Cast Bullet Association Blog Rss Feedhttp://castbulletassoc.org/blog/Rss2_.aspxRss 2.0 for the user blogs.en-usFri, 25 Sep 2026 12:15:42 GMTCast Bullet Associationchefreiss@gmail.com(Cast Bullet Association)info@morganids.com (Richard Morgan)360RETRO FITTING A NEW SPRUE PLATEhttp://castbulletassoc.org/blog/article/2017/1/39/retro-fitting-a-new-sprue-plateThis article was written by CBA member Jeff Brown, Christchurch, New Zealand and previously published on the website, Floyd Files - Complete Guide to Handloading. One size doesn’t fit all. I talk f....This article was written by CBA member Jeff Brown, Christchurch, New Zealand and previously published on the website, Floyd Files - Complete Guide to Handloading.
One size doesn’t fit all. I talk from experience being 6 feet tall and 165 lb. wringing wet. Trust me; I know about these things. So when it comes to sprue plates on bullet moulds the same principle can apply. Let me explain further if I may.

For the sake of mass production manufacturers like to have as many standardised parts as possible. It makes sense. Keeps inventory in check and bean counters quiet(ish). Bullet mould sprue plates are a good example where one plate carrying the same size pouring holes and countersunk areas are used on all moulds regardless of calibre. Where this gets a bit tricky though is when the diameter of the bullet being cast is close the to diameter of the aperture through which the lead is being poured.

Case in point: My first ever mould was an double cavity Lyman 225415, old version, that was purchased second hand and used with great success in the .22 Hornet I owned at the time and the .223 Rem that replaced the Hornet some years later. The factory sprue plate has pouring holes that measured 0.16 inch (4.12mm) in diameter which does not sound very big until we commence to crunching numbers. Let’s compare the pouring hole size to three different common size cavities; .225, .311, .459 inch.


Bullet dia GC shank dia Hole dia GC Shank area Hole area % of sprue hole
0.225 0.218 0.160 0.037 0.020 54%
0.311 0.284 0.160 0.063 0.020 32%
0.459 0.428 0.160 0.140 0.020 14%

Reading across the table we can see that the area of the pouring hole is a little more than 1/2 of the area of the base of a .225 bullet, approximately 1/3 of a .311 bullet but only 14% of a big .459 clunker. What caused me to consider this was inspecting the bases of freshly cast 225415 bullets and seeing just how large the scar left by the sprue plate was in relation to the bullet and I got to wondering about the impact of this blemish on weight variations.

As a test I decided to make a replacement sprue plate for the little mould and a friend in the aerospace sector supplied a couple of perfectly cut to size 5mm think pieces of 7 series aluminium alloy. Using the original Lyman plate as template the new model was marked out and drilled with 2mm (0.078 inch) holes and countersunk with 1/2 inch/90 degree bit. The material worked beautifully and machined very well as it is high quality and very hard by aluminium standards. The finished piece follows:
And the original for comparison:
The benefits are easy to see. To begin with the sprue plate is much thicker allowing for a deeper countersink cavity generating a significantly larger sprue puddle and greater reservoir of metal for the cooling, shrinking bullet. In addition the cut off scar on the base of the bullet is less than half the diameter of the original and only 1/4 of the area thus causing much less distortion and requires very little force to cut the sprue free. The following photo shows bullets cast using the original plate (top) compared to those cast using the new plate (bottom).
The gas check shank to pouring hole ratio of the new plate is 5/37 or approximately 13% so pretty much in line with the .459 example from the table above.

So, was it worth the effort? Absolutely. My weight variations per bullet dropped from +/- 0.5gr to +/- 0.1-0.2gr. In addition the new, smaller diameter sprues, even when cast in linotype, can be cut using just a gloved hand where previously a tap on the plate with a thick dowel was required. The experiment was sufficiently successful that the second piece of material was fashioned into an identical plate and fitted to the Lyman 225462 mould producing the same results. I encourage others to give this a try though a word of caution; be sure to use top grade material. After I succeeded with my plates I was asked by a fellow .22 cast bullet shooter to make an aluminium plate for him also. I arrived on my doorstep with a very ugly piece of material that was very soft and awful to work with. I was never able to make it fit the top of his mould perfectly as I had done with my ‘plane’ grade alloy and gave him my best effort accompanied by "That’s as good as it gets using scrap metal”.

Keep your powder dry.

Jeff

]]>Fri, 27 Jan 2017 07:44:41 GMThttp://castbulletassoc.org/blog/article/2017/1/39/retro-fitting-a-new-sprue-plateCast Bullets in Marlin Micro- Groove Barrelshttp://castbulletassoc.org/blog/article/2017/1/38/cast-bullets-in-marlin-micro--groove-barrelsThis article by By Mustafa Curtess of Austwell, TX, was published in the May/June #229 issue of The Fouling Shot. I have come to agree with Ed Harris that Micro-Groove barrels can shoot cast bullets....This article by By Mustafa Curtess of Austwell, TX, was published in the May/June #229 issue of The Fouling Shot.
I have come to agree with Ed Harris that Micro-Groove barrels can shoot cast bullets extremely well, but I only discovered this by accident.I have a M336 made for Sears, Roebuck. It had a 6-groove barrel marked “J.C. Higgins M45” that was completelyshot out, although the barrel looked decent at thegun show. Never mind that, the price was too cheap to walk away from, and otherwise it was in nice condition. It would shoot the first three to five CB rounds from a clean barrel into sub-two-inch groups with the biggest CB that would chamber, so I carried it in my pickup for years.
Gun Parts, Inc. advertised original barrels for Sears M45 for something like $25 and wording implied that they would be exact replacements.
When it arrived, there was no doubt it was factory new, but deeply stamped “Sears.” Even so, it had the same catalog number that was on the J. C. Higgins version. But my heart sank when I looked through it, –Micro-Groove! I was so disappointed I didn’t even bother to swap barrels for two to three years, expecting the usual removal and installation problems and having no tools for a levergun. Also, it was a “clearance” item that could not be returned.
Eventually I did take it to the farm shop, clamped the frame with a shop towel wrapped around it in the bench vise and attacked the barrel with a big pipe wrench. Surprise! It broke loose without even marking anything. The new barrel I clamped in the vise between two onepound wheel weight ingots and screwed the frame onto it, this time with a 24” Crescent wrench padded with the shop towel. The index marks lined up with very reasonable torque, and everything else aligned perfectly (the notch at the front, forward of the sight blade for the barrel band screw, sight notches, etc). That was all just too quick and easy. I remounted the scope, cleaned the oil and residue out of the bore, and chambered a 30-30 round for another M336 (a 4-groove “K” prefix) stepped out the door and dropped the hammer at a steel target about 75 yards away, mainly just to see if it would fire at all. It hit dead-on the point of aim! What were the chances, after a barrel change and a scope dismount and remount? The entire thing had been just too good to be true. I figured it couldn’t last, but it did.
To this day I haven’t slugged that barrel; I have only miked a bore-ride CB that fits the muzzle lands nicely (.301”).
The ammo was my standard for the 4-groove M336; SAECO 315 lubed in a .310” die over 12 grains of SR4759, and accuracy held up for about 1/2 of a box of 50.
The usual bore cleaning didn’t produce anything on the patches except the usual black carbon (or whatever) but it didn’t restore accuracy either, although it was still sub-3” at 100 yards (still good enough for a truck gun, at least).
Then on a whim, and to see what a new fired case would look like, I shot three factory rounds through it, which looked fine except for the typical primer flattening I like to avoid in my own loads. One solvent and one dry patch, and I was back to 1-1/4” to 1-3/4” 5-shot groups with the “4-groove” ammo.
Early on I had two Micro-Groove rifles I got rid of because they simply would not shoot CBs, regardless of diameter, alloy, load, lube, or anything else. But, that was before I read that shooting a couple of jacketed bullets would remove alloy deposits too little to be seen or felt, and could only be removed with mercury.
I never bothered to write a report on this, because just one instance doesn’t prove anything, and the entire thing may have been a fluke.
But it does occur to me that just maybe a truly alloy free barrel is a key to CB accuracy in a Micro-Groove barrel. (The leading has more places to hide?)
Soon after that experience, I discovered mica, and then PVC wads (which fit 30-30 case necks under 170-180 grain CBs wonderfully) and I’ve never needed to shoot another jacketed bullet through that barrel. The factory rounds did kick the finger lever down palpably, so I knew that whatever ammo wore the original barrel out also wore the bolt and locking lug a bit. A few experimental loads with powders in the IMR3031 class will kick the lever down as well, so I keep loads down below 1500 f.p.s., which meets all my requirements perfectly.
The forearm stock and magazine tube design of that ”Sears” M336 doesn’t lend itself to any “relieving,” so longer strings heat things up enough to cause scope zero to wander a bit, but when allowed to cool down a bit, itreturns, so it is still a 5-round lever gun, but no cleaning is required.
I’ve been tempted to buy a decent-looking Micro-Groove Marlin used, just to follow-up on the “clean barrel ” theory, but at today’s prices? (Not to mention that seven 30-30s hanging on the wall is more than enough, with most requiring individualized CB ammo.)
]]>Sun, 29 Jan 2017 03:04:18 GMThttp://castbulletassoc.org/blog/article/2017/1/38/cast-bullets-in-marlin-micro--groove-barrelsRe-visiting .30-’06 “Guard” and “Gallery Practice” Loads with Bullseye Powderhttp://castbulletassoc.org/blog/article/2017/1/37/re-visiting-.30-’06-“guard”-and-“gallery-practice”-loads-with-bullseye-powderThis article was published in The Fouling Shot #192, March / April 2008 Tales from the Back Creek Diary Re-visiting .30-’06 "Guard” and "Gallery Practice” Loads with Bullseye Powder By Ed Harris, A....This article was published in The Fouling Shot #192, March / April 2008
Tales from the Back Creek Diary Re-visiting .30-’06 "Guard” and "Gallery Practice” Loads with Bullseye Powder By Ed Harris, Annandale, VA
Friends recently gave me several thousand pulled Cal. 30 Ball M2 (150-gr. FMJ) bullets and fired empty cases. These had been accumulated from DCM .30-’06 ammunition from which they had pulled the GI bullets and replaced them with Sierra 155-gr. Palmas over the original powder to use for competition. I was offered half the fired brass and pulled bullets to use my Dillon Auto-Swage 600 to rework the cases and work up a gallery
load for Junior training and rapid-fire practice at 100 yards in bolt action military rifles. My intent was to approximate the old M1906 Guard cartridge. An article in Rifle Magazine, March-April 1990, by Jeffrey W. Houck, p49 was a useful resource to assist with this.
Reduced range guard cartridges were developed for use in the M1903 Springfield on urban installations I settled on a charge of 8 grains of Alliant Bullseye as the best compromise with pulled Ball M2 150-grain jacketed bullets. Bullets were crimped using the Lee Factory Crimp die. Velocity from my 22” Mauser sporter with European style, long tapered throat is 1080 f.p.s. and from a Sako A2 silhouette rifle with 24” Douglas Premium barrel with tight-necked target chamber and SAAMI throat 1160 f.p.s. Report and recoil are very mild, like shooting a .32-20.
The average of five consecutive 5-shot groups fired at 50 yards from the Mauser sporter with 4X scope was 1.2 inches. The point of impact at 50 yards was 3.5” below that of normal Ball M2, which enabled using the heavy duplex reticle as a short-range post, using my normal zero for 180-gr. hunting ammunition. The Sako with 10X scope shot very consistent inch groups at 50 yards. So it was time to go to out to 100 yards and stop
"fooling around.”
The Mauser sporter struck much, much lower at 100 yards, and would require re-zeroing, but accuracy was fairly good, averaging 2.6” for ten consecutive 5-shot groups at 100 yards. This compares to firing full up Ball M2 ammunition. The Sako with 10X scope averaged 2” for ten consecutive 5-shot groups, also typical of M2 Ball ammunition in that rifle.
While I was at it, I decided to load and test cast bullets, fired without the GC, to compare their performance against the Ball M2 pulled bullets.
The cast bullets were not of match quality, but highly satisfactory as practice, training, small game and utility loads useable in any sound .30-
’06 rifle. Cast bullet groups were equal to or better than the M2 pulls, an inch at 50 yards and 2 inches or less at 100 yards. Bullets were cast in
gang moulds of wheel weight alloy, sight culled only, tumbled in Lee Liquid Alox or Rooster jacket and loaded as-cast without sizing. Velocities with the lighter cast bullets were around 1400 f.p.s. with 8 grains of Bullseye, so it may be advantageous to reduce the charge by a grain or so if
leading impairs accuracy over longer strings of fire.
The M1919 Gallery Practice cartridge used a 140-grain, plain-based, round-nose lead bullet shaped very much like the Ideal #308241. Prior to WWII it was reclassified as the Cartridge, Guard, M1. This lead bullet reduced load was originally intended for indoor and outdoor short-range practice. It was alternately used as a Guard cartridge around defense plants and military installations in noncombat areas which didn’t require the FMJ bullet of the M1906 Guard cartridge for compliance with the 1905 Hague Convention. Gallery Practice cartridges were loaded with a charge of Sporting Rifle No. 80 powder to attain about 1100 f.p.s. Guard units commonly reloaded indoor practice ammunition. Ideal Reloading
manuals prior to WWII and Phil Sharpe’s Complete Guide to Handloading (1937) featured data for assembling gallery center-fire rifle loads.
Cast loads which approximate the M1919 Gallery Practice cartridge are shown in the table. These light loads do not cycle the action in semi-automatic rifles, but can be fed from clips in the Garand if the action is worked manually. These charges can be used in the 7.62x54R Russian cartridge with similar results. To produce similar loads for the 7.62 NATO, 8mm Mauser, 7.65 Argentine, 7.7 Japanese or .303 British, maximum charges should be reduced by one full grain.
When using reduced charges of dense, fast-burning pistol powder it is absolutely necessary to visually inspect 100% every case for correct powder fill using a penlight to positively prevent missing or double charges or spilled powder. Another solution is to use a bulky powder which would obviously overflow the case if inadvertently double-charged. The late Col. Townsend Whelen’s favorite small game load for the Springfield used a charge of 18 grs. of SR-4759 powder, which bulks up nicely in the case.
I wrote an article in the Handloader’s Digest, 10th Edition in which I reported results using a charge of 13 grains of Red Dot in a variety of military rifles. "The Load” with Red Dot gives results almost identical to the Whelen small game load, about 1600 f.p.s. These approximate the energy of the .32-40 Winchester and are more accurate at longer ranges, but are louder than the M1906 Guard and M1919 Gallery Loads.
If low noise and minimum danger space are the goal, carefully load 8 grs. of Bullseye in the .30-’06 or 7.62x54R Russian, or 7 grains of Bullseye in the 7.62 NAT0, 8mm Mauser, 7.65 Argentine, 7.7 Japanese or .303 British with any jacketed bullet or cast bullet of the same weight or lighter than the military service one appropriate for the caliber. Do not reduce charges further with jacketed bullets because much below 1000 f.p.s.,
you may "stick” a bullet in the bore.
You may substitute lubricated lead cast bullets of a weight similar to or less than the service bullet with good results and reduce the charge in typical military rifles to as little as 4 grains of Bullseye, Clays, 700-X, Red Dot, Unique, W231 or TiteGroup. Lead bullets will exit the barrel reliably down to about 600 f.p.s. and accuracy is reasonable to about 50 yards. Do not reduce charges any further as ignition is erratic. I don't recommend extreme reduced loads with other powders.

]]>Fri, 20 Jan 2017 11:16:02 GMThttp://castbulletassoc.org/blog/article/2017/1/37/re-visiting-.30-’06-“guard”-and-“gallery-practice”-loads-with-bullseye-powderMore on Full-Up Wadcutter Loadshttp://castbulletassoc.org/blog/article/2017/1/36/more-on-full-up-wadcutter-loads This article written by Nick Croyle appeared in the March / April 2012 #216 issue of the Fouling Shot. In a trade with Ed Harris, I wound up with an unusual mold by Erik Ohlen (www.hollowpo....
This article written by Nick Croyle appeared in the March / April 2012 #216 issue of the Fouling Shot.



In a trade with Ed Harris, I wound up with an unusual mold by Erik Ohlen (www.hollowpointmold.com). It’s an extractor bar hollow base conversion of an RCBS double-cavity, 142 gr. DEWC for the .38 Special. With Erik’s extractor bar conversion, using it requires only a second or so more time than a normal double-cavity mold. That’s because after cutting the sprue, it’s more convenient to rotate the mold 180 degrees and then release the bullets, so they fall downward from the hollow base inserts.

Although it may well make a fine plinking bullet when cast really soft, that wasn’t what I had in mind. I commonlyrun a BHN 10 from the RCBS bottom-pour and I have dead soft lead in one 10-pound Lee bottom pour with linotype in another Lee. I wanted to avoid fooling with a fourth alloy. What I wanted to determine was whether I could drive the bullet at 850 – 950 fps with decent accuracy from my .357s and my .38 Special S&W Model 342 Airlight.

In the .357 Magnum revolvers (S&W 3” Model 60, 5” Model 627-5 and 6” Model 686+) the bullet seems to be a bit picky about powder charges and its point of impact is much lower than my other usual loads. That’s not too unexpected considering its 121 grain weight. However, it is a gem in the S&W 342.
To determine a load, I looked at .38 Special +P loads in the Hodgdon on-line loading data and discovered a maximum load of 4.6 grains of Titegroup with the Hornady 140 grain XTP-JHP. I loaded the little RCBS/Ohlen with 5 each of 4.0 grains, 4.25 grains and 4.5 grains in once-fired Remington +P cases and went to the range.

The 4.5 grains of Titegroup delivered 956 fps from the nominal 2” barrel, did not lead and shot as well as anything else I have tried in it, including NEI #152 RNFPPB at 800 fps. It had significantly less recoil than the NEI load and more muzzle energy. Cases ejected easily.

I loaded 25 more and the following week returned, along with Remington factory 125 Golden Saber and 110 JHP loads to check points of impact. For all practical purposes, they were identical at 15 yards and close enough at 25 yards to stay in the nasty zone of an E-Silhouette target.

Since the owner of the range had some wet newsprint in his boxes, I did some testing. From 7 yards I fired a round and it penetrated 7 inches. His experiences on African game have led him to conclude that penetration in wet newsprint is just about half what occurs in flesh. In addition to other examples, this experience is based upon 17 African Cape Buffalo and 20 Australian Asiatic buffalo. I’ll take his word for it.

This experience has also shed some light on the question of “How hard is hard?” Well, at what has to be right at the SAAMI limit of 20,000 p.s.i. for .38 Special +P ammunition, the skirts on the little bullet don’t blow and the recovered slug in the accompanying photograph still goes 121 grains. So at only 950 fps, BHN 10 is hard.



]]>Sun, 15 Jan 2017 01:44:01 GMThttp://castbulletassoc.org/blog/article/2017/1/36/more-on-full-up-wadcutter-loadsMembership Newshttp://castbulletassoc.org/blog/article/2017/1/33/membership-newsWe continue to grow with a just over 1 per day average of new CBA members. For those of you not aware of it, we have a listing on eBay in the reloading "bullet molds" category. It ran for about two we....Fri, 06 Jan 2017 06:36:20 GMThttp://castbulletassoc.org/blog/article/2017/1/33/membership-news