Swaging & Casting, what's the difference?

[Jim Fleming]

This piece is created at the behest of an anonymous reader that has approached me with the question of this topic. In fact the title of this thread isn't complete.

The actual question was, "Jim, what's the difference between casting and swaging, and why you prefer swaged bullets to cast bullets?"

In a nutshell, Swaging is how ALL of the bullet manufacturers produce bullets. Using high speed punch presses huge billets of pure lead, and miles and miles of gilding metal coiled ribbons. But this doesn't really have much clarification in it. There are dozens of videos on YouTube that show the HIGH SPEED process, but there again these videos don't have much detail in them.

Because I respect this person I've taken the liberty of prefacing my response with the above dissertation by way of explanation.

Casting uses heat to melt the lead, which is poured into moulds that are pre-cut into bullet shaped cavities. Casting produces fumes, has inherent risks from heat related injuries, and somewhat messy.  Don't get me wrong folks, I cast bullets, I cast a lot of them, and I enjoy it.

Casting also has the advantage of being quite a bit faster than hand swaging. Cast a bullet, lube/size it,fire it. It's almost that easy, but at the same time I quickly admit to a HUGE oversimplification when it comes to developing cast bullet loads.

But what if I wanted to shoot a bullet that's ten grains heavier? Or lighter for that matter? Now I have buy a new mould and cast up more bullet bullets and develop a new load adjusted for the change of weight. Notice I mentioned having to spend more money to buy a new mould just to change desired bullet weight. With swaging it isn't necessary.

Swaging involves using pressure to reform pure lead into jackets, expanding the jackets up to proper diameter.

What I'm saying is I take a pure lead core of a specific weight and smaller diameter than the inside of the jacket drop it into a bullet jacket, then put both into a die of specific diameter, expand the lead inside the jacket under high pressure with a punch that fits extremely closely to inside of the jacket. When the lead expands, it also expands the jacket up to the  diameter of the die. The lead is dead soft, I'm saying it has little or no elasticity. But the jacket material has some springiness to it. When expanded it tries to snap back a bit. However due the lead core being in place the causes the jacket to grip the core more tightly.

If you want more details, join the forum and ask away, I think I can answer any and all questions with  regards to the topic at hand... "Why does Jim swage and cast?"

Swaged bullets are inherently more accurate than cast bullets due to the fact that imperfections are less likely to be found. I. E. Bubbles, dross inclusions, wrinkled, poor sprue cuts, and the like. Any such imperfections are removed by the metal working processes, when it comes to using swaged bullets.

Naturally, all swaged bullets are not perfect. But the percentages of finding an imperfect swaged bullet are far less than with cast bullets. Have you ever weighed a factory made bullet? Have you ever weighed several bullets out of a box for comparison reasons? Rarely do you find bullets that are not uniform. Cast bullets frequently yield imperfections. Normally we do not see those imperfections because of the fact they're usually fired in handguns. Those imperfections are hidden by the inaccuracy people expect from handguns.

Then there are some folks that are either crazy like a fox, or cheap like me. Crazy for accuracy, or wanting to eliminate as much as possible all costs. I swage because I am cheap... Don't read that as in accurate, I swage because I am cheap, but by damn I'll put my cheap .22 Rimfire jacketed bullets up against ANY hunting quality bullet there is. Yeah, you heard me... I've posted else where but I don't mind bragging here, I printed a .754 thousandths of an inch at 90 yards with a Thompson Center Contender Super 14 barrel. My barrel is scoped with a fixed power Bausch & Lombe 4X scope.

Folks I'm saying I printed a 3/4 inch group with rimfire jacketed bullets in a darn handgun! That's why I swage. I intend to use these super frangible bullets to hunt coyote. I think that there'd be nothing finer than to own a Coyote Skin Coat! In fact I'd love to have two! One for me, and one for my absolutely gorgeous wife!

I could write for hours, but I'll invite any and all comers and any and all comments... With the sole exception of you anti-gunners. You're not invited, not welcom, or allowed to comment.

[Devereaux]

?So do I understand your explanation correctly. ?You first cast a bullet of particular weight, then insert it into a jacket and compress it with high pressure until it fits completely into the jacket form, which is held in a die to help form the final shape of both the jacket and lead core.

?How do you get the jacket. ?Is it preformed, or do you make a "tube" and then have it form to the die. ?How do you get the 10 gr weight differences.

Lots to learn here.

[Jim Fleming]

Dev, you're only partially correct. Cores for a fact can be cast 'heavy' then the excess is swaged off.

Swaging is close akin to extruding. Think of a tube of toothpaste, when you load your toothbrush, you're EXTRUDING toothpaste. I do the same exact thing with lead. The toothpaste analogy is important to remember in the context of this topic. I'll refer to it again, later I'm sure.

Dev, you've also caught a salient point that I deliberately omitted because I didn't want to get into too much depth in the first posting.

The lead cores. How is the exact desired weight attained?

As previously indicated, cores CAN be made by casting them 'heavy' and removing the excess. However most bullet makers, myself included are using lead wire of a smaller diameter. For .224 dia. bullets I use .187 dia. wire. These wires are cut into short pieces that are about 7-8 grains heavier in weight than desired. I'm say that if I want a finished core weight of 45 grains, I make my cores at about 52-53 grains. That figure of 45 grains comes from my personal knowledge that a cleaned and derimmed 22 rim fire empty shell casing weighs, on average, about 10.3 grains. (Yes, I've ignored the .3 of a grain for this thread.)

Next post I'll start with removing the extra 7-8 grains of lead. For now this comment is getting too hard to manage using my Droid.

?So do I understand your explanation correctly. ?You first cast a bullet of particular weight, then insert it into a jacket and compress it with high pressure until it fits completely into the jacket form, which is held in a die to help form the final shape of both the jacket and lead core.

?How do you get the jacket. ?Is it preformed, or do you make a "tube" and then have it form to the die. ?How do you get the 10 gr weight differences.

Lots to learn here.

[Jim Fleming]

Re: adjusting the weight of the lead cores.

First you're going have bear with my second rather childish analogy. Remember the wonderful ice cream treats we all called "Pushups?" Remember how if you'd pushed on the bottom the treat would come and we'd enjoy ourselves? Keyword: pushed - pushing on the bottom the treat created an internal pressure causing the treat to extrude or flow. That PRESSURE is key factor in swaging.

Let's get back to bullets instead of ice cream. The outer sleeve on the treat now becomes a hardened polished die. The ice cream is the lead. Inside the die is a punch that would roughly be the equivalent of the stick that we used to push on the treat. Now stay with me here. On the opposite end of the press towards the open end of the die/sleeve is punch that's fixed rigidly in place. Lastly in the middle of the die are three small holes that are exactly perpendicular to the center line of the die and punches.

We take in our fingers a single piece of our overweight lead cores. Lubricate it of course. Place it into the die. Then gradually we move the die towards the rigidly fixed punch. Causing the fixed punch to gently enter the moving die. Gradually you'll feel the lead trying to resist the punches pressure. Think extrusion now. As the necessary adjustments are made eventually enough pressure builds up to force the dead soft lead to extrude out of those three small holes in a radial direction. Remove the core, weigh it. Too heavy? A bit more adjustment is made. Working the weight of that heavy core down gradually to exactly where you want it. It seem rather obvious to me, but just in case I've made another omission, here is a bit more information.

I arbitrarily make a decision to create a 55 grain bullet. I simply deduct the weight of the jacket, 10 grains, from the desired weight, and the result is the weight that I need to make my cores. Jacketed bullets usually have only two components. The jacket and core. If other objects, such as a polymer tip are to be included, the bullet maker simply adjusts the weight to include those other objects.

Now to REALLY confuse everybody ..... I stated earlier that I use lead wire. I do in fact use lead wire. I make that too.

Enough for now. Next comment will have elaboration on casting lead wire.

[Jim Fleming]

I just stated that I cast lead wire. I do. I made a 6 cavity piston and cylinder affair that I use to cast my little pieces of pure lead wire from.

Dev, you've asked me how I make jackets from 22 RF empties? Vernon Speer got his start literally making bullets from 22 Rim Fire empty cartridges. I use my Lee Classic Turret Press for that chore. Think about a funnel, upside down, mounted on top of the press and a (very close fitting to the inside of the empty case), punch that snaps into the press's ram. I take my empty case slide it down on to (over the top of) and gently ease the rimmed case up into a ring die (the funnel) which irons the rim of and lengthens the case to a size of about .705 inches. This coincidentally is the perfect jacket length for a very nice 55 gr JHP bullet.

Guys I have to tell you that this missive is NOT written and posted in correct sequence to make bullets. I can summarize the sequence and perhaps I'll add a comment later with the correct sequence in it. When I can use a keyboard instead of this Droid.

Jim

[Devereaux]

OK. More stupid questions. A .22 RF case is generally somewhat smaller than the bullet it fires, so it would be smaller than .22. You now "massage" that case to become a jacket for a .224 bullet. That, I would think, would require some expansion. ?Does the require any heating to "soften" the case. ?Where does the metal from the rim go. ?How do you make the "hollow point".

Inquiring minds want to know. Sorry to make you work so much on that little apparatus - just wait until you get to a decent machine to write more on this.

[Jim Fleming]

#1. Sir, there are no dumb questions, if they're asked with sincere interest in learning...

To answer the question about .22 RF cases, you're correct, they're a tad too big. When I derim them I try to make sure that they're pushed all the way thru the derimming die, thereby drawing them down to a diameter that's somewhat smaller than .220 or so. The .22 RF case contains what's commonly called a heeled bullet, the rear end of the bullet is smaller than the driving bands. But the outer diameter of the case is about .223 inches in diameter. Yes during firing the case does have a tendency to expand to fit the chamber. You're exactly correct.

Next to answer your question about heating the cases. Yes, I do in fact heat the cases to anneal them. It makes it a lot easier to derim them.

"Where does the rim go?" you've asked... The rim simply irons out from the rimmed case we're all familiar with, into a simple unrimmed cylinder. BUT, please recall that I said earlier up above, the cases get longer when they become jackets. I honestly don't have a clue as to how long a fired case is, but I do know that, as stated above, that drawn jackets are around .705 or so in length.

"How do I make the hollow point?" you asked... Back to seating cores... When a core is seated not only does it expand the jacket to proper "ballistic diameter" it also shortens the core considerably. However that shortening of the core is how the hollow point is formed. What I'm saying is that my cores might be around, let's say... .750 inches or so. Just a bit longer than the finished jacket. When the lead is expanded, the absolute volume of lead doesn't change even .0001 (1/10000") of a cubic inch. So the lead simply expands and also shortens under the seating pressure. Shortens to below the jacket mouth. Causing a hollow area that simply is formed into the point shape, causing a hollow point. Hence the name "Hollow Point".

Another way of saying the same thing is that when the core is seated it's "squashed" down below the mouth of the cylindrical jacket making a sort of void in the nose area of the bullet's point that has yet to be formed. I'm saying that the nose area of the jacket, that has a seated core, is hollow. It has no point yet. When the jacket with the seated core is pushed into the point forming die the annealed jacket simply begins closing up, the lead also starts compressing yet again but this time it's not as dramatic as when extruding, or core seating, but it does compress somewhat in the beginning of the nose profile.

(Handgun bullets are another matter altogether. You already know the jackets on them are nowhere near as long as rifle bullets. That's information for another comment, however.)

You didn't make me write all the above on my Droid, Dev, it's a labor of love, ain't no darn way I'd write that much if I didn't love what I was doing. I love sharing the information here... After all it's to my benefit too, you already know that I've learned some from you, and others on the forum. Also us Old Timers kind of have an unspoken obligation to the younger ones. It's their Second Amendment too. Also the other part of the obligation is that someone taught us what we know, it's only right that we share what we know with others...

No matter what kind of durn fool fruity 'Puter's they might be using... (hmmm, I'm getting hungry for some of those fruits that John Chapman made it a point to create orchards of...) What is the name of that fruit...? Oranges? No... Pineapples...? no... I got it, the fruit name that's really only suitable for the fruits themselves is APPLES! Yeah that's it!

Oh wait...? Didn't somebody start a computer company with that name, and aren't even 1/10 as popular as PC's...?

OK. More stupid questions. A .22 RF case is generally somewhat smaller than the bullet it fires, so it would be smaller than .22. You now "massage" that case to become a jacket for a .224 bullet. That, I would think, would require some expansion. ?Does the require any heating to "soften" the case. ?Where does the metal from the rim go. ?How do you make the "hollow point".

Inquiring minds want to know. Sorry to make you work so much on that little apparatus - just wait until you get to a decent machine to write more on this.

[Devereaux]

See! I had planned on saying, "Get your Block and shoot that Freud. Then get two apples. Eat one and type your reply on the other." But grace and good manners kept me from saying that and instead posted only that other line. Us conservatives are so constipated when it comes to word dueling.

I, for one, am beginning to understand a bit about swaging, a term that I have heard bandied about but really haven't known anything about. Thank you for the info; you are most informative.

Next. IF I understand this properly, then I would expect that having the basic machines gives you the ability to make whatever you want. All you need is new dies - rather like a progressive reloader where you change the dies in the head and truck on. You should be able to make any bullet for any calibre providing you have a ram and dies for that calibre. ?Are these dies expensive, or do you, with your metal-making abilities, have the ability to make your own.

[Jim Fleming]

Correct in that I can make other diameters of bullets. Currently I have .357 dies and .224 dies. All I would need are the dies and punches to make other calibers of bullets, however therein lies a problem. I've had the equipment for swaging so long that the manufacturer doesn't support my press and dies any longer. They want me to buy a whole new setup for upwards of $2500.

I can make punches, but I can't make the dies. They're made from air hardening steel, and were lapped out to final diameter on a honing machine that I simply don't have access to. There is one other MAJOR problem with buying stuff from Corbin... He has a two year, (yes I said two (2) years!) waiting list! I don't fancy the idea of sending him 2500-3000 dollars and waiting two (2) years to get my new equipment.

Think of your basic Rockchucker "O" frame press, but the ram is horizontal. I thread the internal punch and die into the ram, and then the fixed punch is threaded into the frame. You're perfectly free Dev, to look up the old Corbin's Mitey Mite swaging press, mine is not iron. But rather it's cast from a very strong alloy of Bronze. All my swaging equipment was from Corbin, except the few things that I made myself.

That web address is http://www.corbins.com

One thing I haven't mentioned is that in handgun bullets I can make them from pure lead, (NO jackets) and they shoot great, as long as I don't exceed 800 FPS.

Incidentally, anyone and EVERYONE is more than welcome to chime in here and add their two cents worth.

Jim

[jmstevens2]

So, if I understand correctly, you press the lead through the open mouth of the cartridge and the open mouth is the end that is pressed to form the ballistic point of the bullet? or does the rim end become the point and have a lead/copper base. I know there are some handgun loads that ate referred to as "total copper jacket" which are required in some indoor ranges. can they be done this way, or are they all this way by swaging?

Jack

[Jim Fleming]

Not quite, the lead cores _usually_ are at least several thousandths smaller the the mouth of the jacket, Jack. So I don't have to press them into the jacket. I just drop the cores in.

And, yes sir, the open end _usually_ is the end that forms the ballistic tip. (Good choice of words, by the way! Forgive me for stealing it from you. I've been trying to keep my words in layman's terms, at least a little!)

However, FMJ, full metal jacket, bullets (notice I didn't say TMJ, total metal jacket, yet). FMJ's are made opposite of soft point and hollow points. The open end of the jacket, the lead, is exposed directly to the powder charge of each cartridge. Same thing with incendiary and armor piercing rounds. That upside down jacket can be stuffed with all kinds of little goodies, if you stop and think about it. But that's mostly Military applications, so unless someone specifically asks I'm going stop there.

TMJ, total metal jacket, is something close akin to misleading! What the really are, is a pure lead bullet that's plated with a THIN film of copper. I reiterate, it's a very thin coating/film of copper. ABSOLUTELY NOT a jacket by any stretch of the imagination! That plated coating cannot stand up any serious velocity when it's fired. Which is why TMJ bullet makers warn Reloaders stringently not to load them over top of magnum loads.

TMJ's are first swaged then plated. The have a benefit of making less lead dust when fired.

So, if I understand correctly, you press the lead through the open mouth of the cartridge and the open mouth is the end that is pressed to form the ballistic point of the bullet? or does the rim end become the point and have a lead/copper base. I know there are some handgun loads that ate referred to as "total copper jacket" which are required in some indoor ranges. can they be done this way, or are they all this way by swaging?

Jack

[50BMG]

great info Jim.
i want and need more info on this subject i want to turn 22lr cases into bullets but im stuck at the price of the equipment and the waiting list. thats kinda turning me away and want to go towards cast 224 with gas checks. any thoughts on that.

[Jim Fleming]

Thank you Jayson, you're very kind.

Re: 224 dia cast bullets with gas checks

First off, please remember the bullets are NOT jacketed. This means you cannot drive them under the pressures/velocities that are routine for jacketed bullets. If you do you risk chance of horrible leading.

Second, our ammo eaters, aka semi-automatics, usually use some of the gas pressure to operate. Using cast bullets runs the risk of clogging the operating system with lead fouling.

 As if that's not bad enough, thirdly, if you used reduced loads to reduce or remove leading risk, the gas pressure you get from those loads probably isn't high enough to operate the rifle.

 To be fair, Jayson, cast bullets with gas checks should operate just fine in a 224 caliber bolt gun.

 Next is the chore of casting them. You don't get much bang for your buck when you cast 224 diameter. I'd have to think long and hard to convince myself to buying into casting for 224 diameter.

Jim

[Devereaux]

Went to the Corbin site you posted and read a whole bunch on swaging. It is quite extensive, something these forums don't really allow for. So while your explanations were quite concise, sitting and reading a lengthy report with pictures made a lot of sense. Things that I only sort of understood from your posts were now much clearer.

One thing I read, and don't quite know how to take, is the issue of rebated boat tails. It is certainly true that boat tail bullets seem to be on pretty much any target bullet you can find. Some of those could be used for hunting, but they would appear to be a poor second to real hunting ammo primarily because they aren't designed to expand, which is a disadvantage for a hunting round. On the other hand, one could place the shot very, very accurately.

So I read all about rebated boat tails and how much better they are than regular boat tail bullets. ?If this is true, how come none of the bullet makes make rebated boat tail ammo. Corbin claims 15% improvement in accuracy, and that's a heck of a lot. You shoot a 1/4 MOA, and then shrink the group size 15%, you basically have a 1/5 MOA gun - not anything to sneeze at. I would have thought if this was really true, the bullet makers would be all over it. In particular, the classic Sierra MatchKing .308 168-gr bullet ought to be a rebated BT. But it's not.

?Any insight.

BTW, making your own fully jacketed bullets is really an intriguing idea. Trouble is, I just am not into reloading for anything but getting to shoot. The actual process is interesting, but not enough to make me want to stick with it for its own sake. It would be just another thing I would have to do instead of buying the stuff already made. Make me some .308 168-gr RBT's and if they show serious improvement in my rifle, I'll consider it.

[Jim Fleming]

Corbin is where I learned everything that I started with.

Re: Boattail Bullets, and insight.

Dev, and everyone that reads this, the real reason the "Bullet Makers" started experimenting with BT bullets, is twofold and simple.

#1, costs. They were trying to make the bullets easier to load into the brass casese, than a flatbase bullet is. We all know that a BT is far easier to seat than a FB is. This is and was exactly what the Ammo Makers and the Bullet Makers were doing.

#2 benefits, The benefit of better flight characteristics wasn't known until the BT bullets were launched, and the groups were studied exhaustively. Then during these studies they also noticed improved accuracy.

Those I say as if they were facts, and as far as Jim Fleming is concerned they are facts, but I don't know this for facts. Those above statements are actually only opinion.

Re: Rebated Boattail bullets. It's my opinion, that the Ammo and Bullet folks don't want to re-invent the wheel. Sure Corbin claims and I sincerely accept and believe his claims, an improvement in accuracy. However now that you've seen the RBT bullets, think... They'd be somewhat like loading flat based bullets. Slightly more difficult to seat. Ammo and Components are made with such a razor's edge profit margin that any cost increase can't be tolerated, if at all possible. That's why I believe the Ammo and Bullet makers haven't invested in Rebated Boattail Bullets, (RBT for the purpose of this discussion.) After all there's really not much of a market for that sort of accuracy improvement.

Dev, I know what I just said sounds like heresy, but think.

"1/4 MOA vs 1/5 MOA, and a 30% increase in manufacturing and tooling costs? Good grief man, you're splitting hairs, and the costs won't allow it!" <--- I'd bet a weeks pay statements like that have made in quite a few Board Rooms... The Ammo and Bullet people have shareholders to report to, and those folks (share holders) very likely aren't shooters. More likely they're bean counters.

Went to the Corbin site you posted and read a whole bunch on swaging. It is quite extensive, something these forums don't really allow for. So while your explanations were quite concise, sitting and reading a lengthy report with pictures made a lot of sense. Things that I only sort of understood from your posts were now much clearer.

One thing I read, and don't quite know how to take, is the issue of rebated boat tails. It is certainly true that boat tail bullets seem to be on pretty much any target bullet you can find. Some of those could be used for hunting, but they would appear to be a poor second to real hunting ammo primarily because they aren't designed to expand, which is a disadvantage for a hunting round. On the other hand, one could place the shot very, very accurately.

So I read all about rebated boat tails and how much better they are than regular boat tail bullets. ?If this is true, how come none of the bullet makes make rebated boat tail ammo. Corbin claims 15% improvement in accuracy, and that's a heck of a lot. You shoot a 1/4 MOA, and then shrink the group size 15%, you basically have a 1/5 MOA gun - not anything to sneeze at. I would have thought if this was really true, the bullet makers would be all over it. In particular, the classic Sierra MatchKing .308 168-gr bullet ought to be a rebated BT. But it's not.

?Any insight.

BTW, making your own fully jacketed bullets is really an intriguing idea. Trouble is, I just am not into reloading for anything but getting to shoot. The actual process is interesting, but not enough to make me want to stick with it for its own sake. It would be just another thing I would have to do instead of buying the stuff already made. Make me some .308 168-gr RBT's and if they show serious improvement in my rifle, I'll consider it.

[Devereaux]

OK. At 500 yards on a 1/2 MOA rifle of, say, .308 cal. your group goes from 2.5" to 2". Not huge, but can potentially be the difference between 1st and 3rd at a match such a Camp Perry I would think. Those things are often decided on the number of "X's" you get. So investing in bullets that are a bit more accurate without having to do anything to the rifle might just be the ticket.

?Why would you have such a large tooling cost. 30% seems awful large, when in effect you need some different dies, basically changing a BT to a RBT. The rest of the bullet is made the exact same way as usual.

[Jim Fleming]

Dev, my friend, I honestly think you misunderstood or misread me.

I quite agree that much of an improvement in accuracy is significant! Especially the very excellent way you stated your example.

When I created that 30% I just pulled that number out of thin air. Very likely the real cost increases would be more in line with that razor's edge of profit. I was merely saying that the Big Guys have Bean Counters and Share Holders to answer to.

You really wouldn't need new dies, you're quite correct. What you'd need to make RBT bullets would be a different punch. In fact a RBT punch (to my way of thinking) would be easier to use and make, and would very likely have longer life (usage) due to the fact that the lips of the punch aren't as thin and delicate as a conventional boattail bullet would be. Also punches are far cheaper to make than dies.

Re: making FMJ bullets...

Dev, I ignored your comment because I wanted to think about it. I have for a fact deliberately inverted jackets up into the Point Forming die. I didn't have any good luck getting that thick end of the jacket to follow the 6S ogive of the bullets profile. (I'm saying that the point didn't form well at all. Making my own FMJ bullets I think would require a totally different style jacket to form up properly. In 224 diameter there simply isn't much room to do much, like adding a tracer pellet, or even better add an armor piercing core. There just isn't much volume of space to work with. Now you get up to say 30 MM or even better 40 MM diameters... By golly you have room for all sorts of goodies! I realize what I just said is a recreation of what I commented earlier, please excuse me.

[50BMG]

Jim thanks for the insight of casting 223 and I now it looks like swageing is a better answer for me. But corbins price is way out side my price range. Just to make enough bullet to make back some of the equipment cost its over 60000 bullets and I'm not sure that I would ever shoot that much through my ar15. I'm just not the much into ar15. But who knows maybe if I can shoot it for the same price as a 22lr that might. So is there any way I could the equipment for less than 800-1000 bucks that corbins charge. I have seen people make 223 jackets from 22lr cases using lee bullet sizer but what about bullet core seating and bullet shaping.  Do you have any insight on this subject.

[Jim Fleming]

Hello Jayson, I completely agree about swaging for 224 diameter. Swaging is a more efficient way to go, especially for the auto loaders.

Re: making bullets with the intention of selling them. First off, the BATFE has a few things to say about that issue... A Bullet Manufacturers license is required. It's not much but it's still required. I think it's something like $30/year but I could VERY LIKELY be wrong, someone, please correct me.

Secondly, when folks hear that you want $0.15-$0.18 cents per bullet they won't buy your bullets, "You're crazy if you think I'm gonna spend $20 buck for a box of your homemade bullets!" But they'll go to the local shop and spend $35 per box for Sierra Match Kings.

Thirdly, you're not going to be shooting 5.56 NATO or .223 Remington for the price of .22 Rimfire ammo. I've been buying some Federal 550 Ammo here lately I've been buying it, for about $40/1100 rounds. That's about 3.6 cents a piece. Primers alone are close to 4 cents a piece.

I hate it that I sound so negative, please don't take it that way, I'm just talking realistically.

I make my bullets for nearly free, this is true. But that merely means I have very little investment in the components of my bullets. I have a lot of time invested in them. I can run my little Mitey-Mite press at about 350 strokes an hour. I've measured it. It's an average and realistic number. I've got about 10,000 bullets made up, each bullet has more than a few operations to be made, #1 Annealing, #2 derimming, #4 core swaging, #5 core seating, #6 Point Forming. Those six steps multiply up to about sixty thousand (yes I said, 60,000) press operations. Divide that by 350 per hour, (and that doesn't include setting up!) I've got well over 171 hours of my labor involved in making bullets for "free."

This is an awful thing to say, but, you aren't going to make much money selling bullets that're made by hand.

Re: Using a Lee sizer to derim empty fired cases... Hey whatever works. Just as long as it's safe.

Jim thanks for the insight of casting 223 and I now it looks like swageing is a better answer for me. But corbins price is way out side my price range. Just to make enough bullet to make back some of the equipment cost its over 60000 bullets and I'm not sure that I would ever shoot that much through my ar15. I'm just not the much into ar15. But who knows maybe if I can shoot it for the same price as a 22lr that might. So is there any way I could the equipment for less than 800-1000 bucks that corbins charge. I have seen people make 223 jackets from 22lr cases using lee bullet sizer but what about bullet core seating and bullet shaping.  Do you have any insight on this subject.

[50BMG]

i was not thinking about selling them. i barely have time to reload for my own calibers much less make bullets to sell. i was just looking that if i spend 800 bucks on the die kit instead of buying remington 55gr bulk bullets for 50 bucks per 500. so if i spent $800 on bullets that would give me 800,000. bullets and like i said im not a AR15 .223 junkie. im more of a 308 and larger caliber junkie. so the 800K would last me the rest of my life and then some.

but i was just looking at corbins website and they have a kit that includes the core seating and the point forming dies for $467. i know i would still need the jacket making die corbins is $180. but if the lee sizeing dies work and i think those are $15. so if the total investment for equipment is $500. that sounds a little better. i know im any talking about 300 difference. but with that 300 i could buy supplies.

what i was thinking that i could buy the dies in steps. since i already have a couple of buckets full of brass. i could start off with the cheap lee die and anneal and make jackets while i was saving up for the $208 die. and once i got that i would start to seat the cores and play around with that die till i save up for the $260 point forming die. and by then i was have several 100k of ready bullets to point form.  so by the time i would be done i would have several 100k bullets around just waiting to be fired. that is my thought process. im i even on the right track with this. or am i just way out in left field wishing in one hand and crapping in the other to see which on fills up first.

is there any other company or person that makes these dies that are cheaper.