Whole Lotta Leadin' Goin' On (probably more than you think)
- Thread starter Mauser69
- Start date
- Status
stubbicatt
Member
I cast bullets for a number of firearms. Alloy hardness is a non issue in my experience. I've shot 30-1 in 357 Magnum rifle with no evidence of leading, the same in a 45-70 and 45 ACP with no evidence of leading. Assuming your bullet carries enough lube to make it all the way to the muzzle, I find it much easier to clean up after cast bullets than after jacketed projectiles.
I use a soft home made lube, and size the bullets properly. I also shoot cast bullet friendly cartridges... 32-40, 357 Mag, 45-70, and 45 ACP.
If one were to shoot 300 Winchester Magnum or similar "over bore" cartridges I'm sure the alloy would make a difference. Years ago when I shot IHMSA with a 7mm BR, I shot linotype gas checked bullets which were quite accurate in that pistol, again with no evidence of leading.
I am certain that there will be a trace amount of lead left in the bore, but no chunks, slivers, or occluded riflings have ever been noticed with my home cast bullets. The same cannot be said for commercial offerings.
Perhaps if OP were to cast his own he too would experience similar performance.
I use a soft home made lube, and size the bullets properly. I also shoot cast bullet friendly cartridges... 32-40, 357 Mag, 45-70, and 45 ACP.
If one were to shoot 300 Winchester Magnum or similar "over bore" cartridges I'm sure the alloy would make a difference. Years ago when I shot IHMSA with a 7mm BR, I shot linotype gas checked bullets which were quite accurate in that pistol, again with no evidence of leading.
I am certain that there will be a trace amount of lead left in the bore, but no chunks, slivers, or occluded riflings have ever been noticed with my home cast bullets. The same cannot be said for commercial offerings.
Perhaps if OP were to cast his own he too would experience similar performance.
In the eighties, I shot frequently with an older gentleman, a WWII vet, who always announced at the end of shooting he was off to clean his revolver. Out would come his full power jacketed ammunition.
Interesting reading here. Lots of knowledge put behind cast bullet use and choice that I wish I could remember down the road.
To prevent leading with cast bullets in handguns, I keep velocities reasonable. Except for the use of swaged bullets (I know, they are not cast), it does not seem to matter much what bullet shape, alloy, or lubricant that I use.
These days, I use purchased cast bullets but I have cast my own in the past. Alloy of my cast bullets was never carefully controlled.
I've had the most leading issues with 357 Magnum and generally, when I get leading, I have driven the bullets too fast. (Note, it was not until recently that I got some other fast movers such as 44 Magnum and 460 S&W Magnum. Based on previous knowledge, I do not load them fast with cast bullets.)
Nothing wrong with shooting full power ammunition but it does not float my boat anymore, so for me, I am happy shooting light to mid range power ammunition these days.
That is not to say, I could make some changes in hardness, lubricant, gas checks, powder, primer, and how I hold my tongue to get the velocities up.
I am planning on trying powder coated bullets. Just have not gotten around to it yet.
THE keys are (in order):
- Bullet diameter being at least a thousandth or two over groove diameter when it hits the barrel.
(That means check your revolver cylinder throats as well as your barrel)
- Soft enough alloy to bump up under pressure -- can oft times overcome even slightly undersize bullets.
(Rarely will you ever need BN>15, and most of the time 30-1 (BN~5/6) and/or wheel weights (BN~10/11)
will do the job even with plain-base bullets.)
- Soft lubes (the classic 50/50 ALOX/Beeswax will handle 98.281% of all applications).
Softer lubes have no problem vaporizing into a thin-film actually pressurized/squirted ahead of the bullet
as it proceeds down the barrel.
- Bullet diameter being at least a thousandth or two over groove diameter when it hits the barrel.
(That means check your revolver cylinder throats as well as your barrel)
- Soft enough alloy to bump up under pressure -- can oft times overcome even slightly undersize bullets.
(Rarely will you ever need BN>15, and most of the time 30-1 (BN~5/6) and/or wheel weights (BN~10/11)
will do the job even with plain-base bullets.)
- Soft lubes (the classic 50/50 ALOX/Beeswax will handle 98.281% of all applications).
Softer lubes have no problem vaporizing into a thin-film actually pressurized/squirted ahead of the bullet
as it proceeds down the barrel.
GooseGestapo
Member
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2003
- Messages
- 6,149
Yeah, over the past 45years, I've seen leading. Mostly with commercial bullets.
Most commercial bullets are:
1. Too hard, don't obdurate with lower pressure loads
2. Bevel base, compounds problem #1.
3. Hard, ineffective lubes. Pretty, stuck in groove, but don't work. Still stuck to fired bullets!
4. Frequently under sized. One size doesn't fit all!
5. Soft swaged lead bullets usually have terrible dry lubes. Lead badly at any speed.
Caveat Emptor, buyer beware.
I'd never seen decent cast boolit performance from my Marlin M336 in .35Rem. I finally broke down and got a RCBS 200grn FNGC mold, lapped it out, and got a .360" sizer. Voila, 2moa or slightly better. Have killed a couple of deer with it. Will never use jacketed in it again!
Thank you Sierra and Remington for lack of bullets!
Most commercial bullets are:
1. Too hard, don't obdurate with lower pressure loads
2. Bevel base, compounds problem #1.
3. Hard, ineffective lubes. Pretty, stuck in groove, but don't work. Still stuck to fired bullets!
4. Frequently under sized. One size doesn't fit all!
5. Soft swaged lead bullets usually have terrible dry lubes. Lead badly at any speed.
Caveat Emptor, buyer beware.
I'd never seen decent cast boolit performance from my Marlin M336 in .35Rem. I finally broke down and got a RCBS 200grn FNGC mold, lapped it out, and got a .360" sizer. Voila, 2moa or slightly better. Have killed a couple of deer with it. Will never use jacketed in it again!
Thank you Sierra and Remington for lack of bullets!
OP
OP
Mauser69
Member
Part 2 - My Testing
Geeze guys, I'm sorry for any angst I caused some of you for waiting a day to post the second part, but I had better things to do with my family on Sunday afternoon! I am also not real happy with some of the pictures I took and hoped to find some time to re-do them with a shorter barrel (didn't happen).
Anyway, here are some more specifics about my guns and the testing I did, including why I chose what I did.
First the guns - although I have 8 handguns in three different calibers and have tested some with all of them, as I said in the OP, this data will focus just on the two .44 Mag revolvers for simplicity.
Gun #1: Ruger .44Mag Super Blackhawk with 7 1/2" barrel - bought used in the 80s, and it has seen a lot of use (but no signs of abuse except an amateurish modification to the front sight). Cylinder throats on this gun measure .433" with a micrometer (not calipers), and the groove diameter is .430.
Gun #2: Smith & Wesson 29-3 with 10 5/8" barrel - bought new in the early 80s and lightly used. Cylinder throats in this gun also measure .433" with micrometer, but I have not slugged the barrel.
As further evidence that the throats on both guns are not undersized and contributing anything to the leading, a .430 Honady jacketed bullet drops clean through all throats in both guns.
When I started down this path looking for a good cast bullet load, I naively assumed it would be fairly easy.
Why the naivete? Well, it started with the fact that I had shot several thousand soft lead wad cutters over the years without thinking I had any leading (I was wrong - I have gone back and carefully tested those and do see minor leading now). In addition to the swaged lead bullets, I had loaded the occasional 500 or 1,000 'gun show' cast bullets (meaning cheap and unknown lead), and also thought I was not experiencing leading issues (also wrong, and determined with more careful recent testing of some of those old bullets).
Contributing to that original naivete were the number of people who post in on-line forums with smug simplistic statements such as leading is very rarely an issue, and that is proved by the fact that so many cast bullets are sold! Since I did not think I had seen any leading problems, I was dumb enough to swallow that BS.
But I guess the real question is "Why was I fooled for so long into thinking that I did not get leading from my revolvers when shooting swaged or cast bullets?" The definitive answer to that lies in the fact that I shot a lot more jacketed stuff than I did lead. And on the days I went out shooting a bunch of slow lead rounds just for cheap fun, I invariably ended up shooting a bunch of magnum jacketed stuff for big bang fun. And I can tell you with absolute certainty that shooting two cylinders of jacketed magnums will TOTALLY clean a moderately leaded barrel! How can I be so certain? Well, that was the last test I performed just two days ago. So I am convinced that my regular practice to end my shooting sessions with magnum loads resulted in never having lead fouling to find when I was cleaning my guns. And because I never thought I had a problem, I also rarely looked that close!
Now I know that there are a lot of folks who will jump in and scream about how dangerous it is to fire jacketed bullets in a leaded barrel, and I will not debate that with them at all. And I am NOT suggesting that anyone do this - you will have to make up your own mind about the safety or intelligence of that decision. I am simply telling you that it is a FACT that doing so cleaned ALL lead deposits out of my fouled guns. I will readily admit that there is a certain logic that sounds like it should be dangerous to fire any bullet into a barrel already fouled with another metal. On the other hand, at least one current gun manufacturer specifically advises their buyers that the best and proper way to clean lead fouling in one of their guns is to fire a few jacketed rounds through it after shooting the lead!!! (Hi-Point Firearms, as published sometime in the past several months in American Rifleman).
So back to my testing - I felt that I had a broad enough range of guns that even if a few of them had specific problems that caused leading, I probably would find at least one that was fairly easy to dial in with a good load (didn't happen). And I chose MBC because I thought it made the most sense to start with an established and generally available manufacturer. They seem highly respected on these forums, they have excellent prices, they are specific about the exact Brinell Hardness of their bullets, and they sell both BH12 and BH18 bullets, along with new hi-tek coated bullets. Most importantly, they openly discuss the leading issue on their web site and give a specific formula to use to know for a fact if the pressure of your reload is appropriate to use with their specific bullets - I mean, how much better could it get, right? If the bullet makers cannot get it right, who can? I didn't like that all their bullets seem to be bevel base types, but guess I can't have everything. (At this point, let me also note that Grant Cunningham has also published very specific formulas to calculate both the Ideal and Maximum BHN for any specific pressure, and his formulas call for much HIGHER pressure loads for the same hardness than the MBC formula!)
So I ordered a bunch in three different calibers with full confidence that I would soon be shooting cheap and clean. But everything I tried was coming up leaded. Just for general info, I will list all the various loads I tried below, along with the estimated speed and chamber pressure of each round based on the data. I must stress that only a few of the test loads are exactly from published data. Since some of my powders are old and discontinued, I had to use old manuals, and even most newer manuals do not include specific loads for the MBC cast and coated bullets. In most cases I had to extrapolate from similar loads with same bullet weights to develop my test loads and estimate the expected speed and pressure. In many cases I also chronographed those test loads, and I will include the actual speeds at 10 feet for comparison - you will see that the actual velocities are all fairly consistent with the expected speeds from the data.
Based on my experience and best judgement, I believe all of these test loads are within SAMMI specs for .44 Spl and .44 Mag, but I cannot prove that; therefore, I do not advise anyone to use my data. I include it only to show you what range of speeds and pressure I tested with these bullets. As I stated in the original post, every single one of these test loads left lead deposits in my barrels after just 20 rounds. Some were relatively mild just past the forcing cone, and others were heavier and/or full length deposits. I am not here to debate which loads might have been best - I am simply stating that ALL loads left lead deposits. To that end, I will not further detail the type of leading from any particular load.
Load data that I referenced as a starting point include Hornady #2, Dupont/IMR 1983, Hodgdon #23 and Western Powders #5.
The following loads used 700x powder in .44 Spl cases (a few in magnum cases are noted), all using the MBC 180 gr RNFP Cowboy #7 BH12:
The following load used 700x powder in .44 Spl cases with the MBC 200 gr RNFP coated Cowboy #5 BH12:
The following load used 700x powder in .44 Mag cases with the MBC 240 gr SWC Keith BH18:
The following loads used WW452/Trap 100 powder in .44 Spl cases (a few in magnum cases are noted), all using the MBC 180 gr RNFP Cowboy #7 BH12:
The following load used WW452/Trap 100 powder in .44 Sp cases with the MBC 240 gr SWC Keith BH18:
The following load used WW296/H110 powder in .44 Sp cases with the MBC 180 gr RNFP Cowboy #7 BH12:
The following loads used WW296/H110 powder in .44 Spl cases, all using the MBC 240 gr RNFP Keith BH18:
The following load used Accurate #5 powder in .44 Sp cases with the MBC 180 gr RNFP Cowboy #7 BH12:
The following load used Accurate #5 powder in .44 Spl cases with the MBC 200 gr RNFP coated Cowboy #5 BH12:
The following load used HS-6 powder in .44 Sp cases with the MBC 180 gr RNFP Cowboy #7 BH12:
So there you have it - speeds ranging from 800 fps to 1,300 fps, and pressures ranging from 10,000 CUP t0 38,000 CUP, and everything left lead deposits in both of my .44 Mag revolvers. EVEN the coated bullets that many claim totally prevent leading. They did not. But I will say that in the only two loads I tested with the coated bullets so far, they were the most accurate and left less leading than any of the cast bullets.
Am I claiming that all guns with all cast bullets will cause leading? NO, I AM NOT. I am simply showing evidence to support my belief that it is a lot more common than SOME people keep saying on these forums. I think it is better for someone new to lead bullets to keep their eyes open and expect it rather than naively think it will not happen.
In Part 3 I will talk about cleaning the lead deposits and show the pictures. I will be specific on why I personally think that many who blithely claim they have no leading at all just haven't looked at it correctly.
Geeze guys, I'm sorry for any angst I caused some of you for waiting a day to post the second part, but I had better things to do with my family on Sunday afternoon! I am also not real happy with some of the pictures I took and hoped to find some time to re-do them with a shorter barrel (didn't happen).
Anyway, here are some more specifics about my guns and the testing I did, including why I chose what I did.
First the guns - although I have 8 handguns in three different calibers and have tested some with all of them, as I said in the OP, this data will focus just on the two .44 Mag revolvers for simplicity.
Gun #1: Ruger .44Mag Super Blackhawk with 7 1/2" barrel - bought used in the 80s, and it has seen a lot of use (but no signs of abuse except an amateurish modification to the front sight). Cylinder throats on this gun measure .433" with a micrometer (not calipers), and the groove diameter is .430.
Gun #2: Smith & Wesson 29-3 with 10 5/8" barrel - bought new in the early 80s and lightly used. Cylinder throats in this gun also measure .433" with micrometer, but I have not slugged the barrel.
As further evidence that the throats on both guns are not undersized and contributing anything to the leading, a .430 Honady jacketed bullet drops clean through all throats in both guns.
When I started down this path looking for a good cast bullet load, I naively assumed it would be fairly easy.
Why the naivete? Well, it started with the fact that I had shot several thousand soft lead wad cutters over the years without thinking I had any leading (I was wrong - I have gone back and carefully tested those and do see minor leading now). In addition to the swaged lead bullets, I had loaded the occasional 500 or 1,000 'gun show' cast bullets (meaning cheap and unknown lead), and also thought I was not experiencing leading issues (also wrong, and determined with more careful recent testing of some of those old bullets).
Contributing to that original naivete were the number of people who post in on-line forums with smug simplistic statements such as leading is very rarely an issue, and that is proved by the fact that so many cast bullets are sold! Since I did not think I had seen any leading problems, I was dumb enough to swallow that BS.
But I guess the real question is "Why was I fooled for so long into thinking that I did not get leading from my revolvers when shooting swaged or cast bullets?" The definitive answer to that lies in the fact that I shot a lot more jacketed stuff than I did lead. And on the days I went out shooting a bunch of slow lead rounds just for cheap fun, I invariably ended up shooting a bunch of magnum jacketed stuff for big bang fun. And I can tell you with absolute certainty that shooting two cylinders of jacketed magnums will TOTALLY clean a moderately leaded barrel! How can I be so certain? Well, that was the last test I performed just two days ago. So I am convinced that my regular practice to end my shooting sessions with magnum loads resulted in never having lead fouling to find when I was cleaning my guns. And because I never thought I had a problem, I also rarely looked that close!
Now I know that there are a lot of folks who will jump in and scream about how dangerous it is to fire jacketed bullets in a leaded barrel, and I will not debate that with them at all. And I am NOT suggesting that anyone do this - you will have to make up your own mind about the safety or intelligence of that decision. I am simply telling you that it is a FACT that doing so cleaned ALL lead deposits out of my fouled guns. I will readily admit that there is a certain logic that sounds like it should be dangerous to fire any bullet into a barrel already fouled with another metal. On the other hand, at least one current gun manufacturer specifically advises their buyers that the best and proper way to clean lead fouling in one of their guns is to fire a few jacketed rounds through it after shooting the lead!!! (Hi-Point Firearms, as published sometime in the past several months in American Rifleman).
So back to my testing - I felt that I had a broad enough range of guns that even if a few of them had specific problems that caused leading, I probably would find at least one that was fairly easy to dial in with a good load (didn't happen). And I chose MBC because I thought it made the most sense to start with an established and generally available manufacturer. They seem highly respected on these forums, they have excellent prices, they are specific about the exact Brinell Hardness of their bullets, and they sell both BH12 and BH18 bullets, along with new hi-tek coated bullets. Most importantly, they openly discuss the leading issue on their web site and give a specific formula to use to know for a fact if the pressure of your reload is appropriate to use with their specific bullets - I mean, how much better could it get, right? If the bullet makers cannot get it right, who can? I didn't like that all their bullets seem to be bevel base types, but guess I can't have everything. (At this point, let me also note that Grant Cunningham has also published very specific formulas to calculate both the Ideal and Maximum BHN for any specific pressure, and his formulas call for much HIGHER pressure loads for the same hardness than the MBC formula!)
So I ordered a bunch in three different calibers with full confidence that I would soon be shooting cheap and clean. But everything I tried was coming up leaded. Just for general info, I will list all the various loads I tried below, along with the estimated speed and chamber pressure of each round based on the data. I must stress that only a few of the test loads are exactly from published data. Since some of my powders are old and discontinued, I had to use old manuals, and even most newer manuals do not include specific loads for the MBC cast and coated bullets. In most cases I had to extrapolate from similar loads with same bullet weights to develop my test loads and estimate the expected speed and pressure. In many cases I also chronographed those test loads, and I will include the actual speeds at 10 feet for comparison - you will see that the actual velocities are all fairly consistent with the expected speeds from the data.
Based on my experience and best judgement, I believe all of these test loads are within SAMMI specs for .44 Spl and .44 Mag, but I cannot prove that; therefore, I do not advise anyone to use my data. I include it only to show you what range of speeds and pressure I tested with these bullets. As I stated in the original post, every single one of these test loads left lead deposits in my barrels after just 20 rounds. Some were relatively mild just past the forcing cone, and others were heavier and/or full length deposits. I am not here to debate which loads might have been best - I am simply stating that ALL loads left lead deposits. To that end, I will not further detail the type of leading from any particular load.
Load data that I referenced as a starting point include Hornady #2, Dupont/IMR 1983, Hodgdon #23 and Western Powders #5.
The following loads used 700x powder in .44 Spl cases (a few in magnum cases are noted), all using the MBC 180 gr RNFP Cowboy #7 BH12:
- 5.1 gr, Estimated 950fps@12,000 CUP
- 5.3 gr, Estimated 1,000fps@13,000 CUP; actual 941 fps
- 5.5 gr, Estimated 1,020fps@13,500 CUP; actual 984 fps
- 6.3 gr, Estimated 1,100fps@14,000 CUP
- 9.0 gr (Magnum), Estimated 1,300fps@35,000 CUP
The following load used 700x powder in .44 Spl cases with the MBC 200 gr RNFP coated Cowboy #5 BH12:
- 5.3 gr, Estimated 1,020fps@13,000 CUP; actual 920 fps
The following load used 700x powder in .44 Mag cases with the MBC 240 gr SWC Keith BH18:
- 9.0 gr, Estimated 1,000fps@38,000 CUP
The following loads used WW452/Trap 100 powder in .44 Spl cases (a few in magnum cases are noted), all using the MBC 180 gr RNFP Cowboy #7 BH12:
- 5.2 gr, Estimated 800fps@10,000 CUP
- 5.7 gr, Estimated 900fps@10,500 CUP; actual 921 fps
- 6.3 gr, Estimated 950fps@13,5000 CUP
- 7.1 gr, Estimated 1,100fps@14,500 CUP; actual 1,096 fps
- 9.0 gr (Magnum), Estimated 1,250fps@20,000 CUP; actual 1,218
- 10.1 gr (Magnum), Estimated 1,300fps@23,000 CUP
The following load used WW452/Trap 100 powder in .44 Sp cases with the MBC 240 gr SWC Keith BH18:
- 7.5 gr, Estimated 1,000fps@22,900 CUP (intentional overload for Spl case to generate higher pressure)
The following load used WW296/H110 powder in .44 Sp cases with the MBC 180 gr RNFP Cowboy #7 BH12:
- 17.5 gr, Estimated 1,400fps@15,900 CUP; actual 1,312
The following loads used WW296/H110 powder in .44 Spl cases, all using the MBC 240 gr RNFP Keith BH18:
- 14.5 gr, Estimated 1,192fps@14,600 CUP; actual 1,105 fps NOTE: This load had wide speed variations - although it comes directly from older Hodgdon published data, it is too low for this powder/bullet combination in my guns.
- 15.1 gr, Estimated 1,200fps@15,000 CUP; actual 1,156 fps
The following load used Accurate #5 powder in .44 Sp cases with the MBC 180 gr RNFP Cowboy #7 BH12:
- 8.5 gr, Estimated 1,000fps@15,000 CUP; actual 1,021 fps
The following load used Accurate #5 powder in .44 Spl cases with the MBC 200 gr RNFP coated Cowboy #5 BH12:
- 8.5 gr, Estimated 1,000fps@15,000 CUP; actual 992 fps
The following load used HS-6 powder in .44 Sp cases with the MBC 180 gr RNFP Cowboy #7 BH12:
- 11.5 gr, Estimated 1,300fps@15,000 CUP; actual 1,274 fps
So there you have it - speeds ranging from 800 fps to 1,300 fps, and pressures ranging from 10,000 CUP t0 38,000 CUP, and everything left lead deposits in both of my .44 Mag revolvers. EVEN the coated bullets that many claim totally prevent leading. They did not. But I will say that in the only two loads I tested with the coated bullets so far, they were the most accurate and left less leading than any of the cast bullets.
Am I claiming that all guns with all cast bullets will cause leading? NO, I AM NOT. I am simply showing evidence to support my belief that it is a lot more common than SOME people keep saying on these forums. I think it is better for someone new to lead bullets to keep their eyes open and expect it rather than naively think it will not happen.
In Part 3 I will talk about cleaning the lead deposits and show the pictures. I will be specific on why I personally think that many who blithely claim they have no leading at all just haven't looked at it correctly.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Mauser69
Member
Thanks Don, that is an interesting comment - but I'll disagree a little bit about Hoppe's No.9 - it is not part of my problem. I use it in this example to simply show the problem that some folks have with brushing the bore with a solvent (any solvent) and drying it with patches, then looking down from the muzzle and declaring it clean, bright and shiny. It may be bright and shiny, but it sure ain't clean if there are still lead deposits. And you make that same point - thank you!
Despite what they say on their label, I am well aware that Hoppe's No. 9 is absolutely NOT a lead remover; in my experience it seems to do nothing but polish it so it shines. But there are other options that do work well and are known to many. I will get to those in Part 3. I've never heard of nor tried turpentine for leading, but I'm interested in giving that a shot. Thanx again for your post.
TimSr
Member
"I've been loadin them lead boolits for neigh onto 250 years now, probably shot mor'n 2 millon of 'em, and I ain't never had no leadin. All ya gotts to do is match the hardness to the speed and you won't have no problem."
That would be me.
I'll just add that it takes quality bullets that are cast consistantly, and need to fit. Sometimes choice of powder is critical. I've never slugged a barrel as the standard size for any given pistol caliber has always worked just fine.
That would be me.
I'll just add that it takes quality bullets that are cast consistantly, and need to fit. Sometimes choice of powder is critical. I've never slugged a barrel as the standard size for any given pistol caliber has always worked just fine.
If you look at actual tests (good tests not anecdotal stuff) there is really no commercial gun solvent or cleaner that will actually remove, dissolve or make lead any easier to remove. One or two will help a little.
Physical, elbow grease (ie: work) is what removes it. A Lewis lead remover or a copper/bronze wool wrapped around a bore brush)
There is a acid one can make that will eat the lead, but if not careful it will eat up you gun finish or actual barrel.
Physical, elbow grease (ie: work) is what removes it. A Lewis lead remover or a copper/bronze wool wrapped around a bore brush)
There is a acid one can make that will eat the lead, but if not careful it will eat up you gun finish or actual barrel.
I believe this is true. I remember when the term "hard cast" began being used for all "cast bullets" and then every newer lead shooter thought "harder is better". Commercial casters only gave the customers what they want, and could sell, so they upped the BHN of their cast bullets. I do remember when most cast bullets were 10-12 BHN (WW alloy) and nearly everyone was quite satisfied with them (I normally don't quote "celebrities, but Kieth liked 16-1 and 20-1 lead-tin alloys, and he shot some pretty hot loads).
Yep it was the "belief" that harder bullets would not lead.
I have asked Brad at MBC about this with the 45 ACP 230 gr Soft Ball bullets.
Per his BHN calculator the 18 BHN is way to hard for 45 ACP going 800 fps or less. It is the same as the Magnum bullets.
He said that folks wanted HARD cast so that is what he makes.
He will make them in BHN 12 if you order 2 boxes.
But now with coated bullets it doesn't matter.
How about Oregon Trail/Laser Cast bullets? They are a BHN of 24. Must be the Silver in them thar hills.
I have asked Brad at MBC about this with the 45 ACP 230 gr Soft Ball bullets.
Per his BHN calculator the 18 BHN is way to hard for 45 ACP going 800 fps or less. It is the same as the Magnum bullets.
He said that folks wanted HARD cast so that is what he makes.
He will make them in BHN 12 if you order 2 boxes.
But now with coated bullets it doesn't matter.
How about Oregon Trail/Laser Cast bullets? They are a BHN of 24. Must be the Silver in them thar hills.
Jesse Heywood
Member
I won't jump up and down and scream, but will admit the claim is valid in a handful of cases. In a revolver with a thin forcing cone wall. If jacketed bullets are fired after the barrel has been heavily leaded, an overpressure situation can occur. In modern guns it is a rare problem. I am aware of one S&W Performance Center gun, one of the large bores in a K or L frame.
In most modern guns it is not an issue.
LOL, OP. Way to debunk the myth. All those guys were lying to sell more casting pots and bullet molds, which end up laying, neglected, in another fool's garage. Obviously, what you ought to do is buy a powder coating setup!
If someone tells me painting the Sistene Chapel can be done by waving a magic marker for a few minutes with my eyes closed, I would probably not be surprised if it didn't work...
... even if I tried red markers, blue markers, and tried waving my arms around at different speeds.
Bullet size, bore size, throat size, bore contrictions near the forcing cone, case swaging. These are all things I care about more than bullet hardness.
BTW, if you can get a 20 shot string with every one of your loads, you don't know what bad leading is, yet. And FWIW, I get some noticeable lead fouling in both my revolvers just past the forcing cone. But I have, indeed, shot thousands of cast out of many of my semiautos with no fouling, at all. (And MBC bullets haven't made that cut, either, but they come real close in one of my guns).
If someone tells me painting the Sistene Chapel can be done by waving a magic marker for a few minutes with my eyes closed, I would probably not be surprised if it didn't work...
... even if I tried red markers, blue markers, and tried waving my arms around at different speeds.
Bullet size, bore size, throat size, bore contrictions near the forcing cone, case swaging. These are all things I care about more than bullet hardness.
BTW, if you can get a 20 shot string with every one of your loads, you don't know what bad leading is, yet. And FWIW, I get some noticeable lead fouling in both my revolvers just past the forcing cone. But I have, indeed, shot thousands of cast out of many of my semiautos with no fouling, at all. (And MBC bullets haven't made that cut, either, but they come real close in one of my guns).
Last edited:
I find it hard to believe that these bullets caused leading:
" EVEN the coated bullets that many claim totally prevent leading. They did not. But I will say that in the only two loads I tested with the coated bullets so far, they were the most accurate and left less leading than any of the cast bullets."
They will leave a deposit of the coating in the barrel, but will not lead unless you cut through the coating while crimping.
" EVEN the coated bullets that many claim totally prevent leading. They did not. But I will say that in the only two loads I tested with the coated bullets so far, they were the most accurate and left less leading than any of the cast bullets."
They will leave a deposit of the coating in the barrel, but will not lead unless you cut through the coating while crimping.
tightgroup tiger
Member
Rule3
Yea, I've been wondering about the streaks also. At one time after I started making my own, I thought I was seeing leading and it turned out to be lube streaks which are also very hard to get out of a barrel also.
Mouser69,
I got away from shooting lead quite a while ago because of leading problems. My barrels would lead up with as few as 12 loads. MBC and others use a pretty large bevel base so the bullets will drop out of the molds easier making their process more efficient.
A couple years ago I had about 100lbs of lead laying around here and decided to try it one more time.
I emailed one of our forum casters, Blarby, about my problems and followed his instructions, including buying a Lee 158gr SWC tumble lube mold in .358 with a not exactly, but pretty darn close to a flat base and with my WW lead and 50-50 alox and mineral spirits, 50 of them are pretty clean, around 100 and they start streaking. These are around 1100 fps. I'm afraid to push them any harder.
I can live with that. It doesn't come out that hard in cleaning and I'm sure there is still some in there when I'm done, but not much.
I remember trying to clean my badly leaded barrels and if I had experienced that again I would have never gone past wasting the $22.00 on the Lee mold but I was pleasantly surprised as to how little leading I was getting with my own softer, flat based, cast bullets so I am still casting them today and happy with them. I still don't like choking on the smoke but they are cheap.
I've always been told by casters I considered to be expert, that if I could shoot 100 rounds with minimal leading, that was as good as it gets shooting lead. I've never expected more than that. Like I said they are Cheap!
I've seen claims also that people never get any leading at all and I don't believe it either under general all around use.
I don't know where all this leaves you because you apparently don't cast your own and I'm not suggesting you start.
I think you just found out what a lot of us have already discovered and your not happy about it.
The best we can do is minimize the problem.
That's just my opinion.
Yea, I've been wondering about the streaks also. At one time after I started making my own, I thought I was seeing leading and it turned out to be lube streaks which are also very hard to get out of a barrel also.
Mouser69,
I got away from shooting lead quite a while ago because of leading problems. My barrels would lead up with as few as 12 loads. MBC and others use a pretty large bevel base so the bullets will drop out of the molds easier making their process more efficient.
A couple years ago I had about 100lbs of lead laying around here and decided to try it one more time.
I emailed one of our forum casters, Blarby, about my problems and followed his instructions, including buying a Lee 158gr SWC tumble lube mold in .358 with a not exactly, but pretty darn close to a flat base and with my WW lead and 50-50 alox and mineral spirits, 50 of them are pretty clean, around 100 and they start streaking. These are around 1100 fps. I'm afraid to push them any harder.
I can live with that. It doesn't come out that hard in cleaning and I'm sure there is still some in there when I'm done, but not much.
I remember trying to clean my badly leaded barrels and if I had experienced that again I would have never gone past wasting the $22.00 on the Lee mold but I was pleasantly surprised as to how little leading I was getting with my own softer, flat based, cast bullets so I am still casting them today and happy with them. I still don't like choking on the smoke but they are cheap.
I've always been told by casters I considered to be expert, that if I could shoot 100 rounds with minimal leading, that was as good as it gets shooting lead. I've never expected more than that. Like I said they are Cheap!
I've seen claims also that people never get any leading at all and I don't believe it either under general all around use.
I don't know where all this leaves you because you apparently don't cast your own and I'm not suggesting you start.
I think you just found out what a lot of us have already discovered and your not happy about it.
The best we can do is minimize the problem.
That's just my opinion.
Glock barrel, tumble lubed bullets. 1,000+ rounds. Barrel looked new. I have not had the same results with any conventional button-cut bore. And my revolvers are the worst.
Regarding said Glock, I started shooting MBC, and I got some light streaking down the last half of the bore, all the way to the muzzle. Still haven't cleaned the bore, yet, with maybe 1300-1500 consecutive cast bullets down the tube without a single jacketed bullet. But I'm kinda bummed that the clean streak is broken. At close to the 1000 round mark, I even took out the barrel and took pictures and posted them on this forum. On very careful examination, I could detect a tiny mark the size of a match head and thinner than nothing, about a half inch down from the chamber, and that was it. But of course you wouldn't believe this.
Before I started using an oversize expander, you would get 10 times the fouling it has, now, after a single shot of MBC. You would be scraping out chunks after a single shot of my TL bullet. My first two boxes of cast bullets, I loaded a couple of plated bullets in every mag to control the fouling.
Last edited:
The first time I ever got any bad leading was in .38 S&W using .358 bullets that were undersized and too hard for the pressure. Coated the bore in 6 rounds. It had no chance.
This was after 1000's of rounds in .45 ACP and .38 Spl. with no leading.
When leading happens, it can be hard to cure if you don't know what to look for. There are plenty of guys here that do know what to look for and how to cure it.
The gun makers and bullet makers make it easy in the fact that most times folks just use a sane load with there selected commercial cast bullet and they don't get leading, or they get very little and are willing to live with it.
Commercial cast bullets tend to be harder than needed, but will still work well if they fit the gun well.
This was after 1000's of rounds in .45 ACP and .38 Spl. with no leading.
When leading happens, it can be hard to cure if you don't know what to look for. There are plenty of guys here that do know what to look for and how to cure it.
The gun makers and bullet makers make it easy in the fact that most times folks just use a sane load with there selected commercial cast bullet and they don't get leading, or they get very little and are willing to live with it.
Commercial cast bullets tend to be harder than needed, but will still work well if they fit the gun well.
sauer1911
Member
Try the coated boolit route!
Bayou Bullets has some really nice products! NO fouling and very little smoke.
be safe.
Bayou Bullets has some really nice products! NO fouling and very little smoke.
be safe.
Still would need real velocity and forcing cone sizes and cut. I wish you would take your hotter loads with the 12 bhn bullets and lube them with alox two coats. See how that works, if you still have leading its the forcing cone.
243winxb
Member
Real leading will cause a loss of accuracy. Some lead or copper left in barrels is normal. I tested with hard heat treated bullets, of the correct diameter, in 45acp & 44mag. Results-cast bullets can not be too hard. The lube used may be the most important, after diameter. imo.
I have had copper fouling that got out of control in a hard-pushed 243, but I'm running lead plain-base
BN/5-6 at 1,250fps, and plain-base BN/15 at 1,500 out of 20-24" rifle barrels where a single dry patch
after 3-4 dozen rounds reveals an absolutely spotless bore. **
Leading is not the norm. If it is, there's a significant mismatch in the products and process that needs correction.
** My `92s (357/44mag), `94s(44Mag/45)and `73s (357/44-40) get no cleaning during a season (relying
on 50/50 lube to literally undercoat the bore surface between sessions) and still remain totally lead free.
Last edited:
The Bushmaster
Member
336A...Damn I hate it when some one tells me I'm doing it wrong. I shot lead bullets from .380, 9mmX19, 38 Spec, .357 Mag, .45 ACP and .30-30 Win. I have NO leading problems. I use 18 brinell lead bullets in all of them.
OK, we all took the bait.
Where is Part #3 the actual proof, pictures, verified results??
We must have a verified scientific method.
I. The scientific method has four steps
II. Testing hypotheses
III. Common Mistakes in Applying the Scientific Method
IV. Hypotheses, Models, Theories and Laws
V. Are there circumstances in which the Scientific Method is not applicable?
VI. Conclusion
VII. References
Where is Part #3 the actual proof, pictures, verified results??
We must have a verified scientific method.
I. The scientific method has four steps
II. Testing hypotheses
III. Common Mistakes in Applying the Scientific Method
IV. Hypotheses, Models, Theories and Laws
V. Are there circumstances in which the Scientific Method is not applicable?
VI. Conclusion
VII. References
- Status
