Core squirt die - squirt holes position

OliveOil

OliveOil

Active member
Gentlemen,


First, let me take this opportunity to say a BIG thank-you to all the people who contributed to the various threads about bullet making among many years. BRC is a true gold mine.



From what I have gathered, holes are placed quite near the punch position once the core is squirted. The holes are therefore "far away" or "oposite" from the ejector / counter punch side.


Is there a reason for that position of the squirt holes ? better weight concistency ? lead swaged in a more homogeneous way ?



I understand that lead bleed coming into the press threading can be a problem. But is there a reason more on the lead swaging side itself ?

Thank you.
Oliver.
 
I'm no die maker . . . but, I do have an opinion.

OliveOil said:
Gentlemen,


First, let me take this opportunity to say a BIG thank-you to all the people who contributed to the various threads about bullet making among many years. BRC is a true gold mine.



From what I have gathered, holes are placed quite near the punch position once the core is squirted. The holes are therefore "far away" or "oposite" from the ejector / counter punch side.


Is there a reason for that position of the squirt holes ? better weight concistency ? lead swaged in a more homogeneous way ?



I understand that lead bleed coming into the press threading can be a problem. But is there a reason more on the lead swaging side itself ?

Thank you.
Oliver.
Click to expand...

Oliver, per the title, based upon a few years and many tens of thousands of formed cores, I'll offer my opinion regarding squirt/core-form die hole size and position.

First, I want a LARGE diameter, single bleed port/hole! Invariably, this format has produced the most consistent core weights and dimensions (A, "nit-picking", side note: bullets are made by VOLUME, not weight).

Secondly, I strongly prefer that the bleed-port be nearer the center of the finished core: if that is not possible, I favor the opposite of your description. That is, nearer to the internal [reciprocating] ejection/knock-out punch, as opposed to the travel limit of the external [forming] punch. My reasoning: in order to exit, the lead must 'flow' and fill the die-cavity completely.

Perhaps this reasoning is flawed . . . I always use shims/spacers to position the hole close to center, while positioning the port so that the squirts go where I want them .:eek:;)RG
 
Last edited:
RG,

Thank you for sharing.

Perhaps that reasoning is flawed ..... but my mind has flowed the very same.
Olive.
 
Cores

So, in the 110 grains cores,(for 308 bullets) what wil be considered a acceptable variance in weight? will a harder alloy allow more consistent weight or the opposite?

What is the rules for consistent weight?
 
Liseo said:
So, in the 110 grains cores,(for 308 bullets) what wil be considered a acceptable variance in weight? will a harder alloy allow more consistent weight or the opposite?

What is the rules for consistent weight?
Click to expand...

For uniform weight, the alloy must be a consistent/uniform blend. The volume, with precision dies should not be an issue. That said, I will never - as I have seen some do - adjust the squirt-die to maintain a uniform weight: uniform core-seating is also volume dependent - altering core volume changes the seating pressure.:eek:

Presuming uniform volume, you will never shoot the difference of +/- 0.3gr. That said, I prefer <+/- 0.05gr, which is doable with sound tooling. I often shoot bullets weighing >6gr difference - at 100yd, the difference, via a good barrel, is high vs. low Xes.

For some projects/experiments, I have used antimony up to 6%, and have observed more weight variation with the higher antimony alloys - this, I suspect, is due to less uniform distribution of the antimony when the alloy is blended, or, partial "separation" during cooling, prior to squirting the billets into wire. I prefer .75 to 1% antimony over other alloys.:D The next guy will have a different perspective.:pRG
 
Thanks Randy


So, therefore, if I separate the cores by weight, using an ADI scale, and seat the heavies cores in the lighter jackets, is a waste o f time?

My cores vary in weight from 108,00 grains to 108,44 grains.(extreme, most are in the middle)

I tried fast lowering the handle,slow lowering, two strokes, stay with the handle for some seconds at max pressure point( sorry, dont know the correct term).

Nothing seems to improve

**But in any case, with the bullets produced, I have made excellent groups
 
Liseo said:
Thanks Randy


So, therefore, if I separate the cores by weight, using an ADI scale, and seat the heavies cores in the lighter jackets, is a waste o f time?

My cores vary in weight from 108,00 grains to 108,44 grains.(extreme, most are in the middle)

I tried fast lowering the handle,slow lowering, two strokes, stay with the handle for some seconds at max pressure point( sorry, dont know the correct term).

Nothing seems to improve

**But in any case, with the bullets produced, I have made excellent groups
Click to expand...

Liseo, "there you have it"!;) I find that a single stroke, which stops ram travel short of top-dead-center (TDC) produces the most uniform weights. As opposed to sorting by weight, I would sort by length and diameter (volume), or, more boring, by displacement . . .:eek: The "double bump" seems like a good idea, as does dwell: both come with more variables, . . .

My experimenting has shown that a solid press, with short of TDC stroke, consistently produces the most uniform dimensions and weight. Especially via the OTDC type presses, uniform stroke speed seems to come more into play: a press set-up to produce, say, a 75.0gr core average, when I operate, may, for you, make an average a couple of tenths different than my average: our combined bell-curve would, from a BR competitors perspective, be HUGE - the outliers being >+/-0.3gr from our combined average weight! The bullets would still, "shoot".

The [short of] TDC presses greatly reduce the operator variation - the cores I squirt in the shop are typically within a 0.1gr range, but sometimes, +/- 0.1gr - even if I have the head accountant make a few, weight is very consistent.:p

Back to your remark regarding the excellent groups, despite the weight variation: the targets will show you the limits of your die-set. Your bell-curve appears to be pretty close to only +/- 0.2gr: if you could ever shoot that difference (<0.2%), you can likely walk on water.:eek: Deliberately make some bullets, say, 110, 114, & 118gr - yeah, it's a pain, but a useful lesson - and shoot them interchangeably, and separately, then "blind", or, mixed-up so that you do not know, "which end is up", or, better yet, have a pal feed them to you, so that he knows, and records the data . . . I predict that you'll be pleasantly surprised.;)

All that said, Charlie Hood make cores which vary , maybe, +/- 0.05gr - if you were here, in the USA, Charlie is "THE MAN"! :)RG
 
Last edited:
Oliveoil, sorry for hijacking your thread.

Randy and others...

Could an excess of lube cause the bullet to stick to the BT punch instead of being removed by the ejector pin?
 
liseo said:
oliveoil, sorry for hijacking your thread.

Randy and others...

Could an excess of lube cause the bullet to stick to the bt punch instead of being removed by the ejector pin?
Click to expand...
i had pin with punch i had i had pin with spring i hadmostly due to tight bt punch just push off wit6h finger as you point up as time goes by it kmay wear inat one time i had spring on a rod to push it off of pt up punch worked well
 
oliveoil said:
gentlemen,


first, let me take this opportunity to say a big thank-you to all the people who contributed to the various threads about bullet making among many years. Brc is a true gold mine.



From what i have gathered, holes are placed quite near the punch position once the core is squirted. The holes are therefore "far away" or "oposite" from the ejector / counter punch side.


Is there a reason for that position of the squirt holes ? Better weight concistency ? Lead swaged in a more homogeneous way ?



I understand that lead bleed coming into the press threading can be a problem. But is there a reason more on the lead swaging side itself ?

Thank you.
Oliver.
Click to expand...
place squrit holes just out of threads three small ones gives better wht double -pump one full stroke then half stroke
 
I'm not an expert bullet maker but have made a few and one thing that I learned early on is that a consistent squirted core starts with a consistent cut core. Some core cutters have a flimsy stop that flexes as the wire hits it. Regardless, I was able to correlate the two and address it, seeing substantial improvement.
That said, and as Randy has alluded to...weight consistency is not the determining factor in whether the bullets shoot well or not, ime.
 
About the consistent core cutted weight.

I tried to cut the cores longer than needed, form then heavier and do another pass in the core forming die to final weight, , so to achieve more consistent weight. A two steps core forming

I didn't notice any improvement in weight uniformity. Tried with two differents brands core forming dies


I must be doing something wrong
 
Liseo said:
About the consistent core cutted weight.

I tried to cut the cores longer than needed, form then heavier and do another pass in the core forming die to final weight, , so to achieve more consistent weight. A two steps core forming

I didn't notice any improvement in weight uniformity. Tried with two differents brands core forming dies


I must be doing something wrong
Click to expand...

What I saw was that squirting twice helped but didn't equalize them. The heavy cut core stayed the heavy squirted core.
 
In case you use a press with a threaded in punch/ejector frame holder, make sure its held firmly in place with epoxi or permanent thread lock. Bad things happen when they come loose!..
 
Liseo said:
About the consistent core cutted weight.

I tried to cut the cores longer than needed, form then heavier and do another pass in the core forming die to final weight, , so to achieve more consistent weight. A two steps core forming

I didn't notice any improvement in weight uniformity. Tried with two differents brands core forming dies


I must be doing something wrong
Click to expand...
i sit hrs. watching clarnce detsch make cores one full pump then half less than tenth difvery few bullets were off a tenth when i did mine they were same at 26 cores a minute
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top