Round Balls that aren't so Round

[Christophero]

The other evening I was finally motivated to dig out the tub of mixed Hornaday swaged round balls of .315 and .350 inches in diameter. Got these off a friend over 20 years ago where a mouse or two had eaten the cardboard boxes and they settled together at the bottom of the bucket.

With the micrometer in hand I set it at the .350" setting and commenced to pick out the larger balls of the group. Funny, a couple I found were larger and wouldn't fit, while the rest slipped right in the space. Thinking there must have been some other sizes added in I set them aside.

Next I worked on the .315" balls and was amazed just out of round these little spheres could be. Some were a bit sloppy, while other were too tight, until I turned the ball a bit so they would slide right through. This wasn't just a couple but a large number of them were not perfectly round.

That got me to thinking about the few larger balls that wouldn't fit the .350" setting. Sure enough, when turned and fiddled with they also would fit the micrometer.

In my 50's I've shot RB's that a long departed friend cast years ago. Never thought to mic those.
Lately I've been loading .530 and .535" RBs in the 54. They came from the same guy the the small balls came from. I'll get around to measuring those soon, too. But it prompt me to ask if this is a common occurrence in swaged and cast round balls? I imagine ramming them down the barrel effects there concentricity of the soft lead, too.

 

[hawkeye2]

It has been many years since I have bothered to measure swaged balls but I did find Hornady to include more out of round than Speer.

 

[bang]

May be a product of laying in the bottom of a bucket with other stuff on top of it for years.

 

[hawkeye2]

Possible but it wasn't in my case as I was taking them directly from new boxes. I was actually somewhat disappointed by something that I felt should have been nearly perfect. I have cast round balls from a Lee mold that are more consistent.

 

[SDSmlf]

I have been repeatedly disappointed by swaged roundballs, sometimes by diameter variations, other times by weight differences. Others claim these differences do not matter as long as they can hammer the patched roundball down the bore accuracy will be outstanding.

As an example of what I have found, here are photographs of the weigh-in of two different balls from a single box of purchased swaged roundballs. Found nearly 10 grains of weigh variation, though less than .0005” in diameter variation. Have seen worse, but don’t have photographic evidence. Personally have found that when everything is perfect and using weighed balls will have groups in the one inch range at 100 yards. Mix in the known goofballs from the same box and in the 3-4” range or more. Have seen significant weight variations in both red and yellow boxes of purchased swaged roundballs.

If weight and diameter variations don’t negatively impact accuracy for you, guess you are good to go. Otherwise you may want to check diameter and weight. Up to you.

 

[Whitworth]

I always thought they looked beat up with all the tiny dimples on them, never miked any though.

 

[dave951]

Not surprising.

 

[Rod Man]

I know this is not the point of the post, but that is one heck of a scale you got there!!! Regarding the post though, I have noticed the same thing. My Dad bought some stuff from an estate sale and there were some bagged .31's and .350's and some were really out of whack...into the melting pot they went. I have not thought about checking the swaged boxed variety. Haven't bought any in a while.

RM

 

[Whughett]

If roundness is all that is important it’s a wonder a fired projectile can be as accurate as they are.

I offer for amusement only the following thoughts.

What happens when a round ball is forced into a revolver chamber, shaving a ring as it goes in, or when it hits the forcing cone and engages the rifling. Even a soft lead patched round ball slid down the long bore of a rifle being pushed by a ram rod with a couple of taps for good measure then subjected to the gravitational forces of zero to hundreds of feet per second by the expanding gases of powder combustion.
Im sort of doubting the importance of its roundness.
And a few grains of weight of a projectile being pushed by a charge of black powder who’s combustion can be upwards of 45% smoke and soot depending on numerous factors, a powder charge thrown by hand and eye in a volume measure then poured into a small opening on a windy day. Then fired from a standing position at a target hundreds of feet away on the same windy day.

 

[LME]

I always thought they looked beat up with all the tiny dimples on them, never miked any though.

The dents use to worry me? I wondered if they were a bad choice for an accurate shot? After many years of shooting I resigned myself to the fact that it is as good as it is going to get. I still am amazed at the accuracy I get out of these dimpled balls? I guess it is like a golf ball, "It helps the flight? I use to buy only the blister packs for accuracy but I found no difference I could measure in accuracy?

 

[Christophero]

Interesting replies, gentlemen, and I thank you for the input. I always had the idea, generated from good advertising from the bullet companies, concerning swaged round balls, are XXX times more accurate than the lowly cast RB because of the superior quality control standards in manufacturing. Swaging insures that no air pockets are hidden in the projectile and that the circumference is impeccably round. HA! SDSmlf's photos shoots that nonsense all to pieces.

I've shot swaged and cast RB's for many years and suppose these .315" pills will knock a squirrel out of a tree as well as any other can, as long as I can hold steady enough and see the sights clearly at the short ranges they will be used at. Now to test them out to be sure.

 

[Flintandsteel]

Guarantee that after that ball is staged into the rifling, and patch, it’s not going to be perfectly round anymore.

 

[smoothshooter]

The other evening I was finally motivated to dig out the tub of mixed Hornaday swaged round balls of .315 and .350 inches in diameter. Got these off a friend over 20 years ago where a mouse or two had eaten the cardboard boxes and they settled together at the bottom of the bucket.

With the micrometer in hand I set it at the .350" setting and commenced to pick out the larger balls of the group. Funny, a couple I found were larger and wouldn't fit, while the rest slipped right in the space. Thinking there must have been some other sizes added in I set them aside.

Next I worked on the .315" balls and was amazed just out of round these little spheres could be. Some were a bit sloppy, while other were too tight, until I turned the ball a bit so they would slide right through. This wasn't just a couple but a large number of them were not perfectly round.

That got me to thinking about the few larger balls that wouldn't fit the .350" setting. Sure enough, when turned and fiddled with they also would fit the micrometer.

In my 50's I've shot RB's that a long departed friend cast years ago. Never thought to mic those.
Lately I've been loading .530 and .535" RBs in the 54. They came from the same guy the the small balls came from. I'll get around to measuring those soon, too. But it prompt me to ask if this is a common occurrence in swaged and cast round balls? I imagine ramming them down the barrel effects there concentricity of the soft lead, too.

Weight and average diameter variations could make a difference, but out of roundness should not, unless it is an extreme case.
A perfectly round ball becomes very imperfectly out of round as soon as you start it down the barrel, and even more-so when the blast of the ignited powder smacks it in the rear to start the ball down the barrel.
The act of seating a ball in a percussion revolver chamber disfigures a ball more than any other gun.

 

[hanshi]

I've never bought any swaged ball since I cast all mine. I've measured and weighed a few over the years just to satisfy my curiosity but that's it. I don't worry over the precision (+ or -) because no better than I can now see and shoot it would make no difference whatsoever. I only visually check as I cast and that's about it.

 

[sheriff john]

Cast balls either have a sprue to cut off (old-timey bag mold ones) or a flat spot. "Swaged balls" sure aren't perfectly round, tho' some are more round than others. Agree with Hanshi ..at my age anything
I don't dry load is a blessing.

With revolvers ..once that lead ring's cut off, they ain't round anyway.

 

[Roundball2319]

I weigh my cast balls and conicals. I usually separate them into three groups based on plus and minus the supposed casting weight.. That way my groups stay consistent within the weight group.

 

[DuncNZ]

I used to weigh all my swaged balls and keep the heaviest (within 1 grain +-) for competition and the lightest 10% or so for plinking . I never measured the diameter of the balls and always assumed the weight differences are from voids in the lead .
Dutch Schultz always said , with careful casting techniques ,one could cast more accurate balls than the brought swaged ones . I have a lot of German H&N swaged balls , there is no weight variation in them .

 

[waksupi]

I always cast my own. I have found the Tanner mold cast the most consistently round balls.

 

[Rifleman1776]

Don't sweat it. Use as they are if only for practice. Or, just toss into casting pot make yer own.

 

[Whughett]

Between round balls and standard pistol bullets I probably go upwards of 5k a year in bullets. I hand cast and size (bullets) them. Even sizing was so tedious on a lube sizer I switched to Lees push thru dies. Weight each one ?? No thanks.
Not a competition shooter though so nobodies scoring me….!