mold of lead for lead

[token tory]

I called it good and proceeded on to Happy Hour.

& well earned it was, too. Thanks for actually testing before posting. :thumbsup: :hatsoff:

 

[Stophel]

Ok, that is freakin' awesome! :grin:

 

[rafterob]

The nay-sayers here seemed to ignore the fact that the molten lead when poured into the mold would instantly and rapidly lose heat. My thought from the beginning was it would work and I was just lurking to see who would go for it. :thumbsup:

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

:applause:
Congratulations laffindog, I'll take your word that it worked, glad you were able to get acceptable results. You will of course need to true the faces after formed, get a usable round cavity, and pins to hold it in alignment and you may be able to do without handles by clamping together. When you have time to run some shootable balls, let us see the results.

hunts4deer, clay marbles were made of fired clay, at least the ones found in my Grandfather's possesions were. He was a child in the 1880s and they may or may not be like those of the mid-18th Century, not sure. Even if fired, I still think there would have been trouble with the massive amount of pressure called for in this application, but so far I have been proven wrong - maybe. :haha: Also, all of the clay marbles my Grandfather possessed had small flats from sitting in the kiln to be fired and none were close to perfectly round. Sort of but not superior to what was available in bullet moulds in the 18th Century that the reprter/correspondent claimed in Spence10's article. They are light compared to glass marbles of the same size. Some did not take their glaze well and show signs of deterioration over the last 130 years. Keep in mind that the glass marbles of the time were only a little better as far as roundness.

Paul, there are different compositions of Linotype metal but the average used in common newspaper work as well as across the letterpress printing industry is/was 85% lead, 13% antimony and 2% tin. There were also harder and softer versions but most shops used the 85/13/2 alloy, it stood up well. That is the allow with the 450 degree melting temperature. As far as where to get it? Ask old printing operations locally, there may be some that have some ingots stored or there may be some forms still in the gallies. And believe it or not, some shops still use it.

 

[CrackStock]

I am with you on thinking that a block of lead might act as enough of a heat sink to work as a mold of expediency. The smoke might prevent the two surfaces sticking.

I won't trade my steel, brass or aluminum molds in anytime soon, but it would be worth a shot in a pinch. Might make for an experiment. Might no be interested in using a marble, but might try with a cherry between two lead plates.

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

The nay-sayers here seemed to ignore the fact that the molten lead when poured into the mold would instantly and rapidly lose heat. My thought from the beginning was it would work and I was just lurking to see who would go for it. :thumbsup:

You sure were right Ghettogun, you caught me. And we'll remember that you were right.... so far. Glad to see that you were finally able to be right. :rotf:

Now, has a usable ball been cast. No. Not yet. When Laffindog makes a mold by the methods proscribed and casts usable, round balls with it, we can all sit down and join him at Happy Hour, I'll even buy his first round. I know he is a man of his word.

We'll even set some doable parameters that must be followed:

(1)The balls must be round.

(2)They must be made by the method described in the article, no standard recess cutting cherries, they must be pressed into the blocks. I know that Laffindog will fully describe the process and give us the amount of time spent on the mould from start to successful completion of the finished, usable mould made of pure lead. He can even use modern, perfectly round glass marbles, something not available in 1748.

(3)Those cast must be of a common weight indicating no voids. Not 3 or 4 out of 100, but a reasonable number as you would expect from what we would call a "bag mould" today, not necessary to expect the results you would demand from a Lyman or Lee mould with insulated wooden handles.

(4)They must be superior to the balls cast in the type of mould mentioned as commonly available in the 1748 article, cast by what the reporter indicated when he said "THE Badness of the Bullet Moulds brought into America for common Sale". Are we really sure what he meant by this? Out of round? Not true to the indicated size? We'll accept that they can be and that Laffindog has or will for demonstration of success shoot the balls and that they do give reasonably good accuracy. A smoothbored or rifled gun can be used for the tests. Both can use a patch if needed.

(5)Here is the one that may give the most problem: Since the correspondent did not mention in the 1748 article the use of a low temperature alloy to make the balls, only pure lead must be used for both the cast balls and the mould blocks and the balls must show a consistent weight within the standards demanded by shooters. I am afraid that the heat demanded of the mould may cause failure in this test. One ball cast in a cold mould or a group of balls cast over a long period of time in a warm mold will not give even weight among the balls, I am afraid that the mold will fail.

Laffindog, I hope you accept this and please do not think that I want to embarrass you, not at all. I do hope that the effort, if you decide to try this project, is successful. Learning a new way to do something is a good thing for us all and if you have the time to make the effort, I will keep my fingers crossed for you, not against. I actually do hope you can prove me wrong. :thumbsup:

 

[Congress Own Regiment]

Ok so the lead blocks sink the heat and did not melt.
But we are still very very far off from a shoot able ball. The propose of the article was to remedy bad molds. There is no way that a lead mold squeezed around a marble is going to make a round ball mold. The lead being displaced by the ball will pull lead in for a greater diameter then that of the ball. and the lead will push way from the depressed area it would require grinding and milling. pinning to hold the haves true. But pinning is not possible with the pushing and pulling going on in all direction. Pinning would need to take place after the fact. making it near impossible to align the haves.
There is no way this adds up to a better mold or ball to fit or shoot ones gun.

 

[Josh Smith]

I have been thinking on this and came up with the heat sink thing that has been proposed already.

However, when I originally read the text, I got the impression that the mould was supposed to be reshaped after every cast -- just retain the marble.

So it would be cast, reshape; cast, reshape; and so forth.

Josh

 

[Congress Own Regiment]

There is no way it will make a good ball it would be odd shaped. And the reworked block would not come out the same each time. And as far as time goes are you kidding me think of the time invested.
:youcrazy: life is to short. I for one like to shoot round balls let me say it again round balls.
Not things that would be belted around the mild that is assuming alot like it would even meet in the middle. Tools where better then we given credit to back then. It would be more plausible to swag round balls then to make them in this method.

 

[oldude]

Shootable ball? Are we talking a .490 ball and a .10 patch or a .490 and any thickness patch? even now we adjust patch thickness with OUR perfect round balls. And how round must it be in a smooth bore or buck shot in a smoothie. There is written documentation that the old boys (sometimes)shot rocks/ram rods/nails and bits of scrap iron in their guns/cannon. I would be happy to see three hits on an 8 inch target at 50 yrds but you all might want a 1.5 inch group.Some of us today make allowance for prefect by casting wheel weights instead of pure lead or use Pdex rather that holy black. I think its great that a lead "ball" can be cast in a lead mold. Bent

 

[Congress Own Regiment]

the two haves would not line up very well. reworking a mold each time to cast a ball. One would do better to tap a bit of lead into a usable ball. with a hammer and a spoon or two. \
Rocks... nails not for long. and the cost of a rifle one would have to be in a life or death struggle or out of there head to do that.

Any one that set out to make balls that way would do better to use the poorly made mold of an under sized ball. And patch it with a thick patch. At lest that way time is at lest on there side.

I for one would not waist my time with that Method. If I found my self in need of a lead ball to shoot. I would cast in the best mold I could find and swage it to be suitable.
good luck to all how have that kind of time on hand to press a new molding block every time they cast a ball or two.

 

[Josh Smith]

Oh, I agree. I have my own moulds and wouldn't use this one.

I'm just saying I think it could work is all, if someone wanted to invest the time, say, a target shooter back in the day.

Josh

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

Shootable ball? Are we talking a .490 ball and a .10 patch or a .490 and any thickness patch? even now we adjust patch thickness with OUR perfect round balls.

If you are addresing this to me, the patch thickness is to be determinedby the shooter, it is not important. At least not to me.

And how round must it be in a smooth bore or buck shot in a smoothie. There is written documentation that the old boys (sometimes)shot rocks/ram rods/nails and bits of scrap iron in their guns/cannon. I would be happy to see three hits on an 8 inch target at 50 yrds but you all might want a 1.5 inch group.

Again, to me it is immaterial. On the average, I shoot a .68 round ball cast in one of the old DGW Hair Straightener Moulds that Turner Kirkland used to sell. Works great in a Charleville Pattern muskets and used to use the same in .75 cal. Brown Bess (the Brits used that cal. in their standard cartridges.) These molds are famous for their semi round balls. It's not perfect but it works. Oh, and I don't use patches in smooth bore muskets. The reason for Parameter #1 is that the 1748 article claims that a mould superior to the common mould can be made this way. If the mould so made casts a less than perfectly round but useable ball, that will be fine.

Some of us today make allowance for prefect by casting wheel weights instead of pure lead or use Pdex rather that holy black. I think its great that a lead "ball" can be cast in a lead mold. Bent

I don't know exactly what you mean by "prefect" but by parameter #5 lower temp alloys can not be used because they were likely not commonly available at the time the article was published. But then neither were wheel weights or Pyrodex common at that time. Incidentally, there is no rule against Pyrodex, it can be used if wanted.

 

[oldude]

Va. I only used your reply button. My post was just my thoughts. The bad molds from Britton are most likley not the ones that survived, they were most likley reforged into something else, after all if they were bad why hang on to them? The patching and round ball were just that and aimed at shooting smooth bores/fusils as they were most common at that time.As for the statement about us making allowances I think the old guys did to and as no(?) lead molds have been found then IF they had been used it was only until a GOOD iron mold could be had and then the lead one was melted for balls.

 

[matt denison]

.."We'll even set some doable parameters that must be followed:"

Who's "we"? Set your own parameters then get out in your shop and get to work.

I set my own parameters, remember? They were:
1. cast a ball without damage to the mold - check.
2. the project couldn't take more than 20 minutes - check.

I don't plan to spend even one more second on this project. I didn't do this to prove anything to anyone but myself. If it didn't work I would have posted that and an explaination of why. I do think that I could re-squish the mold another time or two to get the desired result and then use that mold over and over again without "shape and cast, shape and cast" The pins were installed while the ball was still in the cavity and nothing did (or would) change and the blocks lined up fine. If you think you can compare this method to a Lyman iron block mold then we are all wasting our time. I view it all as an interesting experiment, that's all.

Once more, not a second of time. I have 14 guns on the waitiing list, two kits, four guns in production, 2010 taxes are due and I have another 20 hours to spend on them. I have an HBC knife half done and a pistol that needs to be finished before Valentines Day on my bench. Today is Saturday, I have the wax casting machine warming as I type and will work today and tomorrow until it's time to stop to watch the Stupor Bowl. How are you going to enjoy your weekend? :grin: I'm not complaining, I'm thankful that business is good. I just can't devote anymore time to this.

Matt

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

Laffindog, good to hear that you have finally decided that any further effort is a waste of time, You have cast one semiround ball with a mould made of lead and, of course, this proves nothing. When you have tried it to the point where the mould has heated to the point that you can get useable balls (the same weight with no voids that will destroy accuracy) you will find that the ball will start to cause the mould to melt or at least soften and adhere to each other - that is stick. That is what I have been saying all along. Do I doubt that a mould can be made by the article's method of "squishing" (as you call it)? No that can be done, never said it couldn't. But you can NOT cast lead balls in a lead mould that will be shootable. You have stopped short of this and I don't blame you, why waste the time on something you know will not work.

If this has dragged on longer than necessary,I will quote the reason why:

"I've read it twice. It sounds perfectly plausable to me. Open your minds, fella's, think it through, don't jump to preconcieved conclusions. This is something I want to try."

The open mind is a wonderful thing, especially when it refuses to deal with reality. Sorry, that is just the way it is. Ignoring factual information and experience in one's personal past (we've all cast lead bullets, a common experince) just allows us to get ourselves into bad spots.

As far as my weekend? I will be at work this evening and tomorrow, I may get to look at the game occasionally (if I allow the set to be turned on) but I haven't seen a complete Super Bowl since the Redskins played. And as far as next week, I will spend my evenings completely reworking an Italian Charleville lock - an unpleasant job but someone has to do it. Personally I have more important things than trying to make a mould out of an inapropriate metal.

 

[brubincam]

-----tumble them like can be done to round off sprues----- :idunno:

 

[token tory]

Wow!
I'm amazed, really, talk about pre-conceived notions & a closed mind. Personally I give a big :hatsoff: to someone who actually tested this in the real world. That is just so much more impressive to me than 10 or 100 saying "IMHO" (My italics), I don't see anything humble in the face of such utter disdain for experimentation & inquiry.:shake: This is the mentality of the Salem witch trials. :youcrazy:

 

[shootrj2003]

by adding a little tin you lower the melting temp of the lead for the bullet by keeping the mold cold it doesn't come as close to melting point either the bullets might be a little hard and might be froosty looking and the layer of soot keeps it further from a tendency to mix or melt together ,theoretically plausible

 

[George]

Well, Spence, that'll learn ya, dern ya. You should see now that it's a waste of time trying to post interesting historical tidbits to this board. These boys aren't interested in such nonsense, they are just looking for a fight and nothing is going to stop them having one. Name a topic, any topic, I'll give you 5 to 1 odds they will be in a pissing match in five minutes, insulting everybody in sight.

And what did you learn? #1 stop posting, no topic is safe. #2 shut up, you'll just encourage them.

Sheesh! The art of civilized conversation is dead and gone. RIP

Spence