Handloading for Lead - Details?

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JayBeeKay

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2020
Messages
82
I have handloaded using lead bullets that I've been buying and I'm not getting the results that I was hoping for.
I've had a few revolvers that I've tried handloading for with lead bullets that I've been buying that come lubed and the guns I've tried have been a Ruger Super Blackhawk .44, Ruger SP101, S&W K frame model 13, S&W .41 mag N frame, Ruger Super Blackhawk .41 mag Hunter.

Presently I am loading for my .41 mag Ruger SBH Hunter.

I have about 1500 bullets that I bought and I'd like to use them, but I always get lead fouling.
I'm using 9.5 gr of Unique behind a 200 gr bullet.
These bullets claim to be good to use up to 1200 fps so I use the load that supposedly should provide that velocity. And I always get fouling.
On every gun I've had that I use lead bullets that I buy, I get the same thing, and I hear that some guys are able to fire lead bullets at even higher velocities without gas-checks.
But that never works for my guns.

So I decided I need to get serious and try to figure what's up.
I searched some threads and ended up finding the contact info for Fermin Garza in Corpus Christie, and he was good enough to refer me to an article that he wrote on fire lapping, in addition to spending some time talking with me about what works and doesn't work.

So I'm now at the point where I'm doing a bit of research into that issue.

I measured the throat and took a casting of my bore and measured my bullets diameter, and here are the dimensions:
Throat - .410"
Bore major dia - .413"
Bore minor dia - .404"
Bullet dia - .411"

I'm curious whether these dimensions are something that should be modified and if I did that, would there be any sacrifice in accuracy using jacketed bullets.

Mr Garza is apparently highly knowledgable but it doesn't hurt to get other opinions.
The bullets I'm using are from the Missouri Bullet Co. They're pretty hard and lubed, but I'n not sure what the lube is.
Mr Garza suggests enlarging the cyl throat from .410 to .411

Also, i have been using a Lewis Lead Remover, because brushing doesn't remove the fouling.
I'm not sure whether using that tool is actually good or bad for the bore.

I'm open to suggestions on different powders or whether I should make mods to my gun to make it more suitable for lead.

Thanks in advance - advice from others who are more experienced is tremendously appreciated.
 
Last edited:
The general rule of thumb is that you want your bullets 1 to 2 thousandths over bore size (major diameter) when shooting lead. Yours are smaller, hence the leading. The tight cylinder throat isn't helping. Others will be along with suggestions soon I'm sure. Good luck.
 
Thanks
That was what I was thinking, as well.
The bullets are being swaged down through the throat and they're loose through the bore, after being pushed through the throat.
I was told that enlarging the throat by .001" could help.
I'm hesitant to do that, as it may effect the accuracy with jacketed bullets.

Looking forward to finding out more
 
http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell_Book_Chapter_7_Leading.htm

Herei is some good info:
Leading caused by the gun. There are certain critical dimensions of the gun that can cause leading if they are "out of spec". Again, starting with the rear of the gun and moving forward, the first of these would be the cylinder throats. If the throats are grossly oversized (.004" larger than groove diameter) then if the cast bullet is soft enough it can "bump up" when fired, becoming oversized for entry into the forcing cone, creating lead deposits when it gets swaged back down at this point. With harder bullets, oversized throats do not usually cause a leading problem (although accuracy may suffer due to poor alignment during the cylinder gap transition). On the small side, tight throats can be more problematic. If the throat diameter is .001" (or less) under groove diameter, poor accuracy and serious leading are commonly the result since the cast bullet gets swaged down too small and rattles down the bore with poor alignment allowing lots of gas leakage. Fortunately, this is an easy problem to fix, just hone (or polish) the throats to the proper diameter. It's important to recognize that not all revolvers with tight throats will necessarily shoot poorly, or lead the bore (tight throats coupled with the right amount of barrel constriction will often shoot just fine with moderate pressure loads), but the general trend is that tight throats are usually problematic.

If the barrel/cylinder gap is excessive (.010") then the forcing cone area can become plated with lead deposits. This is fairly common with .22 revolvers, but is also occasionally seen in centerfire revolvers as well. The solution here is to have a gunsmith set the barrel back one thread and re-cut the barrel face so that the gap is more reasonable (say .004-.005").

Perhaps the most common cause of leading that can be blamed on the revolver is the barrel/frame constriction. Sometimes, when the manufacturer cuts the threads on the barrel and screws it into the frame, it's a tight enough fit that the frame slightly constricts the barrel so that the groove diameter in that portion of the barrel is ever so slightly smaller than in the rest of the barrel (the difference is usually less than .001"). The crude swaging process that occurs when a bullet is fired generally results in a heavy lead deposit at the barrel frame juncture. Fire-lapping (or hand-lapping) will generally cure this problem in straightforward fashion.

Variations in steel hardness or slippage in the indexing of the cutting tools when the rifling grooves were cut the barrel can be left with inconsistent groove diameter, or groove/land widths, or tool chatter leading to a roughly cut bore. All of these inconsistencies can be treated with some degree of success by fire-lapping or hand-lapping. Likewise a bore that has become pitted can also be smoothed out in this fashion (but only up to a point). Note that most of the gun related causes of leading are “treatable” by fire-lapping.
Click to expand...
 
JayBeeKay said:
Throat - .410"
Bore major dia - .413" (groove dia.)
Bore minor dia - .404"
Bullet dia - .411"
Click to expand...
I don't know if you found the problem, but you found a problem. The bullet should pass through the throat and arrive in the forcing cone at roughly groove diameter; using a fast powder will likely help the bullet upset and obturate to .413, but not if your sizing down to .410 right away.

I'd hone the throats out to just pass a slug driven through the bore. That's been my practice on all my revolvers.

While you're there, check for a bore restriction under the barrel threads.
 
Look back in thread history for lots of past threads on this subject, mine included.
The old saying “Fit Is King” is paramount when shooting lead boolits. Get the fit right First, then worry about brn, lube, powder, primers, boolit type, etc. Many give up too quickly on shooting lead because of the resulting leading issues! To them, they just take the easy road and buy expensive jacketed.
My old 1973 RBH leaded like crazy with boolits until I got the boolit and throat measurements in order. Lots of help from this thread and others!
INFO ONLY— MY BH likes .360-.361 and my SBH likes .432-.433 to not produce any leading.
Problem arises with fact commercial boolit companies DO NOT offer these diameters.
So “Rolling Your Own” is your only option to solving no leading.
It’s a very rewarding sideline to your handloading hobby when you actually cast your own projectiles! Not to mention when the shelves are bare of jacketed (like now) you are the winner as you keep on shooting as normal while others can only whine.
As my grandson says, “Don’t give up the ship!”
 
Groove diameter for 41 mag should be .409. Are you certain of your measurements. If it is truly .413 a barrel replacement may be in order.

I have had tremendous results with .410 bullets and .4105 throats but I shy away from super hard bullets and bevel bases.
 
You found your problem with the throats being smaller than your bore. You have several ways to correct this. The cheapest would be to open the throats up. Replacing the barrel works too but more cost involved.

Or

You may want to try the HyTeck coated bullets in 10-12 bhn range.
 
I do not have anything to add as everyone seems to cover it except this, in my mind Fermin Garza is indeed a class act and a gentleman in the same line as the old school revolver guys like Keith, Jordan, etc.
 
You would need cylinder throats of .4145" and bullets sized to .414" to have any chance of not leading with a groove diameter of .413". .413" is the max allowable groove diameter in 41RemMag according to SAAMI specs.

Cylinder throats smaller than groove diameter is the worst case scenario for shooting lead bullets. I would call Ruger and explain what you've found and see if there is anything they'll do about it. While technically .413" is in spec, it is on the ragged edge, and they should know better than to ship a gun that has throats smaller than the groove diameter. They've been making revolvers long enough that this sort of thing should not ever happen.
 
First, recheck your barrel measurements. Pray you're off.

If you're measurements are correct. First contact Ruger. Maybe they will replace he barrel.

If not, you can do several things. 1.Resign to using only jacketed bullets.
2. Open your throats up and cast large for caliber bullets.
3. Possibly use gas checked bullets, and have some leading but controllable amounts.
4. Use powder coated cast bullets.

Regarding the other guns, measure them too and then go from there. Full pressure loads in 44 and 357, and 41, work well with ww alloy or similar, and 38 special level loads works well with nearly pure. Often if the gun is perfectly made, you can use a hard bullet for a standard load with no leading. You won't get any obturation, and wont need it. But if your gun ain't perfect but is much closer than the 41 you describe, you can match the alloy to the pressure and obturation will seal the bullet and shoot without leading. Often if the gun is close, simply using a gas checked design will cover your problems sufficiently. Gaschecks are not cheap compared to a plain base bullet, but they save a lot of frustration in cleaning lead out.

Likely the ultimate solution will be to either cast your own or find a friend that's into casting that will cast your needed diameters and of needed alloys.

With lead bullets of unknown lube, you can coat them with lee liquid alox (LLA) and it will give a little boost to the lube situation. If the lube they use sucks, it might be just enough to prevent leading with store bought cast bullets, if the gun isn't real far out of specs.
 
It doesn't matter what diameter you size your bullets, if the throats are smaller than the groove diameter you will most likely get leading. For a few decades now I size all my bullets to the same diameter as the cylinder throat and slug the barrel only to make sure the throats are larger. I used to think the ".002" over groove" was the way to go but soon found that the throat were determining the bullet diameter when fired (I was getting lead spray on the cylinder face and frame from bullets being "pressure sized") I have hand honed two 44 Magnum cylinders out .0015" to .002" to .4315" for a .429" barrel. Very little, if any leading. BTW, how/what tools are you using to measuring?

If I owned the gun I'd open the throats to at least .414" and size bullets to .414"...
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the helpful input, everyone.
I have double checked my measurements and the major bore diameter is .413"
That is measuring a casting of the bore at the lands highest point - I'm sure I'm not measuring the forcing cone.

I'll have to see what this gun will do with jacketed bullets, accuracy wise.

Would enlarging the throats up to .413 or .414, to match the bore effect the accuracy with jacketed bullets?
With the throats at the existing dimension they're a perfect fit for jacketed bullets.


I've had this gun for a long time but I haven't shot it much.
I shortened the barrel to 5-1/2" so it's doubtful Ruger would honor the warranty.
 
JayBeeKay said:
That is measuring a casting of the bore at the lands highest point - I'm sure I'm not measuring the forcing cone.
Click to expand...
er. . . why?

Upset a bullet with a hammer (to embiggen the diameter), drive it down the bore, then measure that. Skip the bore casting routine.
 
OK - I actually bought some slugging bullets a while ago.

....might as well use those

A few minutes later:
The bullet that I used as a slug to test the barrel was .003" smaller than the casting I did @ .410" vs .413"
I'm at a loss for how that's possible.
 
Last edited:
Suggest you call Ruger and review the throat and bore dimensions. I think a .410 throat is squeezing your lead bullet and making it a LOT smaller than bore diameter and now that skinny bullet can't make a proper gas seal as it rattles down the bore. If your measurements are correct, ask for Ruger to put in a new barrel.
The Lewis lead remover will not hurt the bore, but is a pain in the butt ... I buy copper pot scrubbing pads by Scotch Brite. Take several copper strands from a pad and wrap them around a worn-out bore brush. A few strokes is all it takes to remove even heavy leading and fouling ... and it won't hurt the bore. I use this trick in all of my rifles and pistols.
 
SO - Considering that the above measurement is correct, I'll load up some of those .411" Missouri bullets and I'll give them a try.
I think I'll load them up slightly on the slow side.

I've heard that 4227 is a good powder for boolits - Any suggestions or load data ?
I have some Unique, Red Dot, Green Dot, 2400, 4227, Clays

The jury is still out on whether to ream the throats to .411"

Thanks for all the help
 
When slugging the bore, is it smooth from muzzle to breech, or are there sections with increased or decreased resistance? It is not uncommon for there to be a bore constriction where the barrel is screwed into the frame. This might explain some of your difficulties with measurements, and also can cause leading.

While somewhat controversial, I have found that firelapping is a good solution to many of the issues you have described, and have done it to most of my Rugers.
 
Looking at the Missouri Bullets website, they show the bullets as being 18BHN, that's fairly hard. They are also bevel based which counts against you. If I had to guess I would say the bullets are too hard to properly obturate and seal the bore. That, along with being bevel base may be the problem. I will say I find it hilarious that they offer a Lewis Lead Remover on the same page as the bullets. Nothing like a vote of confidence in their bullets.

It might be worth running them a little harder and see if it doesn't fix itself.
 
.38 Special said:
When slugging the bore, is it smooth from muzzle to breech, or are there sections with increased or decreased resistance? It is not uncommon for there to be a bore constriction where the barrel is screwed into the frame. This might explain some of your difficulties with measurements, and also can cause leading.

While somewhat controversial, I have found that firelapping is a good solution to many of the issues you have described, and have done it to most of my Rugers.
Click to expand...

Yes, it was tighter where the barrel threads into the frame
I had been told to expect that and it's pretty much the case with all my revolvers.
I may fire-lap that
i bought a fire-lapping kit that i haven't tried out yet
Fermin Garza introduced me to the concept of fire-lapping, and I called him yesterday and he was able to explain a few things to me.
He suggested trying a few things and making a decision on whether to open up the throats on the cylinder.

I bought this gun as hunting revolver and where I live in CA we have to use lead-free bullets.
So I need to remind myself not to lose sight of my original mission and I really need to sight it in and test the accuracy with Barnes bullets before I make any decisions on modifying something.

Or maybe Barnes bullets will suck and I'll turn the gun into a range plinker

I have a few barrels that I want to fire-lap though and I'm looking forward to pursuing that sometime soon
 
JayBeeKay said:
Yes, it was tighter where the barrel threads into the frame
I had been told to expect that and it's pretty much the case with all my revolvers.
I may fire-lap that
i bought a fire-lapping kit that i haven't tried out yet
Fermin Garza introduced me to the concept of fire-lapping, and I called him yesterday and he was able to explain a few things to me.
He suggested trying a few things and making a decision on whether to open up the throats on the cylinder.

I bought this gun as hunting revolver and where I live in CA we have to use lead-free bullets.
So I need to remind myself not to lose sight of my original mission and I really need to sight it in and test the accuracy with Barnes bullets before I make any decisions on modifying something.

Or maybe Barnes bullets will suck and I'll turn the gun into a range plinker

I have a few barrels that I want to fire-lap though and I'm looking forward to pursuing that sometime soon
Click to expand...

I am in SoCal myself. I bought a Bisley Blackhawk "Hunter" model when the no-lead law came out and intended to use it exclusively with copper solids. It had the usual thread choke, which I ignored for quite some time. Eventually I firelapped it - Ruger stainless takes forever to lap - and despite (or possibly because of) otherwise ideal measurements, it immediately showed a 20% accuracy improvement, as well as much easier cleaning. Results like that are why I firelap almost every single action that comes home with me.
 
That's some very useful information - Thank you very much ! !


.38 Special said:
I am in SoCal myself. I bought a Bisley Blackhawk "Hunter" model when the no-lead law came out and intended to use it exclusively with copper solids. It had the usual thread choke, which I ignored for quite some time. Eventually I firelapped it - Ruger stainless takes forever to lap - and despite (or possibly because of) otherwise ideal measurements, it immediately showed a 20% accuracy improvement, as well as much easier cleaning. Results like that are why I firelap almost every single action that comes home with me.
Click to expand...

So, how are things with that revolver, velocity wise?
I have only shot a few Barnes bullets due to the cost, but I found the case capacity reduction due to the length of the bullet created new challenges.
I'm reluctant to compress my usual powder (296) that much.
But I stumbled across some 800X, by chance (it was all they had in stock) and I'm finding that 800X likes to be compressed, judging by how well it works in my .40 S&W.
I did a search and came across a thread by a guy who was using 800X in a 10mm and the guy was compressing it as tight as he could ... He filled the case to the mouth and compressed it and topped it off a second time, and then seated the bullet over that.
That sounded like destructive testing to me, but he claimed he still uses that load for max. It was compressed something like 180%
Guys like 800X for over max loads because it is predictable and forgiving when compressed.
For the Record: Not endorsing that, but it is interesting nevertheless.

Sort of off topic - But it's my own thread
 
Last edited:
Yikes! I hope that fellow never ends up on the lane next to me!

I always have been a "big and slow" enthusiast when it comes to revolver bullets, so I had to learn some hard lessons regarding copper monolithics. The short version is that "light and fast" is where it's at with those things, as far as I am concerned. I ended up using the 200 grain XPBs, which are about .010 longer than the traditional 250 grain lead Keith SWCs that I love so much. I use 18.5 grains of 2400 which earns about 1450 fps in the somewhat slow barrel of my Bisley Hunter. Barnes does not publish H110 data for that bullet. The fellow with whom I spoke over the phone said it is too slow, and that H110 really comes into its own with the 225.

The 225 XTP is almost another .010 longer, iirc, and the max load of H110 did compress a bit more than I like. According to my notes on the subject, I backed down until compression was not an issue (21 grains in nickel Starline cases) whereupon accuracy and standard deviation went straight to hell. At that point I had two bullets left out of a box of twenty so went back to the 200 gainers and 2400.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

E
  • Locked
.32 ACP Lead Bullet Diameter Question
Replies
1
Views
964
RyanM
R
J
  • Locked
Reloading with lead bullets
Replies
13
Views
677
scrat
S
C
  • Locked
Switching to Lead and Hardness ???'s
Replies
15
Views
554
codefour
C
steve4102
  • Locked
Lead (Missouri Bullets) In A Rifle
Replies
11
Views
838
Randal45
R
joneb
  • Locked
Ruger Redhawk leading?
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
BigBore45
BigBore45
Back
Top