Soft, medium, hard, really hard?

[Bret4207]

Okay, I don't know or care to know how to put a poll together, but I'm interested in something. What defines soft, medium, hard and really hard alloys in your opinion?
For me soft is under 9 Bhn, medium runs 10ish to 18-19, hard is 20ish to 28 or so and really hard is 30ish and up.

I'm interested because it's readily apparent that a lot of us are talking about different things when we say hard or soft.

[Bass Ackward]

Soft 5-10, Medium 10 to 20, Hard 20 and up.

Mostly cause of numbers I guess, but those number pretty much separate things like heat treating in what ever form or mix cause most get at least 20 BHN with 50/50 WW / pure. And it is easier to think of heating to get hard as opposed to having to thing of HTing to get medium.

And the old rifle mix of 10% tin is 10 to 11 BHN depending on how pure your lead actually is, so it is easier to think of all lead / tin mixes as soft. For me anyway.

[outdoorfan]

I guess my interpretation has been a bit off. Super soft = 5-7; Soft = 8-10; Medium = 11-15; Hard = 16-22; Super hard is 22 on up.

[44man]

Bret only posted this because of me! :violin:
If you shoot BP, pure is great and if you shoot BPCR, pure with a little tin is great but as you move to smokeless you had better adjust to the initial thump of the powder, it is a far cry from BP.
If you think you can shoot soft with any powder you are bent over too far looking up your backside too much.

[crabo]

Bret only posted this because of me! :violin:

This is a good thing. There are some of us who are interested in finding out how things work, and something to change when they don't.

I think if we only followed one person's path, we would be selling a lot of guns that "weren't right". Just because a gun won't shoot using someone's favorite techniques, doesn't mean the gun is bad. It may mean that the gun is bad, needs tweaking or whatever, or may mean that we need to change our techniques or preconceptions in our journey.

[Frank]

Hard: 25 - above. Medium: 20-24. Soft: 19 to below. :Fire:

[Edubya]

Not that it matters all that much, but I agree with Outdoorfan; "Super soft = 5-7; Soft = 8-10; Medium = 11-15; Hard = 16-22; Super hard is 22 on up. "

EW

[44man]

Air cooled WW's, soft. Water dropped to 22 BHN is hard.
50-50 air cooled softer, oven hardened is hard at about 20 BHN.
Notice the alloy has not been changed and will work the same at impact but each works different in the rifling.

[jh45gun]

I use air cooled WW for every thing PB 45 Colt 252 Grain Lee SWC and Lee 405 grain .459 HB

Thirty Caliber gas checked 180 grain bullets Ideal 311407 that I use for 30/30, 30/36 and 7.5x55 Swiss.

I do not have any leading issues with any of these applications.

[Changeling]

I've gone from soft to medium to hard to super hard a hell of a lot, and find it AWESOME!
However I believe there are a few who seem to change there mind/opinions on what MEDIUM and what is HARD as time go's on.
Maybe this is an "AGE" thing!

[healey55]

I have shot a lot of wheel weights and I have always dropped em right into water from the mold. I never even thought about it hardening the bullet I just wanted em to cool off faster.

I never have em shatter and they will distort some. This is 44 cal stuff at about 1200 fps

I have no idea what hardness that is but it seems about as hard as commercial cast.

[Lloyd Smale]

I guess im more simple. If its anything air cooled ww or harder its hard and if its less the ww its soft. Personaly i dont have much need for an alloy that softer then 5050 ww/pure or harder then linotype and rarely use them. Im not a big fan of water dropping bullets. Ive allways had access to linotype for alloying and do it that way. Someday when my linotype drys up and i cant find more i will have to adjust my attitude but until then i will alloy to get my hardness. Its easier to control hardness that way and ive just seen to many water dropped bullets fracture.

[Bret4207]

Bret only posted this because of me! :violin:


And? This is somehow a bad thing? It's quite obvious our terms are different. Part of learning is defining our differences and common to terms with them. Don't let your ego stop the rest of us please.

[badgeredd]

We have a few gents here that can likely put a little light on the relationships when we talk Bhn from a scientific standpoint. Being a tool maker, I know the Rockwell scale is not simply progressive as the hardness increases. The relative hardness changes dramatically as the hardness increases by a three point spread. I'm not educated on the relationships on the Bhn scale. To me, a soft alloy is 10 or so Bhn or below, medium is up to about 20 Bhn and hard is above that with anything above 28 being super hard.

Also I've found in my limited experience, that alloying plus water dropping/oven treating affect the elasticity and behavior of boolits of the same hardness (on the Bhn scale) upon impact, the same as steel alloys.

What some call hard in a handgun may be considered medium in a rifle, it seems. What may be hard in a BP rifle would be soft in a smokeless rifle, relatively. VERY confusing at times!!!!!! :bigsmyl2:

Good topic Bret!

Edd

[cptinjeff]

Not that it matters all that much, but I agree with Outdoorfan; "Super soft = 5-7; Soft = 8-10; Medium = 11-15; Hard = 16-22; Super hard is 22 on up. "

EW

+1 on the scale.

I think it is a great start to clarify terms.

Changeling,

Are you sure you didn't get this forum confused with "that other one" you frequent?:Fire:

[44man]

And? This is somehow a bad thing? It's quite obvious our terms are different. Part of learning is defining our differences and common to terms with them. Don't let your ego stop the rest of us please.
Not bad at all and judging by the answers, everyone thinks the same way. Hard cast can be oven hardened 50-50 up to lino. Some would consider pure lead with some tin as hard while another only thinks a brittle boolit that shatters is hard.
Once a boolit resists sizing when seated, does not slump or skid the rifling, it is hard enough. If it does any of the above it is soft--too soft for what you are doing even if you think they are hard cast.
The range of definitions is amazing and is why we need to stop arguing about it. Hard is the point the boolit works and it will be different for everyone.
A boolit a little harder then is needed has NEVER shot worse for me but a few points softer can cause all kinds of trouble.
Once you find the perfect solution for your gun you are free to say it is hard even if it is a far cry from another persons definition.

[MT Gianni]

Soft is less than ACWW, medium is ACWW-LY#2, hard is WDWW-Lino very hard is Lino-OQWW.

[healey55]

Ok soooo.. My water dropped wheel weight bullets.. What is their hardness compared to say pure lino?

I have not seen my bullets shatter. Ones recovered either look undeformed for the most part or the nose is mashed pretty good.

I water dropped everything.. At one time a guy gave me 25 lb ingots of lino type.. maybe 200 lbs. I water dropped them too.

Like I said, I do it cause it it the easiest way for me. Hundred of em laying in the bottom of the 5 gal pail and all instantly cool if I want to grab a handful.

[44man]

Ok soooo.. My water dropped wheel weight bullets.. What is their hardness compared to say pure lino?

I have not seen my bullets shatter. Ones recovered either look undeformed for the most part or the nose is mashed pretty good.

I water dropped everything.. At one time a guy gave me 25 lb ingots of lino type.. maybe 200 lbs. I water dropped them too.

Like I said, I do it cause it it the easiest way for me. Hundred of em laying in the bottom of the 5 gal pail and all instantly cool if I want to grab a handful.
I would not shoot the lino. I would use small amounts to alloy the WW's. Once you find the right mix you will have accuracy on the cheap. Lino is worth too much today.

[Changeling]

+1 on the scale.

I think it is a great start to clarify terms.

Changeling,

Are you sure you didn't get this forum confused with "that other one" you frequent?:Fire:


You caught that, hmmmm, LOL.:roll:

[Bret4207]

Not bad at all and judging by the answers, everyone thinks the same way. Hard cast can be oven hardened 50-50 up to lino. Some would consider pure lead with some tin as hard while another only thinks a brittle boolit that shatters is hard.
Once a boolit resists sizing when seated, does not slump or skid the rifling, it is hard enough. If it does any of the above it is soft--too soft for what you are doing even if you think they are hard cast.
The range of definitions is amazing and is why we need to stop arguing about it. Hard is the point the boolit works and it will be different for everyone.
A boolit a little harder then is needed has NEVER shot worse for me but a few points softer can cause all kinds of trouble.
Once you find the perfect solution for your gun you are free to say it is hard even if it is a far cry from another persons definition.


Whut? That's what we're trying to get away from here.:veryconfu



Well judging from the response I'm getting in the 2 posts I think we're getting some things straightened out. And I would have to disagree with your statement that once a boolit resists sizing in seating etc that it's hard enough. It may be and may be harder than actually needed depending on the gun and powder charge, among other things. I realize you refuse to believe there are guns out there with peculiar tastes in booltis, lube, etc. But I own a couple of those freaks that demand something special. Let's let this play out and see if we can form some sort of basic consensus so we're all speaking the same language.

[waksupi]

I never really thought about classing like that. I use my toaster oven, and by varying the heat setting, can make my boolits pretty much any hardness I want. 25 degrees will change hardness by a couple points.

[44man]

I never really thought about classing like that. I use my toaster oven, and by varying the heat setting, can make my boolits pretty much any hardness I want. 25 degrees will change hardness by a couple points.
We can't class hardness by BHN to match any application.
Bret still does not get it. A boolit must not slump, get sized when seating, get sized opening the crimp, skid past the base when taking the rifling and that a little harder then what does all of this will not make it shoot worse.
To have one gun that shoots 14 BHN and another that needs 22 BHN when both will shoot 22 BHN makes no sense at all. Why would anyone fool with alloys all over the place for each gun?
Why would anyone try to shoot softer and softer and need a different boolit and powder for every gun in the same caliber?
Can Bret explain how I can shoot all of these boolits from one gun and get way under 1" at 50 yards and an inch at 100 if I do my part when I use the same powder and alloy for all of them? Why do they all also do the same from friend's guns?

[44man]

Bret, you are looking for something that does not exist. If your boolit is too soft to work, no numbers will improve your chances.
If your loads will not shoot in a hundred .44's, you are doing things all wrong. Does the factory load jacketed bullets different for each gun? Why are you doing that? Why would ANYONE do that?
I threw the glove in the ring long ago and if you bring a .44 or anything here and do not shoot an inch or under at 50 yards with my loads, I will buy you lunch. If you think I need something different for each gun you are mistaken.
How many different boolits can you shoot an inch with at 50 yards from any of your revolvers?
I have had guys send me boolits to test and in every case I sent them targets back with tiny 50 yard groups because the boolit was fine.
Take a good long look at the number of boolits I shoot from ONE revolver with astounding results. Why do you complicate a simple process? Is it time for you to study the revolver?

[45 2.1]

Why do you complicate a simple process? Is it time for you to study the revolver?

Well, most people don't want to shoot the 44 Mag and above............ Thats a good start. Some guys like the old moderate performing single actions. Your loads are too heavy for those guns. Another way other than heavy gut busting loads and hard boolits shot into the deers shoulder must be found. Its a wonder anybody killed any game with those old guns.... isn't it. I'm not saying your method doesn't work for what guns and large calibers your useing, it just doesn't work for the smaller and less strong guns that are out there. Your method is not the only way.:bigsmyl2::bigsmyl2::bigsmyl2:

[Bret4207]

No Jim, YOU don't get it. From what I see most of the rest of the guys here are shooting what they come by easiest. Most it seems aren't even water quenching. Most don't appear to limiting themselves to one type of shooting either.

This isn't about you and your ideas. It's about fixing the problem of ambiguous terms. If you can't deal with that and the idea not everyone else has the same issues you do then kindly stop muddying the waters. Yes, HARD CAN WORK. So can softer.

[Char-Gar]

I guess after we have some consensus on what the terms, soft, medium and hard mean when it comes to lead alloys, we will have to run some other kind of poll on who is the real, true, one and only sixgun cast bullet "Yoda". We seem to have several contestants for that position.

At times the chest beating, and B.S. depth is almost enough to make a religious man think God man a mistake when he created mankind.

[44man]

Well, most people don't want to shoot the 44 Mag and above............ Thats a good start. Some guys like the old moderate performing single actions. Your loads are too heavy for those guns. Another way other than heavy gut busting loads and hard boolits shot into the deers shoulder must be found. Its a wonder anybody killed any game with those old guns.... isn't it. I'm not saying your method doesn't work for what guns and large calibers your useing, it just doesn't work for the smaller and less strong guns that are out there. Your method is not the only way.:bigsmyl2::bigsmyl2::bigsmyl2:
Now you sound like Bass! :bigsmyl2::bigsmyl2:
Have I not explained that I shoot light loads too and cut my teeth with the .38 and .357?
I never shot any boolits without learning something that needed fixed. The learning curve was long and hard with the fast powders, much harder then for hunting loads. Even in 1956 when I got my first .44, I still shot the .357 good enough to hit very small targets at 100 yards, as small as 1". I have a hard time equaling it today.
My K38 was superb with no leading and accuracy. I just grew tired of the toys when I could hunt deer with a revolver.
Is anything different between guns? No, they all work the same.
The thing not understood is when you get into the real small cases, slow powders don't work well and it is harder to protect a boolit. A .38 is twice as hard to make work as the .44 and 3 times harder then the .475.
Bret, fixing the terms will never work because all lead is different.
I have a knife with a 60 Rockwell blade and I defy you to make more then a few cuts in meat without sharpening it. Same with lead. There are no standards and you can't make it simple.
You work lead alloys with what you have to find the best for your guns. You work alloy just like you work powder. Some never make it work because they pick up range boolits and mix them all together.
You know what I will say when you tell me air cooled WW's work for all loads. Yeah, sure, they do go "bang." How about "bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang at 7 yards." WOW. they shoot good! :veryconfu

[45 2.1]

I guess after we have some consensus on what the terms, soft, medium and hard mean when it comes to lead alloys, we will have to run some other kind of poll on who is the real, true, one and only sixgun cast bullet "Yoda". We seem to have several contestants for that position.

At times the chest beating, and B.S. depth is almost enough to make a religious man think God man a mistake when he created mankind.

Answer to the first part.............. NO ONE HERE......There are too many things to try in different handguns for anyone to be really knowledgable about them all.......... parts yes.....all..NO.

God knew the end and beginning........... This is something only He knows............................

[44man]

Answer to the first part.............. NO ONE HERE......There are too many things to try in different handguns for anyone to be really knowledgable about them all.......... parts yes.....all..NO.

God knew the end and beginning........... This is something only He knows............................
Truth has never been said better! It always comes down to working for yourself and the only good thing here is there are many things to try. There will be a few things that just flat do not work but there are so many choices to work with.

[healey55]

I have come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter. Not for me anyway.

I shoot 4" 44 mag guns and I can't shoot my water dropped wheel weight slugs any better or worse than 240 grain jacketed slugs by remington or winchester. They shoot about the same which is WAY worse than the groups being talked about here.

If I get a 2" group at 25 yards I feel like I need to save the target. 5" at 50 yards is acceptable to me.. 100 yard targets are about 8" with a flyer opening it up to as much as 10 or 12.. Heck.. I can't even see 1" at 50 yards. I am lucky to get a 1" group with my Garand at 50 yards.

So.. I guess for me... the hard cast that are a tad bigger than groove like .431 are best.. If they are not the most accurate.. who cares? I am not good enough to tell with my open sighted 4" guns and really.. at this point all I care about is leading.. the hard ones sized large don't lead. the softer ones lead.

I do have an 8" Dan Wesson that has shot 1" groups at 25yards for me. I can't do it very often tho.. A 2" group with open sights at 25 yards is great shooting day for me.

[Bret4207]

I have come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter. Not for me anyway.

I shoot 4" 44 mag guns and I can't shoot my water dropped wheel weight slugs any better or worse than 240 grain jacketed slugs by remington or winchester. They shoot about the same which is WAY worse than the groups being talked about here.

If I get a 2" group at 25 yards I feel like I need to save the target. 5" at 50 yards is acceptable to me.. 100 yard targets are about 8" with a flyer opening it up to as much as 10 or 12.. Heck.. I can't even see 1" at 50 yards. I am lucky to get a 1" group with my Garand at 50 yards.

So.. I guess for me... the hard cast that are a tad bigger than groove like .431 are best.. If they are not the most accurate.. who cares? I am not good enough to tell with my open sighted 4" guns and really.. at this point all I care about is leading.. the hard ones sized large don't lead. the softer ones lead.

I do have an 8" Dan Wesson that has shot 1" groups at 25yards for me. I can't do it very often tho.. A 2" group with open sights at 25 yards is great shooting day for me.

Perfectly acceptable way to feel about it. I have a couple that prefer harder over softer too, but they happen to be rifles!

That "who's the most bestest hangun guy" contest? I'll nominate Uncle Dale R McGee. Being the gentleman he is he'll decline the honor with typical humility. The mark of a gentleman in my opinion...

[theperfessor]

I can see the logic of trying to come up with a clearer definition of what hard, medium or soft is based on gradations of BHN. After all, we specify how we want our steaks by using a rare-medium-well done scale and most people have a fairly good understanding of what that means. Several scales have been suggested in this thread and I won't try to add to them.

I will make several comments:

1. Metal alloys of different compositions can have the same BHN and yet behave differently under pressure and in contact with other materials.

2. Metal alloys of the same composition can have different BHNs depending on their thermal processing history and will behave differently under pressure and in contact with other materials.

3. Often times the higher cost and lower availability of the materials necessary to make "hard" bullets means that many people will use what they have access to at a tolerable cost. If I can get better-than-factory accuracy with 50/50 WW/roof sheathing lead or just straight WW or WQ WWs or whatever why double the cost by using linotype or Hardball or Lyman #2? At this point it becomes a question of a person's individual ideas of accuracy and acceptable leading and ease of casting, etc.

I'm a bit skeptical about the influence of small differences in BHN on performance. Is a BHN of 11 significantly different from a BHN of 13? Or is the difference so small that other factors have a greater effect? And I'm not sure that in extremely ductile materials such as most lead alloys that the BHN can be directly related to tensile, compressive, or shear strength.

I'll stay out of the "who is the best shot and why its me" discussion, 'cause I'm pretty sure I'm not on the list!

[healey55]

I wouldn't mind watching some of you guys shoot 1" groups from 4" 44 mag guns with open sights at 25 yards. or two inch at 50. Not saying you can't do it just that I don't see people doing it.

Heck.. I get away with being called a real good shot all these years with my pitiful groups.

[Bret4207]

I can see the logic of trying to come up with a clearer definition of what hard, medium or soft is based on gradations of BHN. After all, we specify how we want our steaks by using a rare-medium-well done scale and most people have a fairly good understanding of what that means. Several scales have been suggested in this thread and I won't try to add to them.

I will make several comments:

1. Metal alloys of different compositions can have the same BHN and yet behave differently under pressure and in contact with other materials.

2. Metal alloys of the same composition can have different BHNs depending on their thermal processing history and will behave differently under pressure and in contact with other materials.

3. Often times the higher cost and lower availability of the materials necessary to make "hard" bullets means that many people will use what they have access to at a tolerable cost. If I can get better-than-factory accuracy with 50/50 WW/roof sheathing lead or just straight WW or WQ WWs or whatever why double the cost by using linotype or Hardball or Lyman #2? At this point it becomes a question of a person's individual ideas of accuracy and acceptable leading and ease of casting, etc.

I'm a bit skeptical about the influence of small differences in BHN on performance. Is a BHN of 11 significantly different from a BHN of 13? Or is the difference so small that other factors have a greater effect? And I'm not sure that in extremely ductile materials such as most lead alloys that the BHN can be directly related to tensile, compressive, or shear strength.

I'll stay out of the "who is the best shot and why its me" discussion, 'cause I'm pretty sure I'm not on the list!

I'm 100% in agreement. As I said, most of us have zero clue about he makeup of our alloys. And I'm sure my 30+ year old WW differs from todays WW. But we need some non-ambiguous terms to start with and this appears to be the best we can do for now to me. Having one guy talk about "hard" and meaning 28 Bhn and another guy meaning 14 Bhn....you can see the problem.

[44man]

I can see the logic of trying to come up with a clearer definition of what hard, medium or soft is based on gradations of BHN. After all, we specify how we want our steaks by using a rare-medium-well done scale and most people have a fairly good understanding of what that means. Several scales have been suggested in this thread and I won't try to add to them.

I will make several comments:

1. Metal alloys of different compositions can have the same BHN and yet behave differently under pressure and in contact with other materials.

2. Metal alloys of the same composition can have different BHNs depending on their thermal processing history and will behave differently under pressure and in contact with other materials.

3. Often times the higher cost and lower availability of the materials necessary to make "hard" bullets means that many people will use what they have access to at a tolerable cost. If I can get better-than-factory accuracy with 50/50 WW/roof sheathing lead or just straight WW or WQ WWs or whatever why double the cost by using linotype or Hardball or Lyman #2? At this point it becomes a question of a person's individual ideas of accuracy and acceptable leading and ease of casting, etc.

I'm a bit skeptical about the influence of small differences in BHN on performance. Is a BHN of 11 significantly different from a BHN of 13? Or is the difference so small that other factors have a greater effect? And I'm not sure that in extremely ductile materials such as most lead alloys that the BHN can be directly related to tensile, compressive, or shear strength.

I'll stay out of the "who is the best shot and why its me" discussion, 'cause I'm pretty sure I'm not on the list!
This is as good as can be said and is why using numbers will never work, might be 1000 alloys at say 20 BHN and some will fail or lead the bore big time.
Taking BHN readings is not much better then a fingernail test or dropping an ingot on the floor to see how it rings.
The only place I see it useful is when you have the same alloy and treat it different, to see a BHN change.
So many times I have read that too hard will lead the bore but is it the hardness or has the tin been depleted so the rest of the metals no longer form the proper matrix? Or is there too much of one metal?

[healey55]

So what is the hardness of water dropped wheel weights (modern ones)?

[44man]

So what is the hardness of water dropped wheel weights (modern ones)?
Mine run from 20 to 22.

[RobS]

So what is the hardness of water dropped wheel weights (modern ones)?

Here is a good one.........depends. How hot are they dropping from your mold is the contributing factor...........think of tempering metal if you have knowledge on that topic.

A bullet dropped into a pool of water that is of higher temperature when it hits will be harder than one dropped at a 100 degrees cooler temperature that is if it the alloy has charateristics to make hardening possible (antimony more specifically). This basic concept is what people use when heat treating bullets in an oven. Hotter bullets dropped into water yield a harder BHN bullet etc.

I've casted where the bullets leave the mold quite hot in temperature and have had bullets test out at over 25 BHN and have taken the same alloy and dropped bullets from the mold at a cooler temp that yielded a more typical 20ish BHN.

Everything is relative to what you doing regarding your methods and may/will differ to anothers persons casting/reloading endeavors.

[healey55]

well.. my point is that a bullet that is capable of 1"groups at 25 yards is gonna shoot at least twice as well as I can.

I do not doubt that some of you are shooting these 1" groups at 50 yards from open sights and 4" barrels but I simply can't A bullet that shoots 3" groups at 50 yards is gonna shoot exactly the same for me as one that is capable of 1" groups.

What I really care about from a practical matter is leading and economy . A bullet (load) that doesn't lead and is economical to shoot.

For me.. accuracy is often taking a 240 JHP bullet and a load of 296.. at any range.. if my cast load shoots as well or better.. no matter what the groups.. that is my load.

[healey55]

robs.. thanks. I drop the bullets right from the mold. I mean by that.. right away. The sprues go in the water too.. I cut em right over the bucket and open and drop.

[theperfessor]

I know that it takes more typing on the part of a poster, but I appreciate it when the composition and processing method is included instead of just a BHN. I can quickly relate a statement such as "I'm using straight WWs air cooled" as it allows me to compare my materials and methods to those described. Just saying "my bullets are 15 BHN" is much less descriptive to people who don't have a hardness tester.

Normally I'm a big fan of quantifying properties numerically, but in this case I think a material and it's history is more important than the value of a specific property. And three or four descriptors of hardness based on sensible divisions of BHN would be equally useful and adequate for good communication.

[RobS]

I know that it takes more typing on the part of a poster, but I appreciate it when the composition and processing method is included instead of just a BHN. I can quickly relate a statement such as "I'm using straight WWs air cooled" as it allows me to compare my materials and methods to those described. Just saying "my bullets are 15 BHN" is much less descriptive to people who don't have a hardness tester.

Normally I'm a big fan of quantifying properties numerically, but in this case I think a material and it's history is more important than the value of a specific property. And three or four descriptors of hardness based on sensible divisions of BHN would be equally useful and adequate for good communication.

Very true and not to mention that alloy hardness can change over time as well. Let's say a person tests a bullet hours after casting, possibly not understanding the aging process of cast bullets with antimony etc, but shot such bullets two weeks later. In all I think clarity would show best if all possible info was put out front (known bullet alloy if applicable, if tested then the BHN, age of the bullets, so on and so forth) and yes...............it will be more to post, but a clear answer or evaluation can be determined with better accuracy when more precise descriptions are posted.

[Bret4207]

Both the last 2 posts cover part of the problem we're having- our terms aren't very accurate. Any other ideas on how to establish some sort of standard we can use that will work?

[healey55]

my posts are not accurate on hardness because.. I have no idea how hard my bullet are.. when I say that I water drop wheel weights it just means that I water drop wheel weights and they seem harder than ones not water dropped of commercial ones I have bought.

I do not claim to be an expert and am here to learn.

[Bret4207]

Well, that's okay by me. You've given your alloy source and how you treat it. The only thing left is do you consider your WQWW soft, medium, hard, really hard, etc. From what most here say WQWW would tend towards the hard to very hard end of things. As long as we all can agree on something along those lines we'll get a lot more information across.

[45 2.1]

Soft, medium, hard and kryptonite are all relative terms. You'll get noplace trying to describe them. What you really need to define is the hardness/toughness wanted for a specific use in a specific cartridge. Not much else is informative...................

[Bret4207]

I disagree Ken. As we stated in both posts we're looking for general range areas, relative values, to get the terminology at least in the same ballpark. No, we can't have what we'd like- an actual physical makeup of the alloy, but we can at least narrow things down a bit.

This is more for the noobs than the old salts who have a grasp of things. But since we have people that state 22 Bhn is medium.......