RCBS Cast Bullet #1 manual question

[sgamm1]

I am tempted to track down a used (only option) RCbS #1 Cast Bullet Reloading manual chiefly for more .32 H&R and maybe some .38 special cast data.

I have about ten manuals on the shelf now and untold number of the free booklets and the Hodgdon Annuals. The Lyman cast bullet manual skips over the .32 H&R 98 Grain Keith style SWC. That kind of blows my mind but no manual has everything, I am assuming that RCBS has this bullet covered as they sold that mold in their line up.

Can someone with the RCBS Cast Bullet Manual check for me? If not too much trouble posting a picture of that page if allowed would be awesome too. If it has what I think is valuable I’ll gladly spend the money on a used book. I am guarded buying books. Just bought the hardcover new Lyman manual and have found almost no good changes from three or four revisions back.

thank you in advance

I have the RCBS cast bullet manual as well. I have heard there's some inaccurate data in that manual, but I don't know if that is correct. No idea why they haven't published any other cast bullet manuals.

I have the Lyman third and fourth edition cast bullet handbooks. Both are very good. The fourth edition handbook has loading data for the 32 H&R.

Stan

 

[rockquarry]

I have the RCBS cast bullet manual as well. I have heard there's some inaccurate data in that manual, but I don't know if that is correct. No idea why they haven't published any other cast bullet manuals.

I have the Lyman third and fourth edition cast bullet handbooks. Both are very good. The fourth edition handbook has loading data for the 32 H&R.

Stan

Many other cast bullet manuals available and the RCBS manual is nothing special but still worth having. "Inaccurate data''? Possible in any manual. I haven't gone through all the data in the book but haven't noticed anything that looked out of line. Comparatively, the actual mass of data in the RCBS book is quite limited, but they do have data for RCBS moulds, something you won't find in too many other places.

 

[mtgianni]

Lance, I have a regulation police 32 long with 0.313" throats, and in 32 H&R Ruger single six with 0.311" throats, CA with 0.3145" throats and a 16-4 with 0.313 throats. Fit is king when it comes to accuracy but the cylinder makes a good sizer as well.

 

[Lance Boyle]

I ordered a .313 sizer the other day. I want to try that too and see if it makes a difference. I had .310, .311, .312, skip!, .314

My 31-1 has bigger throats than my Ruger SP101 which run .312 hence having the .314 sized ones around. As my old mentor said, let the gun choose the load.

 

[rockquarry]

I ordered a .313 sizer the other day. I want to try that too and see if it makes a difference. I had .310, .311, .312, skip!, .314

My 31-1 has bigger throats than my Ruger SP101 which run .312 hence having the .314 sized ones around. As my old mentor said, let the gun choose the load.

I had two S&W .32s from the '70s. I wasn't too impressed with the cartridge and sold both guns. According to my notes, I sized to .314" and got best accuracy. I assume I tried sizing smaller but don't recall. I think I have every size die made between .309" and .314" for my SAECO lubrisizer. I've used them mostly for rifle cartridges. For them, .311" is almost always best.

 

[lrrifleman]

Let me help solve a mystery. The RCBS Cast Bullet #1 book was created while Omark Industries (the chain saw chain people) owned RCBS in addition to Oregon Chainsaws. Not long after the the book was released, Omark sold RCBS-CCI-Speer. Omark had a phenomenal employee discount with the RCBS and CCI product line. That's how my father and I got into reloading. IIRC, the employee discount was close to 60% off with free shipping to any Omark division plant. Again, IIRC, most of the RCBS product line (including the casting equipment) had originally been labeled as Pacific. Chances are extremely good that the original data for the book was developed by Pacific employees, and predated it's acquisition by Omark. Subsequent editions probably weren't developed because Omark/RCBS didn't support the research.

 

[Lance Boyle]

Making some headway with the Arsenal mold. It seems to want to come together with more powder.

3.7 W231 (no idea why the one high shot on the first target, miss a bad base culling, an air bubble?) and then 3.9 W231 which came together a tenth under the max. I had already been working the lower charges before making this thread.


I wish the bullet would have had a more accurate node lower but I haven’t found it. I have been improving the quality of my casting though. My big failure is starting with only a modestly warm mold so my bullets would change as the mold warmed up. I have been casting at/near the frosted bullet line lately.

Edit, this is all bench fired at 25 yards.

 

[Lance Boyle]

Yes, I have been puzzled as to why RCBS has only published the one book. They obviously put a lot of work into it. The book has a lot of good loading data and general cast bullet information. I bought my copy in February of 1988.

They call the bullet a SWC, but the picture looks more like a round nose flat point. No matter.

I load 32 S&W and 32 S&W Long for use in my S&W Model 31-1 (from the mid 70s) with 3" barrel, and 32-20 (32 WCF) in my Colt Police Positive Special (made in 1911). Lots of fun! Those are the only 32 caliber revolvers I currently own.

View attachment 774447

Looking at the bullet more closely you are right. Other than the very small wad cutter shelf it’s profile is closer to my MP314-640 mold. That’s the Arsenal 98 Keith style on the left and the MP314-640 on the right.

 

[Chubbs103]

Dillon carries the Complete Reloading Manual from Loadbooks mentioned above. It has the RCBS data as well as several others. There isn't any newer data, but I do find it useful.

The Complete Reloading Manual for the .32 H&R Magnum

Loadbooks USA, Incorporated’s Complete Reloading Manuals contain proven and tested loads for the individual caliber listed on the manual’s cover. These manuals contain data compiled from the leading gunpowder and bullet manufacturers, providing a quick and easy-to-use reference that will enable...

www.dillonprecision.com

Oct/Nov 2018 Handloader Magazine has good data as well.

 

[Lance Boyle]

The MP314-640 is no slouch when I use good casting technique and get them up to a reasonable speed too.

 

[rockquarry]

Just speculation, but my good friend from years past, Alan Jones, who retired from Speer some time ago, may have contributed little or greatly to this book. He pretty much did all the Speer manuals through several editions. However, I did not find his name in the credits on the RCBS cast manual, nor the names of other individual contributors. Regardless, here's a guy who knows much about anything related to handloading.

 

[Lance Boyle]

A good book with much useful information, but no better than many others. I bought this book maybe not long after it was published, but I don't remember when that was. I've always preferred having lots of real paper handloading manuals, mostly older ones. With the forty or fifty I have, most bases are well covered.

The book arrived today. I have a few of the molds used in the book so that direct data is nice. It is a little smaller than I expected. Not bad for $25 but I would have felt a little taken advantage of if I had paid the $50-75 common rate.

Too bad they weren’t building on this through the years with powders as they came out, For the day it was published I think it is a pretty grand book. The hitch is getting your hands on the powders they used. SR4759 was one of my favorites and I see it in the book a lot for cast rifle bullet loads. I have 3/5ths of a pound left.

 

[rockquarry]

The book arrived today. I have a few of the molds used in the book so that direct data is nice. It is a little smaller than I expected. Not bad for $25 but I would have felt a little taken advantage of if I had paid the $50-75 common rate.

Too bad they weren’t building on this through the years with powders as they came out, For the day it was published I think it is a pretty grand book. The hitch is getting your hands on the powders they used. SR4759 was one of my favorites and I see it in the book a lot for cast rifle bullet loads. I have 3/5ths of a pound left.

I used a lot 4759 also and have a couple of pounds left. However, with a good deal of load development work and shooting, I 've found 5744 will equal the accuracy results of my 4759 loads. Hard to imagine any load using older unavailable powders that can't be duplicated with something currently in production and available. We have more powders now than ever before.

Since the mid-'60s, 4759 has been discontinued three times, but looks like it's permanent now. When you consider the tiny number handloaders who cast bullets in comparison with the small number of handloaders in general, 4759 users are most insignificant to powder makers and distributors.

 

[Lance Boyle]

I am using an old can of Dupont P5066. It was full when given to me a few years ago. I had to ask around for data or it. It hadn’t been made since 1968 or 69. It was a popular .45 ACP powder in its day. I have been mostly using it for mid level .38 special plinking loads. It’s been quite accurate. I only unsealed the can as I was afraid it’d get wasted breaking down. It was perfect inside the can.

Fortunately guys were able to direct me to online pictures of old manuals that had been scanned and uploaded.

 

[rockquarry]

5066 was a very a very popular powder when I began handloading in 1965. Lots of 5066 data in my older manuals, but I can't recall if I ever used it or not. I didn't know it was discontinued in the late '60s. I mistakenly thought it was around until well in the '70s.