.38 special blow up and questions regarding proper loadings.

[ell198679]

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...+special+loads I recently had a gun blew up on me I was using 3.2 grains of win 231, magnum pistol primers, and jacketed hollow points 110 grain. I believe I loaded to little amount of powder, PSI must of been off the charts, but shouldn't all of this of been fine?? According to the link you can even use a heavier projectile with that amount of powder. I am guessing my scale must of been bumped or something. Everyone I have talked says the magnum pistol primers are fine in low to medium loads. Considering gas ejection at the front of the cylinder it must not take much of mistake. Only use digital scale now lol.

[williamwaco]

You need to look for a different cause.

You may have had a bullet lodged in the barrel but not by the load you mentioned.

There are two likely possibilities.

1) Fired a round with no powder, heard only a click. The bullet lodged in the forcing cone. Then fired the next round with powder and a bullet lodged in the barrel.
A primer only will not generally force a 158 grain bullet into the barrel. It usually lodges halfway between the cylinder and the forcing cone. ( Don't ask how I know that. )
With a 110 grain bullet and a magnum primer It is certainly credible that it forced the bullet completely out of the chamber.

2) Triple powder charge.
It is very unlikely that a double charge would do that.
According to my manuals a double charge would only get you to the +P pressure level. That would not cause a catastrophic failure.

[ell198679]

1) Fired a round with no powder, heard only a click. The bullet lodged in the forcing cone. Then fired the next round with powder and a bullet lodged in the barrel.

This does make sense I did have some rounds, which did fail to ignite with a primer strike. However, I find it strange that I forgot to put powder in all together.

[fouronesix]

Could be lodged bullet thus bore obstruction- kaboom. However, I quit using ball powder for anything a long time ago for a reason. Besides the possibilities of overcharge or classic bullet bore obstruction... light charges of ball powder can do one more type of kaboom.

The primer fires, the bullet is pushed (by the primer impulse) into the forcing cone and stops, the rest of the charge ignites- kaboom.

[ell198679]

231 is flake powder they are shaped like flakes any way.

[bcp477]

Not that it matters, in this circumstance, but 231 IS a "ball type" powder. It is made as a ball powder - with spherical granules. Then, it is squashed flat, to form the round flakes you describe. So, it does share some of the characteristics of "ball" powders.

However, as someone else said, that load did NOT kaboom your revolver. There definitely is another cause - and I'm betting on a barrel obstruction, too.

[Char-Gar]

A bullet stuck in the barrel might cause a bulge in the barrel but will not cause the handgun to blow up.

The problem was not Win. 231 powder.

The probem is a double or triple charge of powder. Did you use a progressive press, because if you did, there is the cause. You won't have to work very hard to double charge a case with this type of equipment.

[35remington]

Ball powder is not prone to problems that flake powders avoid. Some of the bad characteristics of slow ball powder like W296 when used with light charges, loose case fit and uncrimped ammo in revolvers are not characteristics that W231 is prone to. So blaming W231 for the problem is barking up the wrong tree.

One of the rules of thumb is this: If there is room in a case for more than one charge of powder, sometimes more than one charge will get loaded if you are not vigilant. A bullet lodged in the forcing cone is also possible. 3.2 grains is a quite light charge with a 110 grain bullet in a 38 special case and sticking a bullet in the barrel is a possibility. Loading density with such a shallowly seated bullet is low, and so is pressure and velocity. A magnum primer may make things worse.

[Larry Gibson]

1) Fired a round with no powder, heard only a click. The bullet lodged in the forcing cone. Then fired the next round with powder and a bullet lodged in the barrel.

This does make sense I did have some rounds, which did fail to ignite with a primer strike. However, I find it strange that I forgot to put powder in all together.

You have the probable answer to your question. A 110 gr J bullet has a very short bearing surface and a magnum primer may well have driven it into the forcing cone allowing the cylinder to turn and and you fired the next round with the 1st bullet stuck in the throat. An additional problem is that if the primer strikes failed to ignite the powder perhaps there was little or no powder present? If so then the small charges may be "bridging" in the powder thrower and then double or triple charging a case. Or if using a progressive press the cases are not charged consistently. I can assure you that a triple charge may be very destructive by itself.....but if a double or triple charge just happened to come up (Murphy is alive and well in this sport) behind a bullet lodged in the throat then a "blow up"" is most certain........fortunately you’re not injured (?) and have learned a lesson, albeit an expensive and embarrassing lesson.....

Larry Gibson

[ell198679]

Luckily got the gun replaced. But yes very important lesson happy it happened in a strange way.

It could of also been a low charge, that simple could not eject the bullet. would that of have caused a blow up?

[thegreatdane]

Luckily got the gun replaced. But yes very important lesson happy it happened in a strange way.

It could of also been a low charge, that simple could not eject the bullet. would that of have caused a blow up?

yep. Bore obstructions are bad things

[Norbrat]

A bullet stuck in the barrel might cause a bulge in the barrel but will not cause the handgun to blow up.

Oh, really??



Happened at our club.

[BCRider]

A bullet which sticks just barely into the forcing cone would jam the next one before it leaves the cylinder. And that last picture could be a possible outcome. In fact it wouldn't surprise me if that was the situation with that poor gun.

[odoh]

This thrd caught my eye as there was a time 50yrs ago re 3.2 grs bulls eye destroying guns in the target shooters ranks. Deemed mysterious at the time and squib loads discussed and dismissed. In fact IIRC the term used was detonation. Another mystery at that time was reduced charges of 4831 in the 25-06. Concensus was detonation from 'pressure wave' changing ignition characteristics. Weired coincidence of history repeating itself

[462]

This is your second thread in which an improper powder charge is a likely suspect to your problems. Look into the method you use to charge the cases, as it's seems there is a lack of control whether the case has been charged with the correct amount of powder, or not.

[Junior1942]

This is your second thread in which an improper powder charge is a likely suspect to your problems. Look into the method you use to charge the cases, as it's seems there is a lack of control whether the case has been charged with the correct amount of powder, or not.

Either that or attach a flag to your hat so we won't get at the bench beside you

[GBertolet]

Just out of curiosity, what is your method of charging your cases? Do you pick up an empty case from a bin, charge it, and place it in a loading block? Or do you have all your empty cases in a loading block, and charge them while in the block? Or is there some other procedure you use?

[Larry Gibson]

This thrd caught my eye as there was a time 50yrs ago re 3.2 grs bulls eye destroying guns in the target shooters ranks. Deemed mysterious at the time and squib loads discussed and dismissed. In fact IIRC the term used was detonation. Another mystery at that time was reduced charges of 4831 in the 25-06. Concensus was detonation from 'pressure wave' changing ignition characteristics. Weired coincidence of history repeating itself

Both have been disproven, Federal and Hercules conducted extensive tests and determined it took a double charge with the bullet seated deeply or a triple charge of Bullseye to cause such damage. The cause of the double charge and triple charges were traced to progressive loading machines then in use.....both now discontinued............we continue to find this problem today with much better progressive loading machines when improperly operated or attention is not paid to the loading process. Surprisingly it also happens frequently with single stage loading when the operator also fails to pay attention and use quality control checks to ensure a double or triple charge doesn't happen along with under charged cases. The reason we see "visually inspect every case to ensure a proper powder charge " is an admonishment to head......

The cause for slow burning powders such as 4831 to cause blow ups has been proven and replicated. It is now referred to as S.E.E. (Secondary Explosion Effect) Wave "detonation" is a theory that has not been proven.

Larry Gibson

[fecmech]

This thrd caught my eye as there was a time 50yrs ago re 3.2 grs bulls eye destroying guns in the target shooters ranks. Deemed mysterious at the time and squib loads discussed and dismissed. In fact IIRC the term used was detonation.

I have a copy of the American Rifleman article showing the testing of BE by the HP White lab with the pressures involved and posted it here in the past. There was no BE "detonation" only careless reloading practices. A friend of mine blew up a K frame right next to me shooting PPC with the "Classic" 2.7/BE. Took the top half of the cylinder and top strap and I got a small cut in the side of my face. He was using an inline progressive that was a copy of the CH Auto Champ and admitted to me that he had had some jams and had "jiggled" the handle a couple times and from that we surmised more than 1 charge of powder. He sent the gun to S&W and said he believed he was at fault in the letter. Smith replaced the frame swapping his good parts over and only charged him about $40. IIRC (mid 70's).

[swheeler]

Either that or attach a flag to your hat so we won't get at the bench beside you

That's funny Jr but does sound like a good idea. I think a bore obstruction is probably the correct answer and possibly rounds fired in the order they were loaded. That meaning a case with only a primer to drive bullet into barrel then next round a double charge fired into the stuck bullet. Where did you ever find loading data with 3.2 gr 231 and a 110 gr bullet, that is 2 full grs under a starting load. Sounds like you need to refine your loading technique before you get hurt, or hurt someone else.