Lead Hardness

Does anybody use this formula?

Optimum BHN = PSI / (1422 x .90)

And they are making copper bullets and copper has a BHN of 35-40
IMHO:
That formula is worthless.

A Mihec 432-640 cast bullet that weighs 253gr/254gr cast with my 8/9bhn alloy. The bullet is a fn hp (flat nosed hollow point). The target below was shot with a 6" bbl'd 629-3 @ 50yds.
eZrMQsG.jpg


Lyman 48th reloading manual lists their 429667 240gr fn bullet with a (MAX) load 11.7gr of unique 37,900cup.

Both the lyman bullet and the mihec bullet have the same oal when seated in the 44mag cases (1.645"). The mihec bullet is simply heavier hence the 11.5gr load of unique. Lyman lists that load in cup pressure. Other data like alliant 2003 manual lists a lead 240gr gc bullet 11.8gr of unique 35,000psi.

Anyway that bullet/load combo used above is in the 34,000psi+ range with a 8/9bhn alloy that holds under 1 1/2" groups @ 50yds. That formula would want an alloy in the 25bhn range.
 
My cast boolits going back 50 years have been in the 16 +- BHN. Not a problem. But recently I have been water quenching out of the mold and my recent test results indicate a BHN of up to 33.

I still don't have any problems, and accuracy is good. I just wonder if I'm taking the hardness too high by quenching.

Right now I have a lifetime supply of lead ingots, and all are straight WWs. So, I have nothing to blend it with. Do I continue to quench or not?
Ok, let me get this question straight -- you have a lifetime supply of WWs, you have no problems with leading and the accuracy is good -- Do you continue to quench? Simple answer - NO ..... unless you want to. It doesn't sound like it is needed, but if you like to experiment, then go right ahead. Enjoy your casting.
 
Been casting since the early 60s & used wheel weights for everything back then since they were easy to get & cheap. No sense mixing & matching. Now, since I've accumulated abut 6k in printing lead with a whole lot of mono/lino & getting soft lead is expensive & not that easy to get, I'm loading a lot harder. Probably avg 15bhn for my magnum stuff which I shoot a lot of, mostly .44 & .454. I shoot a lot of .45, 38/357 on my tactical range & they are probably around 9, except hot load 357s. I do have a lot of rifle molds so they are usually are around 20. I should just use straight printers lead since I have so much & probably would never shoot it all up. lol
 
Look at the table in page 8 for starters. I once believed that bhn x 1475 equaled the pressure in psi you should target for the best ration of hardness to cartridge application. I have found that to focus on hardness while ignoring ductility, tensile strength and the ability to hold together as an alloy will not get you where you want to be.

Powder coating changes things enough for me that I can now shoot 9 bhn in the same applications I needed 12 bhn previously.

If you try to get hardness by just using Linotype, for example, you might have a bullet that you can shoot fast but disintegrates upon impact. That works OK for targets but not on game larger than a ground squirrel. Another problem with hard cast is the failure to obdurate or expand to fill the throats.

The best alloy for decades was a mixture of 98 % lead, 1-2 % tin and a slight trace of antimony. This was wheel weight alloy for those times and was about 12 bhn. Those times are gone.

33 bhn might be fine for 223/556 in a 55-70 gr bullet at 85% velocity. I would not expect good accuracy in a 38 special with 2.7 gr BE. I have also seen people have trouble with consistent reads with the Lee tester. If you want verification, PM for an address and I can test a couple of bullets with my Cabin Tree tester.
quote-------------If you try to get hardness by just using Linotype, for example, you might have a bullet that you can shoot fast but disintegrates upon impact--------quote

That is a myth. Both Wheelweights and Linotype both have antimony in them (for hardness). Linotype also has tin in it so that the molds that make the type will allow the type to fill out because of increase flow fill out due to the use of the tin. More tin "does not" make bullets harder or more brittle, too much antimony will make them brittle and much more hard.

I used to sell .44 cal. bullets to Deer Hunters that had 50 per cent linotype in them and no one ever came back and said they shattered even when the bullets broke bone when they hit.

I have shot pure linotype bullets into hardwood logs and dug them out and none shattered.
 
quote-------------If you try to get hardness by just using Linotype, for example, you might have a bullet that you can shoot fast but disintegrates upon impact--------quote

That is a myth. Both Wheelweights and Linotype both have antimony in them (for hardness). Linotype also has tin in it so that the molds that make the type will allow the type to fill out because of increase flow fill out due to the use of the tin. More tin "does not" make bullets harder or more brittle, too much antimony will make them brittle and much more hard.

I used to sell .44 cal. bullets to Deer Hunters that had 50 per cent linotype in them and no one ever came back and said they shattered even when the bullets broke bone when they hit.

I have shot pure linotype bullets into hardwood logs and dug them out and none shattered.
Not a myth; lots of changeable factors involved and they certainly won't shatter every time. Sort of like using a hollow-point target bullet for game. They may work well half the time but can't be called reliable for hunting.
 
I have been casting for 65 years and have found that cast bullets of brinnell from 12 to 15 are plenty hard enough as long as as-sized diameter fits the gun properly, and an adequate lubricant is used. I have used an equivalent to Saeco Green that I blend myself. I have used this lube for about 35 years and have had no leading issues with rifles, revolvers or semi-automatics.

Harder bullets are not needed than 12-15 brinnell for handguns or rifles, but up to ca. 22 brinnell (linotype) does no harm. Any more results in excessive cost due to the alloying metals cost and.or much more work than is necessary by additional steps like water-quenching!

I also have come to agree with Elmer Keith that gas checks are not necessary for either handguns or rifle cartridges as long as hardness, fit and lubrication are correct as explained above.
I have no respect for Keith, he was one of the greatest bull-crappers of all time. Gas checks are necessary for rifle bullets as it prevents the bullet base from being distorted by the hot burning gases. Experiments with both jacketed and lead bullets going back over 130 years prove that if the base is not "square" so to speak the accuracy will be dismal. My own testing verified this once again as lead rifle bullets with gas checks shot much better than those that did not have gas checks.

If you want to learn about accuracy read the book by Dr. Mann called "The Bullet's Flight From Powder to Target: Ballistics of Small Arms by F.W. Mann". Although it was written way back in 1900 it was the first scientific conducted tests on accuracy and what Dr. Mann found is still very relevant today in modern times. Mann accepted nothing but provable testing, unlike Keith who wrote about anything that happened to cross his mind on a given day with nothing to back up his claims most of the time. Not to mention the money making schemes Keith was involved with when he was a "front man" for two charlatan gunsmiths that were pandering their newest "latest and greatest" wildcat calibers that did nothing that was already being done with long established factory rifle calibers.

Keith books are highly entertaining to the point of being ridiculous and hilarious like the time he claimed the .270 his client was using was so anemic that he had to hold on to the back legs of a mountain sheep while his client had to beat the poor animal to death with the butt of his .270 rifle. O'Connor in his book "Confessions of a Gun Writer" tracked down the "client" who said Keith was not even with him that day because Keith had been hired on the hunt as the chief cook and bottle washer and was back in camp washing dishes at the time.

Keith's bull crapping story of making that 650 yard shot on a pronghorn with only a hot loaded .44 special resulted in a rare and very rare occurrence of fellow gun writers all calling him a liar because the trajectory alone would have demanded he aim well above the animal to the point where he could no longer see the animal he was shooting at and Keith even also claimed the animal was even running at the time.

And it is a myth that Keith invented the .44 magnum, rather he only recommended that a new and hotter .44 revolver cartridge be developed which was done not even by Smith & Wesson but actually by Remington Ammunition Ballistics experts.

Keith also claimed to have invented various new wildcat calibers which was again pure bull as again he was being a front man for two gunsmiths who were the actual inventors even though their so called inventions again did nothing new at all.

Keith also beat the "big bore" drums for years obviously unaware that he had already been proven wrong before he even became a gun writer as various Professional Old Time and very famous African Elephant Hunters proved the "big bore" myth just that a "myth" as quite a few of them used medium or even small calibers that killed elephants very dead i.e. the 6.5mm and 7x57, .303 British and 8x57, not the big bore blasters Keith claimed were necessary for even shooting enraged and dangerous barn mice.

O'connor liked to razz Keith in his Outdoor Life Articles by proving him wrong many times which resulted in a feud between both men and O'Connor did this on purpose to raise Magazine Subscriptions having fun all the while doing it. O'Connor was a former University Dean of Journalism while the uneducated hillbilly Keith had to have his articles re-written by the Magazine Editor so they would be coherent to their readers because Keith was mostly illiterate.

For a good laugh read Keith's hilarious books but for serious students of the gun O'Connor and Warren Page were the experts of their day.
 
My experience with linotype bullets is that they often shatter, even firing into stacks of paper. I certainly would not recommend them for hunting. I used plenty of hard bullets years ago, but softer works so much better for almost everything.
I have shot pure linotype rifle bullets into hardwood logs and when dug out none shattered.

I also used to sell .44 cast linotype bullets that were half wheel weights and half linotype to people who hunted with .44 mag revolvers and none ever came back and said my bullets shattered. In fact they praised them and would no longer use jacketed bullets both because of the accuracy and deep penetration which expanding bullets often did not give them.
 
I started out in the mid 1960s wih Lyman #2 alloy - I forget what the BHN was on that but it worked up to 1900 fps in the M1 Carbine, Later I had the challenge of making cast bullets work in an early 1895 Marlin in 45-70 and also a 660 in .308.

That's when I discovered tempering bullets - I didn't measure the BHN on those either but they worked to 2500 fps in the .308 - 1800 in the 45-70.

I ran out of time and space to cast but lately I've been fooling with commercially cast soft expanding bullets from GT Bullets in GA - they work well at up to 1200 fps and do not lead - they list their alloys on the website.

I shot a feral hog that went over 400 lbs live wt with a .480 Ruger a few years ago - used Montanna Bullet Works IIRC, 325 gr. at 1350 - it is quite accurate but I shot the critter twice (on insistence of the guide) but the critter was going down on the first shot - one exited and one stayed in on under the off side skin - based on that I am going up in bullet weight and may try another supplier though I am happy with the perfomance. Attached is picture of the bullet (plus an unfired one to compare) and the group the load shoots at 50 yards from kneeling (only 3 shots).



Cheers,

Riposte
 

Attachments

  • .480 325 from hog.jpg
    .480 325 from hog.jpg
    66.2 KB · Views: 0
  • Ruger .480 3 shots at 50 yards.jpg
    Ruger .480 3 shots at 50 yards.jpg
    63.5 KB · Views: 0
IMHO:
That formula is worthless.

A Mihec 432-640 cast bullet that weighs 253gr/254gr cast with my 8/9bhn alloy. The bullet is a fn hp (flat nosed hollow point). The target below was shot with a 6" bbl'd 629-3 @ 50yds.
eZrMQsG.jpg


Lyman 48th reloading manual lists their 429667 240gr fn bullet with a (MAX) load 11.7gr of unique 37,900cup.

Both the lyman bullet and the mihec bullet have the same oal when seated in the 44mag cases (1.645"). The mihec bullet is simply heavier hence the 11.5gr load of unique. Lyman lists that load in cup pressure. Other data like alliant 2003 manual lists a lead 240gr gc bullet 11.8gr of unique 35,000psi.

Anyway that bullet/load combo used above is in the 34,000psi+ range with a 8/9bhn alloy that holds under 1 1/2" groups @ 50yds. That formula would want an alloy in the 25bhn range.
I think that you are right. I also think that formula was intended to reduce leading. But we know that bullet fit is a better control over leading as well as using gas checks. I like Missouri bullets, who say that they use the formula.. It may make a difference in their cast bulllets, but I use coated, and don't have a lead problem anyway.
 
For shooting under 1000 fps, in different guns, I have found that a bullet formulation of 50% Lyman #2 alloy and 50% pure lead work surprisingly well.
 
quote-------------If you try to get hardness by just using Linotype, for example, you might have a bullet that you can shoot fast but disintegrates upon impact--------quote

That is a myth. Both Wheelweights and Linotype both have antimony in them (for hardness). Linotype also has tin in it so that the molds that make the type will allow the type to fill out because of increase flow fill out due to the use of the tin. More tin "does not" make bullets harder or more brittle, too much antimony will make them brittle and much more hard.

I used to sell .44 cal. bullets to Deer Hunters that had 50 per cent linotype in them and no one ever came back and said they shattered even when the bullets broke bone when they hit.

I have shot pure linotype bullets into hardwood logs and dug them out and none shattered.
I also have used pure lino for rifle & super hot pistol. Usually would use spacers straight for big rifle like 375/458 & big bore pistol 454/500. For faster rifle 22bhn is good.
 
At what pressures and velocities are these extremely hard bullets needed?
 
Back when - I did try to follow the Gospel of Elmer.
Used WWs and pure lead.
Mentioned to one of my associates ( ATT Long Line Supervisor ) that I could use some lead.
He came by and dropped a bunch of lead coated coax in my driveway!
I remember adding some tin to the mix. And when I got to batching, poured it into aluminum muffin pans.
 
Back
Top