Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, Isabel1130
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
It is the same bullet made by Accurate molds that I started using when I took up the challenge of getting the 32ACP accurate with lead but it is commercially available through T&B so you don't have to cast them yourself.
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
T&B is short for T&B Bullets (www.tbbullets.com). They make and sell a 62 gr lead SWC bullet for 32 ACP.
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
Here's a link to the 62gr. http://tbbullets.com/product/32acp-60gr-swc-2/
They have a 5% discount for black friday through today. (Sunday)
They have a 5% discount for black friday through today. (Sunday)
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
Wouldn't it be better if the 60gr bullet was softer? Like 12BHN? Or lower like 9BHN? Surfing casting info it seems softer bullets are generally preferred for our shooting at low velocities. It looks like we should have softer bullets for better acuracc6. Fc90 swages his rejects and gets good results which must be fairly soft?
Or maybe a swaged bullet? I know they are not available but what if they were? Might that help our accuracy quest?
Or maybe a swaged bullet? I know they are not available but what if they were? Might that help our accuracy quest?
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
It is going to be hard to talk a commercial entity into casting their bullets out of a softer alloy partly because it is more difficult to cast them plus they can get dinged up in shipping. I like a softer lube also and this is another thing that a commercial establishment is not going to do because it will be stuck everywhere after shipping. I have tested the BHN on swaged commercial 45 bullets and they run around 10 which surprised me because the old Star swaged bullets were around 5-6. I prefer 8-9 but up to 11 is probably OK. It would be interesting to remove the hard lube and replace with soft just to see if that would make a difference.
The biggest reason a lot of people think a hard bullet is going to shoot better is because Elmer Keith commented years ago that they were better. The problem is, exactly what did he mean by hard. His idea was to not cast bullets that were practically pure, (BHN 5-6) because it is difficult to cast a good bullet but make them of a ten to one mix of lead to tin which would still not be very hard compared to a mix that also has antimony in it. In reality even 40 to one will shoot OK until velocities get past around 1500 and if you are getting good fillout, casting with a soft mix, they are fine for any target shooting.
The biggest reason a lot of people think a hard bullet is going to shoot better is because Elmer Keith commented years ago that they were better. The problem is, exactly what did he mean by hard. His idea was to not cast bullets that were practically pure, (BHN 5-6) because it is difficult to cast a good bullet but make them of a ten to one mix of lead to tin which would still not be very hard compared to a mix that also has antimony in it. In reality even 40 to one will shoot OK until velocities get past around 1500 and if you are getting good fillout, casting with a soft mix, they are fine for any target shooting.
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
A friend did significant cast bullet testing in the late 70's. His results showed that the absolute best accuracy out of his Clark long slide at 50 yards came with Linotype (his load was 4.0 of BE). Even then Lino was expensive so he settled for a mix of lino and wheel weights to approximate Lyman #2. In those days he and his wife were shooting 4500 rounds per month combined. He cast H&G68 (the semi-bevel base style) out of 2-4 cavity moulds, casting enough over the winter to serve them for the year.
He determined his accuracy loads by ransom testing a minimum of 30 rounds per load, length and crimp. He documented his results.
Now some will argue that this was too much trouble. And maybe it was. But it worked for them.
By the way, at 86 he is still casting for his single action .45 colts and finding that they too like harder bullets.
He determined his accuracy loads by ransom testing a minimum of 30 rounds per load, length and crimp. He documented his results.
Now some will argue that this was too much trouble. And maybe it was. But it worked for them.
By the way, at 86 he is still casting for his single action .45 colts and finding that they too like harder bullets.
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
I will disagree completely. When I shot in the AMU 1966 to 68 I was told as I was learning to cast, that bullets should be as soft as possible when casting for accuracy. The AMU has the best of the best when it comes to Bullseye and the bullets I casted with the alloy I was given were very soft. I didn't have a BHN tester or a thermometer in those days but I had to cast very fast to get decent fillout with the pot at its highest setting and with almost any antimony in the alloy, you will have to pause between casts or you will smear lead on the sprue plate.
I like so many, read magazines, and wondered why we didn't use a harder lead because that was the mantra. Even though people shot stellar scores with the bullets we made, I in my brilliance had to try hard lead when I left the army. I guess I didn't think they knew what they were talking about. Well, I learned rather quickly that they did and I didn't. Not only was hard lead typically less accurate but it certainly caused more leading. It was explained to me in simple terms. They told me to try to write my name on a piece of iron with pure lead and of course I couldn't. Then try it with a hard piece of lead and it was simple. It never dawned on me that 22 rimfire bullets go over a thousand feet per second are pure lead and don't lead the barrel plus they can be stunningly accurate.
Fast forward to the 90's when we Bullseye shooters could no longer buy Star pure lead 185 grain swaged bullets which were the best of the best and many of us decided to try every brand of commercial bullets we could to see which could replace them. We had disaster after disaster with hard cast bullets leading and found the best we could buy were swaged Magnus or Zero bullets and they had a BHN of around 10. All of us tested on a Ransom Rest because it is fast since careful concentration is not necessary so it can be done quickly. I have no idea how many bullets were shot but it was a lot. Finally I decided to start casting again and bought a Saeco 069 mold which is a pretty close copy of an H&G 68 which is what was used in the army. It didn't take long for all of us to realize that soft alloy and soft lube was the best. If you want to believe what you heard, go ahead but try to prove it in real tests yourself. I would love to bet money that a soft bullet with soft lube will shoot better than a linotype with hard lube out of the same gun in the same circumstances.
I like so many, read magazines, and wondered why we didn't use a harder lead because that was the mantra. Even though people shot stellar scores with the bullets we made, I in my brilliance had to try hard lead when I left the army. I guess I didn't think they knew what they were talking about. Well, I learned rather quickly that they did and I didn't. Not only was hard lead typically less accurate but it certainly caused more leading. It was explained to me in simple terms. They told me to try to write my name on a piece of iron with pure lead and of course I couldn't. Then try it with a hard piece of lead and it was simple. It never dawned on me that 22 rimfire bullets go over a thousand feet per second are pure lead and don't lead the barrel plus they can be stunningly accurate.
Fast forward to the 90's when we Bullseye shooters could no longer buy Star pure lead 185 grain swaged bullets which were the best of the best and many of us decided to try every brand of commercial bullets we could to see which could replace them. We had disaster after disaster with hard cast bullets leading and found the best we could buy were swaged Magnus or Zero bullets and they had a BHN of around 10. All of us tested on a Ransom Rest because it is fast since careful concentration is not necessary so it can be done quickly. I have no idea how many bullets were shot but it was a lot. Finally I decided to start casting again and bought a Saeco 069 mold which is a pretty close copy of an H&G 68 which is what was used in the army. It didn't take long for all of us to realize that soft alloy and soft lube was the best. If you want to believe what you heard, go ahead but try to prove it in real tests yourself. I would love to bet money that a soft bullet with soft lube will shoot better than a linotype with hard lube out of the same gun in the same circumstances.
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
Good information. What lube are you using?
Dave
Dave
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
All I can say is that his first year of competing in BE was 1964. In 1965 he entered the 2600 club.
For what another shooter thinks of his reloading knowledge you can take a look at this. He exclusively shot lead bullets, that he alloyed and cast. In one series of tests they shot and documented 6000 shots at 50 yards.
http://www.targettalk.org/viewtopic.php ... ht#p222721
I believe that they used soft lube for their bullets based on the NRA recipe.
It may be that there is more than one way to skin this cat.
For what another shooter thinks of his reloading knowledge you can take a look at this. He exclusively shot lead bullets, that he alloyed and cast. In one series of tests they shot and documented 6000 shots at 50 yards.
http://www.targettalk.org/viewtopic.php ... ht#p222721
I believe that they used soft lube for their bullets based on the NRA recipe.
It may be that there is more than one way to skin this cat.
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
Dave, at this time I have settled on 2500. You can get it from lars lube. For a long time I used 50/50 from several manufacturers and had good results. Lately I haven't found any that will stay in the lube groove specifically if the grooves are small. 50/50 varies from brand to brand. If I was only lubing 45's I think any of the 50/50 would be OK. One of my friends does well with a Saeco lube that is very soft and light color but I think it is expensive.UtahDave wrote:Good information. What lube are you using?
Dave
-
Trooperjake
- Posts: 794
- Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 9:22 pm
- Location: Cookeville, TN
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
I was just told by t&b bullets that he has suspended production of the 32-60 gr Bullet because they were not accurate enough. People complained of the accuracy.
He said he used hard cast lead, and wants to try a much softer lead instead.
I have bought some from him, but have not had time to test them.
Does anyone in this group have any results with his bullet?
He said he used hard cast lead, and wants to try a much softer lead instead.
I have bought some from him, but have not had time to test them.
Does anyone in this group have any results with his bullet?
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
I have good results with T&Bs 32 ACP lead SWC bullets and I plan to order 1000 more soon. I will have to call him tomorrow.
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
I should also add, Travis from T&B told me his bullets have a BHN of 14 when I ordered my first batch of 1000. I have had good results with them, but a softer lead would probably improve those results.
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
So... the reason Travis is taking another look at the .32acp bullets is because he and I have been talking. We've discussed the options of a softer bullet and he is experimenting. That said I didn't want to post anything because he didn't want loads of phone calls all asking the same questions. I think we should let him do his testing to see what he can come up with. We've talked about a 20:1 or even a 40:1 mix. When speaking to him I told him I would be glad to post the info once he is ready for all to see. Let's give him some breathing room and see what, if anything, he can come up with for us.
-
Jerry Keefer
- Posts: 136
- Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:34 am
- Location: Maidens, Va.
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
Mike I agree with your conclusion.. I have zero experience with 32 ACP or S&W Long. When I first contemplated a CF cartridge for Amira, I quickly dismissed the 32s due to high investment cost, and also after reading the on going frustrations with components and 50 yard accuracy. After 30+ years of experience with the .38spl. I knew I could make a 52 S&W shoot.jmdavis wrote:A friend did significant cast bullet testing in the late 70's. His results showed that the absolute best accuracy out of his Clark long slide at 50 yards came with Linotype (his load was 4.0 of BE). Even then Lino was expensive so he settled for a mix of lino and wheel weights to approximate Lyman #2. In those days he and his wife were shooting 4500 rounds per month combined. He cast H&G68 (the semi-bevel base style) out of 2-4 cavity moulds, casting enough over the winter to serve them for the year.
He determined his accuracy loads by ransom testing a minimum of 30 rounds per load, length and crimp. He documented his results.
Now some will argue that this was too much trouble. And maybe it was. But it worked for them.
By the way, at 86 he is still casting for his single action .45 colts and finding that they too like harder bullets.
This thread caused me to dig out my hardness tester.. First let me say I hated Star bullets.. I don't care whether 38 or 45.. Leaded barrels were a constant issue.
The vintage Stars I have on hand tested @ 8 for the 38s and tested @ 10 for the 45s.. The cast bullets we use for both the 38 and the 45 tested @ 18...They do not lead even slightly.. And the accuracy speaks for itself, as you well know..
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
Inaccuracy can be caused by a lot of things, but primarily from too tight of a case causing swaging down of the bullet. I don't know if this brass can swage a 14 BHN bullet down or not but the bottom line is that a softer bullet with soft lube is more forgiving however the people having problems with these bullets may have even more if they are soft because then they will swage down. I did get pretty good accuracy with a .45 200 grain bullet from Dardas that was sized to .451 but out of all the tests that I and my friends did, it seemed more of an accident than anything else. I would hate to bet that they would shoot well in another 45 because I then ordered some .452 and .453 to try and I remember them being around 10 inches or worse at 50 yards. Just .001 of an inch and suddenly terrible accuracy with a hard bullet.
When I was first trying to get accuracy out of the 32 ACP and not knowing exactly what to do, I shot some Lyman .313 85 grain bullets and the length of the base caused more problems than the size. They weren't quite the .313 they were supposed to be because the .313 die didn't size all of the bullet but they shot fairly good. Later I tried .313 sizing on an Accurate mold bullet but it was was causing me grief trying different sizes because I constantly had to change my crimp and it was too hard to tell whether I was varying it from test to test but they weren't much worse than the .314 and I think the reason is because a soft bullet is forgiving probably because of the ability of a soft bullet to conform.
Before I got the 32 I was going to test a Beretta 9 mm that was highly accurized. I loaded it with Saeco 115 bullets that were soft and only shot it off sandbags because I didn't have a RR insert. They grouped fairly well at 25 yards with a bullet suddenly appearing about a foot out of the group. I didn't expand the brass much and it swaged the bullets down to about .351. Since the barrel was .355 it is easy to see why it happened but I was surprised that they weren't all bad shots.
When I was first trying to get accuracy out of the 32 ACP and not knowing exactly what to do, I shot some Lyman .313 85 grain bullets and the length of the base caused more problems than the size. They weren't quite the .313 they were supposed to be because the .313 die didn't size all of the bullet but they shot fairly good. Later I tried .313 sizing on an Accurate mold bullet but it was was causing me grief trying different sizes because I constantly had to change my crimp and it was too hard to tell whether I was varying it from test to test but they weren't much worse than the .314 and I think the reason is because a soft bullet is forgiving probably because of the ability of a soft bullet to conform.
Before I got the 32 I was going to test a Beretta 9 mm that was highly accurized. I loaded it with Saeco 115 bullets that were soft and only shot it off sandbags because I didn't have a RR insert. They grouped fairly well at 25 yards with a bullet suddenly appearing about a foot out of the group. I didn't expand the brass much and it swaged the bullets down to about .351. Since the barrel was .355 it is easy to see why it happened but I was surprised that they weren't all bad shots.
-
pistol champ
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2008 4:35 pm
- Location: Eastern PA
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
I agree with Old Caster - soft bullets with soft lube = great accuracy. I can shoot "X" ring groups all day and night with this combination in my 32acp Pardini. I still shoot the old lead Star lead bullets in my 45 and have no leading and good accuracy. (I bought a lifetime supply before they stopped production) Fit is very important if the bullets are too small for the bore they will lead no matter how hard or what lube is used. I like a lead bullet to be .0005" to .001" bigger than the barrel.
I've shot the T&B bullets that have been swaged to 0.3145" and they shoot about 1" groups. Before they are swaged to size and weight the groups are no where near as good
When I first started to load for the Pardini HP in 32acp I was frustrated to get it to group. Now shooting good swaged bullets with proper sizing dies it seems any fast powder/any primer/any velocity from 715 to 850 (with an extreme spread less than 35'/sec) will give "X" ring results. I still can not get cast bullets to group consistently I still get fliers. I also feel the 32acp is still not as forgiving as the 45acp.
I've shot the T&B bullets that have been swaged to 0.3145" and they shoot about 1" groups. Before they are swaged to size and weight the groups are no where near as good
When I first started to load for the Pardini HP in 32acp I was frustrated to get it to group. Now shooting good swaged bullets with proper sizing dies it seems any fast powder/any primer/any velocity from 715 to 850 (with an extreme spread less than 35'/sec) will give "X" ring results. I still can not get cast bullets to group consistently I still get fliers. I also feel the 32acp is still not as forgiving as the 45acp.
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
Pistol Champ can you explain more about your swaging comment? You are taking a cast bullet and swaging it? I though swaged bullets were made from soft lead "wire" and smashed into a die. I'm confused as to what you are doing.
Also, T&B bullets are listed at .314. How are you getting .3145?
Also, T&B bullets are listed at .314. How are you getting .3145?
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
Greetings,
More clues to the previous swaging story.
Pistolchamp sent me some "as cast" bullets to test from an unnamed vendor. Sadly, the bullets had not filled out the mould fully and they were not acceptable for sizing and testing. Since Pistolchamp has done me a lot of favors, I decided to take the bullets and swage them prior to returning them.
The seed has been planted. Pistolchamp informed me that he is in the process of acquiring the tools needed to swage his own bullets. This is a guy with time on his hands....
Swaging existing cast bullets with a grease groove is not the best way to accomplish this task. However, they do shoot better than "as cast" and greased traditionally.
When I purchased my Accurate Molds for the 32 ACP cast bullet testing, I got a fair amount of rejects during final inspection/greasing. Since I labored so hard to make those little pea sized bullets, I did not like the idea of melting them down again. Since I already swage bullets for the 32 S&W Long, I made a set of dies for the 32 ACP bullet. The Moon was in the correct position in the sky and my first test groups with the swaged bullets shot X-ring at 50 yards. Retesting the load several more times proved I was on to something.
By the way, the metal I used was 20:1 Lead:Tin from my Black Powder Cartridge Rifle stash. Future testing will be with 30:1 alloy.
Dave, what about lube??? I place a hand full of swaged bullets in a ZipLoc sandwich bag, squirt in some Lee Liquid Alox, and give the bullets a gentle massage. Then I spread them out on a cookie sheet lined with wax paper and let them dry 24 hours.
When time permits, ha-ha, I will machine a slug mould for the 32 ACP swaging project. This way, I can control the alloy and final product.
PardiniUSA was communicating with a major bullet vendor to supply 32 ACP swaged bullets. At least this is what I last remember.
Do not get all excited about swaging your own bullets!!! It is expensive to set up, getting quality dies and punches, you need to cast the slugs as the bullets are an alloy and plain Lead may not work, and it is labor intensive.
Final comment. My best cast bullet groups, with the 32 ACP in a PardiniUSA barrel, have been with LinoType metal. I have my theories about this and more testing is needed to verify my thoughts.
With kind regards,
Dave
More clues to the previous swaging story.
Pistolchamp sent me some "as cast" bullets to test from an unnamed vendor. Sadly, the bullets had not filled out the mould fully and they were not acceptable for sizing and testing. Since Pistolchamp has done me a lot of favors, I decided to take the bullets and swage them prior to returning them.
The seed has been planted. Pistolchamp informed me that he is in the process of acquiring the tools needed to swage his own bullets. This is a guy with time on his hands....
Swaging existing cast bullets with a grease groove is not the best way to accomplish this task. However, they do shoot better than "as cast" and greased traditionally.
When I purchased my Accurate Molds for the 32 ACP cast bullet testing, I got a fair amount of rejects during final inspection/greasing. Since I labored so hard to make those little pea sized bullets, I did not like the idea of melting them down again. Since I already swage bullets for the 32 S&W Long, I made a set of dies for the 32 ACP bullet. The Moon was in the correct position in the sky and my first test groups with the swaged bullets shot X-ring at 50 yards. Retesting the load several more times proved I was on to something.
By the way, the metal I used was 20:1 Lead:Tin from my Black Powder Cartridge Rifle stash. Future testing will be with 30:1 alloy.
Dave, what about lube??? I place a hand full of swaged bullets in a ZipLoc sandwich bag, squirt in some Lee Liquid Alox, and give the bullets a gentle massage. Then I spread them out on a cookie sheet lined with wax paper and let them dry 24 hours.
When time permits, ha-ha, I will machine a slug mould for the 32 ACP swaging project. This way, I can control the alloy and final product.
PardiniUSA was communicating with a major bullet vendor to supply 32 ACP swaged bullets. At least this is what I last remember.
Do not get all excited about swaging your own bullets!!! It is expensive to set up, getting quality dies and punches, you need to cast the slugs as the bullets are an alloy and plain Lead may not work, and it is labor intensive.
Final comment. My best cast bullet groups, with the 32 ACP in a PardiniUSA barrel, have been with LinoType metal. I have my theories about this and more testing is needed to verify my thoughts.
With kind regards,
Dave
Re: Pardini HP 32, ammo talk
Talked to Travis at T&B yesterday. He is having problems with his mould. He is working to get it repaired so he can begin casting again. Until then he won't be casting .32 60gr for us.