Bullet Nose setback not slump.

[beltfed]

Very Good,Labop,
Agree with BFD,
As I had said earlier--something like Impact Extrusion.
beltfed/arnie

[Kurt]

labop,

I alloy I use is a mix for the .45 caliber is a mix of 18# lead and one roll of 95/5 no lead solder/95% tin/5% antimony. The solder manufactures have to hold a standard so the composition of the product is what it's stated. This mix from my tests shooting the .45-2.4 and the .45-70 gives me the best obturation filling the grooves using a PP bullet. The .40 calibers need 17# lead with one roll for the same results.
Sometime when you run your compression tests try a mix like this and add it to your listened post it.

Brent the dimple on the nose is a good idea I will give a try this winter. But I will use two. One on the point and one on the ogive close to where the ogive meats the shank just far enough ahead so the dimple don't get cut by the lands.
The Lee lead tester is the perfect tool to use for this because it's calibrated with 60# pressure on the ball. (I think they use a 5/32 ball diameter)
Kurt

[Distant Thunder]

Yes, I agree with Brent, there is a difference between testing bullets cast of various alloys and testing various alloys, especially when NOSE setback is what's of interest. And obviously nose shape would be an important factor and of interest. Even with all that tested and analyzed it's what shows up on the target that is of the most interest, at least to me.

[Coltsmoke]

In the past years there has been some shooters that used Wheel Weights mixed with pure lead to cast bullets. Some experienced leading in the barrel when using Wheel Weights. Have any of the PP shooters done any testing with a WW mixture since the bullet will not actually come in contact with the barrel? Kurt have you shot any of these in the snow banks?

[labop]

Kurt
I would need to know how much 1 roll of 95/5 weighs. 8 oz ,1lb?
labop

[labop]

Kurt
I would need to know how much 1 roll of 95/5 weighs. 8 oz ,1lb?
labop

[Kurt]

Kurt
I would need to know how much 1 roll of 95/5 weighs. 8 oz ,1lb?
labop

It's a 1# roll. of 95/5 no lead solder. 95% tin 5% antimony.
You could call that mix 15.2 OZ .8 OZ antimony. 18/15.2/.8.

You can go on line and look for sales on case lots of solder and get it for less than Roto sells their so-called "pure" recycled tin.

[Kenny Wasserburger]

Labop,

Wow the testing you did is pretty incredible, and answers most of what I was intending to do. I tend to agree with Brent, the creep issue in the press I had not considered, tends to make sense. The increase in compression strength of 50% from 20-1 to 16-1

I now can’t but think either firing into water such as Ian did, or a oiled sawdust box would be a better test medium. No offense to Kurt but I think snow and perhaps ice wouldn’t be consistent all the way through.
The hammer drop Brent mentioned is also intriguing and probably easier to build.

Perry’s book mentions great changes in nose shape, and alloys in 1879. Somewhere between 16-1 and 12-1 is the optimum I believe in best preservation of nose shape and the least amount of setback. The 10-1 I shot at Alliance in 2018 shot very well, but no better than my 16-1 bullets this year. However the 10-1 was cast with a BACO money mould of .446 diameter, this year a .445 Paul Jones Money mould.

Thanks for posting all of that information. Your tests have saved me a lot of work.

I want to thank everyone that’s weighed in with, their thoughts and opinions on this thread.

Kenny Wasserburger

[beltfed]

Coltsmoke,
Yes, some of us are using Clip On WW ( COWW) in our BPCR bullets:
My go to for many years has been :
90% COWW plus 10% Lino. (9+1COWW/Lino)
Gives an Estimated alloy of:
94.5% lead/4.5%Antimony/1%tin.
Ross McCollum's Recent test on sample DDEPP bullets is : Saeco Tester 17.1 Lee Test 15.4 bhn
The bullets shoot very well-down to sub minute (when I do my part). Good accuracy and flat shooting. makes me
think I do not have a problem with nose setback.
I have not had leading either in
(my former use of ) GG bullets
or in my Paper Patch bullets.
Works for me...
beltfed/arnie

[beltfed]

Forgot to mention,
Dual Diameter bullets do not have to bump up in the case.
I will be sending some to Kurt to shoot into the snow to check on
what they look like after firing
----if he gets enough snow that is.
And: Labop, I can send you a "cupcake" of my alloy if you would like to
cast up a specimen for your drop/impact tests

beltfed/arnie

[semtav]

In the past years there has been some shooters that used Wheel Weights mixed with pure lead to cast bullets. Some experienced leading in the barrel when using Wheel Weights. Have any of the PP shooters done any testing with a WW mixture since the bullet will not actually come in contact with the barrel? Kurt have you shot any of these in the snow banks?

Ive done a little with patched to groove bullets. Mostly with BH209 but yesterday I patched 5 of my unknown alloy (a whole bunch of lead i lost track of the alloy , but definitely has wheel weights in it) and put them over 108 gr of 1fg Swiss and they shot in the group with 12.5 - 1 lead bullets. Gonna try some more behind bp to see how they work.
If they work good, im gonna send some to a guy on castboolits and have the alloy analysed

[mdeland]

Most of my alloy has Antimony in it and I always get some leading unless gas checks are used, irregardless if black or smokeless is being burned or what type of lube is used.
I made up some 30-1 pure lead tin and it shot with virtually no leading in the same barrel.
In the NRA publication ( Cast Bullets) by Col. E.H. Harrison, he has a good section on how lead, tin and antimony solidify into a "tree" like structure in the boundary layers of the elements in the alloy. Be a good read for you more technical minded fellows in gaining understanding of the strengths of the various alloy mixes.
I think nose shape is irrelevant until one understands the character and properties of the various alloy mixes and how they will react to time and base pressure.
I am also convinced that what ever means is used to capture a shot bullet is going to have some effect in skewing what can be learned from an alloys strength and weakness. If this is the case then it would seem to follow that some means of replication would be necessary to gain only base impact oburturation, needs to found to uniformly measure and compare the strengths of various alloy mixes in the "bump up" mode.
How about a coil spring encased in tubular housing with a trigger release separate from a section of rifle barrel arranged in coaxial alignment. A blunt alloy sample slug (on both ends) of bore diameter is slid into the barrel section with steel cylinder behind it for a base. The coil spring has a fixture on it's base that impacts the steel cylinder behind the sample slug. The sample is captured in oiled saw dust. This should replicate a comparative alloy stress test with the least amount of capture damage. The test fixture would in effect work just as a spring powered BB gun does.

[Coltsmoke]

I bet one of these Rednecks in the South could modify a tater gun to do the job.

[bruce m]

to further muddy the waters.
I recall dan testing hardness changes with time of different alloys.
some became stable in quite a short time, while some took much longer.
some even went up and down in hardness over time, never having a consistent hardness.
this is an important aspect of having a consistent load.

the use of antimony in an alloy relies on tin to actually become an alloy.
lead/tin/ antimony alloys really are lead/antimony alloys, with tin required only for correct alloying.

the old dead guys, from what I have read, tended to use lead/tin only, at least predominantly.
this includes the ammunition factories and govt 45/70 ammo.
did they know about antimony? probably yes.
was tin relatively cheaper than antimony then, or was there some other reason?

with regards testing nose setback with more low drag nose shapes there is an ultimate test.
actual shooting, testing relative b.c. would be the ultimate test.
to do this, the rifle would need to be zeroed at say 200 yds for each bullet alloy.
then the same load would need to be shot at as long a range as possible, and comeups, or drops, compared.
at the same time barometric readings and temps would need to be recorded.
also wind direction and speed can affect drop, and this would have to be controlled.
this would eliminate any possibility of setback as the bullets met the catching media.
even a sawdust box needs something to keep the sawdust in, which when struck could affect setback.
this test would however be in practice very hard to achieve.

bruce.

[Ray Newman]

Col Harrison's book, referenced by Mike Deland above, is long out of print.

Cheapest copy I could find is in the UK for about $75.00 (inc. shipping).On this side of the pond, Amazon & US used book sites have it available for about US$120.00+.

I did find an on-line copy at: http://www.nzha.co.nz/wp-content/upload ... lets-s.pdf

It is approx. 14 5pages and can be saved via Adobe.