You guys were right!

[Steve fuller]

I have a Lyman bottom pour pot and I have been reading on this site that better bullets are obtained from using a dipper.  I tried it today and the bullets were 200% better than bottom pour, no wrinkles, grooves filled out sharply and within 1/2-1  gr.  My question is why?  It seems to take as much time to fill the mold with either method.   Thanks in advance  Steve

[Lloyd Smale]

mostly because the bottom pour rate is constantly changing with the lead level in the pot the more lead the harder it flows. With a ladle its the same every time. Problem is i just dont have time for much ladle casting anymore the bottom pour is quite a bit faster.

[haroldclark]

I have worn out two Saeco bottom pour pots (10 pounders) and I'm now working on a Lyman bottom pour.  When I start a casting run, I expect to have 600 to 700 keeper bullets when I'm finished.

I'm going to have to try the ladle.  I used a ladle many years ago with a single cavity 38 caliber.  Once I got the bottom pour, I could shoot so many more bullets.

You ladle dunkers are making me curious, though.

Harold Clark

[Dusty Miller]

It isen't hard to change the flow rate on my RCBS bottom pour pot and once the mold is good'n hot the wrinkles go away.

[Steve fuller]

I tried the above experiment whitle I was casting using the bottom pour lyman, the mould was to temp. I cast about 50-60 bullets using the bottom pour then switched to the ladle just to see if there was a difference in the quality of the bullet and there definately was. I tried to keep the same cadence for sprue cutoff and opening the molds between the two methods and was amazed at the difference in quality. Just can't figure out why.

[Dusty Miller]

Steve, I'm really intrigued by this.  Can you give us more detail about the differences between the bullets?

[Steve fuller]

Dusty.... the bullets from the bottom pour were in appearance showed some very shallow surface wrinkles, sharp edges on grease grooves were somewhat undefined
and weights varied by as much as 3-4 grains. This was using a 425 grain bullet.  When I switched to the ladle the wrinkles dissappeared, the grease grooves were sharply defined & I had a weight dfference of 1/2 - 1 grain.  The melt and the mold were heated up while bottom pouring long before I had switched so I don't think temp was the reason.

I evidently don't have enough experience with casting bullets to figure out why this happened but I think I will be ladling in the future even tho it is somewhat slower you don't have nearly the number of "culls".

[Longcruise]

When you ladle pour there is a tendency for the lead to go in on an angle and sorta swirl the mold full whreas the bottom pour drops it straingt into the mold.  Some casters claim that the swirling causes the mold to fill out better.  I can say for a fact that my ladle fills a mold much faster than my lee bottom pour.

Another advantage to the ladle is when using wheel weights or partial wheel weights is that the wheel weights are not an "alloy" (even though we call it that all the time).  It's really a mixture that can separate in the pot.  When you use the ladle you are constantly stirring the mix and maintaining homogeneity (izzata word? :grin: )

[R.M.]

When you're bottom pouring, are you placing the sprue up tight to the nozzle? I'm guessing that you're not, but like I said, just guessing.

R.M.

[joeb33050]

I cast with a ladle for years, and was really excited when I got my first bottom pour pot. I looked forward to casting faster, having no inclusions/"stuff" in the bullets, perfect bullets, etc. I never could cast with it, and can't today. I know that many cast with bottom pour pots, but I also know that many of us can't, and I don't know why. It ain't like I didn't try. So I'm on the ladle for life.
joe b.

[LAH]

I have a Lyman bottom pour pot and I have been reading on this site that better bullets are obtained from using a dipper.  I tried it today and the bullets were 200% better than bottom pour, no wrinkles, grooves filled out sharply and within 1/2-1  gr.  My question is why?  It seems to take as much time to fill the mold with either method.   Thanks in advance  Steve

If you are getting wrinkles and grooves that aren't sharp when using a bottom pour pot, you're doing something wrong. I will not get involved in which is better, bottom pour or "dipper" as I've been down that road before and have used both methods, but I will say excellent bullets can and are cast from bottom pour pots.

I had an old Seaco pot that allowed the sprue cutter to be placed against the nozzle. I hobby cast with it for years. Very few rejects. The ladle does basiclly the same thing. Used one of those a bit also. Ladles can be had cheap so no reason for all not to try one.

[JPH45]

I won't go back to a ladle, to slow and too much work. Besides, ladleing constantly exposes new metal to the air, which accelerates the tin oxidizing out of the melt. I've used ladleing when I didn't have a pot, and find it as desirable as having teeth pulled (I don't have a tooth left in my skull, so it's an honest comparison.)

Try preheating your mold and instead of holding the sprue plate against the pour spout, hold it about 1/2 to 1 inch  below the spout. I have used this method for years with complete satisfaction and used both aluminum and iron/steel molds.

Don't be afraid to run the metal hot either. If you are getting frosted bullets that's a good thing. I'm convinced those gun rag pictures are cast with alloy which has no antimony in it, something like 20:1 maybe. I've never had good success with WW and tin making nice shiney bullets.

I've had 3 Lee bottom pours over the years, no complaints. I just wish they held more metal. The high price furnaces would keep me out of the casting game. I do hear they are nice though.

FWIW,

John

[LAH]

>>Quote:Don't be afraid to run the metal hot either. If you are getting frosted bullets that's a good thing. I'm convinced those gun rag pictures are cast with alloy which has no antimony in it, something like 20:1 maybe. I've never had good success with WW and tin making nice shiney bullets:Ouote<<  

I will agree with most what JPH45 said except for the shinny bullet part. Standard casting alloy (92-6-2) is very easy to use and will cast shinny bullets even as high 750 degrees. I do it everyday even though the antimony content is 6%.

When casting with wheelweights some of my moulds will cast shinny bullets but some won't fill out unless they are force fed or are cast frosty hot as you say.

JPH45 makes very good points about the ladle and his feelings aren't much different than mine. In defense of the ladle though I have a few fellow casters using bottom pour ladles that make you wonder if their way isn't better. HEE HEE

[Will52100]

I'm a rank beginner, but while I get good results using the bottom poor for regular bullets using wheel wieghts, I've found the only way I can get consistant bullets and balls with pure lead is to ladle them.  I only cast round balls and hollow base bullets with pure lead and I have to use the ladle or I get wrinkles and partial fills and ect.

[LAH]

I've used a mould or two in my lifetime that refused to fill out. I'm sure the mould had a problem but at that stage of my casting life I was feared to work on'em. These moulds would fill out fine when using a ladle or bottom pour pot and holding the spout directly against the spure cutter.

A point of interest. We cast the RCBS 30-180-FN. A friend who cast for us at times,  wanted some of these cast of pure lead with which to fire lap a new barrel. I agreed to cast them but warned him they may not fill out and look like much. To my surprise they came out fine, at least this once.

[w30wcf]

80+% of my bullet casting is with w.w. + 2% tin. I have used both the bottom pour pot and ladle and from my experience, both methods  work equally as well,  with the exception of the 500 gr. .45-70  457125 bullet. I can consistantly get very good bullets by ladle but not with the bottom pour pot.

w30wcf

[sharps4590]

I've been casting bullets and balls a while...uhhh...since about '77 or '78....1977 or 1978!!!!  For smaller diameter bullets and handgun bullets I use the bottom pour almost exclusively.  When casting large diameter bullets for my Sharps, Ballard or double rifles I ladle pour only.  Perhaps it's me but I simply can't get the accuracy out of a bottom pour than I can with a ladle for larger bullets.

Vic