Ball milling cast lead round balls to reduce/remove sprue?

[Ginormous]

I cannot recall where I read this, but someone suggested ball milling, for a short time, cast lead RBs to peen down the sprue. Any known downside to doing this? Balls are .457's and currently cut a great lead ring during seating in all my .44s, but I don't want to create problems if this is a bad idea.

I currently seat the balls with the sprue facing forward in the cylinder, but it would seem to me that accuracy could be affected by the sprue.

 

[HiWayMan]

I've done it with a cheap rock tumbler. Couldn't do but 15 - 20 at a time though. It worked fairly well, but many of the balls developed a slight flat spot at the sprue location. Didn't change any other dimensions of the balls though. I believe this is what the big time manufacturers do as well.

 

[mykeal]

This was discussed on another forum a short time ago. The consensus was that the difference in performance wasn't measurable. Not worth the time, most people felt.

 

[Ginormous]

Thanks for the responses. I'm not going to worry about it to much then, and just shoot them like they cast.

 

[DrLaw]

Ever try Lee molds? They leave a small flat spot, sure enough, but I have not noticed any real difference between them and Speer swaged balls in performance. (Of course, I am not the greatest of shots. )

The Doc is out now.

 

[Ginormous]

DrLaw, I'm using both a Lee .457 and .375 mold. The smaller mold leaves the flat spot and is less obtrusive. The larger mold has a bit of a sprue. Perhaps I can lap the top of this mold down a bit to reduce the sprue?

 

[messerist]

After reading your post I tore my library apart looking for a blackpowder handbook I've had for years(It is not the Fadala book). If I remember correctly it was a British publication. Anyways, in the book it showed how the author removed the sprues from his cast projectiles. He had two plates of glass about an inch thick and 12"x12" square. He placed about ten balls on the plate and then rested the second plate on top. Then the top plate was moved in a circular motion with a little downward pressure. The sprues were, I guess, "swaged out" by this process. It is driving me nuts looking for this book:banghead:. If I find it I will try and post the photos

 

[BCRider]

Well, since once you shave off a ring of lead the balls are not balls anymore what would removing the slight bump of the sprue accomplish?

Shooting a "de-ringed" ball/ovoid through a rifled barrel would mean that the flat ring around the waist from the cutting during seating is going to register in the bore and react to the rifling to spin the ball with the sprue facing forward. With the spin involved any interference will cancel out. No?

Or are there other factors at play in a C&P revolver?

 

[AdmiralB]

With the spin involved any interference will cancel out. No?

No, not in theory anyway, unless you get the flat spot or the sprue bump perfectly centered in the boreline.

If the projectile is even slightly asymmetric, spinning will actually make things worse.

 

[Ginormous]

. . . He had two plates of glass about an inch thick and 12"x12" square. . .

That's some heavy glass. I have an old Newtonian telescope with a 10" round borosilicate glass mirror, and I cringe each time I've had to remove it. Glass is a surprisingly dense material.

 

[Ginormous]

If the projectile is even slightly asymmetric, spinning will actually make things worse.

Well, this was my thinking as well. Also, the peening of the RBs, besides reducing or removing the sprue, gives a slightly dimpled surface, similar to a golf ball. All of which I had assumed would aid in accuracy.

 

[Old Fuff]

Back during the dark ages of pre-history (1940's) an old timer showed me the right way was to load the ball with the sprue facing toward the front. As you seat the ball the front will be slightly deformed anyway, because the end of the rammer is counterbored to fit a picket ball (aka "bullet").

 

[Ginormous]

I place the sprue facing forward Old Fluff, but I use the Triple-P loader and the jag profile seems to miss the sprue.

Hmmm, a modified .44 loading jag from Tim (6gun4fun) might be just the fix!

 

[Old Fuff]

Boy......

Ya' have 'ta understand, back during the dark ages we didn't have any of this high-tech new stuff. Things was so primative we were reduced to shooting original Colt's, Remingtons and whatever...

 

[Ginormous]

Things was so primative we were reduced to shooting original Colt's, Remingtons and whatever...

OMG, how did you EVER cope!

 

[Old Fuff]

Had to use real black powder too. Oh the hardship of it all...

 

[saaman]

At 25 yards from a rest I can't see any advantage to using sprueless balls instead of those with a sprue. American Rifleman and others have done tests with damaged bullets and found that damage to the base ruins accuracy, but damage to the nose of the bullet doesn't cause a problem. As long as the sprue or flat spot is up when loading, there shouldn't be a problem.
When I first started shooting cap n ball years ago I used 45 caliber buckshot--that stuff wasn't even round it was so lumpy, but the soft lead swaged into the chamber just fine and gave amazing accuracy.

 

[MCgunner]

I cast a .31 RB for my Remmy pocket model. I haven't seen any difference in accuracy with conicals or buckshot. It's equally inaccurate with all of 'em. they're all about minute of paper plate at 25 yards. My 220 conical molds for the ROA get around this sprue thing, too, and they're quite accurate. I have one in hollowpoint and one in round nose.

 

[Ginormous]

AdmiralB wasn't too impressed with the Remington Pocket .31's either, although I am not certain if it was due to accuracy, build quality, or just what the issue was. I know he sent his back and replaced it with a .36 Pocket Police I believe.

I've still got plenty of .44 cal 200 and 220 grain conicals cast by Voodoochile at his world famous super secret Global Corporate Boolit Casting Foundry facility somewhere in Virginia. I really like shooting them in my '58's, Dragoon, and Walker. Accuracy is just fine, particularly in the Dragoon for both weights. And as you say, no sprue to contend with.

 

[MCgunner]

AdmiralB wasn't too impressed with the Remington Pocket .31's either, although I am not certain if it was due to accuracy, build quality, or just what the issue was. I know he sent his back and replaced it with a .36 Pocket Police I believe.

My only gripe with it is accuracy. The thing is beautifully timed and tight as any revolver I've ever owned. It seems really well made, but it's just less than stellar with accuracy. It's good enough to hit a man's head at 7.5 yards or a COM hit at 15 no problem, though.

I got mine from Gander Mountain a dozen or more years ago on sale for 65 bucks. For the money, I was impressed with the quality of the gun. It's a CVA made by ASM. I was thumbing the pages of cap and ball at midwayusa.com looking at the '49 Colt among others, and they had a brass frame Remmy '62 in .31 cal, looked just like mine, but a Pietta. They want over 300 bucks for it on that site! OUCH! I'd be pissed with it for that kinda money, ROFL! For 65 bucks, I'm happy with it. It goes bang and makes smoke. If I wanna hit 10 rings, I have the ROA after all.

BTW, I've always loaded those cast balls sprue down. I don't know if there's any advantage to up or down. Maybe the load lever would mash it down some if I loaded it sprue up? I don't know that it matters, really, though, LOL. I got this brass mold I have from Dixie GWs. It casts one pointed conical and one ball, two cavity mold, kinda cool. It looks pretty authentic, too, though I put some tygon tubing on the handles to keep the thing from KILLING my hand even through gloves. Thing gets HOT!

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=66354&d=1193695832

 

[kanook]

Back during the dark ages of pre-history (1940's) an old timer showed me the right way was to load the ball with the sprue facing toward the front.

It wasn't that long for me, but I was taught the same thing. What is funny is the first time I bought speer round ball and it didn't have the sprue I thought something was wrong.