Casting big bullets

Other than 54 caliber roundballs, I have really never cast big conical bullets.

I currently have a Lee Pro 4-20, but have considered buying a Rowell #1 bottom pour ladel and cast iron dutch oven to melt my 40:1 lead mixture.

Is there any advantage to using a bottom pour ladel?

No, we in the black powder cartridge community have accrued thousands of hours and tens of thousands of large bullet casting experience and for the most part have migrated to hand ladle pouring from melting pots for more consistent uniformity.
The Waage melter is probably the most used as it maintains temperature very well. I have had good results with my Lee 20 lb. pot.
My largest competition bullet is a 530 grain , nearly 1.5 inch long .45 cal Creedmoor bullet design from Paul Jones custom molds. I maintain a window of +/- .75 grains either side of the target weight for the alloy used. That's a maximum of 1.5 grains from top to bottom of the total bullet weight. This is closer than Sierra match king bullets in 30 cal. Some folks keep them within .5 grains . MD.

A hand ladle is the cure for oh so many casting problems!

I totally agree! MD

GoodCheer said:

A hand ladle is the cure for oh so many casting problems!

Click to expand...

Does a hand ladle or bottom pour ladle deliver the lead quicker to the mold than using a melting pot with a bottom spout?

If so, is this why bullets are more uniform and better over all quality?

Bottom pour spouts have to be kept CLEAN of any dross or they will drip, plus they have a limited pour rate which is no problem on small caliber round balls, but can be a problem on larger conicals. I have both bottom pour and a ladling pot ( bottom pour with spout plugged). I like the bottom pour for 50 caliber and below round ball, the ladling pot for larger. :hmm:

I have poured 58 caliber Mini Balls with no problem with the large Lee Bottom pour pot. I did learn to wait until the lead was at casting temp and not start early. I also found that it took several to get the mold up to temp. It took a while to get a cycle so that the mold stayed hot enough to cast good MB's but cooled in a reasonable amount of time.

Geo. T.

I used to use a Lyman bottom pour pot and loved it. Sadly, it rusted away in a 'dry' storage unit.
I cast balls up to .731, 588 grains and it worked just dandy. I now use a hand pour and results are OK with that also. Except for the cost of a good bottom pour pot I would go for that. If budget is a concern, get the big Lee melter with not bottom spout and a Lyman dipper.

ball-et said:

GoodCheer said:

A hand ladle is the cure for oh so many casting problems!

Click to expand...

Does a hand ladle or bottom pour ladle deliver the lead quicker to the mold than using a melting pot with a bottom spout?

If so, is this why bullets are more uniform and better over all quality?

Click to expand...

The ladle has the larger hole with better volume of flow, giving less time for wrinkles to form. And when the spout is held against the beveled hole in the sprue plate you get a form of forced filling of the mold cavity without molten lead squirting around like is often a problem with bottom pour pots. So, it's easier to use and usually gives better results.

I agree 100%. :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

I started out casting about 45 years ago with an iron pot and ladle. My 35 year old Lee bottom pour cured me of wanting to ever use a ladle again. Sure you need to keep the pot clean, but I cast first quality balls and minies with it, and wouldn't give it up for a ladle again.

Of course, it does take a little more finesse to maintain and work the bottom pour, so I understand why some knuckledraggers would experience difficulties :thumbsup:

There are several reasons why a ladle tends to make more uniform large castings with less effort than does a bottom pour.
1. ladle is drawn from center of melt in the pot which is usually free from all dross and oxides ie, cleaner lead or alloy in the casting.
2. The molten lead heat is easier to keep uniform drawing from the center of the melt.
3. The head pressure from the ladle remains constant regardless of pot fill depth.
4. The mold can be rolled from horizontal to vertical with the ladle inserted into the sprue funnel to express air from the cavity, resulting in a more even alloy transfer.
The sprue puddle is more consistent in size from a ladle as well achieving more even solidification. This directly effects mold heat evenness and lead draw from the puddle which in turn effects bullet overall size and weight.
I have used both methods and there is no question in my mind which technique is superior.
I also have one close friend that will not ladle cast for anything and continues to use is 10 pound Lee bottom pour he bought shortly after the earth cooled and he makes good bullets. MD

Now that you have explained the technique of using a bottom pour ladle, I can't wait to try.

Thanks everyone for your input.

ball-et

You miss understood me. I do not use a bottom pour ladle but a standard one as opposed to a bottom pour pot.
Although I have heard bottom pour ladles work well too. You do loose the ability to turn them up together with the mold from horizontal to vertical just as with a bottom pour pot. MD

I have never seen any data regarding a ladle poured bullet was better than a bottom pour pot. The type of alloy that is being poured is more important.

Me either, I just know what works for the most accurate cast bullets made for long range shooting at the present time by those who do it.
Creedmoor and long range bullets must be very precise and uniform to stay on target at 800,900 and 1000 yards.
I know of other shooters who annually shoot targets at a measured mile with the old buffalo guns. It is astonishing what they can do with these using globe sights.
Virtually all of them are hand cast with a ladle and many are paper patched.
Your information on alloy seems incomplete as well. Long range usually requires harder alloys that do not set back and deform the nose. We call this bullet slump. Long range bullet trend is leaning toward bullets as hard as 10and 11 to 1 lead tin ratio. 16 to 1 is and old standard for long range and Creedmoor use. Many shooting the Silhouette game like 20 and 30 to 1. Personally I shoot alloy with some antimony in it for the Midrange events I have competed in.
WE all make better bullets than can be bought from commercial casters with all the various alloys I have mentioned. I have personally seen and inspected many of them from fellow shooters I know and the others by pictures showing them on our BPCR forum. If we can't cast a 500 plus grain bullet within a grain or two of each other we have not learned our craft very well. MD

All commercial cast bullets I'm aware of use bottom or injection pouring systems and no one I am aware of shooting and placing high on a national level uses them.
We virtually all regard commercial bullets as substandard to what we can cast for our selves and most of these are cast with ladles not bottom pour pots. MD

redwing said:

I have never seen any data regarding a ladle poured bullet was better than a bottom pour pot. The type of alloy that is being poured is more important.

Click to expand...

Me either.
Until this discussion, I had never even heard the suggestion that bottom pour or ladle pour was superior/inferior to the other with regards to ball quality. Usually speed of casting and initial cost are the big factors in prefering one over the other.

I agree totally with MD. I also love my waage pot. My casting improved quite a bit when I switched from my bottom pour

Fleener

I think one may be better than the other but that is per the individual so ladle may be better for one person but not another and visa versa. You get strong arguments on both sides.