying to convince one to ream a cylinder, especially if he's convinced your whole problem is you're shooting boolits that are less than 25 bhn. If you find a 'smith that want's to argue with you, walk away. Unless he's a real expert in casting and shooting revolvers, he's likely to do more harm than good.

FWIW,

Gear

[rbstern]

Some guns I've had leaded easily. Others seem to resist leading. My Rossi M92 in 38/357 will digest just about anything without leading. I've gone as high as 2075fps with plain wheel weight alloy and no gas check in that gun. No leading.

When I come across a gun that seems to resist leading, it's on the keeper list and becomes very trade resistant.

[Char-Gar]

Sixguns change the paradigm a whole bunch. First of all let's define leading as it regards sixguns, at least in my opinion.

Any plain base bullet will leave some lead wash in the rear end of the barrel and maybe farther down. That is just an expectation. In hundreds of thousands of cast bullet through a sixguns, I have never had totaly zero lead with plain base bullets. With gas check bullets yes, but with plain base bullet no.

I consider this lead wash not to be leading. It is just like powder trash and is not a problem until or unless it begins to degrade accuracy. This lead wash should not degrade accuracy for several hundred rounds at least.

When I get through shooting, I clamp the sixgun in the shop vise by the barrel, with soft jaws of course. I take a tight fitting bronze bristle brush, and with plenty of solvent give about 20 for and aft strokes. I them run some wet patches through the barrel, followed by a dry and take a peek. Most often the barrel will be sparkling clean. Sometimes there will be a trace in a spot or two. I give those heck with the brush and clean again.

If that doesn't do it, Then we have a leading issue that needs attention.

A smooth and high polished bore will make the above much quicker and easier.

Now that is the truth about cast bullets in sixguns as I know and experience it. I would be very skeptical of tales of many rounds of plain base case bullets with zero lead wash. I think this whole thing may revolve around what is meant by the word "leading", not to be Clintonian.

[1Shirt]

I have always experianced at least a little leading in revolvers, and have just accepted it as the norm. On the other hand, with rifles, once I get the load(s) that I am after and with the right lube, and right size, I almost never get any leading. Have one or two that are exceptions to that rule, but with these, leading is minimal. To me over bore size by at least 2 thousands, and a darn good lube is the key in almost all cases, and I tend to cast almost every thing for rifle pretty hard.
1Shirt!:coffee:

[MtGun44]

NO leading with thousands of full power .357 mag and .44 Mag loads in multiple pistols,
once I knew how to do it properly.

No reason in the world to put up with leading. Dimensions of the gun are important, and
fit of the boolit is CRITICAL !

You want boolits at absolute minimum to be throat diameter and you want the throat
diam to be equal or larger than the groove diam of bbl. I have has best results with
+.001 or .002 over throat diameter. No need for anything harder than air cooled wheel
weights with a proper boolit design, good lube and proper dimensions for full magnum
velocities with zip leading.

Bill

[chris in va]

I get a little through my Sig 220, not enough to worry about cleaning after 200 rounds. But it's there!

[Edubya]

I have never had to scrub my 642. The 617 has a perfect record also. My DW CCOB .45 does not require anything more than a bore-snake. These are all shot at 900 fps or less. My 629 does require some maintenance after a day at the range (usually 50 rds) of 1100+ fps. Now the 9mm XD 4" has also been a bugger at times. It is stock from the factory barrel but I also have an XD-9 in the 5" with a match barrel and it comes clean with the bore-snake even after 100 of the 125 gr at 1160+ fps.

EW

[mustanggt]

Geargnasher. I too have that 1872 open top in 44spl and get zero leading. It is silly how accurate it is. Nothing in any of my other handguns comes as close as that. I have 4 ruger 44magnums. A 50th aniversary Blackhawk leads quite a bit but isn't tough to clean. Just run scotch brite pad down the bore a few times and that usually takes care of it. All the rest of them don't lead enough to talk about. I shoot .432 size bullets in them which seem to work rather well. I shoot .360 size bullets in 38spl and 357 and they don't lead enough to talk about either. Most of them are shot with LLA lube. I shoot fat bullets in my 45 and get zero leading. My 45/70 Marlin and Sharps rifles shoot with no lead. Maybe I'm just lucky but I think that the proper sized bullet is most of the answer.

[nicholst55]

I've got a little Taurus 2" M85CH that leads within a couple of cylinders of commercial cast boolits. I just recently started casting .38 boolits - actually I just recently resumed casting at all after a decades-long hiatus, and haven't tried any of my own cast boolits through it yet.

None of my other .38s or .357s leads at all, even with the too-hard, crappy crayon lubed commercial bevel-base SWC bullets I've been using.

I've fired many thousands of rounds of cast through a number of .45 ACP M1911s over the decades and never experienced any leading, except for one time I was shooting unlubed round balls.

I have loaded cast rifle boolits at pressures and velocities which exceeded the limits of that particular alloy - they leaded like a big dog! I've fired many, many other cast boolit rifle loads that didn't lead at all.

[Dannix]

First, I found the cylinder throats were .451", just like the barrel groove. Not the end of the world, but borderline. Then, I found that while the groove was .451", the forcing cone was a smidge under .450"!! After reaming the forcing cone and firelapping, I got that restriction AND the rolled-lettering/front sight restrictions burned out. Still got a little leading in the first part of the barrel, so I opened the cylinder throats to .452, same as the boolits. Now it shoots, and doesn't lead at all.

Wow. I wonder if Ruger would have done this for you or if you would have just gotten something about 'within spec' or some such. Am I correct in assuming Ruger's spec sheet has the forcing cone and cylinders larger than bore and this is just a tolerance issue, or are these being made basically with no consideration to cast?

Who's your gunsmith, if you care to share? We got any gunsmith sponsors? A lead-friendly gunsmith list would be nice to have.


On a side note, has anyone ever had an after-market semi-auto barrel that was a dud with cast? I'm planning on picking up a Jarvis for a 9mm...I wonder if he would willing to cherry pick a drop in.

[qajaq59]

In my Winchester 30-30 I get no leading. But it took a while and some fussing to reach that point. However, in my Marlin 30-30 which had the micro-grooves, I never reached the no leading stage, or much in the way of accuracy either, so I got rid of the it.

[Bret4207]

I have several revolvers that get that "lead wash" with PB. If it doesn't build up I consider it okay. OTH I have some that will lead with GC designs and badly at that. Still working on fit issues there.

[Maven]

"Okay I'm pulling the rip cord. I have been trying to make a cast bullet work without leading for a long time. I have tried every suggestion you can find on these forums and I still get some leading. I tried near every sized bullet factory made and every bullet I made from #2 alloy to 50/50 ww/lead mix to "hardness optimized" and I still get leading. I hear shooters claiming "i shot 62 billion rounds and never had an inkling of leading"

Is this bull or not? Do you have some leading but don't claim it? Is this a case of "one up" that got out of hand. Swear on a stack of ingots - you get no leading.


$4bill, Actually, I sometimes get leading toward the muzzle of some of my rifles, which tells me that my alloy (WW + 1% Sn, not hardened) is a bit soft and the CB's need a bit more lube.* Btw, that's especially true of PB rifle CB's driven a bit too fast. However, I have several rifles that have rarely leaded, as long as the velocity was held to ~2,000 fps or less: A Ruger #1 in .243Win. and 2 K-31's. Moreover, I do get leading with some bore riding CB's, e.g., Saeco #301 (nee RG-4) and the 195 gr. Lee 8mm Group Buy mold, if I don't coat the noses with liquid alox. Btw, you may want to change the amount of Sn in your alloy to 1% - 2% and water quench your CB's to minimize the odds of leading. If you own a chronograph or have access to one, you can quickly determine at what velocity you get leading in order to remedy it..


*This assumes that the CB's fit the bore.

[Three44s]

If it's too hot in the kitchen ........ go back to the J-words.

Not one of us pick up a gun and get instant gratification ....... the chase is part of the enjoyment.

But when we hit do pay dirt ..... the end of that chase is more SWEET!

Three 44s

[Char-Gar]

"You want boolits at absolute minimum to be throat diameter and you want the throat
diam to be equal or larger than the groove diam of bbl. I have has best results with
+.001 or .002 over throat diameter. No need for anything harder than air cooled wheel
weights with a proper boolit design, good lube and proper dimensions for full magnum
velocities with zip leading." Bill/Mtngun

I think Bill summed up cast bullets in revolvers as well and as shortly as it can be done. Most often I size my bullets a smidge larger than the largest cylinder throat. As long as the loaded rounds will chamber you are go to go. The larger bullets will swage down in the throats to a custom fit. As long as the bullets are groove diamter or larger when they impact you are good to go.

Forcing cone roughness and mico machine hickies in the barrel can throw a monkey wrench into the works and leading will occur no matter what you try. A forcing cone can be recut and barrels smoothed.

I have a Smith K-38 that is one of the most accurate revolvers I have ever fired. It gave unacceptable leading no matter what I tried. I recut the forcing cone and smoothed and polished the barrel and now it is a delight. I have only run accross a few sixguns that needed such work, but they do exist.

If you are doing as Bill suggest above about bullet fit, using ACWW and a good soft lube you should be getting good results. If not, then it is time to consider the sixgun as the culprit.

If you are using those rock hard alloys, Lee snot or that nasty wax stuff for lube, then you need to change your loading habits.

[geargnasher]

Wow. I wonder if Ruger would have done this for you or if you would have just gotten something about 'within spec' or some such. Am I correct in assuming Ruger's spec sheet has the forcing cone and cylinders larger than bore and this is just a tolerance issue, or are these being made basically with no consideration to cast? A friend of mine sent his NMBH back for similar issues, they test fired it, demonstrated it would group six into six inches at 25 yards (or meters, I don't rememer), with jacketed ammo and said the gun was in spec, have a nice life..... And BTW the gun isn't warranted to function with handloads OR lead. The way I see it, you can buy a BFR and all this is done for you, or you can buy two Rugers (they ARE very inexpensive) and finish the job for them. If a cylinder had grossly oversized throats, I would make my point with Ruger about it and I'm sure they would fix it.

Who's your gunsmith, if you care to share? We got any gunsmith sponsors? A lead-friendly gunsmith list would be nice to have. I have a decent local gunsmith, but he's useless for cast. He does put aside his own ideas and do what I ask sometimes, but most of the stuff I need done to my revolvers for shooting cast is well within my own ability, and even buying the right tools is cheaper than paying him. He does D/T, crown jobs, headspace jobs, etc, stuff I can't do.


On a side note, has anyone ever had an after-market semi-auto barrel that was a dud with cast? I'm planning on picking up a Jarvis for a 9mm...I wonder if he would willing to cherry pick a drop in.

With Ruger, you get what you pay for. A cheap, super-durable gun with good action (once you replace the springs), and sloppy production tolerances in the cylinder and barrel. They are not really designed with lead boolits in mind, and it is what it is, I have zero problem paying $450 for a lifetime gun that needs some final fit-finish and tweaking to suit my needs. Smith & Wesson, on the other hand, has made more garbage at three times the price than I care to think about. No excuses for them, from about 1982 on they have a ton of issues. Remember back in the mid-'80s when they were making one revolver every six minutes on a shift? Well, how good do you suppose they were?

I think it's a misconception (understandably so) for many newer forum members that an out-of-the-box revolver can shoot cast well without some changes. Some canand do, but it's not necessarily to be expected. When we talk of how well such-and-such gun shoots with x boolit, what isn't mentioned is the hours of measuring, polishing, shooting, brass prep, you name it that went into perfecting that combination.

Gear

[mpmarty]

Hmmmmmmmm... let's see here.
I've got three 10mm semi-autos that absolutely do not lead the bore with my 170gr cast truncated cone boolits lubed with LLA/JPW 50/50. I've also got a Taurus 1911 a SA XD and a Rock Island Armory in 45acp as well as my trusty carry pistol a Taurus PT145 Pro also a 45acp. None of these lead beyond a light smear that comes right out with a bronze brush and elbow grease. The 45s all shoot the 230gr TC boolit from the LEE tumble lube design and again they are lubed with the fifty fifty JPW LLA mixture. My powder of choice for the ten MMs is AA#9 and the 45s thrive on Red Dot and 700X.

[geargnasher]

Hmmmmmmmm... let's see here.
I've got three 10mm semi-autos that absolutely do not lead the bore with my 170gr cast truncated cone boolits lubed with LLA/JPW 50/50. I've also got a Taurus 1911 a SA XD and a Rock Island Armory in 45acp as well as my trusty carry pistol a Taurus PT145 Pro also a 45acp. None of these lead beyond a light smear that comes right out with a bronze brush and elbow grease. The 45s all shoot the 230gr TC boolit from the LEE tumble lube design and again they are lubed with the fifty fifty JPW LLA mixture. My powder of choice for the ten MMs is AA#9 and the 45s thrive on Red Dot and 700X.

See, just goes to show what works at my house may not work in yours, and vice versa.

The fact that there are nuances to our loading techniques, tools, and guns that differ and can have a huge effect upon results is often forgotten here. I try not to forget that the "law" in my mind based upon my experiences isn't a general law.

BTW, I use HS6 due to better velocity/lower pressure, meters well, and the case volume is PERFECT for my seating depth, I get about 95% load density with it.

Gear

[Dale53]

I have shot several hundred thousands of cast bullets in rifles, revolvers, and auto pistols. I really don't have much information on what causes leading as I really don't have that problem. I won't list the rifles, pistols, and autos that I shoot and have shot but it is a BUNCH.

I believe that one thing helped me, is that I started with absolutely NO information at all. Being aware that I knew NOTHING, at about age fourteen, my first book on the subject was Elmer Keith's little blue book, "Sixgun Cartridges & Loads". I did NO "creative thinking", but followed his recipes EXACTLY. I had NO leading right from the start. However, the revolvers and later pistols I started with were calibers that over the years have a record of correct dimensions. That was part of my "success". Most .38's/,357's and .44 Specials/Magnums in S&W and Ruger had/have good dimensions (at least the ones I and friends have owned).

I have read just about everything written and listened to those that knew. I didn't blindly follow their directions but pretty much did what made sense. I carefully followed true experts like E.H. Harrison and C.E. "Ed" Harris of the NRA as well as the great gunsmiths like Dinan. There were others. One might say I "Paid Attention".

Too many today, listen to "Non-experts" that talk loud but have little actual experience (the Internet is particularly full of people like that).

If I were a shooter today, who wanted someone to advise me, you could do a lot worse than listening to someone like John Taffin and Brian Pearce as well as Glen Fryxzell (just three examples who should be familiar to most). In fact, I would go so far as to say if those names are NOT familiar to you, then you are missing the boat.

There are a number of people on this very forum who are VERY knowledgeable and helpful. Always, keep in mind that no one person, regardless of how much experience he has, knows it all when compared with the collective wisdom of many. The problem with the Internet (and make no mistake, I LOVE IT) it is sometimes hard to "separate the wheat from the chaff".

I have told you that I don't have much experience in eliminating leading and that is the truth because I have seldom had a problem).

However, I never had a .45 Colt until several years ago when I got my first one. It was a Ruger Vaquero. The throats were just a bit undersized and with black powder (that's what I bought it for, black powder matches) there were no real problems. However, with smokeless it did lead a bit. Same with the later Bisley Vaquero .45 Colt. Last year I bought a Ruger SS Bisley .45 Colt/.45 ACP Convertible. I have previously detailed the problems with it. All of the leading and inaccuracy went away when I reamed the cylinder throats on all of the revolvers involved. I was trained as a machinist, so it was simple for me to accurately slug the throats and ream the cylinders. That would NOT be true for an individual who did not have "good hands" and no training. Minor problem for me, Major for many others.

Another thing that helped me immensely was that I started out at fourteen or so casting my own bullets. I have shot jacketed bullets in most all of my guns but regarding handguns, almost entirely used cast bullets (I have boxes of jacketed bullets I have had more than thirty years, just in case[smilie=1:).

My advice to a newbie who is having leading problems is pick your "expert" wisely, then listen to him...

FWIW
Dale53

[putteral]

Way to go Dale. Could not have said it better!

[Char-Gar]

There is much wisdom in what Dale says. I began bullet casting for sixguns in 1959 at the age of 17. I did so as there was no other source of bullets available, at least none I could afford. I was working in the blind except for a Lyman 41 handbook, and the writtings of Elmer Keith, Bob Hagel, Skeeter Skelton and the like that appeared in the very few gun publications available at the time. I didn't think I knew more than they did and followed their footsteps to the letter. I also had good sucess very early one. I didn't meet, know and compare notes to any other bullet casters until a good 15 years into the craft. I have records of every round I have loaded and fired, but have never had the energy to add them up. I know I have fired over 1/4 million rounds of cast through various 45 ACPs and that many again through various other handguns.

Today, the Internet is the thing and folks flock here their questions. Every member of the board rushes to help which is a good thing. But the bad thing is some folks just don't have the experience to back up their counsel, as they just parrot what they heard from somewhere else. There advice is only as good as their source of information. Some folks spout just pure nonsense. Others are riding hobby horses of one kind or another and push the thread off on some tangent. Many answer questions that nobody asked, just to try and show off their knowledge real or not.

If the psuedo-experts get called on their BS, things turn nasty, so most folks just look the other way. Most of the original and truly knowledable founders of this site have left, primary because they were fed up with the trivia and nonsense being propagated.

The literature if still out there if a person is willing to take advantage of it, and do a little self education. Those who are too lazy to do so, are at the mercy of whoever pushes the "submit" button.

If you are not willing to read the literature then do as Dale says and pick your sources carefully. John Taffin is only semi-available via the Internet. I have no idea where to find Brian Pierce, but Glen Fryxell is a member of this board and several others. He is very generous with his counsel and advice. Glen knowsas much as anybody alive about cast bullets in sixguns and probably more than even many of the more recognizable names. All of the above have written extensively and their knowledge in out there for anyone to use...however that means you have to spend the time to hunt it up and read it.

[Recluse]

I have always experianced at least a little leading in revolvers, and have just accepted it as the norm. On the other hand, with rifles, once I get the load(s) that I am after and with the right lube, and right size, I almost never get any leading. Have one or two that are exceptions to that rule, but with these, leading is minimal. To me over bore size by at least 2 thousands, and a darn good lube is the key in almost all cases, and I tend to cast almost every thing for rifle pretty hard.
1Shirt!:coffee:

Pretty much the same for me.

I have one S&W 686 with an 8 3/8" barrel (my pride and joy wheelgun, and my favorite firearm of the entire arsenal) that gets zero leading with my cast loads. All other wheelguns will get a little now and then.

Also have an old Series 70 gov't Colt in .45ACP that will lead if you even hold it near a bucket of wheelweights, let alone shoot it. No matter what I do, that gun leads. It shoots remarkably well and accurate for an old stock 1911, so I put up with it and just accept it as a matter of course.

Rifles? Like 1stShirt, once I get the load and combo down, it's rare that I ever see any leading.

:coffee:

[looseprojectile]

Before any one made jacketed bullets for hand guns I got a flattop .357 ruger single action. Then the only ammunition available were soft lead swaged mostly 158 grain plain base bullets. Six shots and you would have strings of lead poking out of the muzzle.
I recognized that the soft lead was the problem. I then went on a campaign to harden the alloys I cast my boolits from. Combination of alloy, gas checks, lube and powder burning rate put together resulted in little to no leading for these fifty some years. Then you could buy H240 powder for as little as fifty cents a pound.
That powder was ideal for high velocity loads in a .357. SP primers fifty cents a hundred or less on sale.
Anology--- Had a friend tell me one time "You can't make a hotrod go fast just by putting money on the hood, you have to do the work to it".
These days I see a lot of attempts to buy success. Some things still have to be worked for. I wish you lots of good luck in finding that which works for you.
Skeeter Skelton put into print that which I found to work in my .357s.
Life is good

[qajaq59]

There's one guy in here who I wont name, although his initials are Bret that kept saying, "Make it fit, fit, fit." So I did....... Solved the problem on my Winchester nicely. :mrgreen:

[geargnasher]

Yes, and you're not the only one he's helped by riding his high-horse, either :-)

Gear

[frankenfab]

I have always taken the easy way out and used gas checks 90% of the time. But I can say the Lee .476/400 PB never leaded in my FA .475 or BFR.

[Dale53]

There has been some mention of certain writers not really being available on the Internet. Writers that make a living or significant additional income by, duh-h-h, writing will not be apt to spend a lot of time on the Internet answering questions.

1 - They couldn't possibly have the time to do so.

2 - If they had the time, they would put it to use making income.

3 - Those, such as John Taffin, Brian Pearce, and Glen Fryxzell, have a LOT of
EXCELLENT articles available online. John Taffin has a bunch of articles on "Sixguns.com", Brian Pearce has articles in every issue of the Handloader for the past several years (and currently - I E-subscribe to Wolfe Publications for a third of the cost of paper editions) and Glen Fryxzell has many articles (very instructive, I might add) on http://www.lasc.us/ArticlesFryxell.htm

There is enough reading for many an evening and it is GOOD stuff.

I and many others on this Forum (and elsewhere) have much experience and are willing to share it but it WOULD BE NICE if you did a little homework before asking, "What's lead?":veryconfu

The very basic thing that ANY one wanting to cast bullets and reload is to buy Lyman's Cast Bullet Handbook and read, read, read it. Then the questions you ask will reflect the fact that you did your homework and are simply "stuck" on something rather than being someone who acts like a two year old, "Mommy, what is a horse?"

Make NO mistake, my primary reason for being here is to help others interested in the sport (from beginners to long term casters and reloaders), but you DO need to "Man Up" a bit for others to want to stay here helping.

I have had many side benefits from being here, and one of them is meeting so many nice and helpful folks. Yep, even after sixty years of this stuff I am still learning. I pick up little tips and hints all the time that I find useful. Further, the Group Buys are feeding my addiction BIG TIME (I have more bullet moulds than any sane person needs, that is for sure, but there is room for one more (or, maybe, two or three?).[smilie=w:

FWIW,
Dale53

[Three44s]

I found the above mentioned written sources to be "essential reading" as other's have indicated!

One book that was missed above is Lee's 2nd edition. The section on ultimate boolit strength is well worth the price.

I would further echo what many have written here:

"If you don't read ....... what is the use in us that HAVE done our home work ........... breaking away from our endeavors .......... to bail you out????"

I don't want to scare off newbies ........ God Bless newbies! But it seems to me that it's more efficient for a newbie to get steered to those fine references many of us have cut our boolit teeth on ........ and head you all in the right direction ...... than to beat up the subject while trying to instill basic bone head "boolitology" that should be acquired by said reading?


Viva boolits

VIVA NEWBIES!

Three 44s

[Bass Ackward]

Many here miss the point. Everything works. If you stay within it's limits. And just because something works best from a statistical basis for preventing leading, doesn't mean that it performs the best from an accuracy perspective.

There are no laws. No one way works or even works best all the time.

The same people who tell you to read book or author " X " will then proceed to tell you how they do it which is generally contrary to the information they are asking you to read.

Two guns, exactly the same, with exactly the same dimensions aren't. Never will be. Life cycles will always be different too.

A guy who shoots 50 rounds a month is going to view things differently from someone who shoots 2000 rounds a month. Gun break-in will take one guy a month to accomplish and the other well over 3 years if the gun really requires it.

The 3 year guy must live with constant change and frustration that seems endless causing him to curse expert after expert. A totally different perspective. Just shoot a known control load and clean till the gun comes round. Then play around with it.

I would like to meet an expert one of these days. I have so many questions.

Biggest misnomers on this board: 1. All leading is bad. 2. Every gun or individual can shoot PB without leading if you just do " X ". :grin:

[Nose Dive]

Yup..CHARGAR dun gud. Get reliable casting/loading books. Read them. Study them. There some 'stuff' being shared on these pages, as he says. Be careful.

There are places on these pages that offer names and titles to get the straight skinny.

Sometimes, 'free advice is worht just what you paid for it'.

Nose Dive

[evan price]

I have a couple guns that lead. My Super Redhawk used to lead like a sonofagun when I was using a particular commercial cast SWC that was BHN 25 and lubed with crayons. I thought it was "normal" :0
Now I use my own 240 SWCs lubed with ALOX. And I don't try to push high jacketed velocities anymore!

I have a couple of 38's & .357's. It took me a little bit of swallowing my pride to realize that harder BHN isn't the answer, that "everyone sizes .357 and runs 18+ bhn" isn't always right. Now I find that a range scrap boolit at .358" and ALOX/Carnauba lube goes with only a hint of lead at the cylinder end of the barrel. I can shoot 300 of my 38's with no real leading. Of course I scrubbed the bores till they shined first!

A family member bought a S&W Model 10 because he liked mine. He shot 50 of my own reloads and said his bore was so leaded it took an hour to clean. I told him, it was probably never cleaned from the DCS prison it was traded from, get it mirror bright and try again, and he did- viola- no leading.

So, no leading, I swear it on a stack of ingots. You will always have something to clean- powder fouling, a wipe of lead by the chamber- but not "LEADING" which I call a solid trail of jagged lead chunks down the bore.

[MtGun44]

I agree with the folks that are saying Elmer, Brian Pierce and Glen Fryxell are well worth
paying attention to. I've learned a lot from them and when I had problems years ago, I'd
dig out "Sixguns" and read again, carefully, about the particular part where it wasn't working
for me. Usually Elmer got me thru.

Bill

[Char-Gar]

"Many here miss the point. Everything works. If you stay within it's limits. And just because something works best from a statistical basis for preventing leading, doesn't mean that it performs the best from an accuracy perspective.

There are no laws. No one way works or even works best all the time.

The same people who tell you to read book or author " X " will then proceed to tell you how they do it which is generally contrary to the information they are asking you to read.

Two guns, exactly the same, with exactly the same dimensions aren't. Never will be. Life cycles will always be different too." Bass Ackward

Bass... I do believe, if I was a new bullet caster and read the above, I would throw up my hands and move on to golf.

Cast bullet shooting is not voo-doo or magic. It all has to do with the physical universe and all of the rules of physics and mechanics apply. I will agree with are far more variables in cast bullet shooting, than in shooting those dreadful little yellow thingies. That, for me at least, is the pull toward cast bullet shooting.

There is a definite path one can take to get good results. ONe of the biggest problems is folks don't stick to the path, but shoot off this way and the other and end up like a dog chasing it's tail. If one stays linear and on the path, he will come to satisfactory ends.

Satisfaction has much to do with expectations and this internet thing and it's psuedo experts often create false and unreasonable expectation and therefore no satisfaction. I suspect that is the case with the original poster.

With real world expectations, a fellow with patience to stay the course, can follow the path laid down by those who went before and get to a very good place. With linear thinking, patience and endurance I have never had a problem that could not be resolved. A few times that meant work on the gun, but that is part of the linear path.

The great problem with this board and the internet in general is a fellow can be put on the path, and he is swarmed by a bunch of other folks trying to get pull this way or the other, long before he needs to make such decisions or deal with such material. These folks are putting out the M, N, and O before the fellow has done the A,B, and C.

Mtn Gun/Bill did a good service by pointing new casters and shooters to sources that are reliable. This Internet stuff, if anything, lack reliability. There are of course very knowedge folks here like yourself, but new folks don't know who they who.

[Char-Gar]

Evan.. I think it was Will Rogers who said... "Some folks learn by reading. Some folks learn by watching. The rest have to pee on the electric fence".

Getting it through our heads, that when shooting sixguns harder is not always, or even frequently getter is most often an electric fence experience.

Mine came in 1967 when I bought some foundry fresh lintotype to cast some 38 Special wadcutters. Boy were they pretty. They were fired over the traditional 2.7/BE and the result was a lead plated pistol in both the cylinder throats and barrel. What tha.....? How could a bullet that hard, lead at such low speeds.

A switch back to the old butter soft 30-1 (lead to tin) binary alloy brought X-ring accuracy and clean barrels.

Today, I just shake my head at all of the water droppers and their granite hard bullets.

[fourdollarbill]

Out of the stories, procedures and tips which I very much appreciate I found the answer I was looking for.

There is "Leading" and then there is "leading". I have sized, lubed, slugged and optimized hardness and charges in every way I could and I'm down to what I would now call a light lead smear that will probably never affect anything. When I started casting I was getting heavy lead slivers and now I'm down to a shiny smear of lead up against a rifle groove.

Until now I thought that little smear of lead was an issue that must be fixed.

I do find it intriguing that some of the claims of no leading are now qualified with "but unless" and that is what I was looking for. So when I read a thread titled "Leading..." I can safely assume that most of the claims like "I shoot 62 billion rounds a week with no leading" are missing the words - unless..., except when..., or if... the rest of the story.

Thanks fellas, this has been the most informative and I'm going to quit chasing something I cannot fix without a "cast bullet oriented gun smith" for a lack of better words.

[Char-Gar]

Fourdollarbill... I am pleased...it is good to see a fellow break the code.

[jonk]

Depends.

I would not call a slight gray color to the bore that wipes out with normal cleaning 'leading' though it surely is a thin film of lead. I get more deposits from jacketed bullets.

Nor would I call a few shards of lead- again if they wipe out- leading, it can be general debris.

The question is, is any appreciable lead being plated to the bore? If so, then it's leading. I don't get that except in one stubbron .45....

[Char-Gar]

The question is...What is an "appreciable" amount of leading? That is an ambigious and subjective term and the subjective nature of the term "leading" is the nexus of this thread.

[Bass Ackward]

[QUOTE=Chargar;938843Mtn Gun/Bill did a good service by pointing new casters and shooters to sources that are reliable. This Internet stuff, if anything, lack reliability. There are of course very knowedge folks here like yourself, but new folks don't know who they who.[/QUOTE]




What is hilarious is the work everyone said was done here to dispel old wives tales and disinformation.

Then we recommend people go elsewhere for information (old wives tales) because we don't like some of the personalities. And I am not picking on Bill or anyone else cause it is probably done subconsciously. There is a search function here that works.

Most of the Lyman information over the years has been for Lyman #2 @ 15 BHN and sizing to bore. How many here would recommend that? Lyman also like GC designs. And Lino when things get tough. If I recommend that here, people call for my head.

Then there is Elmer that goes all over the place in Six Guns about sizing but most often recommends sizing to bore or .001 over with a caveat that it still must push through the throats with very little pressure by hand. Pretty much goes against bullet fit huh?

My point is that there are enough people giving a man a fish. (instant gratification) What if that fish tastes bad? Nobody is teaching him that he can get his own by fishing and that the sea is full of options. And what people don't remember is that your response isn't to one man when you reply. People will read this stuff for years. The man who starts the thread doesn't own it. It belongs to members past, present, and future.

This thread wasn't a beginners question. Lyman nor Elmer ever answered this question that I can remember.

We just don't have enough confidence in what we are saying. Or .... we truly believe that our opinion is the only way, and everybody else's information is BS. Or .... we believe that others coming in are too inexperienced to digest it. Gotta be one of those. Then we send them someplace that the information is more .... reliable.

Everything will mean something to somebody at some point if they continue shooting. I want them to think, not to agree. I don't need friends or followers. No matter how experienced we get, the mental trigger will bring them back to search for something that they read if it is any good any more.

Today, we are becoming the Lyman manual. Just no credibility. If this stuff is wrong or too dumbed down or unreliable then why stay here? Why come back? And that is why many of the experienced (originals) have left. Cast as a whole and we are diminished for it even though membership has risen. Now we must depend on a new generation to learn and then tell it like it is cause we don't want to rock the boat.

[Dannix]

^I'm new here, but trust me, while I don't know whos-who, I do know a few names I trust undoubtedly.

Sometimes newbies simply don't know where to start (thinking of myself here). Othertimes they expect to be spoon fed, and frankly the experienced hoary heads have better things to do. In both cases though, I almost always see a sticky thread or some such referred to here. I've almost never seen a response like, "go read such and such book," but reguarly seen responses like "there was a thread about this in the whatever subforum". Some of the old threads are like Gold but unknown unless you have a friendly veteran point out there it is. Then the veteran can expound a bit on it once you've read it and have that foundation to learn further.

[MtGun44]

My point about other sources besides this site was what I learned from before I found this
site, and where I have found consistently good information that I can recommend if people
want to go elsewhere to read.

I agree very much on recommending the SEARCH function, and old threads. I do recommend
this from time to time, and maybe should more often. It sometimes feels like saying
"go away you bother me" and I don't like to sound like that.

However - newbies can learn huge amounts from old posts.

As to push thru the throats from Elmer - works for me. I usually have gotten a bit better
accy with +.001 but not always. I sure got no leading with his designs with proper fit,
and have found accy several times with his loads (altho some are VERY HOT!!!) and
not bettered it with many other attempts.

I am happy to recommend other places for people to find good info. As to Lyman,
I think they are too hard most of the time and too often solving their pistol problems with
GCs, a nice sales boost, too for them. Many of their loads are good ones as to powder
choices and velocities with boolits, and often they are the only source of real boolit
loading data on odd calibers esp. I would say "good but a bit dated" for them.
Glen Fryxell - great info, good solid entertainment and lots of boolit history and technology
too. Worth the time, for sure.

Bill

[NSP64]

I have had pistols that lead like all get out And I've had some that won't lead shooting pure soft without lube. I bought a Ruger SRH that after 6 shots looked like a country road. I messed with it for a few month and could never get it to stop leading(firelapped polished you name it) Got rid of it.[smilie=b: Ya gots to know when to say when.

I bought a stevens .223 and shoot some through it and it doesn't lead @ 2000fps. Still looking for the 'right' load (not bad 3" @ 100 yrds. I think it could do better. It will hold 3/4" with Jwords)

[mike in co]

i really only shoot one revolver ..a 44 rem mag super red hawk.
the load is either a 293 fn or a 300hp, both in the 1200 fps range.
no leading....i get a dirtier cylinder than bbl.
i will shoot a couple of matches without even cleaning the gun, just run a brush thru the cylinder to ensure proper feeding.
the lead is ww with minor tin, water dropped.....both are gas check design, shot without the gas check in place.

mike in co

[Char-Gar]

Bass... I don't disagree with you on the general spirit and tenor of your response. You are correct and there are folks here who know as much or more about cast bullets in sixguns as Elmer or Lyman ever did. Elmer was inconsistant from time to time and missed the boat entirely on several important issues.

However Elmer, Skeeter, Bob Hagel and other got it right 95% of the time, which is more than I can say for some of the folks on this board.

But here is the rub...Just who are those truly knowledgeable folks among the hundreds..no thousands of folks who post here? You and I know, but the average poster who has not been around for a decade does not. There is much misinformation on this site and how is the average reader and poster supposed to know who does and who does not know what he is talking about. The number of posts is no indicator, so what is?

[Frozone]

On a side note, has anyone ever had an after-market semi-auto barrel that was a dud with cast? I'm planning on picking up a Jarvis for a 9mm...I wonder if he would willing to cherry pick a drop in.

I put a 'StormLake' extended and ported 9mm into my Glock 23. It leads like crazy so far!!!!! From 1/2" in front of the chamber out to the end of the bore, it puts down far to much lead.
I haven't had a chance to work on things yet, so it's to early to call it a "DUD".
I hope I can eliminate the leading.
Shooting a Lee 120g TC with Jakes ceresin moly lube so far.
Going to try a (Much) softer lube next, I have an 'Alaskan' pistol lube I worked up for my 454. It stopped it's lead problem even to ridiculous pressures, but it's a little temperature sensitive, a little too soft above 60º.

[pls1911]

Dale, Charger, and others all give good advice.

This is what works for me, and in many Marlins micro groove and older pre MG barrels, Sharps, Remingtons, Savages, Winchesters, Rugers, Colts, and TCs... ALL cast bullets for serious hunting and serious playing...30-30 through 45-70. .38 special through .45 Colt.
1. Use Ed's Red (Lanolin infused) to clean and lubricate inside and out regularly and store.
2. Use gas checks on all rifles or magnum pistol rounds. Std loads like .38 Spl or .44 spl, .45 Colt or ACP plain base ok)
3. Size .002 over bore if possible, but at least .001.
4. HEAT TREAT BULLETS (21-28 BHN)... much harder than water dropped but less brittle than lino
5. Keep rifle velocities below 2200fps... 1400-1900 is best, depending on lost of factors.
6. Keep big bore pistol velocities below 1200 fps..(Need more power ? Get a bigger bullet..)

Using these considerations and never over-powering my alloy prevent me from ever wrestling lead from a barrel. Once you start the process, you just don't have to worry about leading.
My bullets are very accurate and truely whack H3LL outta anything they contact.
Save yourself some time and trouble, and start right ... up front.

[MtGun44]

Nice post, I don't doubt your formula works for you.

I find zero need for GC in any magnum pistol at any velocities with AC WWTs.
In this I agree with Elmer completely. He called them diapers for boolits. The
work, but seem a waste of time and money because plain base works too.

I find no need for water dropped hard alloys for ANY pistol, any velocity, any
caliber. Maybe for rifles, not enough experience to say either way with any
certainty.

Telling newbies that hard cast GCs is the only or best solution is misinformation.

Clean bbls with Hoppe's #9, dry patch no special stuff.

Bill

[mpmarty]

i hate gas checks!

[Recluse]

I find zero need for GC in any magnum pistol at any velocities with AC WWTs.
In this I agree with Elmer completely. He called them diapers for boolits. The
work, but seem a waste of time and money because plain base works too.

I find no need for water dropped hard alloys for ANY pistol, any velocity, any
caliber. Maybe for rifles, not enough experience to say either way with any
certainty.

Telling newbies that hard cast GCs is the only or best solution is misinformation.

Clean bbls with Hoppe's #9, dry patch no special stuff.

Bill

Bill, while we occasionally disagree on lubes, I agree completely with the above.

However, I confess that over the years, I have been tempted now and then to experiment with a couple of gas-check design boolits for two of my magnums. I have zero problems with my present boolits and configurations, and have long lived by the motto of "If it isn't broken, don't fix it," but at this stage of my reloading, casting and shooting life, I am more intrigued by the journey than I am by the final destination.

In other words, I love exploring and learning and making new determinations.

However, for those new to casting, I strongly suggest going with what is known to work rather than going with what is thought to work. In that, this website and forum is more valuable than any publication I've ever seen from Lyman or Elmer, et al.

And that is not knocking them one iota. They were the pioneers that forged the path. Since then, technology has changed/improved. The way we do things has changed. We've learned more and we've learned it quicker thanks to Al Gore's super information highway. :)

Hard boolits? I used to think that, but I also will forever maintain that water-dropping and heat-treating are tools of the trade, not requirements. If/when you have a particular situation that warrants a harder boolit, then you have tools to accomplish that via water-dropping or heat-treating or the addition of lino or mono or any combination of the previous aforementioned tools.

:coffee:

[geargnasher]

Dale, Charger, and others all give good advice.

This is what works for me, and in many Marlins micro groove and older pre MG barrels, Sharps, Remingtons, Savages, Winchesters, Rugers, Colts, and TCs... ALL cast bullets for serious hunting and serious playing...30-30 through 45-70. .38 special through .45 Colt.
1. Use Ed's Red (Lanolin infused) to clean and lubricate inside and out regularly and store.
2. Use gas checks on all rifles or magnum pistol rounds. Std loads like .38 Spl or .44 spl, .45 Colt or ACP plain base ok)
3. Size .002 over bore if possible, but at least .001.
4. HEAT TREAT BULLETS (21-28 BHN)... much harder than water dropped but less brittle than lino
5. Keep rifle velocities below 2200fps... 1400-1900 is best, depending on lost of factors.
6. Keep big bore pistol velocities below 1200 fps..(Need more power ? Get a bigger bullet..)

Using these considerations and never over-powering my alloy prevent me from ever wrestling lead from a barrel. Once you start the process, you just don't have to worry about leading.
My bullets are very accurate and truely whack H3LL outta anything they contact.
Save yourself some time and trouble, and start right ... up front.


While I agree with Bill that this no doubt works for you and your guns, it most certainly would cramp my style bigtime.

First, putting a cap on GG rifle boolits at 2200 fps really cripples long range performance with such calibers as .308 and .30-'06. I can achieve upwards of 2700 fps and still have decent (not excellent) accuracy from a ten-twist '06 sporter and be able to shoot 500 meters without aiming at the moon. Every situation is unique, and every gun a law unto itself, so I feel it's limiting to work within a "box" of "knowledge" based upon preconceived laws.

Gas checks on pistol boolits are a waste of money.

I only heat treat really high-pressure target stuff, it's usually way to brittle for hunting.

While I refuse to punish my body the way some do, it often takes more than 1200 fps in big-bore machines to reach out and touch something, even with lighter boolits. It's about trajectory, not necessarily just stopping power.

You and I just have two different points of view, and I put mine out there as a perfect example of what makes horse-racing. It's also an excellent example of why folks need to think of the big picture when reading through threads like these, or get advice from either of us. No one has yet written THE authoritative book of cast boolit laws, nor is it likely, it's just a matter of finding what works in a particular situation.

BTW, I'm convinced that Richard Lee's conclusions about strength and pressure were more than a bit erroneous.

Gear

[pls1911]

Geargnasher,
Respectfully, I agree with your comments as well as stand by mine.
I cannot disagree with your commentary on "what works for me", nor can I negatively comment regarding processes you find which work. You've likely learned the hard way, same as me.
I applaud this column because I always benefit from your experience while sharing my own with others.
In my attempt to provide a general response rather than a long winded technical analysis, my generalizations could certainly be read by newbe's as absolutes... which certainly was NOT the intent.

Using gas checks and heat treating do indeed require extra effort. However, in their place both processes can work well independently or together. In different degrees, gas checks and heat treating provide one the ability to push a given alloy harder by either pressure or velocity or both, extending the point to which the alloy will strip the bore or suffer base deformation and resultant leading due to gas cutting.
Soft to hard, there is an infinite range through which gas checks are completely unnecessary to absolutely required. Of course the combinations of variables are infinite as well... bore/bullet fit, bore condition, alloy, lube, bullet design, and Lube capacity. (And of course we haven't touched on the benefits paper patching...( talk about a PITA that works!)

In any event, thanks for sharing "what works for you". Every time I find a challenge, I look to these columns and find that somebody has the right answer for my own case.

I applaud your comment "You and I just have two different points of view, and I put mine out there as a perfect example of what makes horse-racing. It's also an excellent example of why folks need to think of the big picture when reading through threads like these, or get advice from either of us. No one has yet written THE authoritative book of cast boolit laws, nor is it likely, it's just a matter of finding what works in a particular situation."
AMEN!
We all benefit from constructive discourse .
Thanks, and cheers.

Pablo, Fort Worth.