• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades
  • Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Hard lead minie ball in Pedersoli Musketoon

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
A friend gave me a coffee can full of minies someone had given him. They were pure WWs, hard as hammered lightening and you couldn't pound them down the bore. That's what got me to thinking about a blend.

:thumb:
 
There are lots of alloys out there. "Wheel weight alloy" can vary from 91% lead to 96% with antimony making up the difference.

Then there is "bullet alloy" which runs from 2.5% tin to 6% tin with lead making up the rest. Next is "hard bullet alloy" of 92% lead, 6% antimony, and 2% tin, followed by Lyman #2 which is 90% lead, 5% each of tin and antimony. Continuing you get to Linotype at 84% lead, 12% antimony & 4% tin, and then "super hard alloy" with 70% lead, 30% antimony. Somewhere in that mix is "foundry alloy" with 64.5% lead, 23% antimony, and 12.5% tin.

A lot of hand casters "cut" their wheel weights with an equal amount of pure lead when casting for modern handguns, so I think they are getting closer to 3% antimony with the lead. This makes sense as antimony is pretty hard and would make for a brittle bullet, and antimony balls are used in small, ball-mills when doing DIY black powder.

TIN however I think would make for a better "harder" alloy as it should avoid brittleness. So if one's wheel weights were giving too brittle a bullet, the addition of some tin or even tin and silver (toss in a measured amount of solid core solder) would do the trick.

LD
 
Hard lead will not properly obiturate in the low pressures of a black powder rifle. If the bullet skirt does not mushroom into the barrel for a good fit, it will get flame cut and molten lead will be blown down the barrel ahead of the bullet and get ironed into the rifling by the bullet passing by. Stick with pure lead. If you shoot round ball, it will be forgiving of harder lead as it it patched and does not depend on the dis formation of the lead to seal the bore.
Check the LEE reloading manual Second edition for the proper lead hardness for the pressure to keep bores free from lead buildup.
It has worked for me for many-many years..
 
Tested the hard minies with 46 gr and 50 gr in a PH musketoon. No groups at all, not even on the frame.

What I think happened was the minies got harder over time. Was noticeably harder to size down to .578-ish from the dropped size of .579. Needed to size in steps in a .578 sizer and then a .577 sizer to get a .578-ish minie to fit the bore of the Parker Hale. The Pedersoli musketoon (initial group) needed the .579 mines to be expanded and then sized down to .582. Was easy to do and not noticeably different from working with soft lead.

I could lower my expectations and start working with "softer lead". Could try range scrap "as is", nothing added, for the next batch of test minies. I'd like to have a steel base plug made. Should be easier to cast than with aluminum. This is going to be a long term project.
 
Last edited:
Hard lead will not properly obiturate in the low pressures of a black powder rifle. If the bullet skirt does not mushroom into the barrel for a good fit, it will get flame cut and molten lead will be blown down the barrel ahead of the bullet and get ironed into the rifling by the bullet passing by. Stick with pure lead. If you shoot round ball, it will be forgiving of harder lead as it it patched and does not depend on the dis formation of the lead to seal the bore.
Check the LEE reloading manual Second edition for the proper lead hardness for the pressure to keep bores free from lead buildup.
It has worked for me for many-many years..

LEE's info on pressure and bullet hardness helped me work up a cast load for 9mm with zero leading and good accuracy. Before, thought cast in 9mm was a bad idea. Couldn't find info in the 2nd ed. for minies other than to use soft lead:). With all respect, folks told Orville and folks told Wilbur the thing wouldn't fly. But someday, imho, somebody is going to design a mold that works, imho.
 
LEE's info on pressure and bullet hardness helped me work up a cast load for 9mm with zero leading and good accuracy. Before, thought cast in 9mm was a bad idea. Couldn't find info in the 2nd ed. for minies other than to use soft lead:). With all respect, folks told Orville and folks told Wilbur the thing wouldn't fly. But someday, imho, somebody is going to design a mold that works, imho.
I have used LEE to developed lead loads for many "others". It works. Period. But that's for a different place on the forum...
 
this may give you the mini you want, fill your casting pot with pure lead. into that pot but a strip of 700 degree siversolder available from brownells. nothing else. doesnt have to be alot about 6 inches long. your bullets will cast even better and you put a little stiffness in them. this is not a new idea as the oldtimers would throw a silver dime into the pot of pure lead when they cast their bullets. another way to get what you want is to get a push through reducing die made for your specs. from lee. reduce your bullet 8 thousands. dry wrap your bullet with 9 pound wood fiber paper. tuck the little extra into the base. no lube, bet they shoot. no reason mini bullets cant shoot well. if the twist of the barrel is right.
 
Pewter is good also; more than 90% tin? Could look for beat up pewter stuff at flea market/yard sale places. I have a stash. Was free to cheap.

Not so sure about a silver dime making a pot of lead easier to cast. Silver is 20 something BHN? Maybe it'll make the lead slightly harder. Sure it wasn't for luck or something like that back in the day?
 
Pure silver has a melting point above 1700 degrees. Hot enough you will start getting lead vapors from your pot. Totally NOT a safe thing to do. That IS one way to get lead poisoning. Some silver alloys will melt at a lower temp, but makes an expensive bullet.
 
Interesting read about your work on the Whitworth. Someday I'd like to get one. I have a Pedersoli 2 band; got it used. Always thought it had a 1 in 48 twist. Now I don't want to know:). Cabelas says theirs is 1 in 48. DGW says 1 in 56. Please post when you test the knurled minies.
I had a chance to get out and shoot the knurled minie balls today. Before I get into the results, a little background information is in order.

About 9 or 10 years ago, I made up a bunch of pre-measured charges for the Enfield. I used 70 grains of FG and the minie balls were swaged to a diameter of .575. The sides were left smooth on some and on others I knurled. Long before that time, I started using the bore butter and could shoot all day long with that stuff.

Anyway, these 9 to 10 year old loads were made up with some bore butter and some with SPG. I filled the bases with the lubricant.

Back to the knurled bullets. I knurled them using the Corbin knurling tool. The depth of the knurling is kept shallow as the overall diameter is increased with knurling. So the bullets will run about .578 to .579.

Some of the pre-measured loads were made with the rubber thread protectors. The powder poured in the rubber tube with the lubricated bullet pressed in the opening with a piece of plastic shopping bag as a barrier between the powder and the bullet. Other loads were made up using old plastic 35mm canisters.

Why did it take me so long to get around to shooting these 9 to 10 year old loads? Personal stuff. I've had a lot of things happen to me in the last decade that prevented me from doing things I enjoy; such as shooting black powder and lots of it.

All that has changed and I can start enjoying life again.

That's the good news. The bad news is that all that lubricant; the bore butter and the SPG dried up and got hard. It didn't get real hard like a brick but just imagine 100 year old peanut butter.

Even though all the loads were kept in air tight sealed containers, I suspect the black powder might have attracted some moisture as I had a lot of misfires and inconsistent ignition.

So, I'm going to dump all the powder and will probable switch to FFFG for everything. I use that grade in the pistols and flintlocks. I've used it in muskets before with good results. Prior to today, I also had good results with FG but now want to standardize. I will use FFFG in everything. Besides the finer grade is easier to ignite. I will back off of the amount of powder due to slightly higher pressure.

I left the lubricant on the first ten rounds that I fired. It was the dried up bore butter. It turned brown and was like soft beeswax. These were the knurled bullets. Nevertheless, I smeared white lithium grease on the sides, hoping this would keep the fouling soft.

As expected, the rounds were a little tight. I could load them fairly easily but needed a palm saver to get them seated firmly. After the fifth round, I swabbed the barrel.

Below are the velocity measurements:

Average MV - 895.82 fps
High --------- 948.09 fps
Low ----------762.59 fps
E/S ---------- 185.49
S/D ---------- 55.70

Below is the first target. As you can see the results were disappointing. I believe this was a result of a combination of inconsistent ignition and the dried lubricant in the cavity. I expected this but wanted to try the ammunition out anyway. I was using a 6 o-clock hold on the target. No attempt at windage correction was made.

Enfield Target (1).jpg


For the 2nd string of shots, I took out my pocket knife and removed the old lubricant from the hallow base and replaced it with white lithium grease. I did this with 10 rounds.

The chronograph results were a little more encouraging and I still had several misfires. Note that the extreme spread and standard deviation was cut in half from the previous string.

Average MV - 872.58 fps
High --------- 911.51 fps
Low ---------- 819.36 fps
E/S ---------- 92.14
S/D ---------- 26.83

The group seemed to tighten up a little more with using nothing but the white lithium grease. I still had to swab the barrel after the 5th round.

Enfield Target (2).jpg


I'm not ready to give up on the knurled minie ball yet. I think it does a good job of holding the lubricant. Like I said earlier these knurled bullets are tight.

With that said, I'll be placing another order with Corbin for a set of dies that will probably swage the bullet to a .568 diameter. So with knurling adding another .004 the overall diameter with be .572. I may even go smaller than that with a .564 diameter swaged bullet and a knurled diameter of .568.

As for the white lithium grease. I will still do some more experimenting. I like the bore butter. If I make anymore pre-measured charges using bore butter I better shoot them in the same decade.

On the other hand, I may switch to a mixture of beeswax and olive oil.

As disappoint as the results were, I learned a few things today. That's what shooting and experimenting is all about. So as bad as the targets look, I can tell you from experience, they would have been worse with hard lead bullets.

Any thoughts or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
 
Enfield58 thanks for the post, interesting. Would it be possible to see photos of your minies specially before and after knurling?

I had to wipe the lubricant off for the photo. The knurling is kept very shallow so I could get it down the bore. The shallow knurling adds about .004" to the diameter of the smooth sided minie for a total diameter of .579. Like I said it was a tight fit and I had to use a palm saver to get it seated. At this stage I was only experimenting.

Minie Balls.jpg


The diagrams below are what I am considering next. If I swage a smooth sided bullet with a diameter of .564, I can add anywhere from .004 to .008 depending on the depth of the knurling. That would bring the diameter to a range of .568 to .572.

For the larger bullet I can bring the knurled diameter to a range of .572 to .576. In a perfect world without fouling this would be ideal. So I may go with the smaller diameter.

The other variable is the lubricant. I really like the Bore Butter out of the tube. Except that it can get messy. I like being able to grab the bullet without having to wipe my hands on a cloth to remove excess lubricant. With that said, I am also leaning towards a simple lubricant of beeswax and olive oil either 50/50 or 30/70 mix.

The goal in this project has several facets:

1) Accuracy
2) Keeping the velocity to a level that makes long range shooting possible. Using a target load of 45 grains of powder will get the bullet out of the barrel but if I want to get out to several hundreds of yards then it's going to take more powder. That means a 60-70 grain charge.
3) Being able to shoot a lot of rounds without a lot of bore swabbing.
4) Keeping the manufacturing process simple and with as few steps as possible.

The other possibility is swaging a bullet with a .550 diameter and make up a Pritchett round. That would defeat #4 above. I have made paper cartridges before but spent more time at the bench than I did shooting.

The cost of the Corbin die before shipping is about $250. So I don't want to be collecting die sets at that price. It would be nice to settle on the correct diameter bullet the first time around.

Anyone with any suggestions would be very welcome.

Knurled Minie Ball Version 564.jpg
Knurled Minie Ball Version 568.jpg
 
I like the results that Tobee obtained with the new plug and the soft lead.
Even though it wasn't specifically stated whether the new plug improved on the performance of the original plug with soft lead or not,
it looked like it may have been improved upon to some extent.
At least the new design consumes less soft lead and powder and there's nothing wrong with practicing at 25 yards.
That's seems to be a win just for trying.

My general thoughts are that:

- Muzzle loaders have their limitations.
- Incremental design change is better and more preferable than radical design change.
- Both standard and custom molds [and dies] are easier and less expensive to design, make, tweak or improvise with.

Even if making a custom mold [or die] for a solid projectile, different skirt designs and dimensions can be drilled or otherwise formed directly into the bullet
as a means to experiment with before having another swagging die made.
Someone recently posted how they used a drill bushing as a die to increase the diameter of their undersized molded bullet, using a ball bearing as a driver.
Working off the basis of improving already established, proven or promising molds/bullets might allow for less costly and more
experimentation which could lead to a greater possibility for success.
With limited resources that's probably a better idea than trying to reinvent the wheel.
After all, muzzle loaders and their bullets are designed with some inherent limitations built into them, along with the BHN [hardness variation] of the lead itself.
But I do applaud and admire every individual effort to advance the sport and to benefit others.
 
Last edited:
I had to wipe the lubricant off for the photo. The knurling is kept very shallow so I could get it down the bore. The shallow knurling adds about .004" to the diameter of the smooth sided minie for a total diameter of .579. Like I said it was a tight fit and I had to use a palm saver to get it seated. At this stage I was only experimenting.

View attachment 6938

The diagrams below are what I am considering next. If I swage a smooth sided bullet with a diameter of .564, I can add anywhere from .004 to .008 depending on the depth of the knurling. That would bring the diameter to a range of .568 to .572.

For the larger bullet I can bring the knurled diameter to a range of .572 to .576. In a perfect world without fouling this would be ideal. So I may go with the smaller diameter.

The other variable is the lubricant. I really like the Bore Butter out of the tube. Except that it can get messy. I like being able to grab the bullet without having to wipe my hands on a cloth to remove excess lubricant. With that said, I am also leaning towards a simple lubricant of beeswax and olive oil either 50/50 or 30/70 mix.

The goal in this project has several facets:

1) Accuracy
2) Keeping the velocity to a level that makes long range shooting possible. Using a target load of 45 grains of powder will get the bullet out of the barrel but if I want to get out to several hundreds of yards then it's going to take more powder. That means a 60-70 grain charge.
3) Being able to shoot a lot of rounds without a lot of bore swabbing.
4) Keeping the manufacturing process simple and with as few steps as possible.

The other possibility is swaging a bullet with a .550 diameter and make up a Pritchett round. That would defeat #4 above. I have made paper cartridges before but spent more time at the bench than I did shooting.

The cost of the Corbin die before shipping is about $250. So I don't want to be collecting die sets at that price. It would be nice to settle on the correct diameter bullet the first time around.

Anyone with any suggestions would be very welcome.

View attachment 6942 View attachment 6943

Was wondering if you could control bullet diameter with cannelures? If you put two cannelures close together will the bullet diameter bump up between the cannelures? If do-able, the bearing surface will be solid and maybe less prone to skidding on the grooves.
 
Back
Top