BLR in .358 Winchester - I think I need one!
- Thread starter Jeff/1911
- Start date
Hi Rick,
You have lots of wonderful ideas. I appreciate your suggesting up these things on my behalf...what fun!
I am certainly interested in bullet casting in the future, although at this time I seem to keep myself busy reloading for several different handgun and rifle calibers. When I do get into it, one of my first projects will be a "true" Elmer Keith bullet for use in the .44 magnum revolver...I can't find anything but 240 grain SWC's for sale.
I'll probably start w/ a new BLR lightweight in .358, and keep my eyes open for an all-steel one to buy at a later time in any of the larger short action calibers. I much prefer the SA BLR's to the LA ones.
Thanks again - Jeff.
You have lots of wonderful ideas. I appreciate your suggesting up these things on my behalf...what fun!
I am certainly interested in bullet casting in the future, although at this time I seem to keep myself busy reloading for several different handgun and rifle calibers. When I do get into it, one of my first projects will be a "true" Elmer Keith bullet for use in the .44 magnum revolver...I can't find anything but 240 grain SWC's for sale.
I'll probably start w/ a new BLR lightweight in .358, and keep my eyes open for an all-steel one to buy at a later time in any of the larger short action calibers. I much prefer the SA BLR's to the LA ones.
Thanks again - Jeff.
Custom BLR? Yes sir, I have bought a BLR 81 in .223 to turn into a .300 Whisper. The guy who was supposed to be helping me out on this one no longer answers my e-mails.........
For those who are thinking of getting into casting bullets, here is one word of hard-earned advice: do your melting and fluxing OUTSIDE. I darn near killed myself doing this inside.......
Doug
For those who are thinking of getting into casting bullets, here is one word of hard-earned advice: do your melting and fluxing OUTSIDE. I darn near killed myself doing this inside.......
Doug
It's always fun spending other people's money... BTW, did you know a .303 British, blown out straight, is almost identical to a 40/60 Maynard... 300 grain bullet at something around 2300 fps and a 415 grain bullet at around 1900 fps... using just Lee Enfield pressure limits (48,000 psi). There's another project...Jeff/1911 said:
Beartooth Bullets sells 250 grain Keith style bullets - and heavier. Not sure if you want to shoot them out of tradition or have some intended purpose that requires that, but they also sell .44's a lot heavier than that. Veral Smith makes moulds for his WFN style bullets as heavy as you can stand it - that design is like a Keith on steroids.
Ooohhhh... what were YOU melting and playing with? Old battery plates?Doug said:
I do all my bullet casting inside; have been for years, used to get tested for lead when I was assigned as an instructor and was around bullets and primer dirt all day. No lead problems.
BUT... I stick with isotope containers, mostly, for my lead source, enriched with a little bit of linotype to get an ally that can be heat treated in the oven. Hard lead shot would No mystery metals... I have used discarded wheelweights before, and those I DID do the melt and clean job on outside, using a cruddy old pot for the job. The stink of the dirt, rubber bits, etc made that job something I wouldn't do in the house.
Fluxes. I don't think much of that Marvelux stuff. The metallurgist guru with the CBA tells me I was probably using way too much as only a tiny little bit is needed. That's possible. But the stuff is hydroscopic as hell and draws water like crazy - helps your pot rust. Good old carnuba wax works just as well, if not better, smells pretty good too. I got a lifetime supply in bulk from a woodworking supply place; it's in flake form. Lee Valley or whatever is in your area probably has it as well.
And, I throw a bit of the cage liner material I have on top of the melt - it is probably the same as kitty litter or stuff like that. Minimizes oxidation and all other kinds of good stuff by sealing the melt off from the air. It will stay right up on the top. Can't do that if you ladle pour however - but I'm a bottom pour guy.
I've heard of other guys throwing... boric acid???... or something similar on the top in a powder form; kind of forms a glass layer over the top. I'd make sure of what they're using before trying that.
And, if you do prefer to ladle cast, get a big Rowell ladle. Holds a lot more molten lead, keeps the melt hot while pouring, and gives you a better head behind to push the melt into the mould.
Works for me...
Back to Rick........
I have used just about anything for lead, with the nod going to wheel weights. The one that was really nasty was old lubed bullets, the smoke that came off them hung in my basement for days.......
I cannot recall what I used for flux, but it also smoked like crazy, it has been too long and I inhaled......unlike Mr Clinton in the USA. ;-)
And yes I used ladles, not a bottom-draw pot. My biggest ladle could throw about a two-pound ingot I think! For bullets I used a Lee (?) ladle with a small spigot in it, and it seemed to do the job well. But I was a small time caster, maybe a hundred or so bullets at a time.
Like I think I said, it is an interesting hobby, but by golly you need to keep your wits about you when you are casting!
Doug
I have used just about anything for lead, with the nod going to wheel weights. The one that was really nasty was old lubed bullets, the smoke that came off them hung in my basement for days.......
I cannot recall what I used for flux, but it also smoked like crazy, it has been too long and I inhaled......unlike Mr Clinton in the USA. ;-)
And yes I used ladles, not a bottom-draw pot. My biggest ladle could throw about a two-pound ingot I think! For bullets I used a Lee (?) ladle with a small spigot in it, and it seemed to do the job well. But I was a small time caster, maybe a hundred or so bullets at a time.
Like I think I said, it is an interesting hobby, but by golly you need to keep your wits about you when you are casting!
Doug
We're really hijacking the .358 Winchester/BLR thread here, but just one more...Doug said:
WW is good if you want to keep it as absolutely dirt simple as possible. And they're generally good anyways because they work in most stuff that doesn't demand pure lead, but can be heat treated all the way up to a Brinell hardness of 32. My preferred choice is the isotope "cannonballs" that nuclear medicine facilities at hospitals get their little tubes of isotopes in. There's usually around 8 lbs of pure lead in each one of them, and they're just scrap to most hospitals and an annoyance to be dealt with. They're usually delighted if you offer to haul it off for them. So pure it works for a lot of handgun apps and black powder - with or without some tin in it. Add tin or hardened shot, and you can get something approximating Lyman #2 pretty easily - and once it has antimony in it, it will heat treat.
However, unless you really know your metals, it is a GREAT idea to stay away from mystery sources of lead. Old battery plates, for example, have cadmium and all this other nasty s**te that is very bad for your health. And so, I stick with wheelweights or the infamous isotope cannonballs. No surprises there.
WW's, however, are usually filthy with all kinds of dirt, dust, road salt, etc in them. I render them down outside, and flux them ad nauseum until the metal looks like pure stuff straight from the factory. Put nothing but clean metal in your pot, and you won't have problems - find a ruined old cast iron Dutch boiler or something for rendering down your scrap to cast into ingots.
You can even use paraffin wax. Carnuba is particularly good, doesn't smoke as much, kind of fragrant. All fluxes smoke - at least all the ones I've tried.
You'd have probably gotten better results if you'd used the big ladle for casting. The teeny little ladles sold by Lee (and Lyman for that matter) just don't hold enough alloy to get really well filled out and consistent bullets. I prefer bottom pour pots, but they have a learning curve to get good bullets out of as well. On top of that, just like rifles, every mould is unique in how to get the best out of it.
Bill Ferguson is the man to deal with for purchasing alloys, alloying metals, lead pots if you're going to be a ladle caster, and ladles. Crotchety old eighty year old guy who really knows both metallurgy and bullet casting. Also a nice guy, even if he won't admit it. I recommend him highly.
http://www.theantimonyman.com/
It's actually very safe; it's just that the results can be catastrophic if you fail to follow a few simple rules. My rules are few but ironclad:
- Only use alloys that you know EXACTLY what they contain. Which usually means WW, purchased alloy, or isotope shipping cannonballs.
- Never, ever, allow anything that might remotely introduce moisture into molten alloy anywhere near your pot while casting. That includes drinks, sweat, ingots straight from the garage or under the house, moths flying around, etc. The eruption of molten lead that the tiniest amount of moisture can bring on has to be seen to be believed.
- To acknowledge the "Oh s**te" factor, never cast without a cap, face shield, heavy, gauntleted gloves, shirt, pants, shoes, and preferably a long shop apron that goes from neck to ankles. You'll probably never need it - but if you do, by God, peeling molten lead splatters offthat have hardened on your face after splashing you is no fun at all.
Last edited:
Good advice Rick, and thanks for the memories..........paraffin it was for flux material.
But to get back on topic, I never did try cast bullets out of any of my .35 cal rifles, including this shiny new BLR Lightweight 81 I have here. Nice guns, those BLRs in .358.........
;-)
Doug
But to get back on topic, I never did try cast bullets out of any of my .35 cal rifles, including this shiny new BLR Lightweight 81 I have here. Nice guns, those BLRs in .358.........
;-)
Doug
Now Rick, don't you worry none about "thread hijacking"...the discussion of lead casting is Pure Gold to us prospective casters.
By the way, regarding the isotope "cannonballs"...I happen to work in a Hospital that has a Nuclear Medicine department. Thanks for that tip!
When I get my .358 BLR, I will most certainly be using .357" pistol bulleted-loads to practice with...by the way, would SR4759 be any good for these? I just picked up 4 lbs of this powder - supposedly great for a lot of different "reduced" rifle loads?
Jeff.
By the way, regarding the isotope "cannonballs"...I happen to work in a Hospital that has a Nuclear Medicine department.
Thanks for that tip! When I get my .358 BLR, I will most certainly be using .357" pistol bulleted-loads to practice with...by the way, would SR4759 be any good for these? I just picked up 4 lbs of this powder - supposedly great for a lot of different "reduced" rifle loads?
Jeff.
Last edited:
Just remember that isn't going to be suitable until you get some tin/antimony into it. Not for rifle loads in modern centerfire cartridges unless you're driving them really slow or doing paper patching.Jeff/1911 said:Now Rick, don't you worry none about "thread hijacking"...the discussion of lead casting is Pure Gold to us prospective casters.
By the way, regarding the isotope "cannonballs"...I happen to work in a Hospital that has a Nuclear Medicine department.
This is where you should drag Bill Leeper back into the conversation. He shoots "pistol loads" in his .358 calibers as well. Reduced loads with light bullets are quite safe for your rifle if done correctly, but there are things that you simply shouldn't try. Slow powders, for example, are one of them. Bill as a gunsmith is going to be far more knowledgeable about where not to tread than I will be.
All of my reduced loads in all of my rifles are built around Green Dot. C. Ed Harris, a fairly well known ballistician and experimenter, has written quite a number of articles on his experimenting with reduced loads; mostly dealing with Red Dot, but some with Green Dot. I settled on Green Dot because I already had a boatload of it around and it seems to work pretty much as well as Ed Harris describing Red Dot as working. I don't use any fillers; whatever loads Bill was shooting, he was using a square of non-skid to hold the powder back against the primer. That is a very common thing to do with small powder charges, incidentally, and Bill can probably give you a very good explanation of why he thinks it is a good thing.
Do a Google search using "Ed Harris" and "reduced loads" and I am sure you will come up with lots of info and discussion on the subject. In the meantime, I will post an email from Ed back in the old Fidonet days, concerning reduced loads at the bottom of this. It certainly doesn't cover the entire subject, but certainly enough to give you a starting point.
As far as SR4759, I have never used it myself. However, RCBS's cast bullet handbook gives a low charge of 18 gr. for 1561 fps and a high charge of 20 gr. for 1724 fps using their 150 gr. SWC mould in the .358 Winchester. Ed Harris's "The Load" (mentioned in his article below) would give you 1730 fps using Red Dot. SR4759 using RCBS's 180 gr. cast bullet would be 27 gr. for 2170 fps or 25 gr. for 2093 fps.
I don't know how much higher or lower you could go than that safely with that particular powder - I assume they're aiming at a velocity/working pressure zone where the greatest chance of success lies with that particular bullet. RCBS does seem to use SR4759 a lot in their published cast bullet data.
I would have a use for pistol bullet loads in that velocity zone (jacketed), but I also like to have rifle loads that are subsonic when I "heavy up" for gophers. Just don't need the noise and velocity for going after gophers within a hundred yards while doing a bit of walk and shoot for practice.. those loads are actually pretty zippy, nothing wrong with that but not necessarily required either. I like stretching out my powder supply, and the faster you drive cast bullets the better you have to manage bullet fit, bullet hardness, etc.
Anyways, here's Ed; there doesn't seem to be any copyright issues as Ed posted this out to Fidonet way back then without any restrictions:
________________________________________________________
Date: 17 Feb 94 17:50:11
From: Ed Harris
To: All
Subj: Red Dot in Reduced Rifle Loads
"The Load" is 13 Grains of Red Dot" (In most strong-actioned, military rifles
of .30 cal. or larger) READ ON FOR SPECIFICS AND WARNINGS!
(If you missed this article when it originally appeared in Handloader's
Digest, 10th Edition, here it is again...
By C.E. (Ed) Harris, Revised 2-16-94
My success in economizing by using up leftover shotshell powder
has changed my approach to handloading. I had a caddy of Red
Dot, and no longer reloaded shotshells, so asked myself, "what
can I do with it?" My shooting is now mostly high-power rifle.
I needed several hundred rounds a week to practice offhand,
reloading, and working the bolt in sitting and prone rapid, but
didn't want to burn out my barrel or my wallet. Powder used to
be cheap, but today is $20/lb. (or more), so cost is a factor in
component choice.
I used to ignore pistol or shotgun powders in reduced rifle loads
for the usual reasons: the risk of accidental double-charges,
fears of erratic ignition, and concerns with maintaining
accuracy, and reduced utility with a low-power load. Still, the
caddy of Red Dot kept "looking at me" from the corner. Would it
work? Looking at data in the RCBS Cast Bullet Manual No. 1 and
the Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook suggested it would, so I tried it,
much to my delight! Red Dot is bulky, compared to the usual
rifle powders used in .30-'06-size cases. It occupies more powder
space in typical charges than common "reduced load" rifle
powders, such as #2400, IMR4227, IMR4198 or RL-7. The lower bulk
density of Red Dot adequately addresses my safety concerns
because it makes an accidental double charge far less likely.
After considerable experimentation, my friends and I found "The
Load" is 13 grains of Hercules Red Dot, in any FULL SIZED rifle
case of .30 cal. or larger. "The Load" has distinct advantages
over more expensive alternatives, within certain limitations,
which are:
1. The case must be LARGER than the .300 Savage or .35 Remington.
2. The rifle must be of MODERN (post 1898) design, suitable for
smokeless powder, with a bore size of .30 cal. or larger.
3. The bullet weight must be within the NORMAL range for the
given cartridge.
4. Inert fillers such as Dacron, kapok or are NOT RECOMMENDED!
(Nor are they necessary).
Within these restrictions I have now engraved in stone, "The
Load" works! The bullet may be either jacketed or cast.
Gaschecked cast bullets required in the .30 cals., otherwise you
will get leading, but plainbased ones work fine in the 8mm Mauser
or larger.
"The Load" has shown complete success in the .30-40 Krag, .303
British, 7.65 Argentine, .308 Win., 7.62x54R Russian, .30-'06,
8x57 and .45-70 (strong-actioned rifles such as the 1886
Winchester or 1895 Marlin -- 12 grs. is maximum for 400 gr.
bullets in the Trapdoor Springfield -- Ed.) Though I have not
tried it, I have no doubt that "The Load" would work well in
other cartridges fitting these parameters, such as the .35
Whelen, .358 Winchester, .375 H&H or .444 Marlin, based on RCBS
and Lyman published data.
"The Load" fills 50% or more of a .308 Win or .30-'06 case. The
risk of an accidental double charge is greatly reduced, because
the blunder is immediately obvious if you visually check, powder
fill on EVERY CASE, as you should whenever handloading! A bulky
powder measures more uniformly, because normal variation in the
measured volume represents a smaller percentage of the charge
weight.
Red Dot's granulation is somewhat less coarse than other flake
powders of similar burning rate, such as 700-X, which aids
metering. Its porous, uncoated flakes are easily ignited with
standard primers. So-called "magnum" primers do no harm in cases
larger than the .30-'06, but are neither necessary nor
recommended in smaller ones. I DO NOT recommend pistol primers in
reduced rifle loads, because weak primers may cause erratic
ignition, and their thinner cups can perforate more easily,
causing gas leakage and risk of personal injury!
The velocities obtained with 13 grs. of Red Dot appear mild, but
"The Load" is no pipsqueak! In a case like the .308 or .30-'06,
you get (from a 24" sporter barrel) about 1450 f.p.s. with a 200-
gr. cast bullet, 1500 with a 170-gr., or 1600 with a 150-gr. cast
load. "The Load" is fully comparable to "yesterday's deer
rifle", the .32-40, and provides good expansion of cheap, soft
alloys (10-13 BHN) at woods ranges. Jacketed bullet velocities
with "The Load" are about 120-150 f.p.s. less than a lubricated
lead bullet of the same weight.
Longer-barreled military rifles pick up a few feet per second,
but "The Load" starts to slow down in barrels over 28", such as
the M91 Moisin-Nagant and long Krags or 98a Mausers.
My preferred alloy in the .30 cals. is a mixture of 3-5 lbs. of
.22 backstop scrap to 1 lb. of salvaged linotype. Wheelweights
also work well, as do soft "Scheutzen" alloys such as 1:25
tin/lead. in bores of 8 mm or larger. "The Load" drives soft-
cast .30-cal. to 8 mm bullets fast enough to get expansion, but
without fragmenting. These out-penetrate factory .30-30
softpoints, and kill medium game up to 150 lbs. well at short
ranges up to 100 yards, when placed accurately. In medium and
large bores like the .375 H&H or .45-70, "The Load" gives typical
black powder ballistics for the bore. A 255-265 gr. cast bullet
in the .375 H&H approximates the .38-55 at 1330 f.p.s. Soft 300-
405-gr. cast bullets are pushed at 1300-1350 f.p.s. from a 22"
barrel .45-70, sporter are very effective on deer at woods
ranges. Cast bullets over .35 cal. do not have to expand
appreciably to work well on game if blunt and heavy for their
caliber.
The Load" works well with jacketed bullets, giving somewhat lower
velocities than with cast lead, due to less effective obturation
and greater friction in the bore. The 85-gr. or 100-gr. Hornady
or 90-gr. Sierra JHP for the .32 H&R Mag. revolver, or the
Remington 100-gr. .32-20 softpoint bullet become mild, but
destructive varmint loads at 1600 f.p.s. from a .308 or '06.
If you substitute a stiffly jacketed 110-gr. .30 Carbine
softpoint bullet, designed for higher velocities than imparted by
"The Load", you have a non-destructive "coup de gras", small
game or wild turkey load which shoots close to your deer rifle's
normal zero, but at 25 yards! A more accurate and effective small
game or varmint load uses a flat-nosed 150-gr. pr 170-gr. .30-30
bullet instead. These don't expand at the 1400-1450 f.p.s.
obtained with "The Load", but their larger frontal area improves
killing power compared to roundnoses or spitzers.
I have use pulled GI .30 caliber Ball, and Match bullets with
"The Load" for cheap 200-yd. NMC boltgun practice. Accuracy is
equal to arsenal loads, but I use my 600-yard sight dope at 200
yards. I expect 5-6" ten-shot, iron-sight groups at 200 yards
using M2 or M80 pulled bullets and about 3-4" for the M72 or M118
Match bullets. I use these mostly in bolt-action rifles, but they
can be single-loaded for offhand or slow-fire practice ion the
Garand as well. These .30 cal. pulls shoot fine in the .303
British or 7.62x54 Russian, despite their being a bit small,
because the fast-burning Red Dot upsets them into the deeper
grooves. The 173-gr. Match .30 cal. boattail bullets may not
shoot as well at these low velocities as lighter flat bases in
the 12" twist .308 Win. barrels, but they do quite well in ten-
inch twist barrels such as in the '06, 7.62 Russian, .303 British
and 7.65 Argentine.
The longer bore time of these 1400 f.p.s. (typical 170-180-gr.
jacketed load velocity) practice loads makes errors in follow-
through apparent, a great practice and training aid. The light
recoil and lower report of these loads helps transition Junior
tyro shooters from the .22 rimfire to the service rifle without
being intimidated by the noise and recoil.
Zeroing is no problem in the M1 or M14, because "The Load" shoots
into the ten-ring of the reduced SR target at 200 yards from your
M1 or M14 rifle at using your normal 600 yard sight dope! The
somewhat greater wind deflection blows you into the "8" ring at
200 yards with the same conditions you would expect to do so at
600 yards with M118 Match ammunition. This provides your Junior
shooters some useful wind-doping practice.
The economy of a lighter charge is obvious. A full power .30-'06
load using 50 grs. of an IMR powder like 4064 costs 10 cents a
pop, just for powder, at 140 rounds per pound (if you are lucky
enough to find new powder for $14/lb.). Substituting 13 grs. of
Red Dot gets 538 rounds per pound at a cost of 2.6 cents which is
a savings of over $7 per hundred rounds in powder alone! Greater
savings are possible if you get the best price and buy powder by
the caddy.
Velocity and point of impact of "The Load" is not noticeably
affected by varying powder position in the case. I shoot them
either slow fire, or clip-fed and flipped through rapid-fire in
the boltgun with equal accuracy. Red Dot is very clean burning
and is economical both on the basis of its lower charge weight,
and its lower basic cost per pound compared to other "rifle"
powders.
Best of all, using a shotshell powder I already have reduces the
kinds of powder I keep and eliminates the need for a special
"reduced load" powder. This approach is ideal for rifle shooters
who are also shotgunners, since almost everybody who reloads for
12-ga. probably has a keg of Red Dot already!
I now realize it is foolish to use heavier charges of more
expensive powder for routine practice, varmint or small game
loads in my center-fire rifles. I seldom shoot at over 200 yards,
and don't enjoy wearing out expensive target barrels
unnecessarily. Since I already have good sight dope and need to
work more on technique and save my remaining barrel accuracy life
for matches.
I am glad I found the way to get alot more shooting for the
dollar. Economical powder choice IS possible, and my reloading
has become less complicated and more enjoyable simple since I
realized I could do most of my rifle shooting with 13 grains of
Red Dot!
In Home Mix We Trust, Regards, Ed
--- msged 2.05
* Origin: Home of Ed's Red (1:109/120.3006)
Rick,
I do still have that cerrosafe cast. Measured the bore/groove at .392/.4039.
4759 is a great powder for reduced loads simply because it is bulky and burns well at relatively low pressures. As you know, I was using 700x which I don't consider to be a particularly good one but I had it on hand. Regards, Bill.
I do still have that cerrosafe cast. Measured the bore/groove at .392/.4039.
4759 is a great powder for reduced loads simply because it is bulky and burns well at relatively low pressures. As you know, I was using 700x which I don't consider to be a particularly good one but I had it on hand. Regards, Bill.
Thanks Leeper,
That's great! I just bought four pounds of SR4759 at $10 a pound - was looking for a good use for it!
To All of you, I have now "found" a BLR lightweight in .358 Winchester. It's brand new, and I will pick it up on September 6th.
Now (soon) I will be able to try some of those great suggestions you've all been sending my way. Thanks a lot for all of your input on this; it's just great!
I'll start off with my Leupold 2-7 Compact scope (once I steal it from my A- Bolt in .308) and see how that goes...
Jeff.
That's great! I just bought four pounds of SR4759 at $10 a pound - was looking for a good use for it!
To All of you, I have now "found" a BLR lightweight in .358 Winchester. It's brand new, and I will pick it up on September 6th.
Now (soon) I will be able to try some of those great suggestions you've all been sending my way. Thanks a lot for all of your input on this; it's just great!
I'll start off with my Leupold 2-7 Compact scope (once I steal it from my A- Bolt in .308) and see how that goes...
Jeff.
Thanks Bill. I talked to Browning's techies/shop gnomes, or whatever they are down in the US during the course of the week. They asked about the bore and I could remember groove at .404" but not land size. In the end the other dimension didn't seem to matter. I have never had much luck with Browning and new firearms I was less than happy with before, but in this instance they've been pretty good and said send it in. Now I just have to figure the fastest way to get it done. I think Canadian service centers are out because I got the impression that even US pistolsmiths at those service centers are told to forward the firearm to Browning if it is something major like a bad barrel, bad slide, or whatever. So shipping off to Canada might add weeks or months to getting it back.Leeper said:
The legal end of it has to be confirmed as well; I have the Form 6NIA to take it down to the US and carry it there, but it also says any firearms I take down also leave with me when I come back to Canada. Anyways... I'll get it figured out.
Thanks Bill; I will have to search for some data on the range of charge weights it can be used at and then probably purchase a pound and try it out. I've always been pretty careful with those really light Green Dot and Unique loads I've used, but I suspect that was the story with the loads that ruined that rifle at the DCRA meet you were telling me about last weekend.
Been thinking about that story a couple of times this week and thinking I should maybe be a bit proactive and find something else. Somebody was telling me about a really "fluffy" new powder that has come out in the last couple of years that is really bulky and good for this kind of application, but I can't remember the name of the stuff. I have so much "older" powders that I haven't even looked at the new ones coming out the last five or six years or so.
Seemed to work...
