Lee 6 cavity , 158 gr. G/C Removed , 38/357 Mould.

[Ben]

Just wanted to add another "success story" using Ben's method.

I use a chucking reamer instead of a twist drill, as most of my twist drills are not really very nice ones. The reamers were both new, old-stock from eBay, and pretty inexpensive, so no big investment there.

I had previously done a few 30s and 35s this way, following the rest of of Ben's advice, but had recently bought a NOE 4C RDO 360-190 "clone" with two GC and two PB cavities. I only had to remove one GC rebate to get what I want. Last time, I had to remove three, so this one was easier on the nerves.

THIS TIME, I used the reamer with no lube, because I had a devil of a time getting ALL the oil (or something) out of it when I cleaned it initially and didn't want to stop and do it again - I needed to take advantage of a small window of opportunity to get some bullets cast.

It turned out perfectly without lubing the reamer. I not only can't tell one PB cavity from the other, but I surely can't tell one PB bullet from the other once I cast some up. Just have to be sure to keep the reamer moving (by hand) going in and coming out and it leaves no ugly marks. It took about three quarters of a turn as I lowered and then raised the quill.

This idea was a HUGE help, because I've had terrible luck finding exactly what I've wanted from NOE for a long time. I like their moulds, but felt deprived. I've bought two NOEs now that weren't exactly what I wanted, and for a very small investment of tooling, and a little setup time, I have what I really want. This also helped me make my favorite "squirrel bullet" for the 30-30 from a LEE C309-113, which now is a plain-base and weighs 118 grains.

That's GREAT !!!!!!!
Glad it worked well for you.

Ben

 

[CWLONGSHOT]

I did this mold couple weeks back too. Just a 2 cav but worked perfectly!

Tha ks for the tips!

 

[Jeff H]

I did this mold couple weeks back too. Just a 2 cav but worked perfectly!

Tha ks for the tips!

I like to use PB as much as possible, deferring to GCs only when absolutely necessary, which isn't that often. I think the real cast bullet buffs buy up all the NOE PB moulds and the GC moulds are what's left. Isn't so much of a problem now - thanks to Ben.

 

[Ben]

Where there is a will, there is a way.

 

[CZ93X62]

It IS beautiful work, no doubt as to that.

I sense from the majority of members' posts that gas checking is becoming less popular as time goes on. I see two reasons for that occurring.

1) Cost--GCs run 4-5 cents each nowadays, and if you are shooting hundreds to thousands of a give GC bullet design that starts getting spendy in a big hurry.

2) Necessity--We may as a site have FINALLY destroyed the old gunrag myth that plain-based bullets lead the barrel excessively, and a gas check is REQUIRED to prevent that. Our mantra of SIZE MATTERS is starting to take hold.

 

[Ben]

It IS beautiful work, no doubt as to that.

I sense from the majority of members' posts that gas checking is becoming less popular as time goes on. I see two reasons for that occurring.

1) Cost--GCs run 4-5 cents each nowadays, and if you are shooting hundreds to thousands of a give GC bullet design that starts getting spendy in a big hurry.

2) Necessity--We may as a site have FINALLY destroyed the old gunrag myth that plain-based bullets lead the barrel excessively, and a gas check is REQUIRED to prevent that. Our mantra of SIZE MATTERS is starting to take hold.

I think you have " hit the nail on the head. "

Ben

 

[Jeff H]

I think you have " hit the nail on the head. "

Ben

And, a third reason is that SIMPLER IS BETTER.

We can rationalize whatever we want, apply logic, the scientific method, relay on "data" as much as we choose, but simpler is still always better.

I have invested in the tooling to make gas checks for 22, 30 and 35 caliber, not so much to "save money," but to simplify my life by reducing dependence upon a "supply chain" by one more increment, yet am happy to let that investment languish if I can achieve what I wish without it.

 

[CZ93X62]

Great point, Jeff. It IS simpler.