Does this sound like leading and, if so...

[Pond James Pond]

... how wary should I be?

Basically, I managed to tear myself from domesticity to finish off a charge weight ladder on some .44cal 200gr LSWC.

This consisted of heavier charges up to the existing charge weight of my plated 200gr load of 7.2gr of N320.

None of the loads had unburnt powder. That was my first goal met.

The second load was to gain enough velocity to remain in the Major Power Factor category without excessive, detrimental leading.

So I had 6.6, 6.8, 7.0 and 7.2gr.

At 6.8, 7.0 and 7.2, even after a single cylinder of shots, I noticed small (biggest was about 1/8" long), dark, matt patches in the bore, down by the forcing cone. These could be brushed away with a single back-and-forth with a brass brush.

Sadly, I have no pictures.

So, does this sound like leading and in that case, is it likely to be a problem over the course of a match?

 

[Sevens]

Well... obviously the best way to determine what might happen is to do a session where you shoot 1.5x the number of rounds you would in a match and see what you see.

In any case, when you pull lead out of a barrel, it comes out in very shiny strips and pieces, almost looks like torn aluminum foil, it's pretty obvious what you have when you scrub it out of a barrel.

 

[T. O'Heir]

.44 what? Not many .44's at shooting game matches.
Leading is caused by trying to drive cast bullets too fast.
Assuming .44 Mag, there's no cast 200 data on Vihtavuori's site, but 7.2 grains of N320 is getting close to max for a jacketed 200. So your streak possibly is lead.
"...the Major Power Factor category..." That's an arbitrary IPSC/IDPA shooting game invented thing that really means nothing to anything but the shooting games.

 

[Pond James Pond]

In any case, when you pull lead out of a barrel, it comes out in very shiny strips and pieces, almost looks like torn aluminum foil, it's pretty obvious what you have when you scrub it out of a barrel.

I wasn't getting anything like that. In fact, no evidence of it once the brush had passed. Perhaps it was soot...

.44 what? Not many .44's at shooting game matches.

It's a .44 Mag but I mostly use Spls in it when doing matches.

Assuming .44 Mag, there's no cast 200 data on Vihtavuori's site, but 7.2 grains of N320 is getting close to max for a jacketed 200. So your streak possibly is lead.

It's about 0.1gr over one load listed on Handloads for a jacketed bullet. It is 0.3gr over the Max for a jacketed hollow-point. As I understand it (having read it somewhere, IIRR) for a given bullet weight, jacketed would have lower charge weights for the same velocity because the jacket means the FMJ bullet will take up that bit more room in the case, belong less dense than pure lead.

If correct, then I think it means that I can get away with a smidge more powder with lead bullets than jacketed at a given velocity. Whether that velocity causing leading or not is a separate, albeit related, issue

"...the Major Power Factor category..." That's an arbitrary IPSC/IDPA shooting game invented thing that really means nothing to anything but the shooting games.

Maybe so, but being part of those games, I can exploit it if I wish. .44 Spls in a Redhawk are pretty soft shooting even at Major velocities but each one garners me more points, so I want to maintain that advantage...

 

[5whiskey]

If I were you, I would use the lowest charge that was accurate and met the power factor you are seeking. If I could go to 6.8 or 7.0 I would. 44spl is a pretty low pressure round, so leading shouldn't really be an issue even near max... if you do it right. Are you using pure lead or hard cast? Did you slug your barrel and order the appropriate size projectile?

What you saw is probably not leading, but without a picture no one here can say for certain.

 

[Unclenick]

Could also be graphite from the powder stuck to a streak of bullet lube. No way to tell.

IME, even guns that don't continuously build up lead still get a bit. I've shot over 3,000 rounds through my 1911 without cleaning just to see what happens. Powder fouling cakes up everywhere until the gun finally can't close fully against it anymore, but the leading I got were a few streaks at the inside corners of the rifling in the throat, and, once established, they seem to wear away as fast as they accumulate, so equilibrium is reached and they don't grow and they're not causing a problem.

My Redhawk's bore is a good bit rougher than my 1911 barrels. It also had a slight constriction at the frame, which is fine with jacketed bullets, but prone to developing lead build-up beyond that point, and that required lapping out. Get a flashlight you can shine into that area in front of the throat. I use one of the flashlights with a bent Lucite rod on it to illuminate inside the bore.

Note that the .44 Magnum standard COL is 1.610" and the .44 Special is 1.615". Essentially the same length. That's because Elmer Keith developed the bullets and high pressures in heavy frame .44 Special revolvers originally. The longer .44 Magnum case is just to prevent the higher pressure commercial loads from chambering in a .44 Special chamber, where, with a light gun, they could produce catastrophic failure. But what the shared dimensions also mean is same bullet seated to the same COL will have about the same powder space in both cases, so you can use the same load data with both cases if your bullet has a crimp groove in the right place for the longer magnum case. A number of .44 bullet designs have two crimp grooves, one for the Special case and one for the Magnum case. Some manufacturers claim to thicken the magnum cases a little more near the head, but the extra pressure that would cause with a .44 Special load won't bother a revolver designed for magnum pressures.

Additionally, the Redhawk has a 1.75" long cylinder so that even if you use a .44 Special bullet with only a .44 Special crimp groove in the longer .44 Magnum case, it will still fit, though you might need a touch more powder to hit the same velocity.

What I am getting at with all this is that I prefer to use magnum brass even with Special level loads. The reason is the shorter case can allow some lead and fouling build-up from its mouth forward in the chamber. If that gets thick enough it can interfere with chambering magnum loads or make the ends of the cases fit so snug they can't release the bullet freely, raising pressure. So you have to be careful about that build-up in the chambers if you use the shorter cases. It's the same with .38 Specials fired in .357 Magnum revolvers. Anyway, I just take advantage of the longer cylinder to use the Magnum brass with all loads I put through mine.

 

[mehavey]

If a simple dry patch takes it out, it ain't 'leaded'.
Even if that dry patch shows a few shiny lead pieces -- but the barrel's left shiney
- it still ain't leaded.

 

[pete2]

What mehavey said. When you lead the bore you'll know it. It don't wipe out in a couple passes of a patch or brush.

 

[Pond James Pond]

Note that the .44 Magnum standard COL is 1.610" and the .44 Special is 1.615".

Well, I note that I have a different COL for Spl than Mag. Quite different. Can't remember if I referred to VV or Lyman's but the values are 40.7mm Mag and 36.8mm Spl.

I could seat the same bullet but I'm not sure I'd have any sidewall left to crimp into. Anyway it would be essentially the Spl load but with more neck tension due to a more seated bullet.

All good info, though.

If a simple dry patch takes it out, it ain't 'leaded'.

It don't wipe out in a couple passes of a patch or brush.

I ran a brush through once and it pretty much cleaned it out. No flakes visible, not even powdery residue. So perhaps I'm OK to run the higher loads to keep within the major PF.

 

[ShootistPRS]

Pond,
lead bullets use less powder than jacketed bullets as a rule of thumb, not more. Lead bullets are limited by their velocity and ability to hold the rifling engraving - not by pressure.

I'm not going to tell you it is unsafe to load over max charges but in my experience I can find the best accuracy below the maximum chage.

 

[Unclenick]

Keep in mind that Elmer Keith developed the .44 Magnum shooting bullets he cast and 16:1 lead:tin, and got them to full pressure with 2400. His blunt shaped wadcutters seemed to hold up well to this. The 44 twist rate is slow enough that it didn't cause him a problem with stripping. That said, full loads of 2400 with lead may be smaller than full loads with jacketed bullets. The ability of pressure to distort a lead bullet can cause them to raise pressures some. The mechanism isn't entirely clear, but I suspect the lead may upset out into the forcing cone of a revolver and raise pressure until it swages into the bore. I know Skeeter Skelton and other old timers thought load pressures got higher with lead than with jacketed bullets past a certain point. Below that, the reverse seems to be true.


Detecting leading:

After thorough cleaning with patches, look down the bore and see that it's nice and smooth and shiny looking. Open the cylinder. A piece of white paper held in its place will let you see this. Then take a clean bore brush and run it in and out once and look again. If you now see dull or rough patches in part of the shiny bore, you have lead.

Lead burnishes to a smooth finish easily, so the bore may look clean, though dry patches will usually pick up a little gray from it. But the brush scuffs the surface of the lead and not the steel, so it's a good agent for making the lead visible.

 

[5whiskey]

Pond,
lead bullets use less powder than jacketed bullets as a rule of thumb, not more. Lead bullets are limited by their velocity and ability to hold the rifling engraving - not by pressure.

Pressure is actually a much larger contributor to leading UP TO a certain velocity. 44spl has both a pressure and velocity very friendly for max charges with lead bullets (even using jacketed data, depending on bullet dimensions), or more specifically lead alloy cast bullets. Same with 38spl, 45 auto, 9mm (with caveats) and many others.

The magnums, .40, 10mm, 357 SIG, and others do not. Because of pressure, velocity, or more commonly... Both.

 

[Pond James Pond]

OK. Thanks for the clarification on lead and charge weights. I guess it makes sense.

I have 4 loads that seem to work: 6.6, 6.8, 7.0 and 7.2. I'd rather go for 7.2 to be sure of sitting within the major power factor velocity range. I've got a match on Saturday morning and I will go there and check afterward.

It is a Level 1 so only 4 stages and perhaps about 60 shots total, so not a major abuse if leading exists. If it does, I will re-assess.

 

[Chainsaw.]

If you can facilitate it you should powder coat your lead bullets. It can be done quite quickly and will almost entirely eliminate leading.

 

[Pond James Pond]

So I loaded 65 rounds of these LSWCs over 7.0gr (give or take as the Lyman Gen 6 doesn't seem to like charge weights below 10-15gr!!

I did my match (not very well: too early!) and this afternoon I ran a dry cotton wad through the barrel over my jag. Only soot came out on the patch, nothing flaked out over the white paper on the desk. There was still one of those dark areas in the bore by the forcing cone and again after 2-3 passes of the brush; gone.

I shot about 50-55 shots in total being only a Level 1 match.

So it seems that it is not leading and the loads are good. I just need to confirm the velocity to see if I'm still in major. If yes, the I have a winner.

Now, if I can translate that to mag cases.... (COL for the Spls puts the lip of the SWC just below the mouth of a mag case... )

 

[noylj]

Pictures are always best.
How did the clean bore look? Any shiny gray areas?
Maybe you need to polish the forcing cone?
Have you slugged the barrel to be sure there is no tight spot where the barrel enters the frame?
Really doesn't sound like any problem at all, but just in case: for revolvers, you usually need a bullet that is a snug slip-fit in the cylinder's throats and is at least 0.001" over the actual barrel groove diameter.

 

[Pond James Pond]

How did the clean bore look? Any shiny gray areas?
Maybe you need to polish the forcing cone?
Have you slugged the barrel to be sure there is no tight spot where the barrel enters the frame?
Really doesn't sound like any problem at all, but just in case: for revolvers, you usually need a bullet that is a snug slip-fit in the cylinder's throats and is at least 0.001" over the actual barrel groove diameter.

The bore looks uniform once cleaned. It has never been the mirror finish of my CZ or Astra barrels, though. Even when I bought it new. It is shiny, but not to a mirror like finish.

I've never polished anything and I probably won't: no gunsmith, me!!

I did slug the barrel way back when I'd bought these lead bullets on a whim due to the good price. I'd have to did up the thread about that on here, but I remember that the bore had been borderline suitable for these bullets so I'd be walking a fine like. It was .429 exactly.

I don't recall any tight spots in the bore. Once in the muzzle, the slug went smoothly down until the popped out of the forcing cone.