Fillers? In Pistol Cases

[Bass Ackward]

I know, I know.

Here we go again. Most folks know I am not a filler guy. I have never had much (try any) success and to this day only in certain applications where I use solid filler for compression.

I have gotten used to some pretty spectacular results using PSB in rifle cases. It has enabled me to take ACWW to some pretty fantastic pressures while beating accuracy at lower velocity levels. Chronographed results from this weekend, with the 06 and Whelen, had loads with ES as low as 3 for 10 shot strings. Yep that was 3 fps. Had to test the chrono to be sure myself, and by golly, three was accurate. The 458 is next.

So now I am wondering on pistols how a smidge of filler for compression might work with the slow burners and lighter loads. Last night I loaded some 44 Mags with the tappered 240 bullet that we did as a group buy using 15.4 grains of 2400 and .5cc of PSB. Then I seated the bullet out on the last crimp groove to cut down on the jump. Doing this last time was really dirty and had unburned powder everywhere.

This is just to see how it affects velocity, case seal in the chambers, and if it remains clean burning and off the face of my revolver. If so, then I will play around with it for accuracy. I just don't shoot enough pistol anymore to worry about one more step if it works.

[45 2.1]

Bass-

Fillers aren't too usefull for what your trying. On the other hand ,foam egg carton wads are usefull to get good ignition for round ball loads in pistols and rifles in the staight wall cases.

[Kragman71]

BA,
I'm a dedicatd filler-user with both bottle-necked and straight-walled rifle cases.
But I never found any use for them in pistol cases. I do use wax wads on occasion,which are filler of sorts.
Frank

[felix]

Yes, I have used grits off and on for years, but with a faster powder and with very low amounts of powder. However, the pressure was too unpredictable in almost every situation. Wtih PSB the results might be, should be, considerably more gentle. Herco would be the powder to try because it is the one I have found to be mostly kind-er when filler-ed. How much powder? I'd say 8 grains would be sufficient for a stronger cowboy load, with just enough PSB to hold the powder down, very slight compression. ... felix

[StarMetal]

Yes, here we go again, and again I repeat what I have found. Maybe it should be a sticky. I tried the polyethylene wads directly under the bullet base cut from coffee can lids. I didn't see much of a change. Then I read where Harris from the NRA said something about Kapok filler in revolver cartridges. He said that he found the filler keeps the cylinder throats and face, and the forcing cone frame area, and the bore to a degree, alot cleaner then if they weren't used. I tried it and by God it does keep your cylinder ALOT cleaner. One day shooting the same type and caliber of revolvers (Model 25 Smiths in 45 LC) a friend said "How come your gun is alot cleaner then mine"?. Other then that I haven't found much of a benefit and it's time consuming to use.

Joe

[felix]

Joe, we are not talking wads here, I don't think. ... felix

[StarMetal]

Felix....Kapok is not a wad, it fills the space between the powder and the bullet base. I just mentioned the wad so please forgive me. Did you chew anyone else out that mentioned a wad?

Joe

[felix]

Nothing wrong with wads stuck to the boolit, Joe. You know that. It appears to me that BA is trying to keep the powder next to the primer so he can get a reduced load with a low ES. Kapok will work, but I think he asking for something that can be easily scooped or dropped. ... felix

[StarMetal]

Felix,

Well that easy to scoop stuff is quite expensive for what it is. Sure don't take long to take a pinch of kapok or dacron and put it in a case. I thought about trying some that scoopable filler in my rifle cartridges, but just haven't brought myself to try it yet.

Joe

[Bass Ackward]

Results of my pistol filler testing

Again the load was 15.4 grains of 2400 with .5cc of shot buffer compressed. The bullet was the group buy, multiple crimp groove, 240 grain PB completed not to long ago. Bullet was crimped in the center groove at 1.64 for both loads.

Even though my throats are all .432+, and my forcing cone is .4314, with a tapered bore from fire lapping down to a muzzle of .4308, I chose to size 14 BHN bullets to .4295 to try and creat an undesireable, gas leakage situation.

I also loaded 6 of the same thing without filler and .432 bullets which would be my standard practice.

Quickload predicts a perfect world velocity of 1099 fps with 16,290 psi. This does not take into acount the BC gap or any lost gases from leakage until the bullets obturated up and sealed. My problems in the passed were that the pressure was always too low to obturate ACWW unless I compensated for a larger bullet. While this sealed, cases always came out dirty indicating that a seal was not obtained.

Here we go.

Results with filler:
1. 1050
2. 1052
3. 1050
4. 1048
5. 1050
6. 1054

Can't be right so I fired another cylinder full:
1. 1050
2. 1050
3. 1049
4. 1048
5. 1052
6. 1052

Is this 2400 or Bullseye?

12 shot group size was 5/8" outside to outside at 18 yards into a log end. Absolutely no leading as if you needed to be told. Gun appeared clean with NO unburned powder in the bore and cylinder chambers and outside cases were perfectly clean. Bullet obturated and sealed immediately.


Results without filler:
1. 1034
2. 988
3. 1004
4. 923 (?)
5. 961
6. 1014

Group size was 1 1/4" outside to outside at 17 yards into a log end. Still no leading. Some unburned powder in the barrel. Cases have black on the outside and the cylinder needs cleaning which I will do tonight.

This load shot pretty fair for me with the new bullet. I decided to try the filler under compression to see if I could get a low pressure load pressure load to burn clean. Then I wanted to try to see if accuracy would improve. I will try it at 25 yards later, but acts like a sub inch performer.

This is well worth "my" time to add 5 minutes to 50 shells. Thanks to all those that helped me learn something here.

See Thread "Quickload" under Shooters of this board for results with my 458X2 and fillers.

[felix]

BA, now try the same with Herco for half the cost per round. Use the same volume of powder as you did with 2400 so you can use the same PSB dipper size. Herco is the fluffiest powder in existance that I know of. However, don't exceed about 8 grains for the first trial. We don't want to exceed the speed of sound, right? What does quickload say? ... felix

[Bass Ackward]

BA, now try the same with Herco for half the cost per round. Use the same volume of powder as you did with 2400 so you can use the same PSB dipper size. Herco is the fluffiest powder in existance that I know of. However, don't exceed about 8 grains for the first trial. We don't want to exceed the speed of sound, right? What does quickload say? ... felix


Felix,

I will try this when I get time. I have been under enourmous pressure from my father for a 1000fps load for his Smith using this bullet because he can no longer see / shoot well enough to test for himself. His Smith also leads with everything else below 2400 speed / pressures using Smith size (.4295) bullets.

Blue Dot is my old standard for this range, but even it leads if the firing rate is high enough to heat the barrel and I ain't playing no more lube games for a darn wheeler. I figured that Blue Dot burnt well enough at low pressures because it was a shotgun powder. But 2400 was dirty in a 4" and I had to listen to that noise too. (Fathers can be demanding too) (Thank God, I still have him! :grin:) Accuracy was about 2 1/2" in his gun without filler. Now he saw me shoot that today, so ofcoarse, I have to repeat it tomorrow in his Smith. If there is a God in heaven, hopefully it will perform in his gun for him too.

So many projects, so little time. Check out my 458 results with filler under "Quickload" in Shooters on this board. Would appreciate comments.

[Buckshot]

................BA, neat test and obviously a worthwhile result, eh? Thanks for doing it and taking the time to report same.

.....................Buckshot

[Bass Ackward]

I wanted to follow this up with Saturday's results since they differed somewhat from Friday's test.

What is funny is how one thing can affect other things and change your whole thought process. From bullet diameter to recoil.

I loaded up 6 shells with the exact same load as I used Friday, but I used filler and .432 bullets to fit my throat. Velocities went up a little and ES spreads increased again. (?) My cylinder face and top strap were dirtier. All cylinders remained clean. Still the gun was far cleaner than without.

I have always used larger bullets as the preferred method to improve ignition and seal and to prevent leading. What this has me thinking now is that I can safely use filler to do these things. At least in this velocity / pressure range. As a result, I can cut back my bullet diameter now to bore size from throat. This will allow a faster / easier transition of the bullet from the cylinder into the bore. This will save on the cutting of the top strap and dirt on the outside of the gun.

Here are the velocities for my Redhawk:
1096, 1084, 1102, 1073, 1086, 1090

Still not bad ES (29) for a low pressure / slow powder load. But they show me the gun was working to size down the bullet in the cone. These are more the kind of spreads I get with Unique or faster in this velocity range. It also gives me the option to shoot one bullet diameter in all my handguns. Less headaches.

This was also clean in Dad's 29 Smith and my 329pd. There was more ash in the bore which I would expect with 4" guns. I did not chrono these guns because it started raining.

Another really nice, unexpected side bar to this test, especially with the 329pd, is that this load took some of the .... jab (more rise) out of the recoil. Because of that, recoil was less painful than the 825 fps load I had been using with Unique. This is not a good defense load because it does rise and you have flash.

[Char-Gar]

I am a fan of PSB/Grex in some rifle cases and loads. However, I also hold the opinion that such fillers have no place or use in handgun loads.

[StarMetal]

Well John, like I've mentioned on this forum many times before I told everyone that fillers will keep a revolver shooting them cleaner then one that isn't using fillers.

I'm doing the same experiment with undersized rifle bullets and to answer your question hastily, NO..do far it doesn't work in that velocity range.

Joe

P.S. As an aside, Felix and I have talked by pm's on my idea that
I think bullet lubes server more a function of sealing then lubing
thus we were working on what lubes would do that.

[Bass Ackward]

Well John, like I've mentioned on this forum many times before I told everyone that fillers will keep a revolver shooting them cleaner then one that isn't using fillers.

I'm doing the same experiment with undersized rifle bullets and to answer your question hastily, NO..do far it doesn't work in that velocity range.

Joe

P.S. As an aside, Felix and I have talked by pm's on my idea that
I think bullet lubes server more a function of sealing then lubing
thus we were working on what lubes would do that.


Joe,

Well I think you should post your theories and results once you get them completed. No need to hide on that PM list. That's why I once suggested an experimentation section where only the idiots like me would play. No opinions, just results!

Since I have the propensity to become ..... controversial, I have decided to just post what I am doing. What happened. And let people get out of it what they want if the subject is not popular or unconventional.

My next experiment is if you have to choke a lever if you use compression filler. The only reason I see to choke is for ignition.

[BOOM BOOM]

HI,
I know this subject has been experimented on & disscused before.
But the progress of any science is based on experiments that can be repeated by others w/ consistant or simular results. So I for one am glad you are doing this.
Two question to reafferm/jog my memory.
1)Will fillers like dacron help when one shoots a gas checked bullet without the gc in a pistol at vel. over 1000'/s ?
2)Will fillers also help when one shoots a GC bullet from a bottelnecked rifle case (30/06 family) without the GC if one wants to exceed 1500'/s ?
I think they might, but can't at this time remember if this has been done & reported before.

[Bass Ackward]

1)Will fillers like dacron help when one shoots a gas checked bullet without the gc in a pistol at vel. over 1000'/s ?
2)Will fillers also help when one shoots a GC bullet from a bottelnecked rifle case (30/06 family) without the GC if one wants to exceed 1500'/s ?
I think they might, but can't at this time remember if this has been done & reported before.


Boomer,

I did this because no one here could offer any advise when I asked. I shoot solid filler like PSB, but I have never had any luck with Dacron in all my attempts.

If I can't weight it, or measure it, it don't go in. Doesn't matter what.

[44man]

As far as the gas checked boolit without a gas check, I think you will find that it is the drive area that will control how it shoots and not a filler. Leaving the check off shortens the boolit in effect and it will be the rate of twist that governs how it will do.

[StarMetal]

44man

I don't think that's it, because ungaschecked rifle bullet won't shoot as good as when they are checked in rifles have too much spin. If what you were saying is true then when it is checked it means the rifling in that rifle is marginal to stablize the bullet. Something about the shape of the base of an unchecked bullet has to do with it or that maybe that unprotected base is fragile and the gas and powder distort it, or it doesn't let the gas escape evenly when it leaves the muzzle. It's not lenght and rifling twist. Shucks you can even try a shorter unchecked bullet to prove that out.

Joe

[w30wcf]

Boom Boom,

In answer to your questions, based on my experience.......yes and yes. The polyethylene shot buffer filler that I use (Ballistic Products) works well in acting as a gas check, keeping the powder gases behind the bullet. In my .30-30 rifles, I can easily get to 2,000 f.p.s. with good accuracy with an unchecked bullet using as little as 2.5 grs. of filler.


Bass Ackward,

Thank you for your very informational report. I have found the same good results using poly shot buffer in both the .38-40 & .44-40. As you have demonstrated with undersized bullets, the buffer acts as a firewall, preventing leading and allowing the bullet to transverse the barrel without disruption from the propellant.

It would also be THE PRESCRIPTION for accurate shooting in the case of a revolver that has undersized throats.

In the case of the .38-40, a friend has a 1889 Marlin with a bore that can be best described as pitiful. The barrel is full of ruts and rifling is non exsistant in several places down the barrel! Understandably, accuracy with factory jacketed bullets is non exsistant (12+" at 50 yards) as it is with cast bullet reloads.
We tried polyethylene shot buffer in an attempt to get this old timer shooting again. What a difference! The first 5 shot group at 50 yards went sub 2"!

When I purchased my '73 Winchester several years ago, I bought a box of Winchester Cowboy ammunition to try in it. I soon found out that my '73's barrel is oversized (.433" groove) and the Winchester ammunition was hopelessly inaccurate (.427" bullet diameter) and keyholed at 25 yards. I pulled some bullets from that ammunition, and reloaded them using poly shot buffer over 4227 powder. The first group went just 5/8" at 25 yards! And that with bullets that were .006" undersized.

These results indicate that buffer does, in fact, work as firewall, allowing accurate shooting in less than ideal throat / barrel / bullet combinations, keeping the gas behind the bullet thus allowing it to center itself in the barrel and give accurate shooting, unaffected by disruptive powder gases.

In addition, plain based bullets or gas checked bullets sans g.c. can be pushed to velocities higher than normally possible in most applications.

And finally, as you have also shown, by keeping the powder positioned to the rear of the case, less shot to shot velocity variation is accomplished.

Thank you again,
w30wcf

[Bass Ackward]

Felix,

I tried the 8 grains of Herco with filler as you suggested. It was like shooting 10.5 grains of Herco without filler according to Quickload. The difference of coarse is pressure.

What this has taught me is the way I want to use PSB for compression. I want to use filler to the point that it only improves ignition. In other words, if a manul or Quickload predict a velocity, then I use fillers with powders to improve ignition until my predicted velocity and chronographed velocity match. If actual velocity starts to go over the predicted velocity, then my filler is no longer just improving ignition, but now throwing more pressure.

The trick is to find the bullet powder balance. In other words, Herco burned too fast and was throwing more pressure with the 240 grain. When I seated a 225 grain bullet and added more filler, my Quickload predicted velocity again matched the chronograph. So the cut off with a powder the speed of Herco is somewhere around that point with 8 grains of it. But go up just a little and you are out of balance again.

Personally, I think I will stay with Blue Dot or slower powders with PSB in the 44Mag. Faster is simply too touchy and probably not necessary to obtain adequate ignition. But I wish I knew enough to use this stuff when I played with the 45 Colt.

One other fact to come out of this testing is that I can now shoot this Redhawk under an inch at 30 yards pretty regular. This is the one with the peep sight that so many people wondered how it would work. After another fine gentleman saw / used this sight, he is now in the market for a handgun that he had given up almost 6 years ago simply because he "felt" that he could no longer see to shoot. Just for the record.