Dipping makes better bullets that a bottom pour pot but why?

Boolit Master Join DateMar 2011Posts943

In my experience...

Big bullets, 500g and above, to be "competition quality" with extremely small weight variations need to be ladle poured. Smaller bullets, plinking bullets, handgun bullets....no advantage to ladle pouring.

Dozens upon dozens of folks have proved this "theory" time and time again by ladling a large number of +500g bullets and bottom pouring the same, then weighing and sorting all. The ladle pour bullets ALWAYS have less weight varience. I've not seen, read or experienced with my own testing anything to challenge this result.

I cast sinkers both ways. The bottom pour sinkers seem to drowned the worm a little faster then the ladle poured. Either way, the fish dont seem to care.

If you're happy when you shoot 'em, clap your hands;
If you're happy when you shoot 'em, clap your hands;
If your happy when you shoot 'em,
Top or bottom poured will do 'em,
If you're happy when you shoot 'em, clap your hands.

Last edited by PbHurler; 04-04-2013 at 07:29 AM.

lead alloy is the same
the temperature is the same
the mold is the same and at the same operating temperature
the only thing that is different is the hole in the ladle and the bottom pour pot

Lyman dipper hole size is .185 dia.
Magma hole size is .086 dia. from their web site instructions on cleaning
Lyman mag 20 mine is .115 dia. but i have drilled this one oversize

my speculation at this time is that the bottom pour pot manufacturers do not want a large hole because it may splash with the faster moving more volume flowing alloy from a larger size hole so they use a smaller hole.

and i think that the hole size is why the ladle with the larger hole size work better because they fill the mold faster with more pressure on the metal which would force the alloy against the sides of the mold, it would also mean that less air would be introduced into the mold when the alloy is being poured because of the larger faster fill

i plan to enlarge the hole on my mag 20 to the .185 dia size but i will have to make up a new valve rod as mine will not go any lower unless i move the op handle slot upwards

any comments are welcome and please add the hole sizes of your equipment

Please proof your claim with actual evidense please!

Actual shot strings with actual pics and actual measurements that state that boolit form and veight is the same.

Until then your ramblings are pure manure for the field (at least to me!).

So are you up to the task?
Will you back your claim with actual facts?
Best if you let another shooter do the proofing.
He wont know wich boolits he shoots in what cases he will reload.

Where there is a will, there is a won't

In my experience...

Big bullets, 500g and above, to be "competition quality" with extremely small weight variations need to be ladle poured. Smaller bullets, plinking bullets, handgun bullets....no advantage to ladle pouring.

Dozens upon dozens of folks have proved this "theory" time and time again by ladling a large number of +500g bullets and bottom pouring the same, then weighing and sorting all. The ladle pour bullets ALWAYS have less weight varience. I've not seen, read or experienced with my own testing anything to challenge this result.

May be so that the boolits has a smaller ES weight wise but i bet you $ for cents that they'll shoot the same if they measure the same.

Until the claim is proofed by the thread starter i'll declare a high BS rate on this

Where there is a will, there is a won't

Bottom pour: Lymans #3 manual states "when contaminents like dirt, ash, dross build up between wall of pot and melt, they will find their way to the bottom of pot and then out the spout into mould. This dirt will cause voids in bullets". I believe these contaminants can be caused by DIRTY LEAD and by too much stirring and fluxing. One old time caster here says he does not flux at all when casting...I may try not fluxing next time i use the bottom pour. I will drain and wash out pot before doing so.

Linotype lead: I would like to know the process of filling those old linotype machines...do they flux and stir lead before filling letter moulds free of voids? CLEAN Linotype lead may work better in bottom pour if left unfluxed and stirred.

Ladle: So far i like the ladle method best, but i will also get voids if any dross gets into ladle and mould. I make sure to dip my ladle deep and away from dross.

Montana bullet works cast custom bullets for customers using ladle method only. As written by April 2013 issue of Handloader magazine. Also Mike Venturino likes using Linotype lead when casting for his military surplus rifles.

From Wikipedia:

Linotype Casting section

The casting material is an alloy of lead (85%), antimony (11%), and tin (4%),[9] and produces a one-piece casting slug capable of 300,000 impressions before the casting begins to develop deformities and imperfections, and the type must be cast again.

The continuous heating of the molten alloy causes the tin and antimony in the mixture to rise to the top and oxidize along with other impurities into a substance called "dross" which has to be skimmed off. Excessive dross formation leads to the alloy softening as the proportion of lead increases. The mixture must then be assayed and tin and antimony added back (in the form of a specially proportioned alloy) to restore the original strength and properties of the alloy. In the later years of Linotype casting, it also became more and more evident that employee exposure to the elements of the alloy caused health risks. Lead easily evaporates form the molten mixture and enters the respiratory tract, and both lead and antimony have a tendency to be absorbed through the skin. Many operators and proof readers handled the slugs bare-handed.

Lloyd you know and I know that "Casting good bullets is all about technique". Some people will never be convinced of this.

I started with a bottom pour. I cast my first 100K before I ever tried a ladle. I did not start ladle pouring until I got into BPCR. I read and was told that ladle was the best way for BPCR so I have really worked at producing better bullets with ladle pouring but the best I can do is equal.

It is easier to have poor technique with a bottom pour but good technique produce equal bullets out of either method.

And yes I do check my BPCR bullets on a scale that goes to 0.01 of a grain.

Last edited by M-Tecs; 04-04-2013 at 08:58 PM.

Boolit Master Join DateFeb 2008LocationChugiak Alaska on the outskirts of AnchoragePosts386

I have tried several times to use a ladle as many folks say it is so much better. So far my failure rate using a ladle is upwards of 95%. It's probably me doing something wrong but if I had to use a ladle I would probably give up casting as that rate of failure really ticks me off. I get between 90 and 95% success rate using bottom pour depending on the mold. You would have a hard time convincing me 95% failure is better than 90+% success rate. And that doesn't count the production rate.

From Wikipedia:

Linotype Casting section

The casting material is an alloy of lead (85%), antimony (11%), and tin (4%),[9] and produces a one-piece casting slug capable of 300,000 impressions before the casting begins to develop deformities and imperfections, and the type must be cast again.

The continuous heating of the molten alloy causes the tin and antimony in the mixture to rise to the top and oxidize along with other impurities into a substance called "dross" which has to be skimmed off. Excessive dross formation leads to the alloy softening as the proportion of lead increases. The mixture must then be assayed and tin and antimony added back (in the form of a specially proportioned alloy) to restore the original strength and properties of the alloy. In the later years of Linotype casting, it also became more and more evident that employee exposure to the elements of the alloy caused health risks. Lead easily evaporates form the molten mixture and enters the respiratory tract, and both lead and antimony have a tendency to be absorbed through the skin. Many operators and proof readers handled the slugs bare-handed.

This quote from Wikipedia is garbage. The statement that lead easily evaporates is an old wives tale and not based upon science. The temperature at which evaporation starts is just over 3000*F. Check engineering and chemistry references, not Wikipedia for facts.

This quote from Wikipedia is garbage. The statement that lead easily evaporates is an old wives tale and not based upon science. The temperature at which evaporation starts is just over 3000*F. Check engineering and chemistry references, not Wikipedia for facts.So dross is not made up of tin? Wiki never stated that it evaporates. They said the dross is skimmed off top. What is dross (scientificaly)?

Last edited by detox; Yesterday at 04:37 AM.

I found the true meaning of dross:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dross

If you do not flux enough the ladle will carry more tin as it will separate as you cast.

If you do not flux enough the ladle will carry more tin as it will separate as you cast.I notice the shiney tin forms on outside of ladle. I use a small pea size piece of beeswax or parafin to put dross/tin back into the melt when using ladle.

"Lead easily evaporates form the molten mixture and enters the respiratory tract."
"Wiki never stated that it evaporates."

This sounds contrary to me.

Lafaun

Don't blame me, I voted for the American, again!

"Lead easily evaporates form the molten mixture and enters the respiratory tract."
"Wiki never stated that it evaporates."

This sounds contrary to me.

Lafaun

Exactly.

Many of the facts presented by Wikipedia are as accurate and factual as those found in the National Enquirer.

One advantage to bottom pour is you need to flux alot less and fluxing if overdone can add contaminants to your lead. Could be why some have problems with bottom pour casting, they just have a habbit of fluxing alot more then whats nessisary. Also id bet a dime to a dollar that most of the cheerleaders for ladle casting that claim they make better bullets and have even tested it are guys that have ladle casted for years because they were told it makes better bullets. Then they take a bottom pour pot and cast a couple days with it and compare bullets. Not a real fair comparison. Many dont understand that you have to adjust feed pressure and temperature when going from a light bullet to a 500 grain bullet. Temperature is probably even more critical with a bottom pour. Then factor in your casting those bullets about twice as fast and youll see where your technique is so critical. With a ladle its tough to speed up and with a bottom pour its touch to slow down and be consistant. I think it comes down more to what way you like to do it. Ive done it both ways and youll never convince me that theres spit differnce between bullet quality if you do it both ways RIGHT. Just another wifes tail like bullets need to bump up, or bullets sized nose first outshoot bullets sized base first, that one guy wrote about years ago and now everyone takes it as bible.

You may not post new threadsYou may not post repliesYou may not post attachmentsYou may not edit your postsForum Rules

Abbreviations used in Reloading
Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt"

View the original article here