misconceptions

[castmiester]

I'm assuming this is you Rick....

Cast bullet alloys, characteristics of CB alloys, maintenance of CB alloys

And from Lyman, Perhaps the single most significant error in all the bullet casting literature is the misconception that lead-tin-antimony alloy melts gravity segregate.

So according to your article with the chart of hardness, Lino is up there quite a bit at 22 BHN

According to Lee thier chart that corresponds with thier scope under the last measurement of .079 is pure lead. I had the last number on thier scope which is .10

 

[Rick]

Yes, that is my article. Yes, Lino is right at 22 BHN.

Please feel free to put all the faith in the LEE book and hardness tester that makes you happy.

 

[castmiester]

Well at this point why not. My point of this post is when Brad says my casts are lino type, and you say Lyman charts are off, and my tester shows my casts not being lino, and… pure lead is what Lee says it is, who should l believe sir ?

I watched a you tube video on the LBT tester, and it is really simple to use. My question is why should I put my faith in it or in the Saeco, or others...... how would I know they are more accurate ? Just want to know.

 

[358156 hp]

There are no... okay, very few absolutes in bullet casting. One of the biggest hallmarks of this the somewhat wanton disregard for uniformity from the production mould makers. There are some really excellent moulds out there that suffer from apathy on the part of the manufacturer. Lyman, RCBS, Saeco and the others are all guilty. This is the situation that brought rise to the custom manufacturers like LBT, Accurate, and a handful of others who take the time and effort to ensure a quality product.

Casters also have a share of the responsibility, many don't control their alloy and mould temps well. I'm guilty myself, I use scrap alloys, which will vary from batch to batch. I mitigate this issue by blending large quantities of an alloy and running it to exhaustion, then I make another large batch and start all over again. Experience gives me a cushion of sorts because that's the way I've always done it and I generally know by the end of a first casting session if I need to remelt and adjust anything, or if I can supplement what I already have to get my desired results.

One area I no longer experiment in is casting hollowpoints. After years of frustration I only use new foundry alloy from either Rotometals of Buffalo Arms for HPs. I won't use stick on WWs for this anymore. If pure lead were easy to find I would likely simply blend what I need from the base alloys. Most pure lead sold as scrap isn't pure at all. Any "pure" lead that has been extruded almost always has a touch of antimony in it to make it extrude more uniformly.

 

[RBHarter]

It's a number for mechanical comparison.

A wise old man , and he must have been pretty wise he was a crew chief on a DC 6 that replaced a Lockeed Constellation affectionately known as Columbine, told me "it doesn't matter what the gauge reads , as long as it reads the same every time ".

I've long said "Lee makes a tool for a job and it does the job . As long as you don't mind trading the last 25-50% of the price difference for final QC and fidgety resets on long runs and the progressive press quirks they are serviceable useful tools ".

I started casting with Lee moulds and I'm actually really glad I did because it taught me in about 6 pours to really appreciate an RCBS mould and the pure joy of using NOE, LBT, NEI , Mountain Moulds aluminum,and the brass MP mould .

I kind of like the principal of their case trimmer system but I have 3 with positive stops that allow wear adjustments and aren't dependent on individual cartridge stops and bushing combinations. I have complaints about about the Pro Trim too ........

I won't use Lee dies to form bottle necks if it involves any shoulder movements.

Hated the Lee chamfer deburr tool , don't care for the RCBS bullet either . Like the Lyman VLD.

I don't have another Ram Prime tool but the Lee works well enough. It would be better if it had another 1/8" of reach or 2 more threads ..

I use pencils for hardness testing. Stedler art pencils. Handy , instant , repeatable, cheap .

I have tools from 16 makers , made over the last 90 years . Lee remains next to , Forster, Redding, Cramer, Herters,and Pacific.

 

[castmiester]

It's a number for mechanical comparison.

A wise old man , and he must have been pretty wise he was a crew chief on a DC 6 that replaced a Lockeed Constellation affectionately known as Columbine, told me "it doesn't matter what the gauge reads , as long as it reads the same every time ".

I've long said "Lee makes a tool for a job and it does the job . As long as you don't mind trading the last 25-50% of the price difference for final QC and fidgety resets on long runs and the progressive press quirks they are serviceable useful tools ".

I started casting with Lee moulds and I'm actually really glad I did because it taught me in about 6 pours to really appreciate an RCBS mould and the pure joy of using NOE, LBT, NEI , Mountain Moulds aluminum,and the brass MP mould .

I kind of like the principal of their case trimmer system but I have 3 with positive stops that allow wear adjustments and aren't dependent on individual cartridge stops and bushing combinations. I have complaints about about the Pro Trim too ........

I won't use Lee dies to form bottle necks if it involves any shoulder movements.

Hated the Lee chamfer deburr tool , don't care for the RCBS bullet either . Like the Lyman VLD.

I don't have another Ram Prime tool but the Lee works well enough. It would be better if it had another 1/8" of reach or 2 more threads ..

I use pencils for hardness testing. Stedler art pencils. Handy , instant , repeatable, cheap .

I have tools from 16 makers , made over the last 90 years . Lee remains next to , Forster, Redding, Cramer, Herters,and Pacific.

That doesn't sound like good advice telling someone that it doesn't matter what the gauge reads as long as it reads the same everytime..... If I had a fever a long as it read 101 all the time I'm ok ???

When I was in the Navy we a had a guy calibrate gauges and that's all he did. It's important that gauges read what they are suppose to read.

My Lee neck collet die is repeatable once I deepened the aluminum cap to close the collet completely to have consistent sizing. Their press handle "pressure" is a bunch of hooey. Really don't know if the Ram prime makes a difference, but my groups show that neck tension and the right powder and charge does. Don't know how bad Lee molds are... due to just learning how to pour better. Don't really remember my mistakes, save pot temp, maybe that's why I have better casts now with RCBS and Lyman. I use Redding body dies along with Lee Collet dies.


I bought a Lyman VLD chamfer tool but haven't tried it yet. As far as Trimming.....IDK man. I never really noticed a difference in accuracy. I have the three way cutter I bought for my M-1 BEFORE the pandemic and the economy but it ain't worth the expense to me.

 

[RBHarter]

Ok but if I have a normal 98.6 I'm on my way to a fever , I run 96.8 .
Yes it's important in some applications that a measuring device do it with a particular accuracy and give the correct information . I don't want to have a crank journal the same dia as the ID of the bearings . However if my micrometers constantly show a 2.0" journal and a 2.002 bearing ID do I care if it's actually 2.100 and 2.102 ? Do I care if I have 37 psi idle oil pressure and the gauge shows 35 psi . Probably not but I am going to be concerned if it falls under 15 psi .

It's a $20 tool that delivers a consistent impact with a dimple gauge read through a magnifier vs a certified $1000 tool with calibration plates. As long as it reads the same and the alloy works in the barrel and on the target do we care that it reads 2,3, even 5 points off in a particular range ? Not especially as long as it reads the same for every batch . We make up a batch that's 5 points harder or 5 points softer big deal as long as that's what we meant to do we know it's 1/3 harder or softer than the measured 15 bhn WW ......it'd be awkward if we had a certified dead soft at 10 but at least we would know our 17-18 could be used for HP or anything calling for a 20-1 alloy . We would also know that a 32-35 was closer to A/C lino . If it measures the same and it works the same it doesn't matter what it reads as long as it's the same .

At 101° I'm a sick dog and at 104 I should be in a hospital not a cold tub .

 

[JBinMN]

As long as it reads the same and the alloy works in the barrel and on the target do we care that it reads 2,3, even 5 points off in a particular range ? Not especially as long as it reads the same for every batch . We make up a batch that's 5 points harder or 5 points softer big deal as long as that's what we meant to do we know it's 1/3 harder or softer than the measured 15 bhn WW ......it'd be awkward if we had a certified dead soft at 10 but at least we would know our 17-18 could be used for HP or anything calling for a 20-1 alloy . We would also know that a 32-35 was closer to A/C lino . If it measures the same and it works the same it doesn't matter what it reads as long as it's the same .

Great post~! ^^^^ , and not just the part I quoted.

My "take", or "opinion" below, in agreement, but longer than yours as I tend to ramble...
(More so as I get older, trying to stuff in as much as I can before I am no longer on the "green side of the sod", it seems. Days are numbered, in my case. No one is forced to read it. )

I call that idea you are describing in the quote, particularly the underlined, in the quote, as using a "Benchmark".
Once the "benchmark" is established & "you"(anyone) use it consistently to measure similar parameters against that "benchmark" , you have established a "standard" that "YOU"(anyone) can use to go/measure from, even if "Your"(anyones) use of that "benchmark/standard" is not the same for others, IF, they have set their "own" benchmark /standard.

I understand that back in the day( like in the Bible) there was a "measurement" called a "Cubit".

IIRC< it was the distance from a mans elbow elbow tip to the tip of the middle finger.
Now, the "average" person might have that be a measurement, in "inches" , as, lets say, 15 inches
( < as an example, don't know the average nor am I gonna measure my own to find out.)

Regardless, it was a "benchmark/standard for the average person to use to measure things.

Just like an "Inch", IIRC, was decided to be the distance the sovereign Kings thumb, measured from the tip of the thumb to the first knuckle,/joint.

Once again, not everyone has the same size in that distance for the thumb, but it was used as a "Benchmark/standard" for that time...

I rambled...

I am only trying to help some folks who could be confused, to understand that it does not matter so much than one persons benchmark/standard is the same as anyone elses, but that the benchmark/standard that anyone uses , as long as the benchmark/standard is consistent & remains the same for All OTHER Measurements for comparison to the same thing one is measuring.

BHN/Hardness, be it measures with whatever tool ya use, be it a with a "Rockwell Scale", an LBT, a Lee, or a Cabinetree one, it really doesn't matter what, as long as it is used "Consistently", and using to measure the same items.

IOW, One can't use a "yardstick" in inches & try to say it is the same as a "meter" broken down into centimeters or millimeters. Unless one has a way to convert one into the other.

As an Example/I.E. -My 2 lee pots for melting & casting do not read the same on the dial to hold the same temp. . One might read 7 on a scale of 1-10 & the other, 7.5 or 8, but using the same Lyman digital thermometer( that was checked for consistency using the boiling temp of water(212° F) and found to be off by 4°F low at 208°F, but that does not matter because of "consistency" in measuring as a "benchmark")

I can melt alloy, be it the same for both, or one pot as handgun BHN, and another for Rifle bullets with a higher BHN level, and even not be exactly the same as far as Temp for whatever particular alloy I am trying to use due to trying to get the different types of metals to "mix", but since I am using a "constant" or a "benchmark/standard" for the beginning & until the end & final product, it Doesn't Matter to me whether anyone else end result is the same as mine, as long as I know I was consistent & get the results I want, based on using the benchmarks/standards I started with & stayed with all thru the process.

I like to be consistent, and I tend try to go with 1 BHN to a 100 fps. Meaning if I am pushing a cast bullet at 800 fps, I want at least a 8 BHN. Pushing at 1200 fps, I want to be at least 12 BHN or so, etc. Rifle...I want to push a bullet at 1500 fps, I want to be at least 15 BHN & so on.

As long as I am "consistent" in my measuring my alloy hardness, it seems to work fine, Plus or Minus, for "Me". .
HOw I do it is I make sure my method of testing hardness, in my case a Lee tester, I make sure I set it up as it is supposed to be & I check it against some pure lead that I KNOW is pure lead. The I test it against some monotype, some foundry type or linotype, knowing that the measurements I am getting should be within a reasonable close to what it should be.
IOW, I make sure I have a "Benchmark/Standard". Even if I am off a bit from what many folks use as a scale for hardness, I can extrapolate the results I get, simply on knowing what I want & how the scale worked out for me as I tested the hardness of the alloy(s).
( Doesn't matter is I used a Lee, Cabintry, a LBT, some pencils, or a Rockwell, etc., I set a "Benchmark/standard to remain consistent & use the same all across to do the measuring)

Yeah, here I went again and rambled some more.
JUst trying to help out for those who might not "get" the idea about "parameters" & how to not worry about what everyone else is doing, but making sure one is consistent in what ones own self is doing.

Alloy, Lube, size of diameter in relationship to ones firearm, etc..

Doesn't matter, as long as one is consistent with ones own stuff.

Okay. I got this out of my system.

If ya read this far, Thanks~!,
if not and ya skipped over it... I don't care.
Not gonna edit. Tough it out. I did in typing it.

 

[Jeff H]

Agreeing with a few previous posts here.

ALL of my measurements are RELATIVE.

I'm no longer in industry and don't have the calibration capacity - nor do I need or want it. If things are behaving, it matters MUCH more that my measurements are consistent than whether they will match an official standard.

Everyone says your alloy should be 725F (thereabouts) but my PID setpoint is 750F, because that's where my bullets come out the best. Is the alloy really 750F? I don't know and don't care. If my controller or TC is off, it's off by the same amount each time. By the way, I replaced all my TCs a couple years ago with new ones and they read exactly the same as the old ones. I use ONE micrometer and one 6" caliper for my casting and handloading. They are 40+ year old and never calibrated, but checked for zero each time used. If I measure .3585" on my bullets and .359" on my cylinder throat slugs, but they're really .3575" and .357", it makes ZERO difference in the world, at all, ever.

If I build a furniture project, I use one tape measure. I don't have them calibrated or pick the most accurate one - using the SAME one to measure drawer openings and drawers is more important. Been using the same, cheap 4' level on home projects for 30 years. It may be off a tad, but EVERYTHING I use it on is off by the same amount so stuff FITS TOGETHER just fine.

 

[castmiester]

Ok but if I have a normal 98.6 I'm on my way to a fever , I run 96.8 .
Yes it's important in some applications that a measuring device do it with a particular accuracy and give the correct information . I don't want to have a crank journal the same dia as the ID of the bearings . However if my micrometers constantly show a 2.0" journal and a 2.002 bearing ID do I care if it's actually 2.100 and 2.102 ? Do I care if I have 37 psi idle oil pressure and the gauge shows 35 psi . Probably not but I am going to be concerned if it falls under 15 psi .

It's a $20 tool that delivers a consistent impact with a dimple gauge read through a magnifier vs a certified $1000 tool with calibration plates. As long as it reads the same and the alloy works in the barrel and on the target do we care that it reads 2,3, even 5 points off in a particular range ? Not especially as long as it reads the same for every batch . We make up a batch that's 5 points harder or 5 points softer big deal as long as that's what we meant to do we know it's 1/3 harder or softer than the measured 15 bhn WW ......it'd be awkward if we had a certified dead soft at 10 but at least we would know our 17-18 could be used for HP or anything calling for a 20-1 alloy . We would also know that a 32-35 was closer to A/C lino . If it measures the same and it works the same it doesn't matter what it reads as long as it's the same .

At 101° I'm a sick dog and at 104 I should be in a hospital not a cold tub .

You’re funny Jeff, tape measure and level isn’t related but I’ll give you and E for effort.

Maybe l can give everyone something to think about….

The Spring loaded Lee…. verses the LBT or Seaco that isn’t spring loaded? (Or is it) how did Veral know how much pressure to put on the bullet to get the right reading ? Or Saeco know how far the needle has to go in to take the correct reading? And how did Lee know what length, wire gauge and diameter spring to use? there is a mechanical equation to reach that conclusion… and l would say they all use it. So they ALL should be REALATIVE .

I suppose as long as casts aren't brittle upon impact on big game that's all that matters. So as long as the BHN isn't on the "harder side to become brittle. And that can be determined by mixed alloys. As for me? I have WW’s and really don’t have any idea what brand, year, etc… unlike others who buy antimony, lead, tin, etc to know what they mix and not need a tester (or do they?) Kinda like l really didn’t need a concentricity tester for my brass. It came out to be what Lee advertised thier collet dies achieve. But it gave me a piece of mind. I don’t neck turn for saami chambers.

 

[Rick]

Castmiester, you might find this interesting . . .

https://www.artfulbullet.com/documents/Shay_BHN_Tester_Exp.pdf

 

[castmiester]

Castmiester, you might find this interesting . . .

https://www.artfulbullet.com/documents/Shay_BHN_Tester_Exp.pdf

Yeah, especially the last paragraph Rick !! I’ll read it later and get back to you.

Ok with a brief skimming over your link Rick, l am humbled to know that LEE is the most consistent with the Lab results.

Temp, definitely would effect results. Age? Henry Ford would agree? Forged cast iron verses lead… how old is lead when excavated ?

So what do these experiment prove? The differences between the various testers, the simplicity of using the tester making consistent readings possible, the users ability to use the tester consistently and interpret the results. This test also has shown how close to the lab tested sample (most of) the various testers really are.

The above paragraph about the user and consistency really shouldn’t be an issue. All testers are to simple to use.

So temp differences changes BHN, ie heat treatments… and at first my casts for my 357 were on the lower side like 9 or 10. It was awhile ago with a shakey hand with the Lee scope. But now with it held perfectly still and it reads fine.

Please feel free to put all the faith in the LEE book and hardness tester if that makes you happy.

Sure will ! Rick, as long as l do my part along with it, and hopefully all you read this thread !

Ralph

 

[nanuk]

That doesn't sound like good advice telling someone that it doesn't matter what the gauge reads as long as it reads the same everytime..... If I had a fever a long as it read 101 all the time I'm ok ???

When I was in the Navy we a had a guy calibrate gauges and that's all he did. It's important that gauges read what they are suppose to read.

I think you may be missing the point... if YOUR thermometer reads 101 when you are totally healthy, and reads the same with other healthy individuals, then, as long as you KNOW the offset, you are good to go with 101* temp reading
this has NOTHING to do with your actual temperature, just a way to measure, and do so with consistency.

all well and good to have calibrated gauges, but what are they calibrated against? Another gauge that is calibrated against... etc...

even the most accurate measuring tool is "Close Enough" for the work it is measuring

 

[nanuk]

I used to read a lot on BHN numbers
then, I read about some folks (a few on here) mentioning they could make a specific alloy hit several different numbers.

So, after thinking about it, is it really about BHN, or the alloy itself?

 

[castmiester]

I used to read a lot on BHN numbers
then, I read about some folks (a few on here) mentioning they could make a specific alloy hit several different numbers.

So, after thinking about it, is it really about BHN, or the alloy itself?

I said before it can be the alloy itself but if you’re unsure what you have, check it.

 

[nanuk]

and to accurately test it, you'd need to melt some down, and cast with it using your standard 'whatevers' so you could get a comparison

if you were handed a bunch of medium antimony/copper alloy that had been poured into ingots and water dropped to cool, and you tested them, you'd get misinformation

 

[castmiester]

It doesn’t matter.. whatever it tests out to be, it is.

 

[nanuk]

Ok, so you are looking for straight lino, and I have some ingots of unknown alloy that happen to heat treat due to my ingotizing (is that even a word?) technique....

you'd be happy to pay Lino prices for it, and believe it to BE lino??

 

[castmiester]

Thanks to all for information l could use, especially you Rick with the link from LASC.

 

[358156 hp]

It's a number for mechanical comparison.

A wise old man , and he must have been pretty wise he was a crew chief on a DC 6 that replaced a Lockeed Constellation affectionately known as Columbine, told me "it doesn't matter what the gauge reads , as long as it reads the same every time ".

A great analogy RBHarter.

Our perception is our reality, regardless of the stimulus.