RD, make a Mak bullet mold!!!

[Maximumbob54]

I was going to try to monkey around with my Lee 358 105 SWC mold and see if I could cast them just right but I think they need to be wider to work well. Lee has a funny looking round nose two cavity mold, but once you have gone six cavity... who the heck wants to go back to a two?!?!? And think about it, there are Makarovs, CZ's, and more out there that are in need of a serious fun six cavity mold... No, Taurus doesn't make a 9mm Mak pistol, but this forum isn't all uptight about chatter about other guns either. My two cents says it would be a worthwhile endeavor for you. And since I didn't say it yet...

PLEASE???

[Uniquedot]

It's no use! we tried to get him to offer one on another forum, but he doesn't think there is enough interest in the caliber...he didn't say that, but that was the impression. I have the Lee 2 cavity mak mold and i can tell you that it is the most accurate bullet i have used in the makarov. Like you though i only desire six cavity molds and i hate using that two banger. If i am not mistaken Lee will make you a six cavity version for the same price as they charge for other six cavity molds since they already have the design and tooling there is no custom fees. I have been meaning to contact them to ask, but haven't got around to it yet. I been using the same double cavity mold for over a decade and it still turns out perfect bullets, but it takes forever to cast them. The 9x18 has been a favorite caliber of mine for over 20 years and i would love to see some more bullet designs offered to the bullet caster for it.

[Maximumbob54]

I'm going to have to email Lee now and ask them about a six cavity mold for 9mm Mak. I'm in a group buy to purchase a four cavity HP mold for it already and while the interest isn't huge it is there. Darn Commies, they had to make the bore on the Mak too fat for any other 9mm bullets...

[Ranch Dog]

Actually, it is something I want to consider in 2012. My only concern is that it is something that I would not be shooting as I just don't have an interest in the cartridge. That is a departure from my practice in that I have a very intimate knowledge of the designs I sell. If starting from scratch, It would also mean that I'm going to need to obtain a number of chamber impressions from a "target" series of pistols to work with. That is a big undertaking.

I will contact Lee and ask about their design in the 6-cavity. Would the preference be to stick with the standard lube groove or a Micro Band for tumble lubing?

[Uniquedot]

Actually, it is something I want to consider in 2012. My only concern is that it is something that I would not be shooting as I just don't have an interest in the cartridge. That is a departure from my practice in that I have a very intimate knowledge of the designs I sell. If starting from scratch, It would also mean that I'm going to need to obtain a number of chamber impressions from a "target" series of pistols to work with. That is a big undertaking.

I will contact Lee and ask about their design in the 6-cavity. Would the preference be to stick with the standard lube groove or a Micro Band for tumble lubing?

Tumble Lube is what myself and at least a couple others wanted.

[Ranch Dog]

Man, I look at the Lee bullet and personally would want a Round Flat nose, like my other bullets, with a meplat of 72% +/- in a TL version. The 365-95-1R actually looks pretty lame. No hope of being a self defense bullet. My worry, is that the .365 is slightly under-diameter. If you look at all the mold manufacturers, all their bullets are under-diameter because they base their design on the SAAMI/CIP spec. That is well and good but firearm manufacturers cut large. The nose profile and diameter should be cut as a study of what the manufacturers are cutting the Leade, step, throat, bore, and groove. A couple of reasons for that but most of it nowadays is as a method of rapidly reducing pressure. I would bet that .365" is small.

Just checked my CIP reference and the step should be cut at 9.27mm (.365"). Even if the chamber is cut to spec, the bullet would still need to be .366" at a minimum.

[Uniquedot]

I would also want a round flat nose bullet and with tumble lube grooves as earlier stated. The Lee bullet is only good for punching paper, but it is extremely accurate. I don't know if the bullet is undersized or not, but i don't get leading using it with unique or acc #5 and i recall reading a post helg made on the LM forum where he showed photo's of his bore after 100 rounds and there was no leading...well i don't remember if he was using the Lee bullet or not though as he has a six cavity group buy from the castboolits forum also. I have personally used the Lee bullet in an east German and Russian manufacture makarov with no problems at all with leading though and the bullets drop at exactly .365 from my mold.

[Maximumbob54]

Man, I look at the Lee bullet and personally would want a Round Flat nose, like my other bullets, with a meplat of 72% +/- in a TL version. The 365-95-1R actually looks pretty lame. No hope of being a self defense bullet. My worry, is that the .365 is slightly under-diameter. If you look at all the mold manufacturers, all their bullets are under-diameter because they base their design on the SAAMI/CIP spec. That is well and good but firearm manufacturers cut large. The nose profile and diameter should be cut as a study of what the manufacturers are cutting the Leade, step, throat, bore, and groove. A couple of reasons for that but most of it nowadays is as a method of rapidly reducing pressure. I would bet that .365" is small.

Just checked my CIP reference and the step should be cut at 9.27mm (.365"). Even if the chamber is cut to spec, the bullet would still need to be .366" at a minimum.

That's because it is LAME!!! I would love to have a flat nosed either truncated cone or round nose. Make it plain base with tumble lube grooves and I would buy that in a six cavity. I have no idea what the real design challenges like the bearing surfaces or nose mass would need to be, but just about anything would be better than Lee's ugly little roundy round looking mold. And they don't even make a sizing die for it!!! I would love to see all these Mak's out there have a real viable option instead of having to resort to the Silver Bear trash ammo I usually pick up for her. I think I would prefer a .366 or even .367 mold and the same push through sizer for it. But that is just conjecture on my part. Not sure what would shoot better.

[Ranch Dog]

Well... It has been a long hunting season but I have not forgotten our thoughts here. I've been working on this today and here is what I've come up with.



I've run a couple of digital tests and it meets:

• The stabilization checks out (twist vs. estimated velocity). The bullet will actually remain stable and not tumble down to 67 FPS! Center of gravity and center of pressure are collocated so it should shoot very well.
• The nose radius matches the CIP bullet standard up to the meplat. So, it should provide reliable feed and outstanding self defense terminal ballistics.

It has gotten a bit late so tomorrow I will run the internal ballistic testing to see if everything matches up digitally. I'm also going to run it by a guy that is very knowledgeable in regard to this subject, casting bullets & the 9mm Mak to see what he thinks.

Now 9mm Makarvo shooters, would you pay $60 for this tumble lube groove, 100-grain bullet, 6-cavity mold to feed your Mak?

[Maximumbob54]

RD - "Now 9mm Makarov shooters, would you pay $60 for this tumble lube groove, 100-grain bullet, 6-cavity mold to feed your Mak? "


Ummm...

HELLS YES!!!!

Put me down for one as soon as you have them.

Oh, and offer a sizing die that would be good for it. And put me down for that as well.