Harder Cast versus Hard Cast

[44MAG#1]

What's the purpose of the question: i.e. what will be done with the information?

What is done with the info is up to the individual whether it is of value or not based on subjectivity or objectivity of the person. It may be entirely irrelevant to many.
Some questions & answers are subjective, some are objective.
No offense, but this seems mixed at best (re: subjective & objective), and w/o understanding the purpose of the question, very hard to give targeted answer.

If one finds it hard to give an answer then don't.
It depends on how accurate one wants to be with the perception on has of soft and hard.
i.e. IF you need a precise Scale to soft/firm/hard/really hard, what do you intend to use it for?
I may not use it for anything. I shoot now mainly 15 BHN bullets which to me falls in medium not hard as some people call 15 BHN.
Many conversations on here about how BHN doesn't really relate to combustion pressure capability, so perhaps if you could define the use intended, an answer could be provided.

I am not talking about combustion pressure but BHN's.How one juggles their load to best use the bullets they have and their hardness is up to them.

[Bigslug]

"When discussing terms like acceleration, engineers do not use words like 'FAST'. They're only saying 'You'll be the fastest man in the history of spaceflight' to get me to go along. . .WITH THIS LUNACY".- Matt Damon, The Martian

"Hard cast" is how mass-marketers talk to the non-casting plebes. The myth that all leading comes from a too-soft bullet is quite persistent - - which is interesting considering the cost of antimony and tin; you'd think they'd be hyping the softest stuff they can get away with.

[TurnipEaterDown]

I am not talking about combustion pressure but BHN's.How one juggles their load to best use the bullets they have and their hardness is up to them.

You miss my point, and seem to have taken offense where none was intended.

Your question is open ended (not bound), nor stated in a manner that directs an answer.

What do you intend to use a quantification of "hard" for?
Answer that, and perhaps someone can provide an answer which is useful.

My point on pressure was to draw attention to the fact that some questions do not have an answer as sought because there is no correlation between the question and the intended use of the information.

So, if you just want an answer that another person has, w/o any intended use, how about: The transition from pretty hard to hard is precisely 14.357629 BHN. Not very useful is it? Subjective answer (with sarcasm) masquerading as objective precision...

[Springfield]

There is no standard. Simple. Like "good accuracy", it varies from person to person, to whatever is "Hard" to them.

[44MAG#1]

You miss my point, and seem to have taken offense where none was intended.
No offense was taken. Where did you get that offense was taken?

Your question is open ended (not bound), nor stated in a manner that directs an answer.
Isn't most questions open ended? I was asking since there is a variety of hardnesses where does each end and the other hardness take over? 5 to 22 BHN's is quite a swath to state one is hard and the other is soft. What range is soft what range is medium and what range is hard. Then we could add medium soft and medium hard.

What do you intend to use a quantification of "hard" for?
Answer that, and perhaps someone can provide an answer which is useful.

I thought that was what I asked. Of course I am 70 and may be mistaken. Where does SOFT fall where does MEDIUM fall and where does HARD fall on a scale from 5 to 22 BHN? Since 15 is considered hard by some 22 must be a real good golly gosh bullet.
My point on pressure was to draw attention to the fact that some questions do not have an answer as sought because there is no correlation between the question and the intended use of the information.

So, if you just want an answer that another person has, w/o any intended use, how about: The transition from pretty hard to hard is precisely 14.357629 BHN. Not very useful is it? Subjective answer (with sarcasm) masquerading as objective precision...

Your sarcastic sarcasm is duly noted and is a joy to experience. Thank you.

[Larry Gibson]

I was more leaning to the meaning of hard and it relativity to where hard is from 5 to let's say 25 BHN. Different HARDNESS of bullets can be made to work well depending on how much one wants to experiment.
But where does HARD fall on the BHN scale from 5 BHN to 25 BHN?
If 15 BHN is hard what is 22 BHN?
If 6 BHN is soft what is 10 BHN? It is HARD compared to 6 BHN but not as HARD as 15BHN. Etc, Etc and Etc..

Not being sarcastic but...

"If 15 BHN is hard what is 22 BHN?" Answer is simply "harder".

"If 6 BHN is soft what is 10 BHN? It is HARD compared to 6 BHN but not as HARD as 15BHN. Etc, Etc and Etc." Again, the answer is simply "softer".

I think you're wanting a definative answer to a basically open ended question. As with many things we do in cast bulleting the answer isn't hard fast. An example is, "Linotype alloy is harder than Lyman #2 alloy". Or, "40-1 alloy is softer than COWW alloy". Nothing really definitive in either, just a descrptive statement of fact. As previously stated, a BHN of 15 has pretty much been established [though not written in stone] as where "hard" begins with BHNs above being "harder" because they are.

[44MAG#1]

Let's add this. On Rimrock bullet site we will see if we bring it up.
That they have "Standard Hard Cast Bullets.
Also, "Top Shelf Hard Cast Bullets".
The "standard" hard cast is 15 BHN.
The "Top Shelf" hard cast is 22 BHN.
In this case does "Standard" denote quality, hardness or what? Is the "Standard" wording mean 15 is hard and "Top Shelf" is hard at 22?
Or does "Standard" mean lower quality than "Top Shelf" or are both the same quality but one is softer than the other or that one is lower quality than the other?
15 BHN to 22 BHN is 7 points difference. Is 7 points insignificant or does it mean something worth while?
If it is not worthwhile why not make all their bullets 15 BHN?

[jgstrug]

Purpose of the projectile is almost as important as accuracy. I agree that 15 seems to be where most people think hard starts.I shoot lever action silhouette rifle cartridge with a 38-55 and a Rim Rock commercial cast thought to be rated at 15 but not tested by me. Accuracy is very good and no leading problems, but the only problem that has been revealed is that a hit on the 200yrd ram makes the lead turn into dust, and some of the energy needed to move the steel from its perch is lost by being dispersed into all the fragments.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[Larry Gibson]

Let's add this. On Rimrock bullet site we will see if we bring it up.
That they have "Standard Hard Cast Bullets.
Also, "Top Shelf Hard Cast Bullets".
The "standard" hard cast is 15 BHN.
The "Top Shelf" hard cast is 22 BHN.
In this case does "Standard" denote quality, hardness or what? Is the "Standard" wording mean 15 is hard and "Top Shelf" is hard at 22?
Or does "Standard" mean lower quality than "Top Shelf" or are both the same quality but one is softer than the other or that one is lower quality than the other?
15 BHN to 22 BHN is 7 points difference. Is 7 points insignificant or does it mean something worth while?
If it is not worthwhile why not make all their bullets 15 BHN?

The difference is they quantify the difference between their meaning of "standard" and "top shelf" by giving the BHN for both. The terms "soft(er)" and "hard(er)" in and of themselves does leaves a lot to be desired in terms of BHN meaning. Also, neither term addresses the malleability of the alloy.

Still in common usage "hard" refers to a BHN at 15 or above with cast bullets. Been that way since I can remember.

[44MAG#1]

"Hard" in common usage is 15 BHN.
So bullets that are 22 BHN be uncommon.
I get it now.
Common usage can actually divert meanings. That makes sense.

[fredj338]

So if the bullet can be scratched it is "soft" and if it can't it is "hard"?
"Soft" or "hard" relative to what? Since there is span of BHN's where does "soft" fall and where does "hard"fall?

Really, I think you are over thinking the whole thing.

[44MAG#1]

Really, I think you are over thinking the whole thing.

Over thinking something is bad? Or does it depend on what one is thinking about?
While it may make my brain hurt to overthink something I haven't gotten into trouble like I have under thinking something.

[charlie b]

This is just a way to use up some time on the forum

Just like the other thread on Smelt vs Melt

As well as the signature block above

[44MAG#1]

This is just a way to use up some time on the forum

Just like the other thread on Smelt vs Melt

As well as the signature block above

What does the signature block above have to do with BHN?

[Willie T]

My first automobile was a ‘68 dodge power wagon. When the gauge showed 1/4 tank it was empty. If you based your belief on what the gauge read, you better put some walking shoes behind the seat. Whether you measure “pure” lead at 5 or 7 has little bearing on what you have. Whether it suits your purpose, or if alloying it produces results better suited to your needs is where the rubber hits the road.
Willie

[high standard 40]

The commercial cast bullet sellers made up the term "hard cast" to cater to people who believe that a soft lead bullet will leave massive amounts of lead deposited in your favorite shooting iron, but "hard lead" cures this problem. Knowledgeable shooters know better. Don't allow yourself to be caught up in meaningless jargon. "Hard Cast" has no real value in the discussion of the measure of Brinell hardness. My two cents.

[Soundguy]

I look at pressure and fps when choosing bhn. Non magnum handgun rounds that aren't screamers get about 10. 12 and a gas check for slow magnums.. 14 for fast magnums. I use #2 or 15/16 as starting for most rifle..unless it is slow and low like 45-70. Go up from there plus a gas check as speed/pressure tops out.
Size is just as important as hardness by the way.

[TurnipEaterDown]

This is just a way to use up some time on the forum

Just like the other thread on Smelt vs Melt

As well as the signature block above

And here I sat thinking all along "top shelf" meant the expensive Liquor that did the same job as $8 Popov...

[405grain]

The signature block has nothing to do with the measurement of Brinell hardness. The two are unrelated. The signature block is on it's own problematic.

Years ago I was riding on the subway on my way home from work. In this situation you are presented with a cross section of humanity along it's entire spectrum. On this particular day there was a gentleman in a beige business suit that was becoming more and more agitated and animated. The conversation that he was having which was causing his distress was occurring entirely inside his own mind. Eventually, with arms flailing, he burst into a loud declarative statement: "Nobody knows what time is!" I found this peculiar because, in 1915 Albert Einstein had published his General Theory of Relativity, and for over a hundred years we have all known, or at least had at our disposal, the information of exactly what time is, and what causes it to occur. This gentleman assumed that because he did not know something, in his mind that meant that no one could know it. If something is unknown to you, that does not mean that all others are mystified by it.

As for the rest of the signature block above, it's suggestion that mass cannot be measured is both pedantic and incorrect. The value of mass is used in several scientific calculations, in example the formula for kinetic energy ; K=M*V(squared), or also in the more well known formula E=MC(squared). The signature block further errors on the assumption that the metric system is not based on some system of a standard. The entire metric system which includes volume, distance, and weight is based on water. In example: one cubic centimeter of water weighs one gram. This gives you basis for the volume, weight, and distance of anything measured by that system. The metric system is not afforded relevance by virtue of a convergence to the imperial system.

If you are confused and unable to process something , that does not mean that everyone else is confused by it.

[44MAG#1]

Why are two people fixated on the signature block. This isn't about mass other than a bullet is mass. That mass can be anywhere from 5 to 22 BHN. The mass of the bullet will depend on it's composition.
But again this isn't a treatsie on mass.