A treatise on making swaged stars using a .356" lead bullet swager

[PeteyPyro]

I have a bullet swager that is normally used to form .356" or 9mm round nosed or semi-wadcutter nosed lead bullets from soft lead stock. The stock used is .325" diameter lead wire that comes in rolls or 15" long rods. If I remove the semi-wad cutter nosing die, invert it, (in order to change the formed lead bullet's profile from a somewhat pointed semi-wad cutter shape to a nearly perfect cylindrical lead shape), and then swage lead wire stock, I end up with almost perfectly formed lead cylinders. The length of them is controlled by precise adjustments of the length or "throw"of the ramming arm. .356 diameter by .356" long cylinders of lead can be made with it. Excess lead stock that won't easily fit in to the swaging cavity is extruded out of a side port, once the mold cavity is full and any air pockets squeezed out.

I'm wondering if this swaging machine could be used to make perfect stars with only slightly damp star composition. There may be friction issues with this, so only relatively "safe" star comps should be considered. There would be little to no way that any ignition of a comp would vent easily, and without consequences. Are there any comps that, when damp, could be relatively safe to press or "swage"? Is this too dangerous to even consider? It would seem to be as safe as pressing stars with a star plate. Feed stock could be a hopper filled with slightly damp star comp, probably as damp as a pressed star. Excess comp would simply ooze out of the side port, just like the soft lead did.

The upside is that perfect and very dense stars could be rapidly formed (20-30/minute). Any thoughts on this idea?

I have swaging dies for. 25" through .50" as well. Any thoughts on this?

Edited July 28, 2017 by PeteyPyro

[MrB]

I have NO experience with a machine like this. But, a quick look on pictures and so fourth...

 

I don't really see much safety problems. Use a blast shield, just in case, but pressing doesn't regularly cause issues. My main concern would be star integrity. The composition wont be nearly as hard to simply squeeze out the bottom hole, as, lead. So i'm not sure you will get the composition consolidated enough.

You wont want to use any composition with hard metal content, stars with Ti and such, but not for safety reasons. They just will eat your tooling alive, or simply jam them stuck, and never come apart again.

[PeteyPyro]

That's a good point B. The dies are steel that handles the lead, but a corrosive comp, especially one with water, could eat it up. As far as the comp being tightly bound, the dies basically squeeze lead wire (or comp) into a bullet shape (or now a cylinder) with thousands of psi, and excess lead (comp) that is in the cycle, is extruded out of a 2mm round side vent. I may try just charcoal with binder to see how consolidated they emerge. If ignition happened, it would have to vent through that 2mm hole (or else )... it has nowhere else to go... sort of like with a star plate. A blast shield would be an absolute necessity ⚠. Maybe a non-polar solvent star would be ok, if the setup is kept cleaned after use.

[MrB]

The reason it works for lead, may be the reason it wont for pyro compositions.

Lead is a soft metal, but still a lot "harder" then moist composition. When you start compressing it the hole may act as a extruder port, and give you a 2mm snake, before the composition is consolidated enough in the main chamber.

Only one way to know i suppose. Try it.

[PeteyPyro]

Thanks, B. I'm going to try some charcoal with dex binder and see if it will truely press solidly. Ill try various dampness levels, as well as dry pressing. Good thoughts on this. ✴

[MrB]

Good luck.

[Arthur]

Must admit I've wondered about other non pyro common tools often

 

Granulating BP -cheese grater or potato ricer

 

etc etc

 

BUT usually I intend to make the repurposed item NOT returnable to it's former job. Whether I'd want to take a bullet press and make it unsuitable for it's original use ... not likely.

 

What about using a cake decorating icing pump to make wet stars?

[PeteyPyro]

I even consider using: pasta extruders, caulking guns with reusable tubes, toy playdoh extruders, and am considering using empty .357 and .500 cartridge cases for making a ganged star pump. I'm intrigued using firearm related gear for pyro, and visa versa. (Bullet cases for pyro star pumps, and tannerite (pyro's NH3NO3 + AL) for firearms target practice.)

Today, I pressed several charcoal stars (slugs) from the swaging extruder, and they are now in the drying box. It took two pulls to cycle enough dextrin bound charcoal from the ram-feed hopper to make each star. About 5 seconds per star. They seem hard, and I'll see how dense they are tomorrow.

[MrB]

Today, I pressed several charcoal stars (slugs) from the swaging extruder, and they are now in the drying box. It took two pulls to cycle enough dextrin bound charcoal from the ram-feed hopper to make each star. About 5 seconds per star. They seem hard, and I'll see how dense they are tomorrow.

 

I think, correct me if i'm wrong, but these tools have a limited stroke? As in, anything pressed in them is at least X long.

Since burn time is decided by the density, and the smallest dimension, in this case, diameter, adding cycling strokes until you no longer bottom out, and using a way to identify how much pressure you put on the lever (If hand cranked) would give you stars that may vary slightly in length, but have near identical burn-time. Using a torque wrench, or standing on a bathroom scale, comes to mind.

 

Oh, and when you switch to live composition... Remember that any composition in the hopper is likely to go up in a big cloud of smoke, if anything below catches fire.

 

My "only" concern with this not working, is, if the composition squeezes out through the port, before it's dense enough in the star it self. Anything that does squeeze out is just put back in to the hopper, so that isn't a problem, but if you cant get the density, then you are screwed. But from the sound of things, you are good to go.

[PeteyPyro]

Hi B. This swager has an adjustable stroke. That determines the length of the slug. The nosing die determines the profile of the bullet (round nose, swc, hp, etc). It doesn't matter how many times I pull the handle as slug length will stay the same, once set. Lead only needs one pull since its not very maleable and the slight excess is extruded out of an "over flow" port on the side, but composition is in need of being compressed so that it needs more than one charging of comp. I could pull the handle 3 or 5 times, but then the density of the compressed comp forces strokes 3, 4, and 5 out of the side "over-flow" port. Good point about the hopper, B. If I do go from dextrin bound charcoal to a live star comp, you bet I will only dump a small scoup of comp in to the hopper, as I go. I'm hoping the charcoal "proof of concept" test 'stars' dry rock hard soon.

Tick tock <tapping toe nervously >

[MrB]

In that case... Use the overflow port to set the density of your stars? As in, put one stroke extra in to it, every time. Identical length, and density, every time. And the mouse turds go back in to the hopper, so it isn't waste.

Sounds like a near ideal setup actually. Making the overflow port smaller, possibly by threading it, and adding a restrictor, can easily let you adjust the back-pressure, if the needed density isn't achieved...

If the stroke is adjustable, setting it to as close as the diameter as possible, over or undershooting shouldn't be an issue, and they should all be pretty much perfect.

 

Well. You report back. Sounds... interesting.

[PeteyPyro]

Results: Yes I have 5 dried charcoal w/ dextrin stars, very hard to chip (hard to dry as well). Cleanup was a pain, and evaluating the work to reward involved, may be feasible for large lots. I'm still inclined to stay with proven techniques and I will look into finishing my ganged cartridge case themed pump. I'll be breaking out the solder and brass stock. I'll post some photos. I'm always open to suggestions. Thanks, MrB, and Arthur, for your insights and suggestions.