What alloy using WW & tin?

  • 7.9K Views
  • Last Post 10 February 2014
TRKakaCatWhisperer posted this 26 December 2013

Today I blended 350+ lbs of what I think is 'pure' lead and tin.  Might be 20:1.  An analysis will soon find out.  Cast it into 30 and 40 lb ingots for future use. Tomorrow I'll blend 400+ lbs of WW, mystery 'range lead' and tin.  Analysis will show me what the proportions are. What blend would y'all use, and why?  I'll have two batches - one 20:1 lead:tin and the other lead:antimony:tin.  Should get me through at least one weekend of shooting. :)  

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
mckg posted this 26 December 2013

I wouldn't alter the WW, since the ones we use are getting scarce. Tin would improve castability though.

Range lead is fine by itself for most pistol uses. Add tin later if necessary.

Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 26 December 2013

My friend Joe and I have about 2000 pounds of pre-2001 WW's. I add about 2% tin just to make casting easier, but he uses it as is. The composition of WW's has changed so much in 20 years, plus the addition of Asian scrap, that recipe isn't valid anymore. If it melts and makes decent bullets, shoot it. Ric

Attached Files

onondaga posted this 26 December 2013

http://www.castbulletassoc.org/view_user.php?id=97>TRK

If you are actually going to have analysis done, keep your batches as large as possible. That way you will have the largest possible known analysis batches and won't need analysis done again down the road.

You can use the simple lead harding formula* with your analysis results and then from there arrive at the strength of your alloy in PSI from Lee charts. Relate this to Lee's work for load pressure range and you will then know where to expect the sweet spot of accuracy load level with plain base bullets to exist and have a base line established for your alloy.

After that you have gas checking and heat treating/ quenching options still left to fit your alloy into your needs. Don't feel dazzled with the facts, this is just how it works.

*Basic Rules for Harding Lead- For every 1% additional tin, Brinell hardness increases 0.3. For every 1% additional antimony, Brinell hardness increases 0.9. For a simple equation, Brinell  =  8.60 + ( 0.29 * Tin ) + ( 0.92 * Antimony  )

Actually, I'd alloy it all together in one batch for the largest size batch for analysis. You would then have the largest baseline alloy for reference in any future formulas. What you listed that you have there isn't Tin or Antimony rich. Mixing it all together is more sensible than any segregation with a mixed soft lot of scrap. If you had real valuable hard stuff that could be easily sorted out I'd do only that first. You have Tin that isn't mixed in yet. Keep it that way and bunch everything else into a batch is my best recommendation.

Gary

Attached Files

TRKakaCatWhisperer posted this 26 December 2013

Gary - our thinking is similar.  I've just finished the 2nd batch.  First was 350+ lbs of about 20:1 lead to tin.  Second was 400 lbs of Heinz 57.  Mostly WW and 20:1 tin give or take. My intent is to have enough for a number of years to play with that will be consistent.  The Lead-Tin will be for plain-based bullets for rifle competition.  The other mix for comparison and for all my other pistol/rifle shootin' PB and GC.  I'm shooting everything from .22 Hornet up through .577-450. Lee's volume sounds worth the study. I am surprised that no one even mentioned Lyman #2 alloy!    

Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 27 December 2013

When the price of tin broke $5 a pound, Lyman #2 went the way of the Dodo bird. IMHO, Ric

Attached Files

TRKakaCatWhisperer posted this 27 December 2013

RicinYakima wrote: When the price of tin broke $5 a pound, Lyman #2 went the way of the Dodo bird. IMHO, Ric
That may be.  BUT, since I sell it at $6 a pound (ONLY at ASSRA matches - face to face - to support participation) and since I'm making $ at it (good source) - tin (for me is CHEAP).  OK, I have access to maybe 100 lbs a year. SO the question is, what is the OPTIMAL mix of WW, tin, Lead for accuracy? (I'm not excluding CBA matches, just haven't connected with those close to me yet.)

Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 27 December 2013

Ken, The question is at what pressure? As a once chemist, I will say that the best ratio is 1 part tin to 3 parts antimony for the best grain structure of the metal crystals. For maximum pressure of less than 20,000 psi I like 1% / 3%. For 20/30,000 psi I like 2% /6% and over that 3% /9%. There is always slop with barrel smoothness, gas check fit and throat angle. For ease of casting, 4% /12% (Lin-O-Type) makes the best quality bullets the fastest. I consider test hardness as a false trail that leads nowhere. What is the malleability of the alloy? If cast bullet shooting was a “science” and not an art, and accuracy was easy to obtain, everybody would do it. Ric

Attached Files

TRKakaCatWhisperer posted this 27 December 2013

Whooo Hoooo. Malleability! Charpy notch test?

Thanks for the generalization of 1:3 2:6 and 3:9% tin:antimony ratios.

Hmmmm. Finer grain structure = more malleable?

Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 27 December 2013

Charpy is normally used for iron based alloys right? Don't know how that relates to lead based alloys. But I think you hit the key, finer grain structure. My theory, and only theory, that everyone hates, is that the metal should yield around the tailing edge of the land as little as possible. With gas pressure pushing on the base of the bullet, it everything is right, very little gas leaks around the bullet that isn't caught by the vaporizing lube to stop gas cutting. As pressure peaks, the metal should reform around the lands for the rest of the trip down the bore. The mechanics of the thing is the same as jacketed bullet shooting: a perfectly made bullet, perfectly centered in the bore and accelerated smoothly down the barrel. But cast bullets are semi-liquid plastic wads of gum pushed by gases hotter than the liquidous temperature of the alloy. BIG DIFFERENCE!

Attached Files

onondaga posted this 27 December 2013

http://www.castbulletassoc.org/view_user.php?id=50>RicinYakima

The 5% Tin in real certified Lyman #2 alloy is what gives it the over 100 year old legendary malleability and strength combination of #2 alloy striking game with 1,000 foot pounds and doubling in caliber expansion with zero weight loss. Those are admirable qualities you won't get without being true to formula.

My Clone cheap #2 has the same BHN 15 as the real Lyman #2 stuff but it will and does fragment on impact with game, loses weight and doesn't expand as well because it has more antimony and less tin than the certified 90:5:5 Lyman #2 alloy. Equal BHN does not equal the performance of genuine to formula #2 alloy strength and malleability.

I use the cheap clone for recreational shooting but use the real certified #2 Lyman for hunting. The cheap clone holds the load pressure similarly but has poor performance on game. I hunt Bear and won't marginalize my own safety with brittle bullets that fragment and don't expand well. Certified Lyman #2 certainly is not cheap, it is a matter of value to my hunting and safety.

I can read you really disagree with Richard Lee about the physics and science of ballistics and metallurgy. I believe Lee and have repeated his tests with equal results regarding load pressure related to alloy selection and the sweet spot of accuracy locating 10% below permanent deformation psi of a bullet alloy for plain base bullets. There is different ways to make it all work, his science is repeatable for me personally.

I think we agree it is all moot without bullet fit.

Gary

Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 27 December 2013

Gary,

Empirical tests for the last 100 years have shown that Lyman #2 is about the best lead alloy for terminal effect you can get for shooting game. The one to one of tin and antimony at 5% is the most you can have of bimetal Sn/Sb with no free antimony crystals in the alloy. Any time you change that ratio or percentage, you are going to change the terminal effects upon hitting flesh.

Vernal Smith first published the pressure and permanent deformation work in his articles on revolver accuracy in “Handloader” magazine in the 1970's. Richard Lee carried that idea over and spent a lot of time working up this system. It does work. His results are very repeatable. I certainly respect him for all of this. I just don't agree with about 25% of “WHY” is works that way.

Yes, we agree on bullet fit: better bullet fit equals better accuracy.

Happy New Year!

Ric

Attached Files

TRKakaCatWhisperer posted this 27 December 2013

Since I don't hunt anything but prairie dogs and skunks (skunks I trap - not shoot) and the prairie dogs are easy kills, the mushrooming is academic.

Accuracy?  (rifle)  Lots of folks swear by 20:1 or 30:1.  Some folks swear at antimony.

Please advise!

 

Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 27 December 2013

TRK, You really like to ask leading questions, don't you? I don't shoot many plain base rifle bullets, 40/50 SS, 8.15 X46R and 45/70 (from a trapdoor). I am very happy with 1 in 30 tin to lead, or 1/3 WW's and 2/3 lead from nuclear shipping containers with a touch of tin. This is the same as my revolver HP alloy. The exception is match loads for the 45/70 fired from the case are required by CBA Military Rifle rules. Those were linotype bullets. (Yes, Gary, one was a Lee mould, the only Lee mould ever to set a record.) But I manipulate the bullet's form and size to fit the throat as closely as possible. Antimony decreases malleability very rapidly as the percentage increases in the alloy. Two problems with this for plain based bullets; one is that it becomes impossible to breach seat a bullet without deforming it and the other is that if you do get it in it is most likely non-concentric and with leakage (windage to you cannon guys) around the lands. The bullet no longer “fits” the throat/barrel. Gas checked rifle bullets help with poor bullet fit. My theory is the strong guilding metal check compresses the semi-fluid bullet base band, helping to seal off the “young” gases and reducing gas cutting. I think it also helps to maintain concentricity of the bullet in a well prepared and fitted case. Alloy is much less important here, you just have to be weak enough or malleable enough for the gas check to do its job. None of this is new, as Mann, Mattern and Narramore have written about this for over the last hundred years. All of the basic lead alloy research was done in the 1880's and 1890's for the newspaper alloy industry, it is just matter of digging it out and applying it in a new way. Happy New Year, Ric

Attached Files

JSH posted this 27 December 2013

IMHO I would keep it all seperate. WW is WW. Dead soft/ roof sheathing , lead pipe etc. Range lead I will use but for me it isn't worth mixing into a somewhat known alloy.
Mix it all in one batch and you may need to put some much other in it because of to soft, hard or plain brittle. I used to water drop all of my WW stuff. But now air cool 90% of it. I use an el cheapo metal stamp to initial all of my ingots so I know what the are along with a date. Never did like to put all my eggs in one basket so to speak. Had some dead soft I traded a gent 250 lb for 500 lb of Linotype. Jeff

Attached Files

TRKakaCatWhisperer posted this 28 December 2013

750 lbs in two batches.  350 and 400.  Lead + tin and WW + tin.  Ingots shown are mostly 30 & 40 lbs each. Soon I'll have the percentages of whatever is in them; at least they are uniform. I just got tired of 'mystery metal'.  Now at least I'll have a known starting point to add tin or lino to. Ric -  I DO ask questions.  (It's the professor in me, now an engineer.)  I learn from presenting what I do, what my intentions are and asking others about it.  You (and others) have added to my knowledge. And stirring up a 400 lb batch of alloy was an experience!  

Attached Files

JSH posted this 28 December 2013

Good gravy. Those are some ingots! Uh, will they fit in your pot? I myself hate to remelt any more than I have to.
Why? Don't we burn some tin out or have the chance of it every time? I say this as I get a slight amount of dross every time. Or is this just more impurities?? Jeff

Attached Files

TRKakaCatWhisperer posted this 28 December 2013

Big because I had so much to put into ingots.  With 4 'moulds' it takes only about 5 minutes for the 4 to cool to the point where the mould can be stripped off. Yes, at point in time of use, I will remelt - likely with a hotplate and a 6qt pan to then fill-refill the bottom pour pot or cast into smaller ingots to add as the casting session goes on.  (it only took about 3 hours each session to cast the 350 and 400 lb batches - start to finish)

Attached Files

TRKakaCatWhisperer posted this 28 December 2013

I'm not concerned about loosing a little tin. (I'm in the unusual position of having a cheap source of it.)

Attached Files

JonnnyReb posted this 10 February 2014

I've been separating WW's for the last two days. I noticed some cut very easy while others are hard to cut, but do. How does the Brinell hardness of one weight blend with another. I'm saving all the flat stick on weights for round ball so that not a problem. But all the WW don't seem the be created equal.

Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 10 February 2014

The used wheel weight supply in the US is a mixture of ones made all over the world from countries that supplies new cars and trucks to the US market. There are no standards, except for no lead metal in CA or WA. They can be a mix of anything that will melt in the casting machine.

So with that said, the best you can do is make 10 pound cleaned lots and test for their castability. If one lot doesn't make good bullets, sell it for scrap. Keep the ones that make good bullets with not too many impurities and blend them together. Wheelweights are not longer the cheap and easy base metal for bullets they once were.

Attached Files

Show More Posts
Categories
Search
Popular Tags
This Weeks High Earners
Hot Topics
Close