Am I pushing coated bullets too fast?

[.45Coltguy]

If the coating has bonded correctly it will still be stuck to the bullet when pounded completely flat. If it flakes and falls off it fails. I'm willing to pound one if you want to see. I don't have a failed example, at least I hope.

No need to pound one. Hitting with a hammer simply doesn't tell me if said bullet will work under normal loading conditions, whether in revolver or lever rifle. I have to believe myself and a lot of other handloaders have had fine results loading cast/coated bullets normally. No hammer data needed.

 

[AJC1]

No need to pound one. Hitting with a hammer simply doesn't tell me if said bullet will work under normal loading conditions, whether in revolver or lever rifle. I have to believe myself and a lot of other handloaders have had fine results loading cast/coated bullets normally. No hammer data needed.

It's obviously not the be all end all test, but I don't even know if it applies to HTC the way it does to pc. In pc it's an indication of heat bonding while HTC is chemical I believe. Zero experience with HTC to know if the test even applies. In pc it shows insufficient heat or surface contamination.

 

[Thomasss]

Ya don't need a hammer test. All ya have to do is catch one as it flies out your muzzle. lol. Ya also might want to dig one out of a back stop and see what it looks like. Who knows what kind of pressure you exert with each blow of a hammer. Ya might want to read the FAQ page at Missouri Bullet Company. Their coating IS bonded to the bullet. They apply 2 coats. Their bullets are sized by standard calibers and the coating does not affect sizing. If you need a special sizing, contact them. No, I do not work for them. I just buy and use their bullets and love 'em.

 

[Seedy Character]

I have loaded powder coated bullets to 2600 fps in .30-06, without any problems, leading or PC fouling.

PC fouling is usually an indication of small size bullet in overcome. Slug barrel. Move up .001 - .002 in bullet sizing.

 

[Bearded Phil]

I have to believe myself and a lot of other handloaders have had fine results loading cast/coated bullets normally. No hammer data needed.

That's with the assumption that the coating was properly cured by the commercial caster or homecaster. If it was properly cured, then yea, the coating will survive a trip down the barrel. If it's NOT properly cured then the way you'll find out there was a problem with the coating is when your barrel is clogged with lead.

If a Hitek coated bullet can't survive a hammer test or sizing test with out the coating flaking off it's certainly not going to survive being shot down a barrel.

For anyone who Hitek coats a hammer test on the first and second coats are essential to ensuring that the process is correct and the coating is being properly cured.

And if I had issues with some commercial cast bullets leading my barrels and knew that they weren't severely undersized for my groove diameter I wouldn't hesitate to get a hammer out on one and see what happened. Businesses are run by people and people can make mistakes.

 

[.45Coltguy]

Alright, I couldn't take the suspense any longer. Out to my shop, took one .358" 158gr , one .452" 250gr rnfp and one .452" 250gr rnfp. First two are[were!] MBC, other is T & B bullet.
All are hi-tek coated. Sacrificed those with the hammer test. ZERO flaking or anything else bad, other than a lot more squattier. These were bought pre pandemic and do not need to buy any more for the forseeable future. No more hammer testing on my behalf. Damn, I hated doing that!

 

[Bula]

Alright, I couldn't take the suspense any longer. Out to my shop, took one .358" 158gr , one .452" 250gr rnfp and one .452" 250gr rnfp. First two are[were!] MBC, other is T & B bullet.
All are hi-tek coated. Sacrificed those with the hammer test. ZERO flaking or anything else bad, other than a lot more squattier. These were bought pre pandemic and do not need to buy any more for the forseeable future. No more hammer testing on my behalf. Damn, I hated doing that!

I cast and coat my own. Back to casting pot they go! If I were buying them, not sure I'd enjoy smashing them with a hammer either. Every once in a while a batch gets "contaminated" or temps are off/time etc. and the coating looks good, but comes off like an egg shell when the hammer drops.

 

[barnfrog]

Following up here. I've loaded up some rounds to test with bullets sized to .358 as recommended by a local smith. Hope to get out and shoot them this weekend. I also tried the hammer test on the MBC SWCs and DEWCs and saw no failure of the powder coating so that's a good sign. (The Acme 158-grain SWCs waiting in the wings are another story, but we'll worry about them when I run out of the MBC bullets.)

In the meantime, I ordered some pin gages, both plus and minus types, thinking I might get better precision. Four of the cylinder throats will accept a .358+ gage, and on the other two a .359- gage is the largest that will fit. (As a side note, this seems to bear out GeoDudeFlorida's advice that pin gages are a more accurate method than slugging the throats.) So the overall variance is probably somewhere in the neighborhood of +/- 0.0006". Is that enough difference to show up in group size? And if so, where would I get a reamer that would take them all up to .359? All the reamers I can find only go as large as .358. Groove diameter is .3585.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

Following up here. I've loaded up some rounds to test with bullets sized to .358 as recommended by a local smith. Hope to get out and shoot them this weekend. I also tried the hammer test on the MBC SWCs and DEWCs and saw no failure of the powder coating so that's a good sign. (The Acme 158-grain SWCs waiting in the wings are another story, but we'll worry about them when I run out of the MBC bullets.)

In the meantime, I ordered some pin gages, both plus and minus types, thinking I might get better precision. Four of the cylinder throats will accept a .358+ gage, and on the other two a .359- gage is the largest that will fit. (As a side note, this seems to bear out GeoDudeFlorida's advice that pin gages are a more accurate method than slugging the throats.) So the overall variance is probably somewhere in the neighborhood of +/- 0.0006". Is that enough difference to show up in group size? And if so, where would I get a reamer that would take them all up to .359? All the reamers I can find only go as large as .358. Groove diameter is .3585.

Just my opinion but, those two at .359- with the four at .358+ are not going to be an issue. I think that’s plenty close for lead and I would suggest getting .359” sized lubed or .358” sized coated. A RBH is not a target pistol - for that, get a T/C Contender - it just has to be accurate enough to put a 170gr flat nose through the cardiac sack of a deer at 50 yds or less.

My own 6-1/2” .357 RBH was much worse - which is why I took it to a good gunsmith who was also a personal friend. I don’t recall the exact numbers but I do recall it was bad enough to elicit a whistle from the ‘smith.

Go forth and shoot happily!

 

[wcwhitey]

6.5 Grains of Unique with a 158 LSWC is the sweet spot for me in .357. Plated or not it not too fast for a decent bullet and is super accurate. I have never had a leading issue in any of my carbines or revolvers. I have used MBC, MEI, RimRock and others plated, coated and just lubed with that load.

 

[DMW1116]

Just my opinion but, those two at .359- with the four at .358+ are not going to be an issue. I think that’s plenty close for lead and I would suggest getting .359” sized lubed or .358” sized coated. A RBH is not a target pistol - for that, get a T/C Contender - it just has to be accurate enough to put a 170gr flat nose through the cardiac sack of a deer at 50 yds or less.

I guess they are what you make them. That said, when searching for what became my purchase of a RBH, I ruled out Contender type pistols. Perhaps that was a mistake. My RBH shoots MBC 357 bullets (higher hardness than 38 Special bullets) pretty well, but I have not measured anything like others did. I'm fighting curiosity. If I did measure it and found something off, it would bug me to no end, even though it's my most accurate centerfire handgun. I did measure the bullets and they were reportedly sized at 0.358" but measured 0.359-0.3595 inches. I assume that's the addition of the coating.

 

[AJC1]

Following up here. I've loaded up some rounds to test with bullets sized to .358 as recommended by a local smith. Hope to get out and shoot them this weekend. I also tried the hammer test on the MBC SWCs and DEWCs and saw no failure of the powder coating so that's a good sign. (The Acme 158-grain SWCs waiting in the wings are another story, but we'll worry about them when I run out of the MBC bullets.)

In the meantime, I ordered some pin gages, both plus and minus types, thinking I might get better precision. Four of the cylinder throats will accept a .358+ gage, and on the other two a .359- gage is the largest that will fit. (As a side note, this seems to bear out GeoDudeFlorida's advice that pin gages are a more accurate method than slugging the throats.) So the overall variance is probably somewhere in the neighborhood of +/- 0.0006". Is that enough difference to show up in group size? And if so, where would I get a reamer that would take them all up to .359? All the reamers I can find only go as large as .358. Groove diameter is .3585.

When moving very small amounts of material, a cutter is often bypassed. When dealing in tenths lapping or honing is more common. With flat surfaces are addressed in tenths they are precision ground.

 

[Chief TC]

I dont run high tech but I do run powder coat. 12 ish bhn bullets to jacketed velocities. I only get led chips when shooting traditional lube bullets.

I use moly coated bullets from Bear Creek Supply and never had a problem with them shooting at almost jacketed velocities.

 

[AJC1]

I use moly coated bullets from Bear Creek Supply and never had a problem with them shooting at almost jacketed velocities.

I'm talking 13.7 grains of #9 in a 357 mag.

 

[tightgroup tiger]

I shoot them at 14.1 gr of 2400 and don't have any problems.

They shoot good enough, and don't lead my barrels.
GP100 158gr Brazo's SWC Hi Tech coated hard cast.
14.1 gr of 2400. 7yds. Last 6 shots of the day.
I wouldn't think #9 would be any different.

 

[AJC1]

I shoot them at 14.1 gr of 2400 and don't have any problems.

They shoot good enough, and don't lead my barrels.
GP100 158gr Brazo's SWC Hi Tech coated hard cast.
14.1 gr of 2400. 7yds. Last 6 shots of the day.
View attachment 1144653 I wouldn't think #9 would be any different.

I've only done one test group with 2400 and 13.8 was a good shooter. If I remember I had room to go, but I'm kinda selfish with 2400 because I haven't seen any to restock. #9 is easy to get here.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

Following up here. I've loaded up some rounds to test with bullets sized to .358 as recommended by a local smith. Hope to get out and shoot them this weekend. I also tried the hammer test on the MBC SWCs and DEWCs and saw no failure of the powder coating so that's a good sign. (The Acme 158-grain SWCs waiting in the wings are another story, but we'll worry about them when I run out of the MBC bullets.)

In the meantime, I ordered some pin gages, both plus and minus types, thinking I might get better precision. Four of the cylinder throats will accept a .358+ gage, and on the other two a .359- gage is the largest that will fit. (As a side note, this seems to bear out GeoDudeFlorida's advice that pin gages are a more accurate method than slugging the throats.) So the overall variance is probably somewhere in the neighborhood of +/- 0.0006". Is that enough difference to show up in group size? And if so, where would I get a reamer that would take them all up to .359? All the reamers I can find only go as large as .358. Groove diameter is .3585.

Did you see @TacticalJanitor post about leading and crud with Hi-Tek bullets? Maybe you two need to compare notes? It’s possible there’s a problem with some batches of Hi-Tek.

 

[Walkalong]

I guess I’m wasteful at 14.5 Grs of 2400.

 

[barnfrog]

Did you see @TacticalJanitor post about leading and crud with Hi-Tek bullets? Maybe you two need to compare notes? It’s possible there’s a problem with some batches of Hi-Tek.

I may weigh in further over there if sizing my coated bullets turns out to have any appreciable effects. Given the pin gage measurement results, I'll probably hold off on regulating the cylinder throats, but may explore having the forcing cone cut to 11°.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

I may weigh in further over there if sizing my coated bullets turns out to have any appreciable effects. Given the pin gage measurement results, I'll probably hold off on regulating the cylinder throats, but may explore having the forcing cone cut to 11°.

These questions about forcing cones and throats, especially with powder coat and Hi-Tek getting more use, are going to get harder to answer, in my opinion. It’s not just new people it’s old guys like me who have preconceived notions that are rapidly becoming outdated. I know how much I have to learn, but that’s about all I know.

 

[BBarn]

In my case, smashing the bullet didn't identify the problem. The bullet on the right was suitably smashed with a hammer and anvil. The bullet on the left was removed (with impact puller) after seating in a suitably belled case. The bevel base bullet was straight and set slightly in the case before seating with a die. No crimp was applied. Simply seating the bullet in the case scraped the Hi-Tek coating from the bullet in one area as shown. Seating in the press was smooth with no apparent scraping or drag so I was surprised to see the coating scraped off. No wonder I had barrel leading issues.

 

[barnfrog]

View attachment 1144738
In my case, smashing the bullet didn't identify the problem. The bullet on the right was suitably smashed with a hammer and anvil. The bullet on the left was removed (with impact puller) after seating in a suitably belled case. The bevel base bullet was straight and set slightly in the case before seating with a die. No crimp was applied. Simply seating the bullet in the case scraped the Hi-Tek coating from the bullet in one area as shown. Seating in the press was smooth with no apparent scraping or drag so I was surprised to see the coating scraped off. No wonder I had barrel leading issues.

Thanks for sharing that. My smash test results came out about the same for the MBC coated bullets I tried it on. I'll have load up a dummy and pull the bullet to see if there's any scrape-ifying going on.

 

[AJC1]

View attachment 1144738
In my case, smashing the bullet didn't identify the problem. The bullet on the right was suitably smashed with a hammer and anvil. The bullet on the left was removed (with impact puller) after seating in a suitably belled case. The bevel base bullet was straight and set slightly in the case before seating with a die. No crimp was applied. Simply seating the bullet in the case scraped the Hi-Tek coating from the bullet in one area as shown. Seating in the press was smooth with no apparent scraping or drag so I was surprised to see the coating scraped off. No wonder I had barrel leading issues.

The material is missing from the lube grove. I'd be curious if that area even contacts the bore....

 

[BBarn]

The material is missing from the lube grove. I'd be curious if that area even contacts the bore....

The Hi-Tek coating is scraped off the full diameter area between the lube groove and the crimp groove.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

The Hi-Tek coating is scraped off the full diameter area between the lube groove and the crimp groove.

I don’t see how that could have been applied correctly. It’s got to be a process problem. Have you contacted the company yet?