Alloy and cast bullet size

[Lost Dog]

Ok, I get the heat and water quenching bit. Harder skinned bullets. I sorta get the exotic mixtures that a few brew up. Right, harder bullets. It appears that the goal is, um, let me see if this is right, ah, harder bullets?

Now my last few years as a lawman was spent studying crime patterns and trends to track past activities and predict future ones. I actually got pretty good at it. And thus I've been studying the trends, in general, of alloy use.

Boiling it all down here's a condensed version:
In the 60's the "average caster" used mostly plumbers lead with 20% to 40% wheelweights mixed in. Again, this is NOT an absolute, just an average of sorts.
Flash to today and the "average caster" is using mostly all clip on wheelweights as his preferred material. Once again, this is in general, as some scrounge all sorts of alloy from countless sources. But on the average, wheelweights are the common denominator so to speak today.

Bullet size changes of course with alloy use. Even rookie casters discover this. It seams up until recently, with the custom mould makers, the "standard" for as cast diameter and weight was done with the Lyman #2 alloy. But now you can order moulds to cast a certain diameter and weight with a specific alloy. Further, the custom mould makers (the ones I've checked out) list a lot of their products casting with wheelweights. Obviously they study trends and use what the average is.

According to the Lyman 46th edition (1982), a 358156 cast @ 149gr and .359" with Lyman #2. But was 153gr and .358" in wheelweights. This pattern was standard across the board with the listed castings in their study/chart. Larger bullets showing greater size difference and smaller with less change, but still the difference was there.
My own casual observations over the years back this data up, but of course at the time I was making no record of difference and thus I personally have no measured data to contribute. However, last year I bought some Lyman #2 from Rotometals and recall using a 20 year old Lyman 358429 double cavity dropped as. 359", and sized and shot superb. Then earlier this year my brother sent me some wheelweights in ingots to me. Casting with the same 358429 gave me bullets that would show no signs of even being run through a .358" sizing die. The average bullet miked @. 3578", and barely that too.
I'm lucky now that I've gone to using Hi-Tek coating that makes the bullet slightly larger, and when sized in the .358" die there is now evidence of sizing present. Just barely though.

So, with a predominant trend towards the use of wheelweights as the primary alloy it stands to reason that as cast diameter from moulds designed for Lyman #2 alloy would cast undersized. I am not a metallurgy specialist nor a super casting authority. Just an old crime analyst and curious old retired cop that studied patterns, trends, and human nature for nearly a lifetime. But to me it looks like the average alloy is getting skinnier these days.

 

[62chevy]

don't forget mold temp and alloy temp play a part too. Antimony is the real culprit thou. I believe after 5% the benefits stop. someone with more experience should be along shortly.

 

[Rick]

Ok, I get the heat and water quenching bit. Harder skinned bullets.

That's incorrect Dog. Lead does not respond as does steel. Heat treat steel and it will surface harden, heat treat lead and it will be the same hardness all the way through. It may take the middle a bit more time to catch up but the bullets hardness will be the same from the surface to the center.

As for skinnier bullets the antimony percentage is what will determine the final diameter of your cast bullets. Less antimony smaller diameter, higher percentage of antimony larger diameter.

.

 

[Lost Dog]

Harder skinned was referring to hard or tough in Texas vernacular. Thick skinned , Has a lot of hard bark, rough as a cob. All mean hard or tough down here in armadillo country.
Never meant case hardening. ...
And wheelweights ain't skinner than Lyman #2? Oh, guess that's a Texas thing as well.

 

[Dusty Bannister]

You will find that COWW have changed over the years as well. Handloader #183 showed WW as 1% tin, 9% antimony and the remainder lead. Later, a source on the Cast Bullet Elist showed it to be .5/4/95.5 and an assay provided by Bill Ferguson several years ago showed it to be .5/2.5/95 and the remainder tramp metals. So the Common WW alloy is indeed casting bullets of smaller diameters. Perhaps this is due to the practice of using scrap lead, recycled many times?

 

[Rick]

Dusty is correct. Starting in the late 70's & early 80's the antimony percentage in clip-on weights was reduced significantly. For the last 20-25 years it has been fairly stable at right around +-2%. The hand Loader article was correct for the time it was written but all good things seem to come to an end. Lyman #2 is 5% Sb and 5% Sn so as I said, the lower the Sb % the smaller the diameter. Yep, even in Texas.

.

 

[Lost Dog]

Well I'm just gonna give my bullets protein shakes from now on.Then I can call them fat little Buddha bullets!

 

[358156 hp]

In all honesty, unless you cast with both alloys in the same mould, you're unlikely to catch the difference in diameters with Lyman moulds manufactured since perhaps the 1960s or so. Lymans attention to fine details has seemed to wane since that period. I noticed several years ago that they were now "proofing" bullet castings with lino instead of Lyman #2, and wondered if spec'ing lino gave them a little larger "as cast" bullet, allowing them to use worn cherries just a bit longer. It doesn't really make any difference with the "mutt" alloys I use (no offense meant to the doggie in your avatar).

Sometimes I analyze things past the fault point. It's like having the hiccups, I just can't stop.

 

[KHornet]

Ah, tis interesting how this subject pops up with variations over time. For hand gun bullets, I am more and more prone to be using range scrap. I water drop most everything, as I find it convenient. Most of the time water dropped range scrap seems to come out about 12-14 BH.
For little bullets (22's and 6MM's) I want hard, real hard, and they will run for me better than 22BH, work great for 22HP's.

 

[RBHarter]

I think that another reason why the lead has gotten harder by alloy description is that we are loading for faster, heavier ,higher pressure cartridges than ever before .

60 years ago 38s ruled the shooting games and a high capacity cast pistol was a 1911 with a sprinkling rebels out on the edge with 9mm High Power . Now everyone has a 15 round 9mm or 40 S&W and shoots full jacketed speeds in all of them . I doubt very much that 40 yr ago a typical cast shooter would strive for jacketed speeds and energies in 222 ,223 ,308 with naked GC bullets. Now I shoot 38 ,45 ACP, 45 Colts even a 30 WCF at nominal speeds , but I also have a 223 that seems to be ok with 2800 fps with a 62 gr and a 6.8 Remington at 130 and 2100 fps in their design platforms.

We are pushing ever greater thresholds every day .

 

[Lost Dog]

Mr. Harter, I believe you've hit the nail on the head.
All the souped up short magnums, AR platform craze, high capacity pistols and such. Yes, the shooting community has been sold, and bought into, the business of faster, bigger, with more rounds concept as opposed to half a century ago. It's really a result of marketing I suppose. In the 60's the .44Mag was king, and said to be capable of anything. Today, there's over a dozen .50 caliber handguns that now dwarf the the venerable old .44Mag. making it almost a pocket gun caliber today.
Yup, you're right. Times have changed and the shooters of today want more, and they want it immediately. Kinda like everything else today I expect. Sadly I'm still stuck in the 60's and 70's in a majority of my thinking. Guess that explains why I was so puzzled about the alloy difference. And my little signature thingy at the bottom is incorrect as well. I AM obsolete.

 

[Missionary]

Greetings Dog
Your not Obsolete... just depreciating along with the bunch of us.

 

[fiver]

not really.
there is a major minority of us that even want to try pushing naked lead at jacketed velocity's.
think about it.
what is the advantage beyond the varmint field, or the cool factor on paper.

yeah it flattens my trajectory and can extend my range on deer.
but then I fall back on the no free lunch thing again.
what do I do with the buck standing 40 yds away looking at me around a pine tree .
here I am with a magazine full of 2500 fps. flat point water treated boolits?
so what do I do.
neck shoot him and ruin most of the meat from there to the middle of the ribs. [and the cape]
and take the chance of a shallow flesh wound if I miss a bone or blood vessels?
or watch him walk off and wait for that 200yd shot that might never come.
better off dropping the velocity 500 fps and having the ability to take him cleanly from that poor angle, and still have the ability to take him at 150 yds if that's the shot I'm presented with.

what's happening is we are specializing more and more in certain areas.
but there is an upside to that, it's also expanding the knowledge base for those that care to read about it and work towards it as a goal.
if I decided to abandon my H/V pursuits and wander into tiny handgun target groups.
I could do some research.
and pick out the gun.
the mold.
the alloy.
and the load that would give me the best chance for success within one or two days of research, versus trial and error over 2-3 years time.
or I could just send a pm to one of the forum members I know that does this and have the information in about 20 minutes.
now combine the research and the advice.
this would not give me the 'best' anything, but it would for sure speed up the learning curve and get me going on the path to success quickly.
the rest would be up to me.

 

[Brad]

I make alloys to match the need of the load. Heat treating lets me have even more control over how the alloy behaves at certain pressure levels.
I haven't melted down 100 pounds of wheel weights in my life. Doubt I ever will. I have melted well over a ton of range scrap and find it has properties that I like.

I buy moulds that let me get bullets the diameter want from the alloy I want.

 

[Lost Dog]

I suppose my thinking is as outdated as my equipment. Maybe I'll figure it out someday. For now it's pretty confusing.

 

[Brad]

Not confusing to me. Pick an alloy that works and find moulds that cast large enough. Pretty simple.
Alloys have changed over time. Wheel weights changed in composition like a rick mentioned.m wheel weights also became far less easy to find. We had a huge influx of "hard cast" salesmanship too.
I tend to run on the low end of alloys. Under 2% of tin and antimony in many cases. Heat treats fine and shoots well enough for most of my needs.

Pretty much a matter of reality. Ideas change over time. Lead sources change too.

 

[KHornet]

I have never been hung up on alloys and specific mixes. However I do mix ABOUT 16 lbs of range scrap to ABOUT 3 1/2-4 Lb of lino (or it may be mono) and water drop. Usually runs above 22BH.
Lately, have been going to strictly range scrap water dropped for hand gun bullets. They seem to range about 13-15 Bh, because range scrap will vary a bit. Not at all scientific, but it works for me, and I don't fix what works.

 

[Lost Dog]

Not a single tire shop in my area will turn loose an ounce of WW. They either reuse 'em or sell to the scrapyard. Bought some off the net, eBay I think. Was said to be 40# but the box and all weighed 32# when I got it inside. Then many were Zink infused or something else that was really hard stuff. Not a great experience. My brother in S. Dakota will send me ingots of his WW from time to time. And of course my neighbor that loads pistol rounds will bring me lead from his work now and then. In other words... I cast & shoot "mystery metal" and nothing is ever the same.
So I've decided that I'll just save up some money and just buy Lyman #2 from Rotometals and then I'll know what it is I'm using.

And since I'm going all Hi-Tek polymer coated with everything I cast now, bullet hardness won't matter any longer.

 

[RBHarter]

In my case I have to meet an energy standard to hunt big game .
I have plenty of ways to do that and I've made the cut with PB and paper in several cases . Later this week will mark a mile stone of tinkering with alloy ,probably weeks of reading and a little bit of shooting.
I have a rifle that is sold by the lowest bidder in the plainest configuration possible. It is an AR 15 in 6.8 Remington with a SPCII chamber with a bullet designed for it at NOE . I had to have a load that would make 1000 ftlb @100 yd . We talk about trade offs . Well this was my first gas checked load . Wow that almost makes it worth the 2 cents on every bullet . My bullets are only 18 bhn they are 75 / 25 WW - 1-20 from tamper seals. These will expand not as much as I'd like but they will . Next week my Nv big game legal 6.8 SPCII AR will be whacking hogs I'll be sure to get autopsy pictures and maybe if I think about it ,with shot presentation, I'll get and exit through a shoulder . A long shot should be 60 yd . The load in question has a according to the calculator gives me just over minimum energy with a 2100 fps MV and a 130 gr bullet from a 16" bbl . Where did I sacrifice , well I don't think it was really on expansion the alloy is soft by all eyeball standards. At 1700 fps on plate steel the gas check is flat with no bullet to be found at 1900 the crater is impressive and at 2100 there is a 32 cal crater pass through of 1/4 plate steel . Is it earth shattering not hardly. Does it shoot? Good enough for me . Does it kill clean ...... that is what this is about.

Sure we can get there deadsoft in a 458 WM/Lott or 45-70/90/110/120 . 30-30 class/family I've hit full jacketed speeds with with no checks .
We have a lot of cartridges and platforms that simply weren't available even 50 yr . A main stream daily driver rifle at 62,000 psi was barely on the market (308/T65), high pressure pistols were just a few in maybe 5-6 cartridges. Today there are a probably 20 pistol cartridges and the old war horse 06' is a medium cartridge at best .
I half of the pistols I shoot are 30-35 kpsi pistols the rest are in 100-143 yr old cartridges ..... not saying much since the 357 is well on its way to 100 as well as th 9mm .

 

[Ian]

Fiver hit on a very high point about the knowledge base. Armed with some general knowledge and the stuff you have on hand or can most easily/cheaply obtain, you can gather what you need to start with any gun and intended purpose of the load. Got soft range scrap? Need to toughen it a bit for a rifle hunting load? Get some high-antimony alloy, mix it in, water drop your bullets, and in a month start doing some testing. Same range scrap can be heat treated to work very very well in handguns. It can be drawn soft in an oven to work with black powder and shotgun slugs if pure or near-pure lead is scarce. WW can be drawn softer if that's what your .38 happens to prefer to make tight groups. The cast size can be controlled to an extent by special attention to pot and mould temperatures, as was mentioned also.

"Hard" never was and isn't the goal if you play with this stuff long enough for it to teach you something. "Tough" is the goal, sometimes, when needed, which isn't as often as it is usually made out to be.