Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Cast Balls vs Bullets

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    172

    Cast Balls vs Bullets

    When using cast balls in a BP pistol which end do you place the casting seem?

    I usually put the little bump of lead into the chamber first.....is this the best thing to do?

    How much more accurate are cast bullets vs Balls?

    Cheers

    Jim

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Watton Norfolk
    Posts
    210

    Cast balls vs Bullets

    I recently started casting bullets from a Lee mould. Intitially I would say that the balls work better, I get more recoil with the bullet and it hits a lot higher at 20 yards. Grouping doesn't appear to be as good but it may be I need to experiment with load. I currently use T7 FFFG.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    grantham
    Posts
    1,504

    ball/bullet

    As above. I tried bullets but found them harder to cast, fiddly to load and they shot higher than the round ball. Also got a little ring of lead with every bullet loaded that started to clog the action up if not cleared away before firing. Tried different loads of powder ranging from 16grns upto about 30grns of Swiss pistol and TS2 but have now settled on 16grns of Swiss with round ball and a semolina filler. Different gun and shooter will probably like another combination though. Tim

  4. #4
    davederrick's Avatar
    davederrick is offline With our thoughts, we make the world
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    11,694
    The "little bump" is the remains of the casting sprue which gets trimmed off, but if you get swaged (I think thats the correct term) balls then there is no bump as the ball is formed differently. As far as putting them in the chamber, then the airflow over the bump may affect accuracy, but then BP isn't that accurate IMHO.

    Looking at it from an aerodynamics view, if the bump is behind the ball in flight (load bump first), then it acts like an airplane tail and stablises the flight. If the bump is at the front, then airflow on it will make the ball spin perpendicular to its line of flight as well as the spin imparted by the rifling - which is not good. This may make the ball tumble in flight. I knew i shouldn't have studied applied mechanics But either way, I think the differences are only slight.

    As far as Minie bullets go, they dont seem to be any more accurate than round ball, they just shoot 6" higher in my revolver, as the projectile is heavier & therefore has a bigger recoil.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Brentwood
    Posts
    197
    In my experience, if your mold is set correctly the bump should be virtually unnoticeable, however, occasionally you get those that show a significant bit of lead protruding.

    I put the ball on the chamber so that the protrusion sits sideways and gets shaved off during seating (in the Ruger). The balls ought to be a little oversize depending on the gun used. Some Colts I've used at least have taper chambers and does not shave a ring off the ball.

    Make sure the swivelling bit on the mold cutting the excess lead away on opening, is tight against the mold as this should minimize the bump.

    I've not been able to get good accuracy with mini bullets.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Ashford, Kent
    Posts
    793
    I alwyas put the casting "nub" to the front. At least this way, I can see if it's central, which I can't do if the nub goes into the chamber first.

    As for conicals over ball, you'll probably find that unless you have a modern B/P revolver, such as the Ruger OA, which was designed as a modern gun, the rifling twist on originals or good replicas of originals such as Uberti, are not fast enough to stabalise the conical bullet and so accuracy will suffer. Likewise, because they are heavier than ball, the point of impact will be higher.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Warfield, Berkshire U.K.
    Posts
    4,501
    I'm using conicals in a ROA & getting good results - better than when I tried them in my Remington New Model Army

    I have no problems loading them - as I load the cylinder off of the gun in a press I had made in the states.

    Takes no time to load & is as easy as pie & sets the balls or bullets at a constant depth.

    Only problem is I shoot loads more now !!

    Cheers

    Roy

    OH - and when I load ball - I load it sprue (if it can be called that as you can barely see it) forward
    Last edited by harricook; 21-10-2009 at 08:25 AM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Near Kidwelly
    Posts
    401
    I've tried both balls and conicals in a Remington 1858 and didn't have a great deal of success with the conicals to be honest.
    As far as the sprue cut off is concerned, I don't have any, as I roll my balls, first between two, faced blocks of steel, then on a piece of tuffened glass, finishing of with the base of a pellet tin on the glass. End result, a very round smooth and shiney ball. I know it's a lot of messing about, but I've got first place in my league two seasons running since I started doing this, so I think it's worth rolling your balls

    ATB

    Baz
    Toys : .308 Rem 700 SPS Tac, 7.5x55 Schmidt Rubin K31, 7.62x54R Mosin Nagant M44, .45/70 Browning Mod 1885 HWTR, 8x60R Portuguese Kropatscheck, .58cal PH 1861 Enfield Carbine, .22LR-CZ452 Silhouette Tac, .22LR Smith & Wesson-M&P 15-22-M4 Carbine

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •