Cast HP's @1300fps....

[41 Mag]

With a little work with my alloy I began to pour up some cast hollow points from the excellent MP Cramer style molds. It was a learning curve to say the least. Just getting cast up into magnum loads with no gas checks is sometimes a balancing act on a razor, much less getting a hollow point to expand properly without fracturing or blowing the noses entirely off. If the alloy is too hard they blow off, if too brittle, they fracture, I guess you would call it the Goldie locks effect where you want them just right.

I have a couple of alloys that really work well with the other HP's I have poured in other calibers but I haven't raised the velocity up with those just yet. I figured this would be a good test to see how well it will hold together with the extra deep and wide cavity on the MP 359-640. I poured up a couple hundred a while back and then a couple months or so ago I finally got around to sizing, lubing and loading up a couple of boxes. I figured that since I was mainly looking for two things, 1) leading, 2) results after impact, that I might as well go ahead and stoke them up. I had already been shooting some of the Lyman 358429J, which drop at 170grs, at the top end of the AA-9 listed loads with no issues, that these would be fine to run in a similar load range, since these drop at 160grs.

My load used Winchester cases, Win-SP primers, and 13grs of AA-9. Going by the book, they should be in the 1300fps range from my 6" GP-100. Of course when I got out in the boonies, the battery on my Chrony was dead as a hammer. So I set up my targets and went on with it like I had better sense. The groups were a bit larger than I expected, but I really didn't expect a one hole cluster, none the less they averaged around 3" at 25yds.

After putting them on paper I decided to put some into my bucket trap and see what they did. These are around a 6 gallon bucket, and I fill them with the very fine sandy loam soil we have in our pastures. It is almost like talk, and will bead up water until you stir it in. I usually keep several of them filled with tamped dirt and I pour in about a half 16oz bottle of water and screw the lids on. After a week sitting out in the sun it has pretty much saturated the sand into a nice damp soil that just will clump, but not stick to your hands.

So I set one up on it's side, stapled a target to it and set forth to test some expansion. While this isn't a TRUE muscle and bone test medium, I have found that in most cases the results pretty much mirror what I find, IF I manage to recover a bullet from a critter. The lids are about 1/8" thick and present, in my mind anyway, something similar to hitting a scapula. I am also aware that this "isn't" what I could expect from hitting a game animal, but I doubt also that hitting a deer or hog even would be quite as abrupt on them as that solid bucket of sand is.

So here are a few of the recovered bullets from 25yds, how did they do, and do you figure they would work for hunting? (I am not comparing these to solids, SWC's, wide flat noses, or jacketed, so keep it to the context please.)

I'm open for ideas, critique, or questions....maybe

 

[Walkalong]

The one starting to separate reminds me of the old Ross Sefried article about two alloy bullets where he would pour a soft alloy and then a hard alloy after that. The soft nose would expand real well, and at worst would separate leaving a donut and the hard rear would continue on. He said that was real tricky.

Looks like you have found the right alloy. They should work great.

 

[USSR]

41 Mag,

I cast and load the very same bullet. Cavernous hollowpoint! Your bullets expanded and held together - not much more you can expect than that. Carry on.

Don

 

[41 Mag]

I am going to try a small batch that is just a little harder / tougher. I'm using roughly a 1.75/1.75/96.5 with those, and am going to try a 2/2/95 and see how it compares. Might even bump up to a 2.5.

 

[Sunray]

Hunting what? It makes a difference.
Accurate doesn't show any 170ish grain cast data. A 170 jacketed max load runs 1241 fps with 12.4 of #9. Something ain't right if you think you're getting 1300 with a cast bullet and no leading.
Mind you, there's really not much sense to casting an HP in the first place. A cast bullet will expand to flat when it hits something solid anyway.

 

[Walkalong]

No reason why he cannot reach 1300 FPS with no leading. He is no novice when it comes to shooting cast bullets.

I think trying a cast HP is a worthy and interesting goal.

 

[USSR]

...there's really not much sense to casting an HP in the first place. A cast bullet will expand to flat when it hits something solid anyway.

Hmm. Lead appears to be a little different down here, south of the border. A cast SWC will not expand, let alone go flat when used here. Cast hollowpoints will mushroom a little or a lot, depending upon the alloy used and velocity.

Don

 

[41 Mag]

Hunting what? It makes a difference.
Accurate doesn't show any 170ish grain cast data. A 170 jacketed max load runs 1241 fps with 12.4 of #9. Something ain't right if you think you're getting 1300 with a cast bullet and no leading.
Mind you, there's really not much sense to casting an HP in the first place. A cast bullet will expand to flat when it hits something solid anyway.

Sunray,

I appreciate your input. I also realize that these aren't for shooting things like brown bear, moose, or even a big bodied 300lb whitetail. But for a thin skinned 150# whitetail at around 20-30yds I wouldn't have an issue putting one through the ribs. Bear in mind the impact on that tamped bucket of sand is much harder on them than squishy lung tissue would be. I am really hoping to get within range or a coyote as I think this would be awesome for them.

The data I am using for my loads is from the Lyman Cast Bullet Manual #4. Accurate isn't the only ones who test their powders with bullets nowadays.

In it, on page 259, there are loads listed using AA-9 for 160, 170, and 180gr.The 160gr loads are from 12.3grs @ 1123fps to 13.7grs @ 1350fps, the 170gr are from 11.7grs @ 1028fps to 13grs @ 1231, and the 180gr is 11.6grs @ 1042fps to 12.8grs @ 1171fps. These loads were listed as tested in a 4" barrel. I am going by my results with other loads similar to this which I have chronographed, and were right in this range. Since I have had the heavier 170gr bullet, mentioned in my first post, going 1300fps from this same revolver with the above listed load data, I don't feel this one is that far off.

As for something not being right about getting 1300fps with a cast bullet and no leading, I'm not sure what your meaning there. I shoot my 454 in the mid 1500fps range with cast and no leading.

As for not casting HP's in the first place, well to each his own. I pour a variety of cast bullets in RN, RFN, WFN, SWC, and WC, along with my HP's.

I think the biggest argument about them is that most don't take the time to work with their alloy to get them to preform as they should. Most use wheel weight alloy or a blend of it and pure, and when things go south on them they figure HP's are a waste of time. I am not like that. I have them working in several calibers and not only them but by solids as well,

If your cast solids are going flat when they impact, as you mentioned above, your alloy is WAY too soft, unless that is what your looking for in the first place. Most who cast solids might want SOME expansion for a hunting bullet, but then again most who tout the WFN's and the sort simply want them to drive straight on through letting the wide meplat do all the work with little to no expansion needed or wanted.

I am more than willing to discuss whatever you feel up to discussing, but please bring the proper info when you come. I'm not doing anything unheard of by any stretch, and have no issues putting up my data to back up what I am doing. I'm not loading to crazy pressures, or using some whiz bang super lube, or anything that isn't pretty much readily available to anyone else who might want to pour up something similar.

so, lets chat.

 

[35 Whelen]

Looks like you've found the right alloy if that's the type expansion you want...very malleable. Good job! Do you have a hardness tester with which to test the bullets/alloy?

Expanding bullets, especially in a handgun cartridge are a two-edge sword. The nice fat-mushroomed bullets make a wide path of destruction, but limit penetration. John Barsness explained something like this: If your 160 gr. (for example) bullet expands to .45 caliber, then you'll essentially get the penetration of a 160 gr. 45 caliber bullet. (think low sectional density) But as you said, shouldn't matter much on a 150 lb. live weight whitetail or a coyote.

If I may add to your thread without hijacking it...

I've bought a couple of the MP moulds with the Cramer style HP's too; one in .44 and one in .45. Last fall I did a little experimenting with the .44 mould and loaded two different styles of the HP's down to an impact velocity of 925 fps (which is roughly what the velocity would be a 50 yds.) and shot them in to a series of water jugs. The alloy was roughly 60/40 pure lead/WW's which netted a Bhn of 9.5.

The pentagonal HP- exploded in the first jug with fragments of the nose remaining there. The remaining base of the bullet cam to rest in the fifth jug of water.




The "large" round HP violently exploded the first jug of water but the remainder of the bullet went to the seventh jug. I didn't recover any fragments because they all exited various jugs along the way.




I was lamenting to a hunting buddy of mine the fact that the noses of the bullets had fragmented rather than holding together. He simply replied "Hmm...sounds like the way a Nosler Partition works to me."..................................................................................................................................................................... He's right , you know!

I did wind up shooting a buck with one of the 251 gr. HP's pictured above. What can I say? The wife made a batch of stroganoff out of some of the meat tonight!

35W

 

[USSR]

35 Whelen,

FWIW, I don't put a lot of faith in testing in water. It is just plain too hard and is not indicative of what a cast hollowpoint will do in flesh. I sent some of my MP .45-270 SAA hollowpoints cast in various allows to a member of this forum for testing. He tested in a water medium as well, and I remember him saying of one particular alloy that he would not use it for hunting as it "blew up" in his testing. Well, in loading my ammo for deer hunting I inadverdantly loaded that particular batch of bullets for my .45 Colt. I ended up shooting a very large deer and there was no problem with the bullet holding together. I think if I were to do testing myself, I would probably use a bale of water-soaked newspaper. I believe this would more closely duplicate flesh, as well as provide you with an indication of what the wound channel would likely look like. Just MHO.

Don

 

[41 Mag]

Looks like you've found the right alloy if that's the type expansion you want...very malleable. The "malleable part is what I started off trying to get a handle on. Once I found, like you in your testing, the noses were blowing off, I had to change things up. Good job! Do you have a hardness tester with which to test the bullets/alloy?

The hardness on these runs between around a 9.5 and an 11. Usually more right in the middle around a 10 though. I have found it depends on the casting temp of the alloy as to just where it actually settles out at. With the alloy having equal portions or as close as I can get them, of Tin and Antimony, you can adjust it somewhat depending on how much pure lead you add in. That said, by keeping the tin and antimony equal you get the toughness and malleability that you need once you start hitting velocities up around 1000fps and higher. Basically what I poured these with is a 1.75/1.75/96.5. While it is soft based upon the BHN scale, it still holds up rather well to the pressure of slower powders and the velocity associated with them. So far anyway.

Like mentioned above, I am still working through some different blends, and will be testing out some 2-2-96 here shortly.

 

[35 Whelen]

35 Whelen,

FWIW, I don't put a lot of faith in testing in water. It is just plain too hard and is not indicative of what a cast hollowpoint will do in flesh. I sent some of my MP .45-270 SAA hollowpoints cast in various allows to a member of this forum for testing. He tested in a water medium as well, and I remember him saying of one particular alloy that he would not use it for hunting as it "blew up" in his testing. Well, in loading my ammo for deer hunting I inadverdantly loaded that particular batch of bullets for my .45 Colt. I ended up shooting a very large deer and there was no problem with the bullet holding together. I think if I were to do testing myself, I would probably use a bale of water-soaked newspaper. I believe this would more closely duplicate flesh, as well as provide you with an indication of what the wound channel would likely look like. Just MHO.

Don

You think water is "harder" than water soaked newspaper? Hmm...

Anyhow, I don't trust ANY medium to illustrate how a bullet will perform on game. There are simply too many variables when shooting game for one medium to duplicate the results of a bullet being shot in to game. I used the water test to as a means by which to compare the two different HP's. What I learned is, all things equal, the bullet with the smaller HP expands more slowly (no brainer) and the nose fragments and the remaining portion of the bullet penetrate deeper.

The true test results:





It appears the bullet expanded, but who knows? Like I said he's in the freezer so it's a moot point!

The last two moulds I purchased were HP moulds but I like to think of them as variable weight moulds rather than HP moulds. I've not killed enough game with handgun bullets to trust the reduced penetration that occurs when a bullet expands. I'm sure they're fine on small-ish animals and especially on broadside shots as was the case with the buck mentioned above, but I don't want to chance it (yet).

35W

 

[USSR]

You think water is "harder" than water soaked newspaper? Hmm...

Yep, there's a reason why police forensic labs test by firing into water; it stops a bullet REAL quick.

Don

 

[35 Whelen]

Yep, there's a reason why police forensic labs test by firing into water; it stops a bullet REAL quick.

Don

I've never shot wet newspaper, but I can tell you the heavier bullet illustrated above penetrated to the seventh jug of water. That's over THREE FEET. If you're telling me it would have penetrated further than that in wet newspaper, I'm going to have to hoist the ol' BS flag until someone can provide evidence.

These bullets would be of similar sectional density as your 45-270's. Why don't you cast some of those bullets to around 9.5 - 10.0 Bhn, load them to a similar impact velocity (925 fps +/-) and shoot them in to wet newspaper? I'd be very curious as to how deep they'd penetrate.

The primary difference in water and water-soaked newspaper is water alone yields to the bullet. That's why when anything liquid is shot, the liquid goes everywhere, or yields. Like I said, I've never shot wet newspaper, but have seen jillions of pictures of bullet paths through wet newspaper, phone books, etc., and didn't see much in the way of yielding, or penetration for that matter. But, if I can be proven wrong, I'd consider it a lesson learned.

35W

 

[blarby]

With a little work with my alloy I began to pour up some cast hollow points from the excellent MP Cramer style molds. It was a learning curve to say the least. Just getting cast up into magnum loads with no gas checks is sometimes a balancing act on a razor,

Ain't that the truth !

I'll be following this one for certain- keep up the great research !

 

[horseman1]

Great info in this thread. I dont yet cast my own, but I've been interested in hollow point lead for a long time and thinking about all the variables. You guys have already blazed the trail and sharing your experience is great stuff.

 

[USSR]

I've never shot wet newspaper, but I can tell you the heavier bullet illustrated above penetrated to the seventh jug of water. That's over THREE FEET. If you're telling me it would have penetrated further than that in wet newspaper, I'm going to have to hoist the ol' BS flag until someone can provide evidence.

35 Whelen,

Not talking about penetration, I'm talking about obtaining classic mushrooming of the bullet such as attained by 41 Mag. Your bullet may very well do the same if you used a different medium, and that is my whole point; water tells you little about what to expect out of a cast hollowpoint to be used for hunting. Three foot of penetration in water is of little use when used on whitetails.

Don

 

[Nathan Detroit]

Yep, there's a reason why police forensic labs test by firing into water; it stops a bullet REAL quick.

Don

If I remember correctly, you DIVIDE the depth of water penetration by 1.8 to get the depth of penetration in ballistic gelatin.

Water is easy to get, reproducible and inexpensive.

 

[35 Whelen]

35 Whelen,

Not talking about penetration, I'm talking about obtaining classic mushrooming of the bullet such as attained by 41 Mag. Your bullet may very well do the same if you used a different medium, and that is my whole point; water tells you little about what to expect out of a cast hollowpoint to be used for hunting. Three foot of penetration in water is of little use when used on whitetails.

Don

OK...I guess I misunderstood. When you referred to water as "hard" and that it "stops a bullet REAL quick", that would indicate bullets won't penetrate in water. So it sounds as though you were referring to penetration....anyhow...

If you'll reread my post, I said "...I don't trust ANY medium to illustrate how a bullet will perform on game" and "I used the water test to as a means by which to compare the two different HP's." So again, the water test was to compare the actions of two similar bullets NOT to indicate their respective actions on game.

35W

 

[Walkalong]

Mythbusters did a cool episode where they shot bullets into a pool. Very interesting results.

 

[35 Whelen]

I'd like to see that!

 

[Walkalong]

Shooting a .50 cal into pool.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvSTuLIjRm8

Shooting 9MM into ice is even cooler.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHrBm8C3WEE

 

[35 Whelen]

Thanks for the links! I found the .50 cal into a pool clip. Interesting. Next time you go there, watch the video of the dude (not Mythbusters) shooting an AK underwater. Craziest thing I've ever seen.

OK, I'm through hijacking...

 

[41 Mag]

Ok not a big deal I needed something to do at lunch anyway and was watching some fo those clips when my connection died. By the time I figured out what the deal was lunch was over.

So back to the discussion, some were talking about the expansion in media as well as penetration. This IS a valid point as what works great in one thing doesn't necessarily work so great in another. As someone else has put it on another forum, with the cast wide flat noses you simply need to keep them in the 1300'sih FPS range. This seems to work well out to around 50-75yds with those types and allows them to make very nice wound tracks.

That said, most SWC type bullets will give a little expansion on the noses with a soft enough alloy, but get it too hard and they will drive straight on through.

Just like everything else in casting I have learned so far, it is a balance of alloy, diameter, and velocity. Heck even shooting the same alloy in two different revolvers of the same caliber can sometimes be maddening, one will handle just about anything you feed it the other simply pukes them out the leaded up barrel.

I will fill you in on a little more test results I have found as well. With regard to the penetration and expansion of the above mentioned 45 270 SAA from the MP mold. My loads use either 16grs of AA-9, as listed in Table II of the excellent writeup by Brian Pearce found here, RCBS 45 270 SAA, or using 13grs of HS-6 as discussed in another excellent write up by John Linebaugh which can be found here, Dissolving the Myth.

Either of these loads from my 7.5" Redhawk will run just a touch over 1050fps with the MP 45 270 SAA which drops right at 280gr from my alloy also. In the one picture up above it is shown on the left hand side after being recovered from the same buckets and sand used for everything else. In most cases I think that those were hitting around 8" deep into the buckets of sand at 50yds. Of course the closer ones went a little deeper, but not a whole lot and if I remember it was around 12-13" there. The biggest limiting factor however IS the expansion. As you can imagine the wider the nose gets the faster they come to a stop. This would be great if your busting a BG in the hallway of your house, but when putting one to task on a game animal your really looking for the best combination of both.

I can also say that if I pour the solid version 45 70 SAA and load it with the same charges listed above, they will pass right on through my sand filled buckets at 25yds and finish off their little trip with a skip out across the pasture beyond. I haven't gone through the trouble of setting two buckets up end to end yet, but I might later on this year when I get a few more saved up. With the ones I have on hand I will be testing up a few more alloy blends to see just where the expansion slows down and the fracturing picks back up. I already have poured some up with some straight 2.5/2.5/95 and each one of them blew the noses right off. They did however leave a nice little doughnut which would have been the expanded nose, but that wasn't what I was looking for. I DO realize that the given smaller pieces could/would in effect make them possibly even more of a quick kill proposition due to more pieces spreading out, I would still prefer to get the balance down on the full deal so to speak.

Here are a couple of other write ups I did on another site if you want a little more background into where this has come from, just remember it is still a work in progress. Seems every time I change one thing I end up learning several new things in the process. I guess that is why this si so interesting to me. Anyway hope you find something useful,
Tin in HP alloys

Latest HP Alloy Blend

One other thing to keep in mind, when you start doing a ton of research these formulas, and ratio's start to all run together in your head. As you will see I get things bassackwards at times when I get information overload.

Oh one more link while I am posting, if you haven't been there I HIGHLY recommend this one, Articles by Glen Fryxell

 

[USSR]

41 Mag,

With the MP .45-270 SAA bullet, I only cast hollowpoints and they come out weighing ~265gr. I quickly found that you've got to severely restrict or even eliminate Sb in your alloy if you don't want the front end to fracture. For loads in my 25-5 I have settled on a 20-1 (Pb-Sn) alloy that seems to work well in the 1000 - 1100fps range that I operate in for deer loads. I really don't worry about the bullet expansion preventing penetration on deer, as there is simply too much mass there for something the size of a deer to stop that heavy of a bullet. Like you, I use John's 13.0gr of HS-6 load, as well as 18.0gr of 2400 and 22.0gr of 4227.

Don