Wheel Weights vs Range Scrap
- Thread starter burbank.jung
- Start date
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Okay, here's the issue- If I say "hardcast" exactly what is the Bhn? Not even touching on alloy makeup or quenching or anything else, what's the exact Bhn that's makes it "hardcast"? Is it 17? 19? 21? 30? Someone give me an exact number that establishes the cutoff point between soft and hard. Or go by alloy makeup- what are the exact percentages that establish the cutoff like for hard and soft? You see my point, I hope. It's a non-specific term that implies that "hardcast" will solve all your issues with getting cast to shoot from any gun.
Good luck with that.
RBHarter
West Central AR
I was railed once and informed that "hard cast" contains other than tin and lead in any proportion .
Most of the time by the time it gets to hardness someone has announced that it takes #2/hardball with a gas check to get any good at all in a 357 or 9mm .
I generally respond with something like Elmer Keith developed the 44 mag with 1-16 tin lead . Seems like a lot of experts get real quiet after that .
Most of the time by the time it gets to hardness someone has announced that it takes #2/hardball with a gas check to get any good at all in a 357 or 9mm .
I generally respond with something like Elmer Keith developed the 44 mag with 1-16 tin lead . Seems like a lot of experts get real quiet after that .
This is why I try to remember to always use quotation marks around "lead," "alloy," "hard" or "soft" (as applied to lead-based bullet metals).
I have a Redding (?) hardness tester, but used it for a while and now it sits. I got it out a while back and tested a bunch of bullets cast from various lots of mongrel-alloys and they all came out the same! Maybe my hardness tester is busted.
I personally don't think that there was ever enough thought put into the term "hardcast" to have included any original logic. I think it's a generic marketing term parroted by those who fail to question things - anything. Eventually, it took on a separate meaning to a lot of different people who assumed they knew what it meant rather than trying to research it and figure out that it really meant nothing.
I have a Redding (?) hardness tester, but used it for a while and now it sits. I got it out a while back and tested a bunch of bullets cast from various lots of mongrel-alloys and they all came out the same! Maybe my hardness tester is busted.
I personally don't think that there was ever enough thought put into the term "hardcast" to have included any original logic. I think it's a generic marketing term parroted by those who fail to question things - anything. Eventually, it took on a separate meaning to a lot of different people who assumed they knew what it meant rather than trying to research it and figure out that it really meant nothing.
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Derzackly!!! It means NOTHING! It's an advertising term that implies jacketed like toughness that will make life easy. Lies, lies, lies! And yet, a good 15 years after we figured this out, "hardcast" is still going strong. It's got to be the most irritating thing about cast I can think of and when you try to tell someone it's just not that simple, they can't believe it.
Okay, I've said my piece, again. The people that want to follow that cult are welcome to it.
burbank.jung
Active Member
My definition of hardcase is those posted with Missouri Bullets or Oregon Trails. It must be a specific alloy of some type to have a bhn to bring the lead alloy hardness up. And so to me, melting the type of bullets that look like factory made "hardcast" bullets for reloading into molten range lead should add more of the unknown quantity of antinomy or tin or whatever the hardcast bullet maker was using. What makes me asking myself is my most current bullet casts using MP Molds. The weight is more consistent. Whether if it is my attempt to group the lead ingots of the same bhn and blend them to one pot so there is a consistent alloy mix or my improved skill of finding a cadence an swirling my lead from the sprue plate vs just dropping the lead straight in the hole that I now have more consistent bullet weight is on my mind. My bullets group much better too.
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Okay, then EXACTLY what is the specific alloy that defines "HARDCAST"? Look, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but you are chasing the same idea that myself and many, many others here did- that there is some magic alloy out there that will make cast shooting dead easy. There isn't! If there is, it's mostly copper and goes under the name of "bullet jacket material"!!! BHN is NOT going to be that magic unicorn fart that solves all your problems. If that did work, then all we'd need is an alloy of ___ Bhn and we'd all be shooting 300 Win Mags at jacketed speed. I went through the same learning curve. I was shooting 30+ Bhn bullets and finding out that they didn't do any better than the 13 Bhn bullets. If you are getting less weight variations it's likely you getting better at casting, not the Bhn! Mix your stuff together, forget the Bhn and work on fit. That is the answer you are looking for, that is where you will find success and Bhn is only a small part of the whole mix that will get you there.
FYI, the main reason commercial casters tend to use a relatively harder alloy than most of us is the same reason they tend to use the hard waxy crayon type lubes- They make damage in shipping much less noticeable.
FYI, the main reason commercial casters tend to use a relatively harder alloy than most of us is the same reason they tend to use the hard waxy crayon type lubes- They make damage in shipping much less noticeable.
Last edited:
Michael
Active Member. Uh/What
Here is my take on it. When it comes to range scrap, IME/IMO the so called "hard cast" bullets are those sold by commercial casters and usually have very pronounced bevel base, lube still in the grooves and very little deformation almost to the point were one could of wash off the dirt, call it good, resize, lube, and load em up
. This seems to be the majority of what I have found over the years. Softer stuff usually HBWCs 22s, jacketed bullet cores and assorted plain base slugs from folks like me who really do not care for commercial "hard" cast bullets, or bevel based molds, I prefer my own and either flat base, or where needed GC.
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Then the question is, how hard are they exactly and what is the exact makeup that produces that and then you come to the big question- Do they shoot better because of the Bhn? Do they shoot good at all? Or, like most commercial cast bullets, are they so-so in the accuracy dept, prone to leading and wild shooting if pushed?
If "hardcast" is the answer then why doesn't "hardcast" work? (Hint- Fit is King)
If "hardcast" is the answer then why doesn't "hardcast" work? (Hint- Fit is King)
L Ross
Well-Known Member
The author of "The ABC's of Reloading." My bible as a fledgling loader. I loved his stories too. Like the story about his buddy shooting Dean's .44 spl in the dump and flinging the empties after he shot. Dean said if the feller wanted something to throw he's have given him a handful of dimes.
Dusty Bannister
Well-Known Member
HOME | usantimony
www.usantimony.com
Repeat of post #29
Last edited:
Ian
Notorious member
Straight from Missouri Bullet Company's website. They do tell you exactly what they're giving you, but the little "lesson" is laughable. First, they describe "obturation" means bumping the bullet base, which it does not. Obturation is a term borrowed from the medical world where it means to plug up a passage such as an artery.
ob·tu·rate
/ˈäbt(y)əˌrāt/
verb
TECHNICAL
block up; obstruct.
It does not imply that the object causing the blockage must to expand to do so. Then, they give a definition which is different and MUCH more correct: "This failure to obturate (“seal the bore against onrushing gases”) causes leading which is a chore to clean and is a major obstacle to accuracy." Kudos for that.
Anyway, the user is instructed to make sure the alloy is SOFT enough to "obturate" under the pressure of the load. mmmm, kay. That means peak pressure is higher than bullet strength, the way I read it.
Next we are instructed to make sure the alloy BHN in PSI is balanced for the pressure of the load in PSI, stating both too hard will not "obturate" (back to the wrong definition again) to seal the bore, and too soft will expand too much. (facepalm)
Next problem is they want you to follow the Lee pressure/bhn formula and "round upwards a couple of points", so in fact they're asking us to make the bullet tougher than the peak chamber pressure would be able to swell. Sounds a little contradictory to me.
There is much talk about gas cutting and leading but they have it all backwards with regard to fit. They want you to "bump" their bullets to achieve obturation (essentially so, if you make a few corrections to how it is written), when in fact they should be emphasizing that the bullets need to be LARGE enough to not leak. Bumping a bullet base is a practice that only really works with pure lead and hollow base bullets when using really fast powders like fffG, Bullseye, Red dot, etc where the pressure rise is almost instantaneous and the peak well above the yield strength of the alloy....not a mathematical equivalent pressure of "couple points" lower than bullet strength.
At least they actually tell you the consistency of the alloys they use.
With misinformation like this right on the product manufacturer's website, listed the "Technical" tab, it's no wonder people are confused.
Fit is King. That means many things but above all it means make the bullet big enough to obturate the bore in the first place.