Dipping makes better bullets that a bottom pour pot but why?

[SODAPOPMG]

lead alloy is the same
the temperature is the same
the mold is the same and at the same operating temperature
the only thing that is different is the hole in the ladle and the bottom pour pot

Lyman dipper hole size is .185 dia.
Magma hole size is .086 dia. from their web site instructions on cleaning
Lyman mag 20 mine is .115 dia. but i have drilled this one oversize

my speculation at this time is that the bottom pour pot manufacturers do not want a large hole because it may splash with the faster moving more volume flowing alloy from a larger size hole so they use a smaller hole.

and i think that the hole size is why the ladle with the larger hole size work better because they fill the mold faster with more pressure on the metal which would force the alloy against the sides of the mold, it would also mean that less air would be introduced into the mold when the alloy is being poured because of the larger faster fill

i plan to enlarge the hole on my mag 20 to the .185 dia size but i will have to make up a new valve rod as mine will not go any lower unless i move the op handle slot upwards

any comments are welcome and please add the hole sizes of your equipment

[Old Caster]

I think it is because when alloy goes through a bottom pour, dirt can collect because there is nothing to make it not add up. Eventually a piece comes loose and gets in the bullet. When using the ladle, it is constantly being moved and knocked clean so it is less likely to have dirt enter the cavity by adding up or collecting anywhere.

[tudor8055]

With a bottom pour head pressure changes as the pot empties.
Ladle pour head pressure is always the same which makes it more consistent through the session.

[runfiverun]

With a bottom pour head pressure changes as the pot empties.
Ladle pour head pressure is always the same which makes it more consistent through the session.

yessir

[SODAPOPMG]

head pressure would not be a problem until the pot got below the 1 to 1-1/2 high head pressure of the ladle and you would think that having up to 6in of head pressure of the pot would be better more pressure faster fill
unless it is restricted by a smaller hole

i can see dirt affecting the occasional bullet but that would be a very small percentage of them and would be a problem with the ladle too depending on the operator

comments are always welcome

[Le Loup Solitaire]

I use the ladle as well as the bottom pour so I don't rally have a horse in this race, but I am satisfied with the results obtained either way. I do suggest, that if possible, for interested parties to obtain/read the outstanding article written by Jim Carmichael on the subject/investigation regarding this matter..in "The Art of Bullet Casting"...a classic book still in print and available from Wolfe Publishing out of Arizona. Definitely worth the cost and the reading. LLS

[BruceB]

You are making a WILDLY FLAWED assumption.

You ASSUME that your experience parallels that of legions of other casters, and that your so-called "superiority" of ladle casting is 'A Great And Accepted Truth'. It is not.

You ASSUME that everyone else shares your OPINION.

You ASSUME that you can make such a bald-faced statement without being challenged.

That will do for a start.

I have been casting now for some 47 years. I cast EXCLUSIVELY with a bottom-pour pot, and would fight like crazy to avoid changing back to your oh-so-wonderful ladle.

My bullets are just fine, and range from 55-grain .22s to 888-grain .50BMG, with around 100 moulds filling the gaps in between. Variations in bullet weight and dimensions are very small, and well-within my comfort zone.

"Pouring pressure" is just one rather-minor factor, and it is subject to operator technique. For example, I do NOT contact the sprue plate with the pot's nozzle, and I do NOT allow the level in the pot to drop more than about three pounds from full. I can assure you that there's danged little variation in flow rate when the "head" only varies from 22 pounds to 18 pounds. Without physical contact between spout and mould, pressure is a non-factor. Flow rate becomes the variable, and it's not an important consideration.

If you wish to discuss ladle vs, bottom-pour casting, that's fine, but you are starting out with an unwarranted position with which many of us disagree.

[freebullet]

I shoot the **** outa my bottom pour boolits, and I'm happy. I need to many for slow production methods.

[Lloyd Smale]

im with bruce. Id put my bottom pour bullets up against anyones ladle casted bullets. Actually i think that with a mold guide to insure the distance of the pour is the same each time its more consistant. If your rythem isnt perfect hand casting your temps will vary. As to pressure i keep two pots going and feed the pot im casting with from the other so the lead level never drops more then an inch. Bottom line is even if you dont do that i doubt youd see any more variation in bullet weight anyway. As to contamination. Most contaminants float to the top so if your not constantly cleaning your alloy your more likely to get contaminants ladle casting and if your constantly fluxing your alloy you can actually get some bad effects by contaminats in the flux. With bottom pour you can about flux at the beginning of a melt and not have to bother with it after that. If you want you can even put a layer of sawdust on top of your melt to block oxidation. Ive casted everything from 80 grain pistol bullets to 550 grain bullets and have done it both ways and have checked and if theres a differnce other then the fact bottom pouring is MUCH faster, i havent seen it. To me casting with a ladle is about like loading pistol ammo on a single stage press. If i had to go back to doing it that way therers a good chance i wouldnt do it at all.

[M-Tecs]

I’m with Bruce and Lloyd on the one. I to will put my bottom pour bullets up against anyone’s ladle casted bullets. I do both not because of quality but since my primary bottom pour is ninety pounds it easier for me to use my twenty pound non bottom pour for special alloys for testing or small runs. Good technique is the key to both methods.

[imashooter2]

I dipper cast for many years before moving to a bottom pour for the convenience and speed. I still believe that I get fewer rejects when I dipper cast, but the bottom pour is so much easier and faster that I do not mind the slightly higher rejection rate. The non rejects from either method are completely equivalent.

[Old Caster]

If bottom pour is better, or at least as good, why do all the top notch BPCR shooters use ladle. Maybe you haven't enlightened them. Perhaps one of you could go shoot in a big match and show everyone how it is done.

[gbrown]

Many, Many years ago, I started out with the ladle. Tried the bottom pour. All sorts of problems. Maybe of my own creation, I don't really know. Went back to ladle pour. A very satisfied caster. Figure out what works for you and go for it. Whatever floats your boat.

[Bullshop]

This discussion gets kinda silly and even childish since its based on opinion and no one is going to change anyone elses. Kinda like the my Dady can beat up your dady at the playground.
If you must carry on children.

[blikseme300]

This discussion gets kinda silly and even childish since its based on opinion and no one is going to change anyone elses. Kinda like the my Dady can beat up your dady at the playground.
I you must carry on children.

+1 ^^^^.

The hogs that I shoot don't know or care how the boolits were cast. No matter the method outcomes can and are different depending on the person doing the casting. It is like comparing the quality of the violin music depending on how the bow is held. Whatever works for you, stick to it.

[Cane_man]

just to stir the pot some more

" In my 20 plus years of bullet making experience, I have tried everything and made every mistake at least twice. I have found that the best bullets are made the old fashioned way--with a ladle. The volume of the molten lead in the ladle is easy to control--it's either full or it's not--and the stream of lead going into the mould is gentle and easy to maintain bullet after bullet. This means no cavitation and very consistent weights. I personally see every bullet I make and inspect each one 3 times before it's shipped to a customer. My acceptance rate of perfect bullets is over 95% with ladle casting and less than 60% with a bottom pour pot. You can make a decent bullet with a bottom pour pot if the bullet is short and not very heavy, i.e. most pistol bullets. But in my experience, a long, heavy caliber bullet, like the Big Bore rifle bullets I make, cannot be made to hit targets at 1,000 yds unless they are ladle cast and as perfect as humanly possible. The key to making perfect bullets is consistency in every aspect of manufacture and strict quality control." -Montana Bullet Works

http://montanabulletworks.com/page9.html

[PS Paul]

Hmmmmm. and the pot errr, plot, thickens!! M. Venturino's writings in Lymanc CBManual comes to mind. He prefers ladle pour and says, like Old Caster above, that most top competitors in BPCR, prefer ladle pouring, but he woulen't argue someone's success if they bottom pour.....

Might be like this: for many,achieving consistent results with heavy cast boolits seems to be easier with the ladle. Bottom pour consistency can be achieved with greater attention to the process and systematically maintaining melt levels in the pot for desired results......

but, I digress since I only bottom pour and do NOT compete in BPCR, although I pour a beautiful 405 gr. .45 boolit with a bottom pour pot on a regular basis.

[BAGTIC]

If some people think they get better pour with a ladle perhaps it is because the ladle slows down the casting rate and keeps them from getting carried away with how fast they can do it.

[detox]

Bottom pour: Lymans #3 manual states "when contaminents like dirt, ash, dross build up between wall of pot and melt, they will find their way to the bottom of pot and then out the spout into mould. This dirt will cause voids in bullets". I believe these contaminants can be caused by DIRTY LEAD and by too much stirring and fluxing. One old time caster here says he does not flux at all when casting...I may try not fluxing next time i use the bottom pour. I will drain and wash out pot before doing so.

Linotype lead: I would like to know the process of filling those old linotype machines...do they flux and stir lead before filling letter moulds free of voids? CLEAN Linotype lead may work better in bottom pour if left unfluxed and stirred.

Ladle: So far i like the ladle method best, but i will also get voids if any dross gets into ladle and mould. I make sure to dip my ladle deep and away from dross.

Montana bullet works cast custom bullets for customers using ladle method only. As written by April 2013 issue of Handloader magazine. Also Mike Venturino likes using Linotype lead when casting for his military surplus rifles.

[Lloyd Smale]

black powder shooting is an old school thing and id bet a good many of them cast with a ladle just because thats how it was done back in the day. I dont cast black powder bullets but have owned and shot the linebaughs, 50ak and 4570s for many many years and cast bullets as large as 550 grain and have done them both ways and if theres a differnce in quality of the finished product i havent seen it and it would show more in my high tin/antimony alloys then it would with pure as they set up much faster. Pure sets up slow so the lead in the mold is going to be molten for a bit either way giving it plenty of time to fill out the mold. Casting good bullets is all about technique. Its about doing the same thing every time in steady pace. It doesnt much matter if you ladle or bottom pour if you are consistant with what your doing. Keep contaminents out of your pour, keep the level in your pot consistant. Keep your mold temp and alloy temp consistant and either method will make good bullets. With a bottom pour your going faster and it takes a bit more consentration to be smooth, so theres a bit of a learning curve and id guess thats why some will claim the ladle is better. Most of us started with a ladle and when switching over you may have more rejects till you master it and im sure a good many give up before they give it a fair chance. Im retired now so have plenty of time to cast. If it was a better way id be doing it but im not going to do it just to do it. To me it would be like going back to loading pistol ammo on a single stage press!! Some bullheaded people still think you can make better ammo that way too!!!!! Ive seen cowboy action shooters who insist on loading there ammo on hand tools like they did back in the day too but does that make there ammo better?