Bullet Nose setback not slump.

Talk with other Shiloh Sharps shooters.

Moderators: Kirk, Lucinda

Post Reply
Kurt
Posts: 8428
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 10:28 pm
Location: Not Far enough NW in Illinois

Re: Bullet Nose setback not slump.

Post by Kurt »

Kenny
It will work just fine. Just use saw dust from a table saw or band saw. I went to a cabinet shop and got some out of the wagon he has that the vacuum deposited it and the shaper and plainer chips had to be sifted out. They did not do the bullets any good :)
Also unless you have a metal detector make provisions so you can insert a thin sheet of paper down the line that will make finding the bullet a bit easier. I used two sheets of sheetmetal and put the paper between the sheets and pushed it down then pulled the tin out. It will save you a lot of time and making a mess finding the bullets. Also go easy with the oil. No oil works better than oil, but you will need a longer box.
The reason a dog has so many friends is because he wags his tail instead of his tongue.

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"Winston Churchill
labop
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 9:34 am
Location: IN

Re: Bullet Nose setback not slump.

Post by labop »

Since my post on December 21 I have been collecting the equipment to make a drop weight tester. The hammer will be 4 Kg (8.8185 pounds) which will drop though a guide tube for 2 Meters (78.74”) to the top of the 1.00” tall specimen. The specimen will sit on a 43 pound anvil which is one half of forging die set ground smooth where the specimen sits. This specimen is the same flat end cone shape used for the compression test which is 1.000” tall X 0.920” X 0.970”. The diameters vary slightly with alloy composition as do bullets. This mold was made in 2012 for my initial compression tests and there is no scientific or historical basis for these dimensions. It was just a convenient piece of bar stock.
I will also add a couple of alloys to the compression table later next week.
I started casting the alloys available to me on December 23 so the testing will begin after they have aged a week.
labop
BFD
Posts: 2789
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:36 pm

Re: Bullet Nose setback not slump.

Post by BFD »

2 meters! That's plenty and then some. I was thinking about this for quite a while and I envisioned a test with about 6-9 Pb:Sn ratios with 5-10 samples per alloy. And then plotting that data for a likely second order regression. I was thinking of pure Pb, 40:1, 20:1, 16:1, 12:1, 10:1, 8:1 and pure Sn.

I was also thinking of doing this at two different temperatures. Something like below freezing and room temperature. I think temperature might matter quite a bit, but could be wrong.

Good luck with this.
Kurt
Posts: 8428
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 10:28 pm
Location: Not Far enough NW in Illinois

Re: Bullet Nose setback not slump.

Post by Kurt »

Don't forget the shock absorbing effect the wad materials have on setback :D

Just reading you guys scientific approach to this gives me a head ace :lol:
The reason a dog has so many friends is because he wags his tail instead of his tongue.

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"Winston Churchill
beltfed
Posts: 1962
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:07 am
Location: Central Wi

Re: Bullet Nose setback not slump.

Post by beltfed »

Could do a variation with a "wad" on top of the specimen.
beltfed/arnie
labop
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 9:34 am
Location: IN

Re: Bullet Nose setback not slump.

Post by labop »

After I get through the current schedule of 11 alloys in drop testing we can decide which alloy/wad combination would give us the most information. I buy my wads precut so I do not have any LDPE or vegetable fiber. I do have a 1" wad cutter.
labop
dbm
Posts: 290
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 7:26 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Bullet Nose setback not slump.

Post by dbm »

Come into ths late and haven't read though whole discussion in detail, however...

During 1919-1920 Eley Bros. conducted experiments to measure the change in hardness with time of bullet alloys of lead & antimony and lead & tin. Testing was on cast and formed cylinders 0.325" diameter and 0.5" long.

The hardness of the cylinders was tested by dropping a 3lb. weight through 16” axially onto the cylinder. The decrement of the cylinder giving a measure of the hardness. Each test consisted of five crushings, the average result being taken.

David
www.researchpress.uk - www.facebook.com/researchpress
Historical Firearms, long range target shooting and military history
BFD
Posts: 2789
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:36 pm

Re: Bullet Nose setback not slump.

Post by BFD »

dbm wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2020 10:16 am Come into ths late and haven't read though whole discussion in detail, however...

During 1919-1920 Eley Bros. conducted experiments to measure the change in hardness with time of bullet alloys of lead & antimony and lead & tin. Testing was on cast and formed cylinders 0.325" diameter and 0.5" long.

The hardness of the cylinders was tested by dropping a 3lb. weight through 16” axially onto the cylinder. The decrement of the cylinder giving a measure of the hardness. Each test consisted of five crushings, the average result being taken.

David
So interesting! Any reference where we could read about it and especially see the results.
User avatar
powderburner
Posts: 2987
Joined: Sat May 24, 2003 12:23 am
Location: elko nv.

Re: Bullet Nose setback not slump.

Post by powderburner »

Brent. A lot of this stuff is covered in fluid dynamics. Do you have access to these references in your library?
Not to deter the info from others
Dean Becker
only one gun and they are 74 s
3rd asst. flunky,high desert chapter F.E.S.
MYWEIGH scale merchant
reclining member of O-G-A-N-T
dbm
Posts: 290
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 7:26 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Bullet Nose setback not slump.

Post by dbm »

Brent,

The papers have not been published. The findings in summary...

W.E. Metford had experimented with cast lead bullets containing various proportions of antimony or tin and he found that the hardness of the resulting alloys varied with the time which had elapsed since they were formed. He made comparisons of the particular compositions and ages which were to be compared by squeezing bullets against one another in a vise. The harder bullets penetrated the softer and the amount by which it was harder than the other judged by eye. Notes referred to one bullet being "slightly harder" or "vastly harder" than another. He showed that with the lapse of time the hardness of tin lead or antimony lead alloys changed.

Eley found that at one week lead tin alloys had become softer while lead antimony alloys had become harder. Lead antimony tin alloys were found to behave similarly to lead tin alloys. It was found that after one week in nearly every case softening commenced and continued steadily for the whole period of the experiments (15 months). The greatest fluctuation in the hardness of both kinds of alloy was completed by about seven weeks. From seven weeks onwards there was generally less softening of the tin than of the antimony alloys, and for this reason tin was thought to be a better hardening medium for bullets than antimony.

David
www.researchpress.uk - www.facebook.com/researchpress
Historical Firearms, long range target shooting and military history
BFD
Posts: 2789
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:36 pm

Re: Bullet Nose setback not slump.

Post by BFD »

David,
The squeezing of bullets against each other is the basic idea behind Dave Corbin's hardness testing method right here
http://www.corbins.com/lead.htm#hard

You can save yourself a lead hardness tester with that method.

so, not much new there. Without quantification, it's not really very useful.
mdeland
Posts: 11708
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 1:47 pm

Re: Bullet Nose setback not slump.

Post by mdeland »

I have not found that to be true. Lead tin continues to grow soft over the first year at least and lead tin antimony is much more stable over time in hardness change after about 14 days or so when it gains hardness. I have some lead tin Antimony bullets I cast at least 15 years ago that I hardness tested last year with both an LBT and Lee tester and they were with in 2 BHN of when they were made.
The trouble I have found with antimony alloy is barrel leading issues no matter what lube or wadding material used. Gas checks are the only way I have found to stop barrel leading with this alloys use and are of course illegal for out games so I put up with some barrel leading. I have to clean between relays to maintain optimum accuracy.
Dan Theodore did a bunch of alloy testing and found pretty much the same as I have.
I have read that lead tin alloy can have it's softness gain retarded by storing in a freezer but have not personally test this.
labop
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 9:34 am
Location: IN

Re: Bullet Nose setback not slump.

Post by labop »

https://ibb.co/VTv6T4S

All tests were performed after aging 7-8 days and results within the alloy type were consistent, falling within a maximum 0.010” variation. Results are an average of two or three tests performed per alloy type. There are three sets of specimens that have not aged 7 days so I will add those later. The 94.4-5.3-0.3 is Kurt’s 40 caliber alloy similar to 17-1 with a small amount of antimony. The addition of 12-1 to the chart may provide some interesting data.
Well what does all this tell us? Eliminating the issue of creep with drop testing does shine a different light on some alloys. In a 2015 post Dan Theodore made the comment “Antimony is not all it is purported to be concerning reducing ogive bump-up.” The addition of antimony does make for a much more complex alloy in working to improve on 16-1. I have had a lot of fun over the years playing with antimony alloys and the test results do show some promise. The issue of age hardening and then age softening especially in the presence of catalysts like arsenic, commonly used to make lead shot, will be a factor in success with some compositions.
beltfed
Posts: 1962
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:07 am
Location: Central Wi

Re: Bullet Nose setback not slump.

Post by beltfed »

Here is what Harris said about initial aging of "typical" harder and softer Lead/Antimony/Tin alloys
and their initial age hardening.
So, for the last 40 years, I allow about 20 days of age hardening of my 9+1 COWW/Lino alloy bullets
before I shoot them.
And, unlike some others, I do not have leading problems with the GG bullets .
UNLESS the bullets are undesized. ….!!!
https://shilohrifle.com/forums/download ... a63f874a25
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
mdeland
Posts: 11708
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 1:47 pm

Re: Bullet Nose setback not slump.

Post by mdeland »

Dan T. was also a big believer in Stainless barrels over chrom/moly as less likely to lead up. I have always used CM barrels so can't really say if it helps or not. Also I have always used groove diameter bullets in rifle or revolver.
I did once make up some 30-1 lead/tin alloy to test in my 45-70 match rifle and the barrel was practically lead free after the test.
Post Reply