- This topic is empty.
-
Topic
-
michaelburns
Would anyone be interested in any of these profiles? I see a .455 in my future (and tbh I’d buy a 4-cav “just in case” and then go looking for a revo to use it for. Cart before horse and all that
) and can’t be doing with 1-cav RCBS moulds. RCBS do basically a Mk.2 and a Mk.4 at .455.For infos, the Mk.3 is the famous “Manstopper”, and the Mk.4 is the Naval Bullet.
I would imagine that either would be popular at 453 for .45 ACP revolvers / tight .45LC (I had one a while back that was .450 on the groove!) and .456 (or even .457?) to please even the loosest .455 Webley or .45LC.
Edit to add: my preference would be for a Mk.2 profile, hollow base, probably 455 or 456.
michaelburns
-
Replies
-
adamsutherland
erikdorothy
I’d possibly be interested in the 220grain MKIV. If you can figure out how to do the MKIII Manstopper, HELL YES! .453-.454 would be ideal for me – both my MkVI’s are .452 in the throats.
Swede, it looks like stoats’ blueprints are pretty straightforward, but I have a couple options in 265 RNHBs if you need samples of those. PM me if needed.
A couple thoughts/suggestions: The skinny lube grooves can be a BEAR to get good fillout on. While it flies in the face of tradition (and what do we shoot Webleys for, if not tradition?), you might consider making this slug with one large lube groove and a crimp groove in the appropriate location. Offhand, I would probably get rid of the first band up from the base, increase the thickness of the second band, and taper the front of it into a proper crimp groove. Same amount of lead, just easier to cast. The lack of the skinny band might also help the base expand. . .just guessin’
Beerhunter
jasonhicks
SwedeNelson
The Mk.2 and Mk.4 are the sort of items you’re likely always to be able to shift as a stock item, particularly cos the RCBS 1-cav is so darn expensive.
I’d have to agree with this. The RCBS was the first mold I ever purchased, right after my dad got us into casting with his equally odd hexagonal Whitworth rifle mold. I had no knowledge of the greater “casting community” at the time, so as far as I knew the RCBS mold from Midway was the only semi-authentic option. I cranked out about 700 of the little buggers in one setting, but it made for a VERY long day. The day I landed the MP group-buy leftover was a very happy one indeed.
The Webleys are a good example of what you might call a “gateway drug” that gets people hooked on casting. We buy them because they’re historic and cool, but quickly realize there’s little ammo or suitable components and start looking for options. Even then, many probably won’t shoot much because single cavities for anything but a buffalo rifle are maddeningly slow. The MKII bullet at the very least is one you’d want to keep a few of constantly on hand in 4-hole configuration ( though brass may be the better medium). Military collectors are a tight knit bunch – word will get around.
On that topic, you might give some thought to offering a small selection of more “generic” hollow-base profiles in the common diameters of the 19th Century. This could gain you serious “hero points” among the folks with worn throats, pitted bores, “Frankengun” mismatches of barrel and cylinder, or just weird original barrel/cylinder specs like the Webleys.
Thought I’d give this a bump for interest with the following thoughts:
There is plenty of room in the MK-VI revolver’s cylinder.
The available brass that I know of is all the shorter MKII case from either Hornady or Fiocchi.
The MKI bullet scoops out a larger hollow base cavity than seen on the later slugs, and relocates that weight to make the nose longer. This would put the full diameter closer to the throat. Would it not be reasonable to assume that this would be a more accurate bullet – especially in the stumpy little MKII case?
In the meantime I managed to get a .457″ Mk.2 mould from Mihec.
From this experience, I can tell you the following:
1. .457 is a very useable diameter (which is in fact correct for my S&W – and is easy to size down to .455 or .454).
2. Those 3 tiny square lube grooves are a complete pain. There is definitely a vote here for a “modern” form that will fill out better. The more rounded the better.
3. There’s a big problem with voids in front of the cavity pin. Not sure how to cure it – possibly a flatter pin?
4. Crimping on the “shoulder” of the bullet is not a problem. Not sure that a proper crimp groove would be an improvement.
5. The brass mould, which is an excellent piece of engineering, likes to be run super hot, with a super hot melt.Having got a Mk2 mould, my vote is now for a Mk.4, .457″ diameter
chrismann
edpindro
adamsutherland
erikdorothy
Beerhunter
jasonhicks
SwedeNelson
chrismann
edpindro
henrikmelby
ronreed- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.