RotoMetals2RepackboxSnyders JerkyLoad Data
Inline FabricationReloading EverythingMidSouth Shooters SupplyLee Precision
Titan Reloading Wideners
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 87

Thread: Is drilling out flash holes dangerous?

  1. #1
    Boolit Grand Master


    Larry Gibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, Arizona
    Posts
    21,326

    Is drilling out flash holes dangerous?

    Drilled Flash Hole High Pressure Test; 308W

    In the past I have posted this explanation of why I drill out flash holes for use with low end reduced loads.

    I shoot many thousands of squib loads in various calibers but mostly in .30s. Many of these are rimless cartridges; 30-06, .308, .308 CBC, 7.65, 7.62x39 etc. The squib loads I shoot most often is a Lee 314-90-SWC-TL over 2.7 to 3.2 gr of Bullseye depending on the cartridge. Velocity is around 800 – 875 fps. I found a long time ago the shoulders do in fact get set back with light loads such as those. With many cast loads that use normal weight bullets in the 1600 to 2000 fps range there was little setback. It basically is a matter of the psi the load generates. It takes roughly 7,000 psi (depends on thickness and hardness of the brass along with how much the case needs to reach the chamber walls.

    Measurements of shoulder set back or increase are easily taken with a Stoney Point tool. There have been basically the two theories regarding the cause; the firing pin blow theory and the primer theory. I ran the same tests with a fire formed case and inert primers; headspace was not changed. I then used the same fire formed case with live primers. In as little as two firings there was a measurable decrease in headspace. After five live primers the fired primer was noticeably backed out after firing. NOTE: this increase in headspace was with case taking LR primers. I never experience the problem with the .222 Rem or the 5.56 NATO.

    Using #d drills I gradually increased the flash hole diameter with a progressively larger drill. Using a different fire formed case with each larger drill and firing 5 primers I then measured the headspace before firing and after. As the size of the flash hole increased the headspace decrease lessoned. With a # 29 drill I no longer got any decrease in headspace. I dedicated five .308 cases and five 30-06 cases that were well fire formed to their respective rifles chambers and drilled the flash holes with the #29 drill. Over the next few days I fired 50 shots with each case. There was an indoor 50” range where I was stationed so it wasn’t all that bad. After the 50 firings there was negligible change in headspace with any of the five cases of each cartridge. The results of my test firmly demonstrated to me that it was the force of the primer explosion that drove the case forward and set back the shoulder. The squib load does not have the pressure to expand the case out to fit the chamber. By drilling out the flash hole the force of the explosion mostly went directly into the case as there is little rim left to contain it. Two other side benefits that were unforeseen; the extreme spread and standard deviations of the velocity readings improved and the case position sensitivity of the small charge was greatly reduced.

    As a result of the above tests I dedicated fire formed cases for squib loads for each rifle in rimless cases and drill out the flash holes. I have fired them many, many times now with no further change in headspace. Besides the squib load mentioned I also use 311631 (# may be wrong but it’s the 118 gr GC 32-20 bullet) with Unique in the above cartridges loaded to 1400 fps or so for a little more powerful small game load. The flash hole drilled cases work just fine for those. I now use the flash ole drilled cases for all my rimless cartridges with squib and really light loads.

    Further pressure testing in the .308W the last few years indicated that loads with a psi above 12,000 will obdurate sufficiently to prevent the primer from driving the case forward thus setting the shoulder back.


    Since then seems like every time the subject comes up we get admonitions not to do so because it is very “dangerous” should the cases with such drilled out flash holes be used for a “regular” load. Having Previously tested such cases with “regular cast bullets loads creating 28 – 30,000 psi (measured via an Oehler M43 PBL) I have endeavored to ascertain the danger of loading such to the psi of “regular” loads at 55,000 +/- psi.

    I had enough cases LC 92 7.62 NATO (308W) cases I was going drill out the flash holes to run a series of 10 tests using five 9 shot tests and five 8 shot tests. I would run a test with the flash holes as they were (.061”) and then increase them in size incrementally to .140”. That is the maximum size to enlarge the flash hole while still retaining enough of a shelf for the primer anvil legs to rest on. I used numbered (#) drills alternately from #44 up through #28 to enlarge the flash holes.

    Here we see the cases with the flash holes drilled from “as issued” on the left to #28 drilled on the right;

    Attachment 237040

    The cases were FL sized in a RCBS X-die the loaded with pull down M80 bullets (147 gr FMJBT) ove 43 gr of IMR 4895 with WLR primers. The loads were tested on 2/25/2019 in my test rifle with a 24” barrel. The Oehler M43 PBL was used to measure velocity, pressure, etc. I could see no difference in the appearance of the primers after firing. Have a look for yourself;

    Attachment 237041

    Here is a compilation of all the data measured during the test. I’ll be darned if I can see any meaningful difference between the first load with “regular” .061” flash holes and the last test with .140”.

    Attachment 237042

    Throughout the test the sky did not fall, Humpty did not fall off the wall, the chicken made it across the road and no collusion between Trump and the Russians was found………and I’m still alive and the rifle did not blow up……… It appears, based on actual test results, using cases with drilled out flash holes might not be as “dangerous” as some thought………
    Last edited by Larry Gibson; 04-16-2019 at 07:01 PM.
    Larry Gibson

    “Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
    ― Nikola Tesla

  2. #2
    Boolit Man
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    79
    Well conducted and interesting test results. I enjoyed the read.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #3
    Vendor Sponsor

    DougGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    just above Raleigh North Carolina
    Posts
    7,408
    I would think the only real difference could be in how far the brisance of the primer could reach into the powder. It would seem that with the factory primer hole the pressure built up in the primer would push it farther into the powder than it would if the primer hole was large.
    Got a .22 .30 .32 .357 .38 .40 .41 .44 .45 .480 or .500 S&W cylinder that needs throats honed? 9mm, 10mm/40S&W, 45 ACP pistol barrel that won't "plunk" your handloads? 480 Ruger or 475 Linebaugh cylinder that needs the "step" reamed to 6° 30min chamfer? Click here to send me a PM You can also find me on Facebook Click Here.

  4. #4
    Boolit Grand Master


    Larry Gibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, Arizona
    Posts
    21,326
    We might think that Doug but there is no measurable indication of that. Should that occur and there be some change it would show up in the "Rise" measurement. Note there is no consistent change + or - as the diameter of the flash hole increases. Also there is only a 15 micro-second difference between the high (test 5) and the low (test 8). That is only 15 millionths of a second. Note also the largest diameter flash hole is only 4 micro-seconds slower. BTW; "rise" is the a measurement of the efficiency of the powder burn. It measures from 25% up to 75% of the rise in pressure.
    Larry Gibson

    “Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
    ― Nikola Tesla

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    3,409
    LG, I really enjoy your posts and tests. I always learn so much from you and OP75.

    Thank You
    Last edited by Conditor22; 02-28-2019 at 03:06 PM.

  6. #6
    Boolit Master rsrocket1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    DFW, TX
    Posts
    1,178
    Excellent test and data. I'm surprised at the high ES and SD peak pressures on the 0.140" flash hole test. I wonder if the huge swings are due to the size of the flash hole or if it made it more sensitive to powder position (averaging out to a reasonable number). Were your measured peaks from 52-60 kpsi?

  7. #7
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    NWO sunset country
    Posts
    716
    Thanks Mr G as always well documented I have been wondering about what would happen if by chance I got some of my brass mixed erroneously and had drilled them now I know . I've just learned something new today!!!

  8. #8
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Northern Michigan
    Posts
    9,003
    The largest flash hole results show a high ES and SD in psi. Was there one "outlier" that caused that or were the readings erratic?
    Don Verna


  9. #9
    Boolit Master


    kungfustyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    1,235
    As always, Great stuff. I noticed that the groups were in the 2 to 3" range, is that standard for the rifle or does it shoot better with the as issued primers holes? I wonder if a slower/faster powder would change the group size?

  10. #10
    Boolit Grand Master


    Larry Gibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, Arizona
    Posts
    21,326
    Quote Originally Posted by rsrocket1 View Post
    Excellent test and data. I'm surprised at the high ES and SD peak pressures on the 0.140" flash hole test. I wonder if the huge swings are due to the size of the flash hole or if it made it more sensitive to powder position (averaging out to a reasonable number). Were your measured peaks from 52-60 kpsi?
    Actually there was one that gave the highest psi and velocity. Had not the other 7 shots been within the normal range for this load I would have suspected something. The same thing occurred with load #5 with it's 37 fps SD and 90 fps ES. That load also had one high psi and velocity. I suspect I may not have gotten all the steel jacketed M80 bullets out. Don't know though. The peak psi for #10 was 61,400 and the low was 53,000 psi.
    Larry Gibson

    “Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
    ― Nikola Tesla

  11. #11
    Boolit Grand Master


    Larry Gibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, Arizona
    Posts
    21,326
    Quote Originally Posted by dverna View Post
    The largest flash hole results show a high ES and SD in psi. Was there one "outlier" that caused that or were the readings erratic?
    Yes, there was also one very close to the same in test #5 as explained above.
    Larry Gibson

    “Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
    ― Nikola Tesla

  12. #12
    Boolit Grand Master


    Larry Gibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, Arizona
    Posts
    21,326
    Quote Originally Posted by kungfustyle View Post
    As always, Great stuff. I noticed that the groups were in the 2 to 3" range, is that standard for the rifle or does it shoot better with the as issued primers holes? I wonder if a slower/faster powder would change the group size?
    The test groups were with pull down M80 bullets. I tried to remove all the steel jacketed ones but may have missed a couple. The brass jacketed ones are all from different lots and different bullet making machines. They shoot consistently into 2 1/2 to 3" groups with an occasional flyer out of that, as seen in test #6, with 10 shot groups. The average group size of 2.79 is well within the norm for those bullets.

    I did shoot a validation 10 shot test string just prior to this test to validate the rifle/Oehler were working within normal limits. I used a match load of the Sierra 168 MK over 41.5 gr H4895 with WLR primers in LC Match 72 cases. The 10 shots went into .91" which is about right for that barrel. The velocity was 2699 fps with an SD of 9 fps and an ES of 25 fps. The average PSI was 58,800 with an SD of 700 psi and an ES of 2,100 psi. That was almost exactly as it should be. All was well with the system.

    When I was loading for the test I was thinking of just internal ballistics but now, on second thought, I wish I would have used a better quality bullet.......
    Larry Gibson

    “Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
    ― Nikola Tesla

  13. #13
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    510
    Any evidence of the primer backing out more with the larger flash holes?

  14. #14
    Boolit Master slim1836's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Burleson, TX
    Posts
    2,123
    Larry, I could only wish I knew what you've forgotten, providing you actually forget. Thanks for making my brain think, always enjoy your posts.

    Slim
    JUST GOTTA LOVE THIS JOINT.

  15. #15
    Boolit Grand Master



    M-Tecs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    9,556
    Quote Originally Posted by edp2k View Post
    Any evidence of the primer backing out more with the larger flash holes?
    It would be less. Primers backing out is only a issue with low pressure loads. The solution is larger flash holes. On normal loads the primer gets reseated.

  16. #16
    Boolit Master

    RedlegEd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Mountain Home, AR
    Posts
    573
    Larry,
    Great write up. I was really interested in the #41 drill bit since that's the size Spence Wolf recommends drilling out .45-70 primer holes for Trapdoor loads. It seems the data for that size hole (0.096") falls right about in the middle of your data and might be a general all around good choice for enlarging primer holes for a variety of loads.
    Ed
    Last edited by RedlegEd; 03-02-2019 at 12:59 PM. Reason: Corrected bit size
    ______________________________________________
    Growing old is mandatory, growing up is totally optional!

  17. #17
    Boolit Master


    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    southern MO
    Posts
    2,948
    Thank you Larry for the very informative posts (as always). I have read the various arguments/theories on larger primer pocket flash channels and it is good to see something concrete about it. I also learned something new today right here!. Thanks.
    Mark 5:34 And He said to her (Jesus speaking), "Daughter, your faith has made you well. Go in peace and be healed of your affliction."

  18. #18
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Northern Michigan
    Posts
    9,003
    Agree...good post!!

    It makes me wonder how the standard size flash hole was originally determined.
    Don Verna


  19. #19
    Boolit Master 243winxb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,844

    Flash hole/ spit hole

    https://apps.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA606635

    Influence of Berdan and Boxer Primer Spit-Hole Diameter on 7.62-mm Cartridge Performance.

    The U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL) conducted a study to examine the effects of varying a small caliber (7.62 mm) cartridge s spit-hole on the interior and exterior ballistic performance of the cartridge. Along with standard Boxer primers, a Berdan style primer configuration is evaluated. Performance metrics evaluated were cartridge pressure, primer pocket pressure, and muzzle velocity

    EDIT-
    The pressure in the primer
    pocket is calculated to be approximately 23,890 psi
    My Savage Axis will set the 223 shoulder back .006" from 1 pin strike. More with the 2nd hit. Using a dead primer. The extractor type allows the forward movement.


    Search at https://discover.dtic.mil
    Last edited by 243winxb; 03-01-2019 at 10:25 AM.

  20. #20
    Boolit Master 243winxb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,844

    Primer Output and Initial Projectile Motion for 5.56- and 7.62-mm Ammunition

    https://apps.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA622138

    Primer Output and Initial Projectile Motion for 5.56- and 7.62-mm Ammunition

    I had primers fire and the bullets didnt move at all.

    1. No powder in a 30-06.

    2. H450 powder started burning and stopped in a 22-250 using a cci mag primer.

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Abbreviations used in Reloading

BP Bronze Point IMR Improved Military Rifle PTD Pointed
BR Bench Rest M Magnum RN Round Nose
BT Boat Tail PL Power-Lokt SP Soft Point
C Compressed Charge PR Primer SPCL Soft Point "Core-Lokt"
HP Hollow Point PSPCL Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" C.O.L. Cartridge Overall Length
PSP Pointed Soft Point Spz Spitzer Point SBT Spitzer Boat Tail
LRN Lead Round Nose LWC Lead Wad Cutter LSWC Lead Semi Wad Cutter
GC Gas Check