Super Hard Bullet Recipe
- Thread starter stlg67
- Start date
CWLONGSHOT
Well-Known Member
Yup some almost collapse the grease groove!
Took a deer last year with that bullet ontop of 13g Blue Dot in the legend. 1400mv @ 65/70 yards complete pass thru behind shoulders taking out tip of elbow on exit. Eat right up to bullet hole. Traveled some 40-50 yards tipped on his nose.
Took a deer last year with that bullet ontop of 13g Blue Dot in the legend. 1400mv @ 65/70 yards complete pass thru behind shoulders taking out tip of elbow on exit. Eat right up to bullet hole. Traveled some 40-50 yards tipped on his nose.
Ian
Notorious member
Lots to be learned there if you think about it. The flow characteristics of the alloy can be manipulated by what you put in it, and also by the pressure curve of the powder you put behind it. Those two things working together is the definition of "dynamic fit", which occurs in the first inch or so of bullet travel and can make or break your groups.
Interesting. I was thinking it would expand better. Didn’t think about it being too soft, actually thought it would be hard enough until IAN made that comment. So would my best bet be to soft lead my alloy down a little until I got good expansion test results, or what alloy should I be looking at? Or will the wheel weights do fine for expansion?
Hmmm more questions than I have answers for at this moment.
Hmmm more questions than I have answers for at this moment.
RicinYakima
High Steppes of Eastern Washington
Not being a big game hunter, but vermin and varmints, expansion is not high on my list of needs. Penetration is required for the most little guns I shoot.
waco
Springfield, Oregon
I kill lots of cans, rocks, paper, wood, and steel. BHN for me is pretty much a non issue. The only exception would be if I'm trying to shoot cast bullets at a very high velocity and maintain a good degree of accuracy. BHN is important but the strength of the alloy is way more important.
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Whoa!!! Flashback time! Hadn't thought of Rudy Vallee in decades!
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Depends on what you're doing with it. The parameters it will work depends on the specific gun, cartridge, load, etc. Put it in a 223 and try to blast chucks at 2500fps, probably not your best bet. In a 357, 44, 45 or 45-70, even a 35 Rem or 30-30, it can work great. And is it GC'd or PB? PC is alleged to help too, can't comment directly on that. The variables add up and determine what you can do with what you have and how you are using it. IOW, there's no right answer outside of "Fit". You can surely blow it apart or you have 100% success. It's not as simple as a Bhn reading being the deciding factor. And read what Waco wrote- "...but the strength of the alloy is way more important." Bhn doesn't equate 1-1 with strength, or ductility or ability to withstand rising pressures. It's part of it, but not all of it.
Ian
Notorious member
First, the bullet must fit the gun (could write a book on that one). Next, the alloy must be optimized for what happens INSIDE the gun, or it won't group for beans (dynamic fit, as I outlined in post#204). Then you work some stuff around until you get the velocity, accuracy/repeatability, and terminal performance needed for the job you intend to do.
There are literally an infinite number of combinations that will work, some chasing opposite ends of the system's limits. CW"s soft, malleable bullets above kicked with a heavy charge of relatively fast powder converted to hollow-point wadcutters within an inch of travel. The ballistic coefficient was reduced by at least two points. But the terminal performance speaks for itself, at least at short range.
There are literally an infinite number of combinations that will work, some chasing opposite ends of the system's limits. CW"s soft, malleable bullets above kicked with a heavy charge of relatively fast powder converted to hollow-point wadcutters within an inch of travel. The ballistic coefficient was reduced by at least two points. But the terminal performance speaks for itself, at least at short range.
Last edited:
That all makes a lot of sense.
Longer I’ve thought about it sounds like my best bet is to work off of what I’m already working with. I actually have hard data on this alloy I’m using and know what it has done so far so I should be able to modify it to gain some terminal performance without sacrificing all the toughness of the alloy I think . I don’t know what the mess is, but it is a very tough alloy.
Longer I’ve thought about it sounds like my best bet is to work off of what I’m already working with. I actually have hard data on this alloy I’m using and know what it has done so far so I should be able to modify it to gain some terminal performance without sacrificing all the toughness of the alloy I think . I don’t know what the mess is, but it is a very tough alloy.
Last edited:
Bret4207
At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
BINGO! Now you're talking. And realize that none of us know exactly what happens when we strike the primer. We have theories that seem logical, and that's about the end of it. Then someone comes along and has results that defy that logic. So far, "Fit is King!" seems to be the only absolute in this game, but "fit" covers everything, so that kind of figures. We also tend to exaggerate the actions of pressure, at least IMO. I use the term, "mashing it into putty", not exactly accurate, anymore than "hardcast" means anything whatsoever. Art and Science, equal parts, eh?
Last edited:
RBHarter
West Central AR
I was informed that "hard cast" is a very specific term . It means the alloy has something other than lead and tin in it .
I was like " dude that is sooooooooo helpful , you know that Keith used 1-16 for what eventually became the 44 mag . Right ?" ........ Bam blocked just like that .
At least the putty description expresses a useful visual reference beyond this is is a bullet from a pot of 60-1 I accidentally dropped a WW and 50/50 lino/47' Chevy rod bearing babbitt HT to match TSX .........
A person asked the other day something about down loading a magnum of one sort of another to make it more range friendly . With good powder and bullet choices it's not hard to get a 460 Weatherby down to a really angry 45 ACP / Colts or a 264 WM down to 250 Savage or less , I said .
If in doubt about your intentions or skills buy the heavy mag and shoot shorts , specials , or 308 family levels over your chronograph . Easy ......."says the guy that resisted gas checks so hard he has a remedial mastery of the paper patch ".
I was like " dude that is sooooooooo helpful , you know that Keith used 1-16 for what eventually became the 44 mag . Right ?" ........ Bam blocked just like that .
At least the putty description expresses a useful visual reference beyond this is is a bullet from a pot of 60-1 I accidentally dropped a WW and 50/50 lino/47' Chevy rod bearing babbitt HT to match TSX .........
A person asked the other day something about down loading a magnum of one sort of another to make it more range friendly . With good powder and bullet choices it's not hard to get a 460 Weatherby down to a really angry 45 ACP / Colts or a 264 WM down to 250 Savage or less , I said .
If in doubt about your intentions or skills buy the heavy mag and shoot shorts , specials , or 308 family levels over your chronograph . Easy ......."says the guy that resisted gas checks so hard he has a remedial mastery of the paper patch ".
358156 hp
At large, whereabouts unknown.
Revolvers also alter these internal dynamics, which get complicated by the presence of the forcing cone. A common issue is people loading powdercoated dead soft bullets, usually hollowpoints at high velocity only to complain about the forcing cone leading. Now this can't be possible because the powdercoating prevents this, right?
I’ve said it many times, it’s as much if an art as it is a science. We all learned this in one way or another and the absolute rule is none of us do it the same way, all we can do is bounce ideas off each other and make suggestions. It’s up to you, or in this case me, to make the determination of what to do based on the information given. I will make it or break it and it will all be my problems, either for not listening to sound advice or screwing up and pushing too hard. I thinking that’s a given for all of us at some point.
Think I’ll just keep on keeping on and go back to what I learned in the beginning and build on that. Size them to the gun and shoot and see what the paper and barrel says, the rest can be figured in small adjustments.
Before I deleted Facebook, I read so much BS on the loading pages. Cast questions came up pretty often, and the answers people would give would blow my mind. Had one guy shooting a 500 grain “HARDCAST” in 45-70 iirc and he was shooting it though 6-8-10 2x4s and was bragging about how it didn’t deform or anything. I made the comment if it doesn’t expand it’s not doing what it should. I may as well have kicked a hornets nest, I got schooled about Maximum penetrating power and shooting through and through 3-4-500 pound hogs, blah blah blah. Although I agree a .45x hole through anything and the hydrostatic shock associated with it is going to be (or at least should be)deadly, but imagine if that bullet would expand just a little to like 750 then it would have been something even better in my opinion. Anyway this guy knew it all and that was the end of that. Shortly after that I became tired of That place and decided I needed to remove it from my life. Best thing I ever did.
Point being there is always someone who thinks he knows it all and then there are the ones who do know massive amounts of information. I’d rather be listening to the ones that do. From my experience those lessons of learning come from failures associated with doing something and not giving up. There are few left in the world willing to put the effort into achieving something where you get defeated as much as you succeed.
Think I’ll just keep on keeping on and go back to what I learned in the beginning and build on that. Size them to the gun and shoot and see what the paper and barrel says, the rest can be figured in small adjustments.
Before I deleted Facebook, I read so much BS on the loading pages. Cast questions came up pretty often, and the answers people would give would blow my mind. Had one guy shooting a 500 grain “HARDCAST” in 45-70 iirc and he was shooting it though 6-8-10 2x4s and was bragging about how it didn’t deform or anything. I made the comment if it doesn’t expand it’s not doing what it should. I may as well have kicked a hornets nest, I got schooled about Maximum penetrating power and shooting through and through 3-4-500 pound hogs, blah blah blah. Although I agree a .45x hole through anything and the hydrostatic shock associated with it is going to be (or at least should be)deadly, but imagine if that bullet would expand just a little to like 750 then it would have been something even better in my opinion. Anyway this guy knew it all and that was the end of that. Shortly after that I became tired of That place and decided I needed to remove it from my life. Best thing I ever did.
Point being there is always someone who thinks he knows it all and then there are the ones who do know massive amounts of information. I’d rather be listening to the ones that do. From my experience those lessons of learning come from failures associated with doing something and not giving up. There are few left in the world willing to put the effort into achieving something where you get defeated as much as you succeed.