Cayuga, would not the patch catch the rifling instead of the lead? I am not in your experience level here so don't get mad at me for asking this, but i would think the patch covering the RB would catch it???
I go by a lot of what I was taught, so many years ago. One of them was that WW were not as good as pure lead, as they leaded the bore. The times I used them, I did observe metal flake on the swab patch. It had to come from somewhere. What the gray speckles consisted of was anyones guess. I suspected it was lead fragments.
And yes, I agree that the patch should pick up and catch some of that. But if the ball was harder, would that also not force more pressure on the patch itself against the edges of the rifling? Could this not cause a patch that was not failing, to suddenly fail? Also (I never tested it) would a WW ball engage the rifling better. I would guess it would not form as deep into the rifling. How should that effect accuray.
As I said, I shot them WW ball. George and I casted some .530 once and they were tight but shot well. We (George and I) casted up a bunch of .535 round balls once out of wheel weights. When we were trying to shoot them, they were so hard to load, we were literally ramming the ramrod against a tree to get them seated. It was something to see actually. So they do cast bigger I believe then a pure lead ball. I just recently sold that mold. The new mold owner loves the mold, as it might be twenty five years old, but hardly cast a couple hundred ball. All the ball we casted from that WW batch, turned into the best wrist rocket (sling shot) ammo I ever used.
We also casted pure lead ball out of that .535 mold. They were still a little hard to load, but we did not need a tree to load, or a hawk to drive them down. As long as we swabbed between shots, they could be loaded and were very accurate. These were in Thompson Center Rifles (as that was all we would even shoot back then) I casted some pure lead ball just before I sold the mold. They load beautiful in my Lyman Trade Rifle. So I suspect the bore of the rifle is more .535 friendly.
My casting experience is probably no more then anyone else who casts for them selves. And I never get mad at a question. I love to see discussion. Its how you AND I learn things.
I have casted for about thirty years. In that time I'd hate to think how many roundball I have cast. I was taught (by George) that WW were not as good as pure lead. My flake sighting, and that halirious day of ramming ramrods against trees, and pounding them down the bore to get a ball loaded, just kind of enforced that, which George taught me about casting. Pure lead good, WW's bad. Also since I have pure lead, I do not worry about WW ball anymore. Although like I said, if I did not have pure lead, any lead would do.
If you cast WW ball and after you shoot say.. 100 rounds of them. Just for kick, solvent the barrel, brush it, then dry patch it and see what you find on the patchs. I would be interested in your findings.
Something else to think.. if you wanted a bone busting ball that would not flatten out like a pure lead, say .. hunting elk or moose. Wouldn't a WW ball give you better penetration? Although I don't think a pure lead would have any problems.