Lead Hardness

GypsmJim

GypsmJim

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
4,008
Reaction score
6,956
I started reloading .38 in 1971 using Speer Wadcutters. Leading like crazy. I have been casting since 1975 and have never had leading since then. That goes for 26 rifle and pistol loads, all shot with homemade lead boolits.

In my old age I try to learn new stuff all the time. In that regard, I just bought a Lee Lead Tester to evaluate my stash. I have a bunch of BHNs that I found interesting.

Before I post my results (just for informational purposes only), I have a question for the experts.

How hard is TOO hard?
 
Register to hide this ad
taz666 said:
Download this article and give it a read. It should answer all of your questions regarding cast bullets.
Click to expand...
Excellent article. I downloaded it and will read the whole thing as time permits.

But the sections that pertained didn't answer my primary question: How hard is TOO hard.

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?
 
Too hard is when the bullet fails to seal. The higher the pressure, the harder I cast. I try to recover several slugs to inspect.
I get hard alloys from rotometals to melt into my wheel weights and I always quench all but round ball and some BP projectiles.
Knowing the hardness allows me to adjust.
 
GypsmJim said:
Excellent article. I downloaded it and will read the whole thing as time permits.

But the sections that pertained didn't answer my primary question: How hard is TOO hard.

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?
Click to expand...

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.
 
Books could be written on this subject. I read many years ago something in the THE FOULING SHOT (magazine of the Cast Bullet Association) that I've always kept in mind when it comes to alloy hardness. Glen Latham, editor of the magazine at the time and someone who has done far more accuracy-oriented experimenting than 95% of us, said something to the effect that the softest bullet that doesn't lead for the desired velocity will usually be the most accurate. He was speaking of rifles loads, but based on my limited work, seems it also applies for handgun loads, standard or magnum.

I don't shoot cast rifle bullets at high velocity (over 2,000 or so fps) so have never really needed anything beyond a BHN of about 15 (Lyman #2). Same for handgun bullets, but a BHN of 10-14 will usually work fine for .357 and .44 Magnum loads up to about 1,300 fps. 8-10 BHN is fine for .38 Special and all the other popular non-magnum chamberings. Bullet fit is essential.

I'm not an Elmer Keith disciple, but I've read most of his material since the early '60s. He used a soft 10-11 BHN bullets in full power .44 Magnum loads. Keith and many other knowledgeable cast bullet shooters had no need for what many today refer to as "hard cast" bullets, 18-22 BHN being an arbitrary hardness level. Keith apparently considered his bullets hard cast whether he used that term or not.

Not-so-hard bullets will do a lot of penetrating, probably more than anyone really needs, even if you're trying to shoot through the imaginary giant bears so many anticipate encounters with. I think some like the sound "hard cast" makes as it rolls of the tongue, or maybe the use of the term gives one the feeling they are well-informed even if they're not.

Someone mentioned Glyn Frixell's (sp.?) writings. Read them, he's a true expert. Same for C.E. Harris. He also knows what he's talking about. Having cast for fifty years, I remain an amateur but hope to better myself.
 
If it works for you, go for it. Ease of use is 1st and foremost along with having an alloy you can cast a quality bullet with.

Myself I use 8/9bhn for 99%+ of my casting/shooting needs.

Decades ago (pre internet) I did a lot of testing with accuracy, velocity & consistency with cast bullet alloys. I found that was as low/soft of an alloy I could go and still use that alloy in all my pistol/revolver/light rifle loads. The 8/9bhn gave me higher velocities then 13bhn and higher alloys. Along with lower es's and was easier to find multiple accurate loads with different powders.

Ended up with a range scrap alloy that was 8/9bhn air cooled and 12/13bhn water dropped. The only time I found that I needed a harder alloy then that was with the long-bodied cast rifle bullets and high-pressure loads (over 25,000psi)

Accuracy standards are different for shooters. I always looked at an accurate load would be a load that could hold the 10-ring on nra targets for pistols/revolvers. And the smaller the better with cast rifle bullets.

I do a lot of casting with hp, hb molds along with casting cores for home swaged jacketed bullets. That 8/9bhn alloy works for all of them along with casting standard bullets.

I'm casting with:
a 8/9bhn alloy for most of my casting needs
once in a great while I water drop that soft alloy for 12/13bhn alloy
all my high-powered rifle bullets are cast with a 14bhn alloy.
 
It's Never Too Hard ... just add pure lead and make it Softer !

The stoff I find hard and usefull is the Print Types ...
Linotype ... 22 bhn , Sterotype ... 23 bhn and Monotype ... 28 bhn .
Lyman #2 is supposed to be 15 bhn
Lead is 5 bhn
My general purpose mix is 50/50 COWW and soft lead for a bhn of 8 - 9 , This works much better than straight COWW for all handguns and rifle below 2,500 fps .

It is never too hard if you have soft lead to mix !

Gary
 
Getting the correct size is more important than hardness to prevent leading. Too soft can be a problem if you want high velocity. Too hard is an issue because you are wasting expensive tin and antimony. You'd have to get lead that is harder than jacketed bullets before you reach some point that is "too hard". Bullets can be too brittle, but that is different than too hard.
 
GypsmJim said:
Excellent article. I downloaded it and will read the whole thing as time permits.

But the sections that pertained didn't answer my primary question: How hard is TOO hard.

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?
Click to expand...
Mix the Clip on Wheel Weight metal 50 / 50 with soft scrap lead ( 8 - 9 bhn) ... this is easy to find at the metal scrap yards ...
It will make better bullets for all handgun bullets .
Save some of the COWW for Rifle bullets ... you can push them +2000 fps easy . This will extend your COWW supply and does make better ...Boolits !
Gary
 
The only time that I didn't have the "correct size" was when I bought a 25-5. So, I upped my sizing to 0.454 and it solved the accuracy problem. The interesting thing was these bigger boolits worked better in my other .45 Colts, so I just switched to 0.454 full time.

I now use wheel weights 100%. I'm not "wasting" tin and antimony because I don't blend. I also don't have any more pure lead in my stash, so I have no means to reduce the hardness.

When the govmt made "lead" WWs illegal, I went ahead and bought old stock from several sources. At my current annual casting volume, my inventory of ingots will last me till I'm 100, so I really do not want to buy more lead.

Based on all my tests it is apparent that the 33 BHN was achieved by quenching, since unquenched with the same ingots gave 15-16.

The purpose of my question was to resolve whether to continue quenching or not.
 
Last edited:
I think for most folks a hard bullet works although it may not be the best for accuracy or hunting purposes. Most of mine are COWW because that's what I had a lot of but for 38 special and low pressure rounds I'm going to use softer if it works. I say that because it can vary between firearms also. I will also start using softer and quench for extra hardness in the future, especially for rifle use. WW's are getting tougher to find, being the reason.

I've shot silhouette in the past, Ruger SBH with air cooled WW cast bullets, 10 grains of unique. By the end of 40 rounds there was some leading in the forcing cone but they always hit when I was on out at 200M. The rest of the barrel was good unless you didn't clean well before the next session.

The Lee manual has a pressure chart that is useful to help determine what is good for the strength of the alloy you're using, try to get a copy on that.

Plus some powders are known to lead more than others, bullseye, unique and 2400 with plainbase supposed to be bad offenders but I still use them. And clean out some leading, sometimes.

My old 25-5 will take .456, as cast, and they work well. No quenching there.
 
GypsmJim said:
Excellent article. I downloaded it and will read the whole thing as time permits.

But the sections that pertained didn't answer my primary question: How hard is TOO hard.

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?
Click to expand...
I do not know why you seem to be so obsessed with hardness. I think maybe because you think hardness will decrease leading which it will not. Undersize bullets cause leading not lack of hardness. I have used factory swaged wadcutters made of almost pure lead and got zero leading because the bullets "were not" undersize and even expanded slightly because they were so soft. I have used undersized hard cast bullets that lead like crazy and oversized cast bullets that had almost no leading.

Size your bullets 3 thousandths oversize and you will have very little leading no matter how hard or how soft they are. And they will be accurate as well.

Even when using cast bullets in rifles as long as the velocity is under 2,000 fps hardness is not a worry. Cast Bullets using Wheel Weights without adding tin usually do not make very good bullets because they do not fill out properly in the mold. This is very noticeable in smaller diameter bullets and sometimes difficult to detect with big heavy bullets like 245 grain .44 caliber bullets but it is there if you look close enough.

In the old days they used to add tin to Wheel Weights that is where the myth got started that you could use straight wheel weights and still make good bullets. Modern wheel weights have no tin in them, they have cheapened them like everything else being made these days so adding tin is a must for making good cast bullets.

I might add that gas checks do not prevent leading nor do they clean out leading either. In rifle bullets gas checks are an advantage because you are using so much more powder and the gas check keeps the bullet base from being distorted by the hot burning gases which destroys accuracy.
 
GypsmJim said:
I started reloading .38 in 1971 using Speer Wadcutters. Leading like crazy. I have been casting since 1975 and have never had leading since then. That goes for 26 rifle and pistol loads, all shot with homemade lead boolits.

In my old age I try to learn new stuff all the time. In that regard, I just bought a Lee Lead Tester to evaluate my stash. I have a bunch of BHNs that I found interesting.

Before I post my results (just for informational purposes only), I have a question for the experts.

How hard is TOO hard?
Click to expand...
You probably had leading as those older bullets were probably swagged (soft) and not cast.
There is so much "information" out there on lead hardness. Good Luck:eek:
 
bph9 said:
I do not know why you seem to be so obsessed with hardness. I think maybe because you think hardness will decrease leading which it will not. Undersize bullets cause leading not lack of hardness. I have used factory swaged wadcutters made of almost pure lead and got zero leading because the bullets "were not" undersize and even expanded slightly because they were so soft. I have used undersized hard cast bullets that lead like crazy and oversized cast bullets that had almost no leading.

Size your bullets 3 thousandths oversize and you will have very little leading no matter how hard or how soft they are. And they will be accurate as well.

Even when using cast bullets in rifles as long as the velocity is under 2,000 fps hardness is not a worry. Cast Bullets using Wheel Weights without adding tin usually do not make very good bullets because they do not fill out properly in the mold. This is very noticeable in smaller diameter bullets and sometimes difficult to detect with big heavy bullets like 245 grain .44 caliber bullets but it is there if you look close enough.

In the old days they used to add tin to Wheel Weights that is where the myth got started that you could use straight wheel weights and still make good bullets. Modern wheel weights have no tin in them, they have cheapened them like everything else being made these days so adding tin is a must for making good cast bullets.

I might add that gas checks do not prevent leading nor do they clean out leading either. In rifle bullets gas checks are an advantage because you are using so much more powder and the gas check keeps the bullet base from being distorted by the hot burning gases which destroys accuracy.
Click to expand...
I have no obsessions. I started testing hardness just for informational purposes and was surprised by some of the results. My post was specific and as yet few replies were directed at that.

I am also well aware of the importance of bullet diameter. See my last post above.

As far as "leading", that is of no concern to me at all, considering my present experiences. The last time I had to clean lead out of a bore was in 1975. After that I bought a few molds and started scrounging lead. I used Lyman #2 for many years until switching to WWs.

The 33 BHN boolits that lead to my post are oversized, produce no leading and I'm quite happy with the accuracy.
 
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.
 
mtgianni said:
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.
Click to expand...


Thanks for your comments. They are appreciated.

Some years ago when WWs were switching to zinc, I hoarded a whole bunch of them from local tire shops. Tests on my current inventory show that 12 BHN is pretty spot on.

I load 26 calibers, and cast boolits for each one. Except....5.56. My feeling was that at 2800 fps +- lead was not a good idea. Plus, I got a deal on bulk Hornady FMJ, so another lifetime supply was stashed.

As a retired Engineer with 45+ years of professional experience, much of it in testing materials, my evaluation of the Lee tester was good. I can't attest to precision, but the repeatability meet my standards.

As an addendum to my testing I just tested some recent 145 Wadcutters (WW, quenched) and got 20.9 BHN. Should have been close to the .454s (same method but of course a different batch on ingots), so how they came to 33 is beyond me.

Last Fall I mined my pistol target berm, and had not melted them down yet. I retrieved a 145 and it tested at 14.3. I know it was my casting, but it could have been 30 years ago before quenching.

This has been an interesting thread. At my old age I try to learn something new every day.
 
mtgianni said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Erocksmash
Seaking a gas checked 180gr .40cal HC FP
2
Replies
21
Views
499
TIMETRIPPER
T
R
Reload Problem For Model 52-2
Replies
15
Views
1K
Rick H.
R
Kyler Hamann
Significant leading after very few rounds?
Replies
16
Views
1K
venomballistics
venomballistics
R
H&K with cast bullets
Replies
1
Views
109
Alpo
Alpo
Boogsawaste
Casting question
2 3
Replies
52
Views
2K
rosewood
rosewood

Latest posts

Back
Top