Bpx in a lead wad

[Jim Atlas]

Why into water and not at paper? You can puck up the wad out of the grass just as easy as out of the water. Seems a waste of shot...

 

[Billy hill]

Way too many wads in my yard. I will pattern it and don't care about the waste. Water gives me information also. It let's me see the width of the shot spread.

 

[Buster_AZ]

Any hard shot type used in a lead wad is playing with fire. Check for scoring that can start in the forcing cone. Even with heavy, non tox wads, there is a chance for a piece of shot poking through the wad slits.

 

[Northhunter]

Any hard shot type used in a lead wad is playing with fire. Check for scoring that can start in the forcing cone. Even with heavy, non tox wads, there is a chance for a piece of shot poking through the wad slits.

Or through the petals themselves. Have had pinholes in CSD's.

Not much to a lead wad. That's not something I would try. The forces that get applied to a projectile act on it as a whole, not just the surface. That's why Bismuth doesn't just simply dimple.. it fractures.

 

[Billy hill]

I understand the concerns... my quest is to see if the BPX is different than the other harder than lead non tox. Understand pressure is universal. Has anyone mounted,sectioned and etched to see what the thickness of the tin plating is. I am loading a 1oz #2 it should be a fairly short stack column compared to steel. The shorter column should create less setback and less outward pressure=less scrub. The tin is the same hardness as lead. I don’t think manufacturing wise they would plate it if it didn’t have an intended function. I’m hoping it’s function is sacrificial surface that won’t hurt the barrel. Brownings lengthened forcing cone and probable minimum choke due to slower speed and large shot size gives me a chance at lead components and recipes. Tried calling BPX and Speero u.s. No idea on their part. The down range waa 1oz wad has uniform thickness petals edge to edge. I’m also going to use a wrap if I need to

 

[Northhunter]

Has anyone mounted,sectioned and etched to see what the thickness of the tin plating is.

I highly doubt anyone has done this.

The tin is the same hardness as lead. I don’t think manufacturing wise they would plate it if it didn’t have an intended function. I’m hoping it’s function is sacrificial surface that won’t hurt the barrel.

It's intended function is a selling feature. They seem to emphasize "spherical precision". If it's intended function was a softer "sacrificial surface", then what is the point of making it perfectly round and promoting that aspect? (as that property wouldn't remain after being fired). Also, if it's intended purpose was to make it barrel friendly, they would sure as heck mention it in the marketing. They don't.
There are already other types of tungsten shot that are softer than steel developed to fit that market (a market that isn't growing). This doesn't appear to be one of them.

Brownings lengthened forcing cone and probable minimum choke due to slower speed and large shot size gives me a chance at lead components and recipes.

No it does not. This seems like an awful lot of wishful thinking to me. What you want the plating to be, the Browning barrel... all of it. Sorry. My $.02

 

[Billy hill]

No problem on the sorry part. The spherical precision is before the plating occurs so again I think they would save the cost to plate If it was just there to help make round. They do make an allusion to why tin instead of copper or something else, lubricity, Im also not clear how tin plating is solely a selling feature if it doesn’t also have some benefit...your 2 cents is noted. at least tell me I might be right about less scrub because of the shorter stack height. Give me a guess about plating thickness and if that could be a function of the tin...how thick do you think it would need to be

 

[Northhunter]

An ounce is an ounce. Regardless of how high the pellets stack, you're still taking an ounce of material and sending it ahead of a powder charge. The resulting pressures are still there. Different materials take that pressure and distribute it differently. Lead is malleable and that absorbs some of the shock. Bismuth will deform to some extent before it simply fractures. Steel and anything harder doesn't have that same ability, so that pressure gets transferred down and out within the wad. You would be taking a lead wad with limited protection and hoping it would withstand that pressure (and doing it with 2's, which would promote bridging and outward force more than say 4's or 6's).

I have not held any BPX and will not be ordering any, but the impression I get is that it is not plated any thicker than any other type of shot. If that is the case it may help the pellets "flow" a little more freely (probably more notably through a choke - patterning), but I bet it will be insufficient in protecting a barrel from something as hard as tungsten in a lead wad.
They used to produce copper plated steel (not BPI, ammo manufacturers), and maybe still do... but it was never really promoted as barrel insurance or a density advantage (even though it is heavier, and softer). The spin on it seemed to be less rusting, better patterns, better penetration.
Another thing to consider with a lead wad is how easily will the harder pellets transfer that energy of setback and imbed in the base. That is purely a performance issue, but one that already exists with steel in beefier no-tox wads.

Your thinking has some merit. A tin pellet with a tungsten core would probably work. But if that was viable enough, I'm betting somebody would have produced it by now and promoted the heck out of it. I'm betting that's not what BPX is.

 

[Billy hill]

How do you know about this stuff. Your profile says student.

 

[Jim Atlas]

So why are you wanting to use a lead wad? For fitment issues, or just for the hell of it? Just curious.