Casting the best ball possible

[Idaho Ron]

Ron I've always been amazed with the long range accuracy you get and how using the absolute best of the cast helps achieve that.
Your cull rate is really high, that's a lot of work for the return.

You say you cull for hardness first.
How can hardness vary within individual bullets when so much time has been spent hardness testing the lead before the melt?

Aside;
It's not going to matter for ball, the accuracy of the sphere and the barrels made for them is in that 100-125yrd range anyway with the rainbow trajectory in all calibers. Sure we can tighten up that 100yrd group eliminating variables, but you know as well I those unique open sight super groups from RB that show up every once in awhile is bravado an BS.

I start off by putting soft lead in. Then I add some harder lead and cast some. I test the hardness and add more if needed. SO I cull first for hardness. I test about every 50 bullets to make sure I am still in the right spot. I don't test every bullet but I do a lot of hardness testing Then I do weight, then looks.

 

[Rifleman1776]

I want to go with a furnace for sure in order to eliminate the need for propane and a burner, electricity is just too convenient, but I still want to hand ladle each pour. From all of my endless reading/research on the subject hand ladling is the best method to produce the best consistency.

When I was using a bottom pour Lyman pot it gave me much better consistency than I have ever been able achieve hand pouring. And, at the time, I was a .1 (one tenth) of a grain fuss budget target competitor.

 

[Billnpatti]

:metoo: I'm with you on hand ladeling into my moulds. I had a bottom pour furnace http://leeprecision.com/production-pot-iv.html a few years back and had problems with the bottom spout leaking on occasion and on other occasions, it would plug up. I got tired of messing with it and got one of the Lee 10 pound melters http://leeprecision.com/precision-melter.html

It is a perfect size for me and heats up much faster than the 20 pound melter. http://leeprecision.com/magnum-melter.html+ One of my friends has one of the 20 pound melters and his takes what seems like forever to get up to temperature.

Lee makes a good dipper but after years of bullet casting, this is the dipper that I prefer http://www.lymanproducts.com/lyman/bullet-casting/casting-dipper.php

My guess for the best source for all of your bullet casting equipment is Midsouth
Shooters Supply. http://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/Dept/reloading/lead-bullet-casting

 

[Billnpatti]

Actually, most of what I said above was information intended for someone starting out. For this person, this looks like the perfect deal
http://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/item/000152800375/Big-Dipper-Casting-Kit-

Just add the Lee ball moulds of your choice and some lead and you would be good to go.

 

[Cowboy]

:metoo: I'm with you on hand ladeling into my moulds. I had a bottom pour furnace http://leeprecision.com/production-pot-iv.html a few years back and had problems with the bottom spout leaking on occasion and on other occasions, it would plug up.

Lee makes a good dipper but after years of bullet casting, this is the dipper that I prefer http://www.lymanproducts.com/lyman/bullet-casting/casting-dipper.php

My guess for the best source for all of your bullet casting equipment is Midsouth
Shooters Supply. http://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/Dept/reloading/lead-bullet-casting[/quote]
I agree with billnpatti 100%. I shopped around and found that midsouth shooters supply had the best price's and that is where I got all my equipment. After 2 or 3 casting sessions your equipment will pay for its self. Then you are in the clear to cast your hearts desire. When you add up what it cost for a box of 100 for your balls then add the shipping charges on top of that, you will see your initial investment in the equipment pays for it's self rather quickly. :2 Respectfully, Cowboy :thumbsup:

 

[M. De Land]

Guys, if your using a lead tin alloy, in one weeks time after casting your hardness numbers will change upward a bit and in one years time they will be much softer if not kept in the freezer.
Alloys using a bit of antimony are much more stable over a much greater time period.
Antimony also lessons the shrinkage rate of an alloy which is important to know for mold size and patch thickness.
Tin can only change the hardness of an alloy marginally where as antimony can change it dramatically.
As mentioned Tin will make an alloy fill the mold out better but good smoking and proper mold temperature is more important in my opinion.
My bullet batch alloy consists of 16 lbs of mostly pure lead, 4 lbs of wheel weights and 3.2 oz of pure tin. This introduces a bit of antimony into the alloy.
This will yield 20 lbs of approximately 20to 1 (lead tin) alloy with a cast bhn of 9.5 when cooled. A week later they will be about 10.5 bhn if memory serves.

 

[Idaho Ron]

Some alloys do change and some don't. I harden with reclaimed lead shot. For the most part the bullets stay right where I make them. I have tried hardening with dental lead and it will age harden a bit but I am hardening my 50's to like 6.5 BHN and the 45's to about 8 BHN. It doesn't have much alloy in it.
If you ever want a hardness test ran on your lead let me know I can run some for you.

 

[M. De Land]

I have both the LBT and Lee hardness testers. They correspond quite favorably with each other although I think the Lee is one of the most precise testers out their once you learn how to use the scope or in my case convert to calipers to measure indent diameter.
By the way pure lead has been reported in the past as having a 5 Brinnell Hardness Number BHN on I think the C scale but it has been down graded for precisions sake in the last few years to 4.7 BHN.

 

[M. De Land]

Lead shot will work but is not the best alloy for hardening and stabilizing bullet alloy in my opinion because of the arsenic content.
Linotype or old wheel weights are still some of the best shooting alloy for cutting or used as is, to be had, short of certified alloy which is very expensive.
Both are getting harder to find.

 

[necchi]

Here's a very interesting article done by the LASC regarding hardness testers (Ron was one of the blind participants).
The basic summary is testers are good but relative to the individual using it.
The Cabin Tree had the lowest extreme spread of all the testers, kind of indicating repeatable reliability across many users.
For all readers here, if you want real and useful understanding of lead and it's use in casting,, book mark and follow the links on this page;
http://www.lasc.us/Shay-BHN-Tester-Experiment.htm

My point being while hardness is important when making different projectiles for ML, the actual hardness only pertains to the individual as he makes changes for his own use. If he has a tool to measure it and makes note of his use he can duplicate as needed.
It's like measuring fabric thickness for patch, everyone has their own technique that will get his personal results,,it's repeatable for that person

 

[fleener]

A few years ago I bought quite a bit of lead that came from Doe Run and is very pure. I buy one pound bars of tin that are around 14" long, mark them with inches and simply cut off what I need based on the lbs of lead I put in the pot. Keeps it simple. I can cast whatever ratio I want.

Lead that I dont know what it is, gets cast for my 38-55 lever action that does not really care what it gets fed.

Fleener

 

[Idaho Ron]

I have both the LBT and Lee hardness testers. They correspond quite favorably with each other although I think the Lee is one of the most precise testers out their once you learn how to use the scope or in my case convert to calipers to measure indent diameter.
By the way pure lead has been reported in the past as having a 5 Brinnell Hardness Number BHN on I think the C scale but it has been down graded for precisions sake in the last few years to 4.7 BHN.

I have the Cabine Tree tester. I have seen guys use other testers and to be honest The cabine tree is the easiest in my opinion. I can measure lead softer than 5BHN. Look into them they are a very versatile tester. The man that developed this tester has now sold it and it is now listed by another company. http://cowboybullets.com/Lead-Tester_p_57.html

 

[Idaho Ron]

Lead shot will work but is not the best alloy for hardening and stabilizing bullet alloy in my opinion because of the arsenic content.
Linotype or old wheel weights are still some of the best shooting alloy for cutting or used as is, to be had, short of certified alloy which is very expensive.
Both are getting harder to find.

Actually I find that chilled lead shot is very easy to harden with.

 

[Idaho Ron]

Here's a very interesting article done by the LASC regarding hardness testers (Ron was one of the blind participants).
The basic summary is testers are good but relative to the individual using it.
The Cabin Tree had the lowest extreme spread of all the testers, kind of indicating repeatable reliability across many users.
For all readers here, if you want real and useful understanding of lead and it's use in casting,, book mark and follow the links on this page;
http://www.lasc.us/Shay-BHN-Tester-Experiment.htm

My point being while hardness is important when making different projectiles for ML, the actual hardness only pertains to the individual as he makes changes for his own use. If he has a tool to measure it and makes note of his use he can duplicate as needed.
It's like measuring fabric thickness for patch, everyone has their own technique that will get his personal results,,it's repeatable for that person

Thanks for posting that link. You are absolutely right. A tester can help the person that uses it to make the same quality of bullet every time.