Better lead than this?

[35 Rem]

You guys taught me to use the 20/1 alloy and thus far I like it just fine. However, finding pewter is proving to be impossible for me and I was wondering if there is another metal that can be used instead of pewter or tin to make a usable alloy for my slower speed handguns. 38spec, 45acp and some 9mm for my Sten.

For low velocity handgun loading the lowly clip-on wheel weights or range scrap would work just fine and be a lot cheaper than 20/1. I know Elmer used it and I used to read everything he wrote in Gun & Ammo magazine every issue but as a broke High school/college kid at the time, I used the cheapest version of lead I could find. I still find myself very hesitant to put $20 to $30 of tin into a Lee 20lb pot to turn out handgun bullets in spite of my much better financial situation compared to back then (late 1970's - early 1980's).

[RogerDat]

94-3-3 sounds good to me. But how would you arrive there with Lino type and range scrap and 50-50 solder. Does someone have a link to learn the math of it? It’s an end product and the pencils have stated it. With different ingredients I have to go a different way.

Member Bumpo developed a very useful alloy calculator available for download from this sticky https://castboolits.gunloads.com/sho...oy-calculators
It is a spreadsheet so one needs to have MS Excel OR OpenOffice Calc which is free open source software available here https://www.openoffice.org/download/ One can choose to just install Calc (the spreadsheet application) during the installation. OpenOffice is however a full suite of office tools that are generally compatible with Microsoft Office documents.

Especially useful if one scrounges lead as there are places to add in custom alloys.

I make different alloys in 100# or larger batches just so they will be consistent. I agree with the idea that a small variation isn't usually a problem but consistent is preferable even if the percentage of something is off by a touch one way or the other.

I like Lyman #2 90/5/5 as the equal parts antimony and tin create a stronger alloy than one would expect from the 5% of each metal. Sum is greater than the parts. That alloy can be pushed pretty hard without leading. Although I tend to powder coat high velocity rounds for 5.56 or 30 caliber milsurps. Powder coat yields almost jacketed performance. Lyman #2 is also is easy to cut with plain lead to yield less "rich" alloys of 94/3/3 or 96/2/2 if that is all that is required.

I have had good results for handgun plinking rounds all the way down to 97/1.5/1.5 which is essentially 50/50 COWW and Plain lead plus 1.5% tin. I tumble lube a lot of those rounds and have no leading.

I have suggested that folks just getting started casting bypass making their lead and start with "known good" alloy that is purchased as it removes the alloy making as a skill to be mastered before they can get good cast bullets created. Same applies to anyone who factors the cost of purchasing lead alloys as the better deal compared to getting into casting and scrounging for their own lead. I think the scrounging is fun, I have been able to accumulate a much larger supply of lead buying scrap than I could have fit into the budget as purchases of ready made alloy. Then too there is the sudden joy at finding some linotype or bars of body solder.

Doesn't have to be all one way or the other either One can purchase alloys and scrounge for filler such as soft lead to cut them with to make ones money go further and using the alloy calculator it is pretty easy to cut store bought 94/3/3 with soft lead to cast revolver or 45 acp rounds at a reduced cost with a known alloy.

Side note hardball 92/6/2 is almost same hardness as Lyman #2, BHN of 16 and 15 respectively. Hardball uses less tin which is expensive amd just a touch more anitmony which is less expensive which is one reason the commercial casting operations used hardball. Not too difficult to use the calculator and a bit of solder get hardball to yield almost same alloy as COWW plus 1.5% tin and that has been wacking whitetails out of a 30-06 for at least a couple of generations of casters if not more. Soft lead I think is the scrap that is easiest to find or cheapest to purchase from foundry so there can be some savings from buying hardball and using soft to cut the alloy and cut the cost per bullet.

[Rickf1985]

I have a problem with that calculator. it does not give true readings of BHN whenever you are using pure lead. That is the biggest offender but there are others. If you look at pure lead in the selection field it shows it as 5 BHN. Just select 1 in that block and click enter and look down at the bottom and you will see that it is assigned a value of 8.6 BHN! Now, if you are trying to figure a 50/50 mix of pure and W/W for example you will get a substantial difference between what the calculator tells you and what you actually get.

There are others that also do not have matching values to what they show in the fields. To find out just select 1 in that field with nothing else and hit enter and see what it shows at the bottom. That is the actual value the calculator is using to calculate your alloy, not what it shows in the hardness block up in the fields. I always tell people that if you are using pure than use the mixing cross calculator put out by Wiederlader. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Y0raK6_Vbk

[Rickf1985]

Just to add to what I said above, I do use that calculator a lot. I will get you in the ballpark for what you are looking for and then fine adjustments in your alloy can be made and documented for the next batch. If I knew how to use Excell I would modify the calculator for my use to have the pure actually use BHN 5 but there must be some reason it is set for 8.6. I know that is the figure Rotometals uses but when my three lead testers all tell me it is 5 then it is 5, not 8.6!

I just compared the mixing cross method with the calculator to get a BHN of ten from Lino with BHN 19 and pure with either BHN of 8.6 or 5.

Mixing cross with BHN of 5 would give me 9# of pure and 5# of lino to get 14# of BHN 10

Bumpo's calculator calls for 9# of pure to 1.4# of Lino to get 10.4# of 10.4BHN.

Bumpo's calculator using the mixing cross formula of 9# to 5# gives 14# of 13BHN.

So, Adding that extra 3.6 BHN to the formula for pure really changes things and makes it very inaccurate.