burbank.jung
Active Member
As a reloader, my newly adopted technique is to expand my sized case necks with an RCBS expander plug so the neck tension on the bullet will be the same.
How to make better reloads
- Thread starter Kevin Stenberg
- Start date
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
IMO, based on what I've seen personally, there are a few concrete rules in this game and a lot of "sometimes" semi-rules and then a great big bunch of "I dunno, maybe this will help" type stuff. What works with one alloy in one caliber in one gun with one bullet might not work at all in another set of circumstances- at least from what I've seen. I read here and watch the results others get and try to make sense of it in relation to my own set of circumstances. I've been on a lot of other sites where the hubris and ego just drips down my screen or where the sheer lack of real world knowledge leaves me wondering if anyone ever actually shoots or if they just repeat what their buddies down at the tavern said.
I'm just gonna keep reading and watching.
I'm just gonna keep reading and watching.
burbank.jung
Active Member
Well, Bret4207 what can I say. How about if I start with what I'm working on and thinking about than what I know. By doing so I hope experienced casters and reloaders will step up and add their experience. As for me, I haven't cast long and shoot my testloads 1-2x/year.
Last year I collected a lot of range lead and melted them into ingots. From reading posts here on the internet and observations. After initially checking the ingots for hardness and doing so months later, the hardness changed as the lead alloy stabilized. I took the aged ingots and separated them by hardness. The softest alloy is to be used for my .38 wadcutters, the second for my .45. The hardest alloyed ingots will be used for my .40 S&W, 9mm, and .357 which have the highest chamber pressure. Is this necessary? Maybe. Some casters says you can shoot softer lead alloys in a 9mm and .40cal and that can be true. A PC bullet is a soft jacketed bullet so there is less change of leading. But, what about the powder charge and chamber pressure? I'd guess that the high bhn lead alloy will be able to shoot more accurately with high mv and pressure. To prove so I'll cast .40cal bullets of different bhn and find out what the max mv accuracy is. The highest pressure I plan to use a gas check too. Another bullet will be a lead alloy with 2% SB with a gas check. I'd like to do a similar test with a rifle bullet too.
Last year I collected a lot of range lead and melted them into ingots. From reading posts here on the internet and observations. After initially checking the ingots for hardness and doing so months later, the hardness changed as the lead alloy stabilized. I took the aged ingots and separated them by hardness. The softest alloy is to be used for my .38 wadcutters, the second for my .45. The hardest alloyed ingots will be used for my .40 S&W, 9mm, and .357 which have the highest chamber pressure. Is this necessary? Maybe. Some casters says you can shoot softer lead alloys in a 9mm and .40cal and that can be true. A PC bullet is a soft jacketed bullet so there is less change of leading. But, what about the powder charge and chamber pressure? I'd guess that the high bhn lead alloy will be able to shoot more accurately with high mv and pressure. To prove so I'll cast .40cal bullets of different bhn and find out what the max mv accuracy is. The highest pressure I plan to use a gas check too. Another bullet will be a lead alloy with 2% SB with a gas check. I'd like to do a similar test with a rifle bullet too.
There is nothing wrong with testing things yourself. First hand experience is a great teacher. Failure is an even better teacher.
Outside of safety rules I never see any harm in trying something just because.
My biggest problem with lots of testing is that it quickly becomes like work and I find it sucks the joys out of shooting,
Outside of safety rules I never see any harm in trying something just because.
My biggest problem with lots of testing is that it quickly becomes like work and I find it sucks the joys out of shooting,
burbank.jung
Active Member
Maybe it's like changing oil. It was fun as a kid but not now.
I could agree with that.
I don’t mind testing a new load or something like that. When I was doing a lot of lube testing it become job like. No shooting for enjoyment, always with testing as the goal. After a few years of that it was time to get back to fun.
Might be why I have become a plinker much of the time?
I don’t mind testing a new load or something like that. When I was doing a lot of lube testing it become job like. No shooting for enjoyment, always with testing as the goal. After a few years of that it was time to get back to fun.
Might be why I have become a plinker much of the time?
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
I wasn't responding to your post, if there was any confusion on that.
As for what you are doing, if I may make a suggestion, forget the darn Bhn and shoot what you have. Diameter in the throat is far, far, far more important than a relative Bhn number, which tells you nothing about your alloy other than at time your tested it you got "X" Bhn. I chased that rabbit (Bhn) for about 10 years before someone told me- "FIT IS KING". Bhn alone is not a guarantee of anything, much less of accuracy or lead free shooting. That's one of those "few rules" I mentioned above.
Beyond that, have fun!
Last edited:
burbank.jung
Active Member
Sorry for the confusion Bret4207. I really want to climb into that rabbit hole. Sometimes the New Guy has to see things for himself. But thanks for the warning. At worse, I can say, "Bret4207 told me so..". What boggles me is I separate my cast bullets by weight and my best testload groups still don't look as good as those printed with Dardas bullets.
Dimner
Named Man
Just to reiterate what others have said.... The biggest thing I have learned is that when chasing 'accuracy' (precision really) either with cast or jacketed, we are subject to the law of diminishing returns as we go down the list of what to tweak.
Personally, I find the easiest way to make better handloads is to isolate one variable at a time. Go down that list of variables that you have identified and know when to quit. Start with the low hanging fruit, and move on from there, but have a goal in mind. Unless you are like me and the journey is more fun than the results.
However, I have a question for the group here..... Has anyone noticed higher SD with ball powder vs extruded? I have seen that a bunch. I could mine my data to see if I can quantify it, but the trend is there... at least in my hand loading. At first, I was thinking I hate ball powder. But now I'm thinking that ball powder is just more sensitive to something else amiss in my handloads. Bullet tension? Case fill? Those are my two hunches.
Either way though the higher SD doesnt 100% equate to worse groups.
Personally, I find the easiest way to make better handloads is to isolate one variable at a time. Go down that list of variables that you have identified and know when to quit. Start with the low hanging fruit, and move on from there, but have a goal in mind. Unless you are like me and the journey is more fun than the results.
However, I have a question for the group here..... Has anyone noticed higher SD with ball powder vs extruded? I have seen that a bunch. I could mine my data to see if I can quantify it, but the trend is there... at least in my hand loading. At first, I was thinking I hate ball powder. But now I'm thinking that ball powder is just more sensitive to something else amiss in my handloads. Bullet tension? Case fill? Those are my two hunches.
Either way though the higher SD doesnt 100% equate to worse groups.
Rockydoc
Well-Known Member
Challenging, ain’t it!
Snakeoil
Well-Known Member
With my limited experience, I suspect that how easily the power ignites plays a role in your experiences. I've read that flake powder is much easier to light. So that might result in more consistent results. The ability to light the powder along with how the powder lies in the case is probably another variable. As hobbyists, it is probably impossible to ever truly test various parameters and be 100% certain that your results are not a combination of factors, several of which you might not even be aware of. Although this is a learning process for me and learning is half the fun, I tend to have the basic philosophy of address the obvious first and be as accurate and consistent in what you do from case to case and find a load that works. Then you can start to chip away at the smaller variables. But you can only work one at a time or you will never know which one was in play when things changed, or how much each one was in play.
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Fit friend, it's all about fit. You have static fit and dynamic fit. The former is your baseline dimensions and where/how you seat the bullet...and a few other things. Dynamic fit is everything that happens after the primer goes off. Different alloys, not necessarily with a different Bhn, are going to give different dynamic fit, as will every other variable related to pressure and the bullets travel from the case. If you can figure out why the "Dardas" bullets (I'm assuming commercial?) give better results, you'll be on the right track. It may be Bhn has something to do with it, (why the Bhn is higher or lower is more important than the number, eg- specifics of the alloy), but it's far, far more likely there are several other more important contributing factors beyond a relative number.
Have fun in the rabbit hole.
Last edited:
fiver
Well-Known Member
it's [Ball powder] super sensitive to................... the primer.
if you pay attention you'll start to notice some powder/primer combination trends.
i have a few powders that i instantly go straight to a certain primer because it has performed for me in the past.
stick powders-federal rifle [with a try to remington]
ball powders- winchester first
Alliant powder- in the LP cylinder type cases- straight to CCI 300's with federal as a backup for the boomers.
lower amount ball powders that aren't heavily coated [IE faster than 3031]-- federals or mag tech's.
if you pay attention you'll start to notice some powder/primer combination trends.
i have a few powders that i instantly go straight to a certain primer because it has performed for me in the past.
stick powders-federal rifle [with a try to remington]
ball powders- winchester first
Alliant powder- in the LP cylinder type cases- straight to CCI 300's with federal as a backup for the boomers.
lower amount ball powders that aren't heavily coated [IE faster than 3031]-- federals or mag tech's.
RicinYakima
High Steppes of Eastern Washington
Winchester primers have been developed around ball powders since WW2. Big flakes of aluminum in them.
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Huh. I've never had access to a wide variety of primers. My own fault I suppose, but I'm still using CCI and Federals from about 1980. I don't think I've ever even seen a Winchester primer, at least that I can recall or any for sale locally.
fiver
Well-Known Member
CCI's are made like 100-125 miles away from me, you'd think i could get them in a gas station,
but i can buy winchesters by the sleeve all over the place here, they only gotta come 3/4's of the way across the country.
i've used primers from just about everybody except Unis Ginex.
off the top of my head i've got Cheddite, Rio,Federal ,win,rem,mag tech, CCI, S&B, and Wolf's kicking around the place.
but i can buy winchesters by the sleeve all over the place here, they only gotta come 3/4's of the way across the country.
i've used primers from just about everybody except Unis Ginex.
off the top of my head i've got Cheddite, Rio,Federal ,win,rem,mag tech, CCI, S&B, and Wolf's kicking around the place.
"Lots of testing" used to be a great excuse to shoot a lot.
Also, getting a rifle dialed in after a new scope, or swapping scopes, after bedding, etc. I've done all that for so long that it's not fun any more and I really just want to cast, hand-load and shoot. I want a couple bullets per caliber, sized/lubed and ready, which I know work. I want a load or two per gun which I know works. I want a few guns which are sighted in and known to shoot its load or two well.
It may sound boring, but I'm tired of working on guns, having six "up on blocks" to every one that's sighted in with an accurate load. I'm tired of having a couple tablespoons of powders that never let me down and thirty two pounds of ones which didn't pan out or only work well for one load in one gun - usually one that's not finished.
I may be able to get a few more fps or shave a fraction of an inch off my groups, but I don't need that much work to do. I'd rather focus on casting and loading what I know works in the guns I have and hooting t hose guns more.
Don't get me wrong - it was a lot of fun and a great education (read humbling experience), but I'm having different fun now.
Jeff, I am there with you.
I tend to find one bullet and load for a gun and just make lots of that same load. It also leads to fewer moulds kicking around and far fewer bins of bullets I don’t need.
Every few years I do “The Purge” on the loading room. Bins of bullets I am no longer using get sent to the garage for melting with range scrap.
I tend to find one bullet and load for a gun and just make lots of that same load. It also leads to fewer moulds kicking around and far fewer bins of bullets I don’t need.
Every few years I do “The Purge” on the loading room. Bins of bullets I am no longer using get sent to the garage for melting with range scrap.
todd
Well-Known Member
i'm with ya!!!!! i used to be able to be a "one hole guy" and my shelf of powders was filled with various powders and primers. i still have some powders but i use imr 4895, 2400, rel7, hs-6 and unique more than imr 4350, h4198 and others(like superformance and the 6.5 creedmoor). i got tired of "careful" handloads that could shoot in the .1 - .2" at 100 yards. instead, i do "sloppy" reloads that are 1/2 - 1 1/2" at 100 yards. you know, i could do 3" at 100 yards and not think of it, because the ranges i shoot deer are well under 50-60 yards.
altho i am a neophyte (i have done cast for 11 years), i can still learn and have fun doing it.