So you think you cast good bullets?

[beagle]

Ha! Bet that got your attention. It's a fact that you don't cast as well as you think. I thought I was good until my partner go to messing with impact coating moly as a hard lube. I mean, he was meticulous in casting. Fluxed, let melt set for 20 minutes to settle, then cast and didn't return sprues or culls to pot. Then culled for defects. He was casting a special nose pour bullet for the .32-40.
The process called for tumbling the bullets in jeweller's media with liquid moly added for 20 minutes. Then remove, rinse and let dry. We expected perfect bullets. The first batch of 100 we did, we culled over 70 for internal flaws. As casters, we're use to seeing base flaws at the sprue. We had plenty of them, we also had flaws on the side of the round nose, on the driving band and the bands between the lube grooves. Plenty of flaws on the dide of the base. Flaws on 70% of the bullets we did. We ran many batches in order to get enough to test. In the end we gave up the project because even though they gave good accuracy without lube which was the objective, the moly tended to coat the barrel and was a bear to remove. In order to get the accuracy, We hand lapped several barrels and that was a several day project in itself.
The flaws evidently occur in almost all cast bullets under the skin. The jewellers media is a hodge podge of metal shapes used to polish jewelry. The steel media is evidently enough to impact the surface of the bullet and cause imperfections under the skin of the bullet to sink in and expose the void.
All I know is that I thought I made good bullets and it deflated my ego.
Best solution is make 'em as good as you can and shoot 'em. That's all you can do.
Like sausage, it's good but don't ask what goes into it. You might be surprised./beagle

 

[Glaciers]

Yeah I cast ok bullets, but then I’m not shooting matches. I’m embarrassed with my castings compared to some on this forum and it sounds like you’re in that crowd. But, I’m happy in my ignorance because my flawed castings work ok for what little shooting I get to do.
Pistols not a problem. Rifles now some molds just don’t work for me so they get ignored for that mold that shines.
But, casting and loading are exceptionally enjoyable. And I’m working on the rifles.

 

[Missionary]

That is what I like about shooting our blunderbuss. I know all those round balls are culls and at twenty yards it really is not going to matter one sniffle to a bunny or real close in crow.
But a rifle sure is a different beast. Striving for excellence at 300 yards does make a person re-think casting procedure.

 

[RBHarter]

In handholding for accuracy it doesn't matter what the question is . The answer is always the same . You remove as many variables as possible, some of which are giant leaps while others might actually be a set back .

As far as anything goes with a tumbled cast bullet I can't see it doing them any good past beating the sprue nubs and parting lines into RB . Even then I'm not convinced that it matters in a pistol to 150' , with standard loading ideals .

I would think with the much discussed bullet displacement , acceleration "slump" , etc that nearly any void or band defect that wasn't in a PB base band and was below the case mouth would be closed pretty quickly with the application of 8-40kpsi on the base .

All I ask of mine is to be capable of a clean harvest of nominal game for the caliber and to match or better factory ammo groups where applicable. Sometimes that's a long reach

 

[StrawHat]

I am pushing 70. Torn rotator cuffs to prove it. I cast as good as I can. My targets may not always agree with that statement. Perhaps, that is why I quit shooting paper and instead, once sighted in, choose to shoot rocks, paint can lids, 5gallon pails and such at unknown distances from field positions. If I shoot 20 rounds in a session, it is a lot. Handguns, quite a few more.

Kevin

 

[Josh]

I cast and improve my technique until I can't see an improvement on paper. After that, I let the cards be what they are and don't worry much. I try and stay within what's practical anymore and keep myself from going down rabbit holes. It makes my shooting experience so much more enjoyable.

I will say though, without experimenters, we wouldn't have the PC process we have now that I enjoy so much. Keep experimenting and I'll keep learning.

 

[CWLONGSHOT]

Sounds like the old saying about asking questions to answers you never wanted.

 

[PGPKY2014]

Ha! Bet that got your attention. It's a fact that you don't cast as well as you think. I thought I was good until my partner go to messing with impact coating moly as a hard lube. I mean, he was meticulous in casting. Fluxed, let melt set for 20 minutes to settle, then cast and didn't return sprues or culls to pot. Then culled for defects. He was casting a special nose pour bullet for the .32-40.
The process called for tumbling the bullets in jeweller's media with liquid moly added for 20 minutes. Then remove, rinse and let dry. We expected perfect bullets. The first batch of 100 we did, we culled over 70 for internal flaws. As casters, we're use to seeing base flaws at the sprue. We had plenty of them, we also had flaws on the side of the round nose, on the driving band and the bands between the lube grooves. Plenty of flaws on the dide of the base. Flaws on 70% of the bullets we did. We ran many batches in order to get enough to test. In the end we gave up the project because even though they gave good accuracy without lube which was the objective, the moly tended to coat the barrel and was a bear to remove. In order to get the accuracy, We hand lapped several barrels and that was a several day project in itself.
The flaws evidently occur in almost all cast bullets under the skin. The jewellers media is a hodge podge of metal shapes used to polish jewelry. The steel media is evidently enough to impact the surface of the bullet and cause imperfections under the skin of the bullet to sink in and expose the void.
All I know is that I thought I made good bullets and it deflated my ego.
Best solution is make 'em as good as you can and shoot 'em. That's all you can do.
Like sausage, it's good but don't ask what goes into it. You might be surprised./beagle

This is (food for thought), I had never thought about how good or bad my cast bullets are, exceptto compare them to they jacketed counterparts. I pistol calibers I have often shot better groups with cast, withrifle not as often. what really grabbed my attention was casting 22 centerfire.Did not cause nightmares but probably was close. I rarely ever get as good groups .but still trying.

 

[JWinAZ]

From my days of specifying, designing, and troubleshooting mechanical mechanism castings: a casting is a collection of porosity, cold shuts, hot tears, shrinkage voids, foreign material, and inclusions held together by a matrix of metal of uncertain composition and quality.

 

[johnnyjr]

I have shot some with a wrinkle nose and see no difference in them. Only at 50 yards... hope to do some shooting this afternoon..

 

[Cadillac Jeff]

It's kinda like this for me...

I reload so I can shoot more.
I cast because I like to cast . And I like to make nice bullets for All the calibers I load But...

Handguns rounds I cull when I see a bad spot on a base,or groove, or if not the right look or texture...if ya know what I mean.

Rifle now they must be Very well filled out with Very good base & grooves & I try to make a batch all the same look or texture & keep them as a separate batch from the next batch.. that is for target shooting.

To me, that is My hobby making really perty bullets....shooting them into my berm ( though a hunk of paper) & do it again next year for as long as I hold up & have primers...

 

[jonjon]

I keep the ones that you can't see the defects in when they're loaded.

 

[BBerguson]

I was casting 225gr bullets for my 308. Borrowed my buddys 4 cavity mold so I was busy stocking up while I had it. I ended up culling at least 1/3 of them saving the “perfect” ones for the 308. Then I got thinking…. My son has an AR-10 in 308 and I had a load with this bullet that cycled well. He’s not shooting long range or trying to get great groups, he’s just shooting it to get range time with it. So those culled bullets ended up going into the “AR-10” jar and I had a lot more bullets all of a sudden!

 

[JonB]

Yep. I do think I cast good bullets. I'm glad I don't shoot rifle at longer distances than 100 yds, cuz I might find out they ain't as good as I think

 

[358156 hp]

Well, this statement is going to start something. I think the main problem is that we're filling the moulds with molten lead from the wrong end. Pouring lead down into a mould aerates the lead. We should pump it into from the bottom of the mould fairly quickly..

But we're not in Australia.

 

[Elpatoloco]

I do everything I can by culling visual defects and weighing. I have 4 revolvers that will hold as best as I can shoot them at 100. I Rarely air one out that far anymore, but practice at 50. Things may go to hell in a handbasket with my slugs beyond that. I'll likely never know as My eyes are not getting any better with age.

 

[RicinYakima]

I have tried to avoid this thread but FWIW.

There are 40 years of records from the CBA on match shooting. Other than plain base, the most consistent winner's alloy is linotype. The reason is simple: it is eutectic, it fuses a one specific point, so there are less voids from alloy fusing on the side of the cavity. It is very consistent for weight and form. The major issue is getting it to fit the throat.

If you have the ability to control alloy temperature, mould temperature and rate of casting you only have to visual sort (unless you want to be a winner).

 

[L Ross]

I'm with Ric, I tried to stay away, reaaaaaly I did. But, once upon a time I got all wrapped around the axle because I could not put 20 shots, fired as carefully as I was able to into the magic inch at 100 yards with my cast bullets or a couple of pretty darned good .22s with pretty darned good ammo. My rifles were good, my glass is good, my bench solid, my technique is, well, questionable.
In an effort to establish a base line of "perfection" I weighed twenty .30 caliber Sierra Match Kings and darned if they weren't all 168 grains, who'd a thunk? I loaded them in my best .308 Lapua brass with my cast load of 16.5 grains of 2400. I even made sure I used neck tension appropriate to jacketed bullets. I went out to the bench on a nice calm morning and shot the same size groups as my cast .308s and my .22s. Twenty rounds into between 1.125 and 1.250" as best as I could measure the torn up paper target. Tried the same experiment again, tried harderer even. Nope, SSDD. Oh well, my cast bullets are good enough.

 

[Rick]

Last time weighed jacketed bullets (years ago) they had more variation than my cast bullets.

 

[waco]

I watched a YouTube video some years back where a guy was tearing down match grade factory ammo and weighing the powder charges. I was amazed at the amount of variation in the weights.