"Clean" burning powders

[excess650]

It looks like you could easily seat that WC out and use a taper crimp on the center driving band. This would still allow 2 lube grooves to be in the cases and not prone to attracting grit and dirt. Check near the muzzle and see if you're carrying enough lube so as to prevent leading in that Handi Rifle.

[35remington]

"......I didn't make it clear that I am on the quest for an accurate powder."

If you are on the quest for an accurate powder, I suppose the point was that you've also got to try those that aren't supposedly as "clean burning." It's usually a matter of relatively small degree and miniscule differences in aggravation after shooting. One isn't seriously more difficult to bear than another, cleanup wise.

If you're not on the quest for an accurately shooting powder, many would reasonably ask, "Why the heck not?" Why arbitrarily rule on cleanliness as the most relevant criteria absent those many other more important things? It's best to select a powder based on multiple important criteria rather than placing heavy importance on a insignificant side benefit.

Which is what prompted Chargar (and later, me) to post. It's sort of like buying food not for how it tastes, but rather how quickly one cleans up the dirty dish after the meal.

We old curmudgeons wonder how such things gained such importance.

I suppose the other thing that prompted the posting was that most of the preferred powders cast bullet rifle shooters use on this website are far, far "dirtier" than Unique ever was in a pistol, and this inconveniences us not a bit, because the accuracy is excellent, and that is unarguably the most important thing to a shooter. So the "clean powder only" statement raises a red flag on a site devoted to cast bullets.

This is advanced as a sort of explanation, by the way. Especially in reference to the "crabby" replies. Please don't take this as crabby, but rather just a guy making a point that you may not care about and will therefore ignore. It's hard to preach to the newly converted.

Look up some of those "dirty burners" especially in the rifle/carbine applications.

In reading your posts, I get the sense that you have a lot of handloading prudence in respect to developing properly safe loads, so I do not have fears for your ability to produce workable combinations based on your powder choices. It can be done, just as you've quite rightly suspected. But if you do have a wide range of other powder choices on hand, I'd encourage you to try all of them.

With plainbase lead bullets, I'd sure give that Handirifle a try with 2400, 4227 and similar. No matter how "dirty" they are......and they're a lot dirtier than Unique.

[Char-Gar]

"......I didn't make it clear that I am on the quest for an accurate powder."

I assumed that. I don't think folks come here looking for an inaccurate powder. IMHO accuracy is the goal and how much powder trash is generated in the process is not relevant.

One my favorite powders for cast bullet loads in rifles in WC872. This slow burning ball machine gun powder, leaves lots of fouling in the barrel and often copious amount of unburned powder. But the bullets play follow the leader very well, and for me that is paramount. To hit what you are shooting at is the name of the game. Everything else is a side issue, if an issue at all. It is important to keep a singular eye on the goal. Too many folks get lost in the weeds of minutia at the expense of the goal.

I have a mixed mind about this "off the page" issue. One one hand, I frequently go where the books have not, so I understand the urge to do so. On the other had, many folks try and do so without the necessary experience to chart a safe course. It is not wise to depend on anonymous internet posters to do your navigating for you. You have no idea who can chart a safe course, and who is a total unsafe idiot. Depending on internet folks to warn you away from dangerous waters, may be a form of foolishness all of it's own. If you choose to do that make certain you have fresh batteries in your BS detector.

One of the first lessons in life is to know the difference between your friends and you enemies. Your friends will tell you the truth and what you need to hear, even thought you might consider it "crabby" or out of line with the intent of your question. Those who are not looking out after your interest, will peruse their own and throw BS at the wall and hope some of it sticks..well sticks to you anyway.

There is nothing I post on this board, that puts a nickle in my pocket, a star in my celestial crown, nor massages my ego. It is all for you, crabby or not.

[Land Owner]

I've been hand loading for 20-plus years but casting bullets for 2-minus days (10-weeks to get equipment together to cast some lead 50/50 WW ingots). Some of my 358-91 cast WC's look poor, did not fill out the grooves completely in the cold mould pours, have rounded bases, and I had thought to recast all of them, about 500, but have been encouraged to just shoot the "average and above" of them, about 300.

My first try to pan lube was a mess. There is gummy wax/lube from the bottom of the base to the top of the WC. The Win. 30-30 case (0.405" less twice the thickness) isn't a close tolerance to the 0.358" bullet. There is a lot of excess lube. That almost got me to throw in the towel and recast all of them.

Even wiping most of the top and bottom lube off by hand, the seating die gums up every 20 rounds. I am trying to get through this rough spot.

Yesterday, I picked up another 50#'s of WW's! Add that to 50#'s of the over 600#'s of lead shielding I have and I can make another 100#'s of 50/50 ingots.

For now, perfection and accuracy are not the immediate goal. I have made some cast bullets, pan lubed them, and now loaded some (of the nicer ones). I am finding pit falls to the left and right. Stuff happens. I am not discouraged.

Do you guys remember the first time, when everything was impossible? Kind of like puberty and getting to first base with a date.

[Char-Gar]

I started casting in the late 50's with a plumbers gasoline fired furnace and a single cavity Lyman mold filled by a dipper. I had an old timer show me how to join the dipper and the mold at a 90 degree angle and then tip the mold down and the dipper up in what he called "force casting". The furnace got the cast iron pot to glow red in short order, so the alloy was plenty hot. This resulted in a good bullet first time out.

I started with a Lyman 45 machine and skipped the pan lube stage. It was about 7 years before I had my first real bottom draw furnace. It was a 10 lb. Lyman. I thought I had died and gone to heaven. It made life so much easier, although I doubt the bullets were any better.

For the most part I was working by myself with only a Lyman cast bullet handbook as a guide. So, I didn't get any feedback and didn't know what was possible and not possible. In spite of it all, I got some good results. I started with the 45 ACP and the first rifle round was the 25-20.

We judged alloy hardness by smacking one ingot with another. If it went "thud" it was pistol alloy. If it had a ring to it, it was rifle alloy.

I would opine that today's beginning casters have too much information and expectations that exceed reality. The whole process of casting bullets isn't really all that hard. If a fellow would just shut off the damn computer, buy the new Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook, his life would be far simpler. Providing of course, he read it and did what it said. At least, that is my thinking on the matter.

[btroj]

I think the whole "clean thing" started with shot gunners. They don't seen to like powder fouling in their barrels.
I don't see any real world difference between clean and dirty powders in my rifles when using cast. I really like 2400 with cast in most rifle cartridges. It can leave unburied powder in the barrel. So what. It pushes out easily and never seems to cause a problem.

I see powder "cleanliness" as more of a marketing ploy than anything. My lube leaves more goo than any powder ever will. I just find an accurate load and go with it. How clean the powder is, or isn't, is never even considered.

Much ado about nothing.

Brad

[Land Owner]

...expectations that exceed reality...

I do not understand. Is this from your posting experience? Are they looking for instant accuracy? That is to be worked for and earned. Rarely does it occur on the first shot. You are lucky if it does.

Information should not, imo, be overlooked. You are more than correct to caution that not all are friends with "fact" or "accuracy" in their posted data. It is a caveat emptor society (let the buyer beware).

You can not foresee how your information, based on 60-plus years of valuable experience, is going to operate in my guns, through my barrels, after the immeasurable minor variations that I unintentionally apply, which are different than your own. No one can anticipate the results. It is always an experiment, within reasonable bounds.

[peerlesscowboy]

As a Trapshooter and shotgun shell reloader I'm surprised to hear anyone describe 700X as "clean burning"

[btroj]

I think Chargar is speaking of people who come here asking how to get jacketed accuracy at 2700 fps with a hollow point that will stay together for good penetration on elephant. Oh yeah, I want to use LLA and refuse to pay for gas checks.

That is not reasonable for any caster but a noon asking that question obviously has no idea what he is talking about.

Get valid info from a valid source when you are starting put.a Lyman manual is a darn good starting point. Read it, understand it, follow it. Then go cast, load, shoot. ALOT. Learn thru observation. See what works and what doesn't. Start low and work up. What changes as the powder charge increases?

Learning at the range can not be replaced by the Net. Period.

Brad

[Char-Gar]

Land Owner... Let me try and sharpen that up a bit. New casters come to this board and perhaps others and listen to the chit-chat, wisdom and BS. They take away from that expectations that may not prove to be reality based. There is a learning curve and often folks get frustrated and come back to seek advise. What they get is a mish-mash of experience and opinions often flavored with wishful thinking.

In a nutshell, new casters often can't distinguish between the BS and the true stuff. That produces expectations that are no reality based. "Back in the day", we didn't have all of that flood of information and disinformation. We just plodded along casting and shooting.

I would like to give a hearty amen to the statement of Brad. "Learning at the range can not be replaced by the Net. Period". That says it better and shorter than I can say it. Hang out at the range and you will know for yourself what works and does not work. Hang around the computer and you are at the mercy of strangers who may or may know know what they are talking about. This does not mean there is no value to this and other boards for indeed there is. However, without the experience to evaluate what is said, you are in a world of frustration and confusion.

[excess650]

As a Trapshooter and shotgun shell reloader I'm surprised to hear anyone describe 700X as "clean burning"

My father shot trap and skeet in the late '60s through the '70s and used 700x as a cleaner burning alternative to less costly Red Dot. I shot 700x in my 45acp rather than Bullseye or WW231 because it was cleaner.

The newer "clean burning" and "reduced recoil" powders seemed to show up in the late '80s and early '90s.

[USSR]

I think the whole "clean thing" started with shot gunners.

Yep, at least for me it did. Used to use Red Dot for trap and skeet. My local gun shop guy suggested I try Solo 1000. I did, and never looked back. Cleaner and recoils less. I'm using it now for .45 Colt loads. IMHO, it's a great powder for that application, as it is a bulky powder and light loads nearly come half way up the case.

Don

[btroj]

The clean burning thing is great in a shotgun.but you are not running a lube down the shot gun every shot. I believe that much of the clean burning argument with cast is moot. The lube leaves a fair amount of crud in the barrel, depending upon what lube you use.
I just don't see changing powders just to get "cleaner" burning. To get velocity, accuracy, something tangible yes, clean? No.

Brad

[peerlesscowboy]

My father shot trap and skeet in the late '60s through the '70s and used 700x as a cleaner burning alternative to less costly Red Dot. I shot 700x in my 45acp rather than Bullseye or WW231 because it was cleaner.

The newer "clean burning" and "reduced recoil" powders seemed to show up in the late '80s and early '90s.

I suppose it's all relative? I burn a lot of 700X in my 1 oz singles loads, it's a good powder but leaves a lot of residue in the barrel. IME, Clays & Intl Clays burn much cleaner. Not a biggie unless I suppose you're shooting a gas operated auto and worried about clogging up the gas system.
Anyway, getting back to cast bullet shooting..........Unique is one of my all time favorite powders for "just packin' around" revolver loads and mild "punkin' roller" rifle loads, can't say I've ever noticed undue amount of unburnt powder with it? I guess it's all a matter of perception

[35remington]

That, and the fact that pistol loads likely are running several thousand psi higher than shotgun loads, which is the single biggest factor in "clean burning."

[NoDakJak]

I began handloading in 1962 and casting about ten years later. My experiences and opinions are a virtual mirror of what Charger has stated.
PB is possibly the most under rated powder utilized in the cast boolit field. It measures extremely well and is possibly the cleanest burning pwder that i have ever used. The burn rate is somewhat similar to Unique and has replaced it in most of my pistol loads. I have began experimenting with it in cast rifle loads and results are most promising. There was quite a bit of published data on this powder about twenty five years ago but the new ball powders aced it out in popularity. I suspect that was because of madison Avenue advsertising. PB was at that time and remains a great powder for the astute handloader. Neil

[felix]

I agree, PB should be used a lot more often. ... felix

[gnoahhh]

I'll side with guys who consider clean burning to be superfluous. I personally don't care about what remains behind in the barrel after a shot is fired. It's going to get blown out by the next shot anyway, and as such is not cumulative. What you see in the barrel after a shooting session is that which was deposited by the last shot. Since one is (probably) going to clean the gun at that point it doesn't require any more effort or time to clean a "dirty" bore than a "clean" one. As long as a load is accurate I could care less if it burns "clean".

Also, count me in as a believer in PB. Great for low pressure loads in vintage shotguns, reduced loads in rifles and a surprising number of pistol loads.

[targetshootr]

For pistol calibers I have loaded, Clays seems to burn cleanest followed by Universal. Universal burns at nearly the identical rate as Unique except your gun doesn't feel greasy after using it. Dirt is no big deal but grease is unacceptable.

[SciFiJim]

PB is possibly the most under rated powder utilized in the cast boolit field.

I agree, PB should be used a lot more often

OK, I checked the burn rate chart and couldn't make it out. What is "PB"?