95/5 vs. 50/50

[jonk]

I usually make #2 alloy from 9 pounds of WW and 1 lb of 50/50 solder, but recently got some 95/5. Question; since the 95/5 is mostly tin, if I use 1/2 pound of the 95/5 solder can I expect more or less similar results to using a full pound of 50/50, per 9 lb of WW (with the added hardening bonus of the antimony, of course)?

[runfiverun]

yes..

[Echo]

Well - you would end up with about 5% tin, which is way more than you need. I believe Lyman #2 is wasteful of tin, as you don't need more than 2-3%. I suggest 1/4 pound of 95/5 to 10 pounds of WW's. Don't be wasteful of the high-priced spread. Aim for 2 to 3 percent...

[Lloyd Smale]

thats where the lyman manual is a little odd. they have three or four recipes for #2 and the one your using doesnt really test as hard as the ones they use lineotype mixed with ww and tin to get the hardness. As to your alloy staying the same with 95/5 i doubt theres a hardness tester precise enough to show the differnce.

[Gohon]

I've often wondered about these kind of statements, such as today's wheel weights contain less antimony than in the past or that 4-5% tin is a waste of tin. Are these just repeated guesstimates floating around or has any of you actually run tests on the different alloy mixes.

[Rem700]

I dont recall who but someone here tracked the BHN of bullets cast from WW over a 15 year period and found little difference 1-2 BHN so I would say they havnt changed much.

[Shiloh]

Well - you would end up with about 5% tin, which is way more than you need. I believe Lyman #2 is wasteful of tin, as you don't need more than 2-3%. I suggest 1/4 pound of 95/5 to 10 pounds of WW's. Don't be wasteful of the high-priced spread. Aim for 2 to 3 percent...

So do I.
You gain nothing. Hardness comes from antimony and trace amounts of arsenic, tin for alloy flow. Save your tin for the next batch if needed

Shiloh

[Gohon]

So do I.
You gain nothing. Hardness comes from antimony and trace amounts of arsenic, tin for alloy flow. Save your tin for the next batch if needed

This is what confuses me when I hear other say adding tin to pure lead raises the BHN. Someone has to be wrong..........

[MtGun44]

True, tin increases pure lead hardness. Antimony does MUCH MORE.
For WW alloy, also true, but not by very much, and esp not much per $.

Bill

[Gohon]

True, tin increases pure lead hardness. Antimony does MUCH MORE.
For WW alloy, also true, but not by very much, and esp not much per $.

Well, you see that is where the confusion sets in for someone like myself just getting started. According to Lyman's third edition, Wheelweights are 95.5% lead, 0.05% Tin, and 4% Antimony at 9 BHN. Their formula for making #2 alloy is 90% lead, 5% Tin, and 5% Antimony which is at 15 BHN, is to simply cut 9 pounds of WW with one pound of 50/50 solder. Seems like a pretty big increase to me even if the BHN only gets to 13-14. Every time I see someone ask the question on how to get started, the first thing they are told is get the Lyman book and read cover to cover. Yet when something like this comes up that same information is suddenly no good. No wonder one is easily confused........

[runfiverun]

they [lyman] also show loads in their books going way faster then they really do.
and faster then you are probably going to get.
now the rub.
you can usually "go up" an alloy recommendation with your velocities.
i.e. for medium magnum ranges[handgun] a plain based ww's alloy with 1% tin or less will push along just fine to 1600 or so.
but some designs in rifles will show leading with this same alloy at 1400 in a rifle.
where? about a foot or so down the bbl.
why? lube bails on you,pressure drops off and the boolit relaxes.....
next guy says what are you talking about i shoot that same p/b design to 1600 in my rifle with no problems...
there are generalities,there is what works most of the time then there is what is working for you in that gun.

[AZ-Stew]

See these links for more info than you willl be able to absorb for the next couple of years:

http://www.lasc.us/FryxellCommentsCBAlloys.htm

http://www.lasc.us/CastBulletNotes.htm

Glen is a frequent poster on this forum.

Regards,

Stew

[Shiloh]

Linotype has 4% tin and 12% antimony, with a hardness of about 23 BNH. Less tin, but enough for it to fill out letters of old time typesetters molds efficiently and perfectly, very few if any voids.

Lyman #2 is 5% tin and 5% antimony, with a hardness of about 15 BNH. Linotype is harder because of the antimony, making it half again as hard as Lyman #2. I reiterate, Lyman #2 is unnecessarily high in tin in my opinion, but hey, it's there alloy.

Hardball alloy, has half the tin and antimony of linotype, but is still slightly harder than Lyman #2.

It is the antimony, not tin that hardens the alloy. If WW alloy won't cast well, I turn up the heat a little. If it still won't, then I add three feet or so of 95/5 solder. That usually fixes the problem, and it water quench hardens beautifully.

Geez, I confuse myself with all the percentages.

Shiloh

[Gohon]

AZ-Stew, I've read Fryxell's writings several times before. But even he, on the links you posted lists the same Lyman's formula I quoted for making #2 Alloy. He also states tin does add hardness, just not as well as antimony. I'm not arguing a particular point either way. Just trying to box most of the facts in one package so to speak to make things simpler. I guess the truth is, I'm not really confused at all but just sometimes a little irritated that comments are often made with nothing to support them except a because I said so. So I guess the best thing is for me to just stick with the writings of Lyman, Fryxell and others of that sort that can show how they came to their conclusions. That is not meant as a disrespect for those that have posted, but unless one can show me something other than just their personal opinion then I must view it as just that, a opinion and not fact.

[Lloyd Smale]

I have seen batches of ww that took more the 2 percent tin to get to cast well. Ive added as much as 7 percent to some batches. Im guessing those batches had a small amount of zinc contamination as they were smelted back before i took precautions to avoid it. The aditional tin did make them cast much better. As to it being a waste to add more i dont totaly agree. Alloys like 5050 ww/lyno and even #2 seem to cast eaiser for me then ww with 2 percent tin. Im personaly convinced its the fact they have more tin that does it. Problem is with tin rich alloys is they can actually have the reversed effect in some cases. If you cast large bullets and get the mold hot or run your pot to hot you can actually get hot spots in your mold and alloys with alot of tin in them tend to not fill out well in those hot spots. Switch to an alloy without much tin and the problem goes away.

[Gohon]

Hardball alloy, has half the tin and antimony of linotype, but is still slightly harder than Lyman #2.

While that is true, Hardball has almost twice the antimony as does wheelweights which is what is being used to produce a #2 alloy. I can't raise the antimony content to get to #2 alloy but I can raise the tin content. The goal is to reach a #2 hardness straight from the pot without the use of Linotype, water quenching, or heat treating. Anyone know of another way to do it?

[Shiloh]

While that is true, Hardball has almost twice the antimony as does wheelweights which is what is being used to produce a #2 alloy. I can't raise the antimony content to get to #2 alloy but I can raise the tin content. The goal is to reach a #2 hardness straight from the pot without the use of Linotype, water quenching, or heat treating. Anyone know of another way to do it?

Nope. Other than buying hardball alloy.

What alloy do you have?? Do you have wheelweights or some other type of scrap lead? What about adding some lino for hardening purposes. Thats what I use my stash of lino for. Water hardened wheel weights have been fine for all my rifle shooting needs. Have you tried water hardening what you have? What velocities are you shooting that you need a specific hardness?

Shiloh