detonating powders??

[XWrench3]

i did a search, and looked around to try to find a list, but i could not find what i was looking for. maybe it has already been posted, or not. i really am not even sure if this can be done, but here goes. i was looking for a lit of powders that are known to detonate when reduced. i know that Hodgdon H110 will, and a freind told me that imr 4831 will. are there more? or will most powders detonate if reduced to a point. i have successfully reduced several pistol powders to the point of sticking a bullet in the bore without detonation (young kids shooting). i also have a 10 year old that is a bit sensitive to recoil, so i am looking at downloading rifle loads now. i really do not want to have a detonation for either of us, but especially him! if a list could be compiled, it might be a good sticky.

[44man]

i did a search, and looked around to try to find a list, but i could not find what i was looking for. maybe it has already been posted, or not. i really am not even sure if this can be done, but here goes. i was looking for a lit of powders that are known to detonate when reduced. i know that Hodgdon H110 will, and a freind told me that imr 4831 will. are there more? or will most powders detonate if reduced to a point. i have successfully reduced several pistol powders to the point of sticking a bullet in the bore without detonation (young kids shooting). i also have a 10 year old that is a bit sensitive to recoil, so i am looking at downloading rifle loads now. i really do not want to have a detonation for either of us, but especially him! if a list could be compiled, it might be a good sticky.
No gun powder detonates, it burns. It is conditions for burn speed and where the pressure is applied that will get you in trouble.
Stay with book loads, never take it upon yourself to reduce loads.
Change powders for light loads but only by the book.
You flirt with danger reducing loads by yourself. I fear for your kids.
I want to SCREAM at you and shake you like a rag.
STOP RIGHT NOW!

[10 ga]

"Holy Black" and subs like 777 and Pyrodex come as close to detonation as any powder. When used in ML they are pretty safe as there is containment w/o open space. When used in cartridges at reduced loads/volume it is usually packed with "filler" to get close to a case full. Otherwise you are asking for SERIOUS problems. $.02

10 ga

[Chicken Thief]

The rule is to switch to faster powders as loads diminish.
Search for "Squib loads", "Cat sneeze loads" and "Mouse fart loads" and all your questions will be answered.

What happens in short is:
1) Powder starts to burn slowly.
2) Bullet jumps the throat and stops at the rifling.
3) Pressure drops rapidly and semi-burnt compounds develop, and some/most of the burn rate retardent evaporates.
4) Pressure rises very rapidly again and an uncontrolled burn commenses, the poor bullet is now an obstruction in the barrel.
5) BANG.

[375RUGER]

There is not a list of powders that are "known to detonate" because stupidity is the NUMBER 1 reason that so called detonation exists. If you reduce a charge of slow burning rifle powder you will likely achieve a very unsafe conditon.
There are plenty of proven rifle loads with reduced velocity in the CB Loads section and the Canister and Surplus Powder section.

Use proven loads.
Small powder charges are dangerous because it is very easy to double or triple charge a large case if you aren't paying attention. Cases must be checked with a flashlight everytime to ensure no overcharge exists.

Use proven loads.
I believe the Lyman cast handbook has reduced velocity load data. The older ones did anyway.

[leadman]

Buy the Lyman Cast Bullet manual, either the 3 or 4th edition. These have loads that are tested and safe. The faster "shotgun" powders tend to produce less recoil and would be ideal for your situation.
Attention to charging the cases is mandatory to prevent double charges.

[Rocky Raab]

One problem is terminology. "Detonation" has a very precise meaning, and no smokeless gunpowder can truly detonate by that definition. You definitely CAN get an overpressure excursion, but it is not an explosion or a detonation.

Read and follow what the manual says. If the warnings say to not decrease loads with a given powder - don't.

[felix]

By that detonate definition, neither do nuclear bombs detonate. In fact, I am not convinced that anything does unless by a miraculous situation, such as the "big bang" theory if indeed that is what happened by any of man's measurements. ... felix

[Rocky Raab]

I think you're going the opposite way, Felix. You're reading too much into it.

The definitions of "burning," "deflagration," and "detonation" are precisely written to describe what actually happens. They don't set a standard that nature has to somehow meet.

[MtGun44]

Fast powders don't seem to have a problem, although there is always the possibility of
double and triple charges in larger cases. If you stick to Red Dot, Unique, 2400 for
reduced rifle loads you are in VERY well known and safe territory. 10 gr Unique, 13 gr
Red Dot and 16 gr of 2400 are EXTREMELY commonly used as starting points and very
often are quite accurate in the 1400-1700 fps range for any wt boolit in any of the large volume
bottleneck milsurps (battle rifles) from about 1890 to 1930s or so. For small stuff like
.30 Carbine, do not expect the same safety.

Bill

[geargnasher]

SR series of powders, Trail Boss, and the bulkier shotgun powders are good for reduced loads. Stay away from Blue Dot at low loading densities, though.

Gear

[BLTsandwedge]

I think you're going the opposite way, Felix. You're reading too much into it.

The definitions of "burning," "deflagration," and "detonation" are precisely written to describe what actually happens. They don't set a standard that nature has to somehow meet.

If you've ever eaten a burrito from one of the Mexican catering trucks around here, you will understand through experience a precise definition for each of your three quoted terms.

[paul h]

One can cause damage by a fast burning fire that creates pressure that exceeds the capability of the structure.

What is believed to occur in firearms with some slow burning powders is the primer and initial burn of the powder causes the bullet to leave the case and begin it's travel down the barrel. The burning of the powder for lack of a better term stalls or smolders for a fraction of a second, and this allows the pressure in the case to drop to the level that is unable to allow the bullet to continue down the barrel. The bullet becomes lodged in the barrel. The powder continues to burn and with the bullet lodged in the bore, the pressure created by the burning powder is sufficient to cause structural failure in the gun.

This all occurs fast enough to the human eye to be an explosion of the gun. Technically, the powder did not detonate and there was no explosion, but the gun is in more pieces than before firing the round and the shooter is injured, or worse.

With all that said, I've worked up accurate mild recoiling cast bullet loads in rifles using Unique and 2400.

[softpoint]

I think you're going the opposite way, Felix. You're reading too much into it.

The definitions of "burning," "deflagration," and "detonation" are precisely written to describe what actually happens. They don't set a standard that nature has to somehow meet.

Working with explosives the term "expansion velocity" is often used too. So, detonation would have to be the initiation of the event, or is it supposed to mean some imaginary instant event such as Felix was referring to? This makes my head hurt, I'll go back to casting bullets.
And to the question, better to stay out of trouble., look into using a powder like Trailboss, or a powder that isn't position sensive like 5744, 4759, or one of the pistol powders for reduced loads.

[mpmarty]

Powders known to be dangerous in reduced loads:
H-870
H4831
4350 (either one)
WW296
H110
plus any other slow burning powder from any source.

[41mag]

The overall best powder I have found info on for reduced load for both kids and probably cast loads has been Hodgdon's Reduced loads using H-4895.

If you look over on the Hodgdon site you can easily determine by using their guidelines a number of very light loads for just about any caliber which is listed to use H-4895.

What I found VERY useful was the fact that by starting at the lowest charge listed in the reduced loads, you can work all the way up through the scale to the max listed load for that caliber/bullet weight. this might differ a bit with cast, but since I haven't gotten into the cast rifle loads just yet I cannot say.

I can however say that with J-words, everything I HAVE used, has been great for the grandkids and even I like some of them.

[David2011]

Another vote for H4895! It's usually considered safe down to 60% of a normal full load for anything Hodgdon says it's good for.

http://www.hodgdon.com/PDF/H4895%20Reduced%20Rifle%20Loads.pdf

David

[Splatter]

Stay with book loads, never take it upon yourself to reduce loads.
Change powders for light loads but only by the book.
You flirt with danger reducing loads by yourself. I fear for your kids.
I want to SCREAM at you and shake you like a rag.
STOP RIGHT NOW!

Really dude? 12,000+ posts on a board that is, in a large part, dedicated to pushing the boundaries of what is possible with cast bullets and you really feel that way?

Now... I'm not saying that one should throw caution to the wind, the books with their proven loads are there, and are a safe place to go when you want to get started.
2 years ago I would have said that it was impossible to develop a safe load for my M14 using H4831, after-all, "the book" says nothing slower than 4064 may be used.
I also would have said that a load with 4227 would have been impossible, "the book" says nothing faster than 3031... Guess what, light-ish loads of 4831 work great, and heavy-ish loads of 4227 also can work pretty well; but nothing like that appears in any "book".
There was a time when no one thought it was possible for 9mm Para to be pushed to a power factor of 170+, but I shot 9mmMajor for years...

[Mohillbilly]

Search for the "majic" red dot universal rifle load here on the board . It can help .

[leftiye]

Really dude? 12,000+ posts on a board that is, in a large part, dedicated to pushing the boundaries of what is possible with cast bullets and you really feel that way?

Now... I'm not saying that one should throw caution to the wind, the books with their proven loads are there, and are a safe place to go when you want to get started.
2 years ago I would have said that it was impossible to develop a safe load for my M14 using H4831, after-all, "the book" says nothing slower than 4064 may be used.
I also would have said that a load with 4227 would have been impossible, "the book" says nothing faster than 3031... Guess what, light-ish loads of 4831 work great, and heavy-ish loads of 4227 also can work pretty well; but nothing like that appears in any "book".
There was a time when no one thought it was possible for 9mm Para to be pushed to a power factor of 170+, but I shot 9mmMajor for years...

I suspect that he (44man) really DID feel that way (dude). It is obvious that the first poster, though he has the right cautions in play, didn't understand the issues involved with reduced loads. To his credit, he asked. I readily see 44Man's trepidation about the purpose of making reduced loads for the purpose of reduced recoil for kids to shoot. Kids being the operant issue.

On the subject that the first poster brought up, I'm a bit at a loss. I'm inclined to use the terms understanding and knowledge. Detonation aside, There are many many light loads that are used every day by members here. If you lack knowledge of powder applications and powder characteristics, tread softly.

Probly we should then go to making reduced recoil loads (as opposed to reduced powder loads). As was also mentioned, if you aren't sure what will or won't work, stay with what you are sure will work. IE stay with published low velocity loads with light boolits. AND do a lot of research here and in the manuals. Those light loads do exist and some even seem nearly foolproof. Take the "Universal" load of 12 grains of Red Dot(?) in almost any rifle cartridge.

[leftiye]

Really dude? 12,000+ posts on a board that is, in a large part, dedicated to pushing the boundaries of what is possible with cast bullets and you really feel that way?

Now... I'm not saying that one should throw caution to the wind, the books with their proven loads are there, and are a safe place to go when you want to get started.
2 years ago I would have said that it was impossible to develop a safe load for my M14 using H4831, after-all, "the book" says nothing slower than 4064 may be used.
I also would have said that a load with 4227 would have been impossible, "the book" says nothing faster than 3031... Guess what, light-ish loads of 4831 work great, and heavy-ish loads of 4227 also can work pretty well; but nothing like that appears in any "book".
There was a time when no one thought it was possible for 9mm Para to be pushed to a power factor of 170+, but I shot 9mmMajor for years...

I suspect that he (44man) really DID feel that way (dude). It is obvious that the first poster, though he has the right cautions in play, didn't understand the issues involved with reduced loads. To his credit, he asked. I readily see 44Man's trepidation about the purpose of making reduced loads for the purpose of reduced recoil for kids to shoot. Kids being the operant issue.

On the subject that the first poster brought up, I'm a bit at a loss. I'm inclined to use the terms understanding and knowledge. Detonation aside, There are many many light loads that are used every day by members here. If you lack knowledge of powder applications and powder characteristics, tread softly.

Probly we should then go to making reduced recoil loads. As was also mentioned, if you aren't sure what will or won't work, stay with what you are sure will work. IE stay with published low velocity loads with light boolits. AND do a lot of research here and in the manuals. Those light loads do exist and some even seem nearly foolproof. Take the "Universal" load of 12 grains of unique in almost any rifle cartridge.

[303Guy]

A detonation is when the explosive does its thing at the velocity of the pressure wave passing through it - the chemical reaction takes place at the wave front. A nuclear explosion is slightly different but lets not go there - it's all the same at that level! Black powder explodes. It does not detonate. An explosion doesn't have to be very fast or even powerful to be an explosion. Even an over heated hot water cylinder with no pressure relief will explode! As in 'blows up' - like a gun undergoing a SEE event.

I suspect that many 'SEE' events are actually due to a case with no powder lodging a bullet in the throat and the next round has insufficient powder to stop the bullet being pushed back so a double bullet event is the real cause of the blow-up.

[303Guy]

Oh, there is a trick for low recoil loads and that is to use a heavier boolit with a slower powder that fills the case. The recoil is more of a gentle push. Such powder loads don't get published in manuals because the powder is simply too slow to get any performance. Loads that are listed for the 303 Brit are not listed for the 308 simply because they produce 303 Brit velocities which are lower than 308 velocities. So, have a look at 30-40 Krag load data - those are low pressure loads. Do remember that the case capacity is larger than the 308.

[44man]

Really dude? 12,000+ posts on a board that is, in a large part, dedicated to pushing the boundaries of what is possible with cast bullets and you really feel that way?

Now... I'm not saying that one should throw caution to the wind, the books with their proven loads are there, and are a safe place to go when you want to get started.
2 years ago I would have said that it was impossible to develop a safe load for my M14 using H4831, after-all, "the book" says nothing slower than 4064 may be used.
I also would have said that a load with 4227 would have been impossible, "the book" says nothing faster than 3031... Guess what, light-ish loads of 4831 work great, and heavy-ish loads of 4227 also can work pretty well; but nothing like that appears in any "book".
There was a time when no one thought it was possible for 9mm Para to be pushed to a power factor of 170+, but I shot 9mmMajor for years...
I really do. It is very dangerous to reduce slow powders. You might get away with for a long time but every time you pull the trigger you do not know what that next shot will do.
I get very concerned and scared over some things. I will ever make any excuse over and above SAFETY. I am bone headed in the extreme.
I have been loading for a good 60 years and have spent a month researching a caliber before ever using a powder charge or taking a shot. Not enough information available so caution will never let you down.
You have to understand even a reduced load of 4759, a fast powder, can fail to ignite, send a boolit into the bore and if it does go off, you will destroy the gun. I will not speak of shooting another behind the boolit and powder in the bore, a shooter should know something was wrong and check.
I get harsh for a reason!

[44man]

Oh, there is a trick for low recoil loads and that is to use a heavier boolit with a slower powder that fills the case. The recoil is more of a gentle push. Such powder loads don't get published in manuals because the powder is simply too slow to get any performance. Loads that are listed for the 303 Brit are not listed for the 308 simply because they produce 303 Brit velocities which are lower than 308 velocities. So, have a look at 30-40 Krag load data - those are low pressure loads. Do remember that the case capacity is larger than the 308.
This is true, just fill the case.
Even if the powder is correct for burn rate, it is safer to go a little over book max then it is to reduce below starting loads. ( I don't promote over loads either.)
The biggest danger is to look at a minimum load of slow powder and reduce it a lot more thinking it will be slower with less recoil.

[felix]

303Guy, I like the pressure wave definition for igniting an explosive material! That should make the SEE definition more clear to many folks new to this board. No pressure wave, no detonation! ... felix

[44man]

303Guy, I like the pressure wave definition for igniting an explosive material! That should make the SEE definition more clear to many folks new to this board. No pressure wave, no detonation! ... felix
Yes, reverse pressure wave turns a rifle into a bomb.

[jlchucker]

"Holy Black" and subs like 777 and Pyrodex come as close to detonation as any powder. When used in ML they are pretty safe as there is containment w/o open space. When used in cartridges at reduced loads/volume it is usually packed with "filler" to get close to a case full. Otherwise you are asking for SERIOUS problems. $.02

10 ga

Yup! Holy Black is an explosive, and generally speaking, smokeless is a propellant.. Google up the Phineas Gage story and read about an astonishing thing that happened in the 1840's during the building of a railroad. That happened in my old home town, back when they used Holy Black to blow rock during construction. Talk about explosive!

[44man]

Yup! Holy Black is an explosive, and generally speaking, smokeless is a propellant.. Google up the Phineas Gage story and read about an astonishing thing that happened in the 1840's during the building of a railroad. That happened in my old home town, back when they used Holy Black to blow rock during construction. Talk about explosive!
Yet it is still different then dynamite or plastic. It took a barrel of black to do what a stick of dynamite could do.

[felix]

New versus old BlueDot, Jim. The old will not detonate in the 41 mag case, but the new will according to the makers. I bet we will have a brand new lot available with a different chemistry fairly quickly. And, I also believe the makers will never suggest even allowing new 41 mag listings either. ... felix

[44man]

New versus old BlueDot, Jim. The old will not detonate in the 41 mag case, but the new will according to the makers. I bet we will have a brand new lot available with a different chemistry fairly quickly. And, I also believe the makers will never suggest even allowing new 41 mag listings either. ... felix
Scary to say the least.

[Mooseman]

I must add my 2 cents here from years of reloading as well as blasting rock with High Explosives.
Smokeless gunpowder is made from nitrocellulose which is a high explosive.
Anytime you prime and load a cartridge when you fire it you are dealing with a controlled explosion. it is why your gun goes BOOM instead of POOOT.
Powders are formulated with certain stable burn rates and when proper amounts are loaded, and when ignited ,burn from rear to front. The projectile starts moving at the initial burn and continues to gain speed as the powder build to full pressure in milliseconds. Overcharges of powder as we all know can create a dangerous high pressure situation due to the amount of gasses produced and gun steel can fail and blow apart.
With light loads, it has been discovered that a pressure spike of 2-3 times normal pressure can happen and there are several schools of thought from Engineers as to why.
One is that the flame from a primer ignites a larger surface area of the powder all at once, so it flashes and burns much faster than normal. The second thought is a pressure wave detonation from the extra air in the case being superheated causing a "pressure piling" situation. Another thought is that the pressure builds so fast from the loose powder that the bullet doesnt have time to start down the barrel and the overpressure leads to gun failure. Some lab tests were done that proved a smaller amount of powder than a normal load in a pressure vessel created almost 3 times the pressure when ignited.
While black powder is considered an explosive , it in reality has a very fast burn rate with a lower pressure yield than smokeless powder. If you dont believe me , pour out a very long string of black powder and it will burn the line very quickly , but not nearly as fast as det cord which burns (explodes) at 4000 meters per second.
Back in the mid 70's in the Gunsmith shop we had several Smith and Wesson revolvers come in that blew up with light loads in .38 /.357 magnum. The guys that were shooting them and loading were very meticulous with their powder charges so we knew they were not double or triple charged because of the loading procedure they used. We tested some of those same loads Using Ruger revolvers and a Thompson Contender bull barrel and they showed signs of overpressure on the cases and after talking to several powder engineers at Winchester and Hercules about the problem , they stated that the minimum load in the books was there for a reason because a light load could overpressure but the exact cause was still unknown.
Rich

[Sven]

Going back to the OP's original reason for wanting a reduced load.

I would recommend lots of shooting practice for your 10 year old with a .22 rimfire before moving to a center fire rifle. You did not state what caliber of center fire rifle you want him/her to shoot, but you should maybe concider purchasing a naturally mild recoiling rifle. I started my shooting career with a .257 Roberts in a fairly heavy gun (Remington 722), but the .243 is much more popular today. A .223 would be even milder, but if deer hunting is your goal, legal in your state or not, a .223 is not the best choice. Obviously the lighter weight bullets driven at moderate speeds will give the lightest recoil and lowest report. As stated previously, stick to the books when developing a load.

Good luck.

[XWrench3]

wow, i am not even sure how to reply to this thread. 44man, first, thank you for being so concened, especially about my kids. but they will NEVER get to pull the trigger on ANY load that i do not work up or down first. and by "working" i don't mean 3 shots. i mean at least 20 rounds of any given load. if something happens, it will be my hands that get mangled or removed. i have been reducing loads for over 20 years. far below any published data. i try to use my head, and use faster powders, i was told about the 4831 potential problem about 4 months ago. but i have also used it in my 30-30. not at 1/2 load, but at the bottom published load for it. when i see unburnt powder kernals in the bore, that tells me that there is something wrong. the thought of trying a magnum primer to see if that would solve the unburnt powder has gone thru my head several times. but without actually calling the powder maker, and talking to a representative, i would not do that. the only problem with talking to those guys, is that they have been schooled heavily in "C.Y.A." language, to keep them out of court for liability. so we are not always going to get full honest answers from them all the time. as far as published load data, no company could ever afford to pay their ballistics guys to sit and play with every load ever conceived of. it is just to big of a task. probably more than any one person could do in his entire lifetime. certainly enough time and money to bankrupt a company. so i go slowly, and carefully, and pray for good results. if i went about this blindly, with no fear, i am sure i would be dead by now. i try to be safe, but i also will not let fear completely paralyze me. if you NEVER take ANY chances in life, i am not sure it would be worth living. i was schooled that the only stupid question, is one not asked. i stand by that. knowledge is an awesome thing. something that if the entire human race shared openly, would move us to a much higher level. but it is hoarded away, like a squirrel with 10 hollow oak trees. and when the squirrel gets run over by a truck, all of the nuts just rot, and no one benefits. if the human race could get this thru their heads, there would be no stopping us as a species. sadly, the greedy will never let that happen.

[44man]

XWrench3, I was not being mean or anything. But the danger is there with reducing slow powders. You might get away with it for years.
Mooseman posted something so important it should be read many times.
We do care.

[303Guy]

XWrench3, what rifle and calibre is that you want reduce loads for? The heavier boolit trick really does work, not in the recoil is less but the speed of the recoil is less making is more gentle, like a push. Slower powders can be used which produce that slower acceleration. Muzzle blast increases though. Are suppressors legal in your parts? A good over-barrel design reduces recoil big time, especially with slower powers that produce more muzzle blast.

On the pressure spike thing, I've been loading shotgun powder behind a light boolit and getting mild pressure signs on the case and primer - hardly any flattening at all. But, the cases were jamming in the chamber! That particular chamber has a rust damaged patch in the neck area and the necks were getting expanded into that patch. That does not happen with normal pressure loads. That would be the first stages in chamber ringing I would think.

[leadman]

There are many folks here that share their knowledge freely and try to help all who ask for it. Much different than most internet sites.
If you can post what firearms/ cartridges, and powders you want to work with I'm sure you will get good info.
My previous post to buy the Lyman manual I think is still a great way to get safe loads that have either been pressure tested or stood the test of time.

[300winmag]

If you've ever eaten a burrito from one of the Mexican catering trucks around here, you will understand through experience a precise definition for each of your three quoted terms.That would be taco bell around here, we call it tacolax.

[Silver Hand]

No gun powder detonates, it burns. It is conditions for burn speed and where the pressure is applied that will get you in trouble.
Stay with book loads, never take it upon yourself to reduce loads.
Change powders for light loads but only by the book.
You flirt with danger reducing loads by yourself. I fear for your kids.
I want to SCREAM at you and shake you like a rag.
STOP RIGHT NOW!

Brings to mind an old friend He triplexed loads!!! I did not want to shoot with him after he told me that wile looking into three shots in one hole at one hundred yards.
The next summer he blew up a gun using reduced loads he Cooked up.
That deaf old coot [2nd WW battleship gunner] was always using a hammer to open his bolt.
Not that he could not listen he didn't want to.

Use Ka pock [ sorry about the miss spelling] to hold the powder against the primer. There are listed loads for that! Using book loads in Speer #9 as I recall.
I have built a few for an old favorite of mine - .350 Rem mag shooting pistol boolits. There is more information on low powder loads I have used safely and read in books of loading data,. It was so long ago I cannot remember where I got that from. But was it fun.

[Awsar]

would only load by the book not worth getting hurt.
if the kids dont like the big guns get a smaller one i.e. .22lr
they could shoot those all day. gl:mrgreen:

[1Shirt]

44 Man's first post is right on correct. Pay attention to reality!
1Shirt!

[turbo1889]

You can add Reloader-19 to the list of powders that you have to be very careful with reduced loads.

Some of the powders that normally could have a problem with a reduced load and could cause "unexpected, rapid and extreme pressure spikes" (hard to argue with that term) will work well without problems provided they are used in a full case compressed load situation in a cartridge which does not have enough case capacity as the cartridges of the same boolit diameter that normally use that powder. For example I know from personal experience and even some published load data that both 4350 powders make excellent loads in the 30-30 cartridges as full case compressed loads topped off with cast lead boolits in the heavier end of the weight range. Where as if you were to put the same amount of those powders that fit in that smaller case as full case compressed loads in a 30-06 or larger capacity 30-cal. cartridge case with the same bullet you could end in trouble.

Believe it or not with cast bullet loads for modern bottle-neck rifle cartridges sometimes it is actually smarter to figure out which powders normally gives full case (or nearly full case), full pressure, full power loads and then find a good stable burning powder that is a slower burning powder then those powders that is usually used in cartridges with a little more case capacity then the one you are working with and load that powder as a full case compressed powder charge instead of trying to reduce the charge of the powders normally used in that cartridge.

Literally thousands upon thousands of 30-06 and similar capacity and caliber size cartridges have been loaded with full case compressed loads of very slow burning powders especially surplus 50-BMG type ball powders with no problems. I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that it is impossible to get an "unexpected, rapid and extreme pressure spike event" with a full case compressed load of slower burning then normal powder but it goes a very long way in reducing the danger. It can still happen sometimes, usually those cases though happen with particular cartridges that are known to be especially problematic like the 6.5 Swede and/or powders that are know to be extremely problematic such as H110.

[303Guy]

You folks are quite right with your cautioning but what XWrench3 was asking was whether there was a list. Some responders have provide direct answers and there's been some interesting examples given, like the following;


You can add Reloader-19 to the list of powders that you have to be very careful with reduced loads.Interesting post, turbo1889.

This is an interesting thread. It should perhaps go under a Reloading Safety 101 sticky. There isn't one - yet - but perhaps the moderators could create one into which relevant posts could be added (by them, perhaps). Just a thought.

[44man]

The hardest thing for me to find is powder charges for certain powders, they seem to be ignored or just one boolit weight shown with it.
4759 is one so I had to guess a lot based on one boolit weight shown. I had my mind twisted when I had a failure to ignite with just 1/2 gr reduction for a heavier boolit. I was using Dacron too.
Who would ever figure 4759 would do that?
Then 4198 shot super with jacketed but with cast I would stick brass for a few shots and the chrono showed a 250 fps rise.
4227's in the .44 mag would shoot faster and faster as the gun got hot, so much change I was 16 clicks over normal for 200 meters and still hit 50 meters short. I was not at max, just below, primers got dead flat and even a 3 gr reduction did the same.
It seems the longer you are into loading your own, the more stuff you see and the more cautious you become.
It is a good thing and you will study and research more but many times you run into a wall because there is nothing there.
Powder companies and manuals do not even know it all. How can you or I know it all??? [smilie=l:
The best thing to ever do is explain your experiences.
There is one thing you will never hear from me, "I do it all the time."

[turbo1889]

To my mind, if we were going to collectively make a list in regard to powders properties along these lines I would actually divide that list into four sections in order the potential danger:

#1 ~ Powders that should not EVER be reduced below the start load AT ALL.
#2 ~ Powders that should not EVER be reduced any more then approx. 5-10% below the start load if that (not quite as touchy as #1 but still potential problems).
#3 ~ Powders that should not be reduced any more then approx. 10-20% below the start load if no filler is used and fillers do work with them to safely make reduced loads below that but you MUST use a filler if reducing further.
#4 ~ Powders that you can safely reduce significantly (25% reduction or more) without fillers and that with fillers you can go all the way down to half charges or less.

My personal knowledge from my personal experience could put the following powders in the following catagories of that list (for metallic cartridge use only, not talking about shot-shells):

Type #1 Powders:
----- H110
----- W296

Type #2 Powders:
----- Reloader-19
----- IMR-4350 & H4350
----- Accurate 9 (the new blend not the old AA#9 blend)

Type #3 Powders:
----- Reloader-15
----- Blue Dot (new blend)
----- IMR-4227 and H4227
----- Accurate 1680
----- Accurate 2230

Type #4 Powders:
----- Reloader-7
----- Blue Dot (old blend ONLY)
----- 2400
----- Accurate 5744
----- H4895
----- Unique



On the back side of the page of that list you can do a second list of powders that do work as full case compressed loads in smaller capacity cartridges then they are normally used in; and those few powders that cannot be trusted to work when used in that manner:

A ~ Powders that work exceptionally well when used in smaller capacity (then normal for that powder) cartridges as full case compressed powder charge loads.
B ~ Powders that work well when used in smaller capacity (then normal for that powder) cartridges as full case compressed powder charge loads.
F ~ Powders that cannot be trusted to work when used in this manner, and thus should not be used as full case compressed loads in smaller capacity cartridges.

My personal knowledge from my personal experience could put the following powders in the following catagories:

Type A Powders:
----- Reloader-17 (King of all type A powders)
----- 2400
----- Lil'Gun
----- IMR-4227

Type B Powders:
----- Reloader-7
----- IMR-4350
----- Alliant Steel
----- Most 50-BMG ball powders

Type F Powders:
----- Reloader-19



Those are by no means complete lists but they are what I could come up with off the top of my head. My main point is that it isn't as simple as a Yes/No list and a spectrum of categories is needed to better define the situation.

[XWrench3]

i was thinking about one of the explanations of detonation, s.e.e., or secondary pressure wave, what ever it is would want to call it that destroys things. now keep in mind, i (and most likely very few of us) have never seen this happen, and none of us, short of a ballistics lab would ever try to make it happen. but is seems to me that it would take a pretty small charge of powder to have the bullet almost or actually stop once the ignition sequence started. i can understand, especially in an non crimped bullet, how the primer could actually make the bullet move forward, maybe even far enough to jet jammed against the rifling. then, if the powder lit, oh baby, yes, that would create a pressure spike. the only time i use very small charges of powder, is if i use pistol powder. maybe it is that by the grace of God, i have always crimped my bullets into place that has saved me from catastrophic damages. i really do not know. maybe it is that i do not use very small charges of rifle powder? how ever slow or fast they are. you know, now that i think way back, i do remember having a couple of delayed ignition rounds that were not crimped. i lost all my data a while ago, when lightning hit our computer, and destroyed it. but i believe that was using pistol powder in the 300 win mag. that was when i decided to crimp everything. i was not thinking so much about an explosion per say, but i was worried about a large rise in pressure if the bullet had moved. i do not remember any flattened primers because of it. i do remember that was when i started playing around with dacron filler. maybe i was just very lucky it was a remington 700, and built like a stainless steel outhouse. i certainly do know that this can happen. and i would not wish it on anyone. which is why i initially asked if there were certain powders that were known to destroy things. /// the big reason for the reduced loading right now is my son is old enough to hunt deer this year on the youth hunt. i have 2 rifles he could possibly use, a 223, which in the hands of an experienced hunter in my opinion, is marginal (especially since it has a slow twist rate, and can only shoot 55 grain bullets accurately), or my old marlin 30-30. he openly admits that the recoil is more than he likes, so my desire is to start off light, and work his way up to at least close to a factory load. i figure over the course of 6 weeks or so, shooting a couple of times a week, he can be ready, and competent with the 30-30. now, if buck fever gets him, that will be a different story. but i want him to be able to handle the gun properly and proficiently before he hunts.

[XWrench3]

turbo 1889, that is AWESOME! THANK YOU so much! i will print that off, and put it in my reloading book (a binder that i keep with my reloading manuals) with all the other tid bits, tricks, warnings, etc. that i find. eventually, i believe my son and or daughter will take over my "hobby", and while some of the material will be way outdated, much of it will still be relevant. so i will not be the only one that benefits from it.

[turbo1889]

. . . the big reason for the reduced loading right now is my son is old enough to hunt deer this year on the youth hunt. i have 2 rifles he could possibly use, a 223, which in the hands of an experienced hunter in my opinion, is marginal (especially since it has a slow twist rate, and can only shoot 55 grain bullets accurately), or my old marlin 30-30. he openly admits that the recoil is more than he likes, so my desire is to start off light, and work his way up to at least close to a factory load. i figure over the course of 6 weeks or so, shooting a couple of times a week, he can be ready, and competent with the 30-30. now, if buck fever gets him, that will be a different story. but i want him to be able to handle the gun properly and proficiently before he hunts.

For a reduced load, especially with a cast lead boolit in that 30-30 of yours my first suggestion would be a full case slightly compressed load of R-17 powder. Basically take a sized and primed case and fill it up with R-17 powder till the powder just starts to come up the inside of the neck a little bit (assuming the base of the boolit will sit at the bottom of the neck of the case). Pore that powder into the scale pan and figure out how much that weighs and then weight out that as your charge. When the boolit is seated it should just squeeze the powder a little bit.

That kind of load with R-17 powder works like a dandy for me both in the 30-30 and 7.62x39 as a low recoil reduced load.

[Texantothecore]

Trail Boss is specifically designed for reduced velocity loads and you might try that. I haven't heard of any problems with it so I would give it a try.

[1Shirt]

Turbo, That was well thought out, and well written! Thanks!
1Shirt1

[XWrench3]

Trail Boss is specifically designed for reduced velocity loads and you might try that. I haven't heard of any problems with it so I would give it a try.

i have heard and read about that for trail boss. that you can basicly dump in whatever amount (as long as it is enough to send the bullet out the barrel), seat a bullet, and shoot. i have gone to get a bottle 3 times in the last 4 months (getting paid monthly sucks), and every time, the 2 places were out. the one time i called ahead, they had 3 bottles. in one hour, they sold all 3. :sad: the only trouble i can see with it, is if i start at a full case, i will have to switch powders to go up from there. and there is no way i am going to pay an additional $27.50 for haz mat fee to have a bottle shipped to me. :mad:that haz mat fee is a total and complete bunch of non sense. there is no reason, other than they make a bunch of money off from gun people, for it. :mad:[smilie=b: if i was ordering dynamite, tnt, or liquid nitroglycerine, i could see, and understand it. but smokeless gun powder? RIP OFF.

[turbo1889]

I wouldn't go so far as to say you can just dump however much TB you want in any case under any bullet and you will be fine. That is a little too open ended of a statement for me to be comfortable with. The thought of some Yo-Yo filling up a 7mm Shooting Times Western case (massive amount of powder capacity with a sub-30-cal bore and usually uses 50-BMG burn rate powders) all the way with TB and capping it off with a 175gr. copper solid (greatest weight and bore friction combination of any commonly available bullet for the 7mm) makes the hair stand up on the back of my neck.

Long story short TB is indeed a very versatile powder but you can still get yourself into trouble with it if you don't use some common sense.

[Texantothecore]

Get him a PAST Magnum shoulder pad and it will absorb most of the recoil. They are very popular with .460 caliber shooters. And it would be completely safe. Problem solved.

[303Guy]

Perhaps a converse or inverse list would be helpful too - one on powders that are forgiving and versatile. A definition of 'reduced' loads would be helpful too.

There are powders loads listed that have higher pressure and velocities than some other powders. Don't reduce those! Other powder loads have a max with lower pressure and velocities than other powders - don't exceed those! Those powders have a nasty way of producing pressure at an exponential rate above max. I know this because I tried it. I could only plot the velocity/powder charge curve but the curve got very steep at the top end! primer flattening increased dramatically too.

turbo1889, a well thought out and presented post. Thank you.

Interesting observations, 44man. Respectfully, that's exactly what I have come to expect from you.

[XWrench3]

yes, i know that there are always exceptions, and that no manufacturer would ever make such a statement for any powder. i have no idea what a 7mm shooting times western cartridge is. never heard of it. sounds like some kind of wild cat round. i suppose a person could neck down a howitzer cartridge to 20 caliber, and call it a 20 howitzer improved, and there would be no powder in the world safe enough for a case full of that.

as for a shoulder pad, i will have to look into that. though i have no idea what a .s0caliber shooter is. we are out in the sticks, no real matches are close by around here. if you want to shoot, you walk out your back door, or if it is to many houses, drive 3 miles to the woods.

as for a definition of a reduced load, to me, it means a load that is less than any starting load, in published data. i have 7 reloading manuals (including lymans cast bullet data book) , and 4 manufacturers web site load data sites in my computer. so data is not a problem. trying to find soft shooting or cast boolit data, is not so easy. the only real source i have for cast boolits is the lyman book. some of the loads there do not work for me/my guns/ bullets/powders. and trying to buy every different powder, from every manufacturer, is crazy at best. and i certainly do not have the room, or the budget for 228 (that is the highest number on a burn rate chart i found) pounds of powder in my home! you would need to be a Billionaire, and have 90 years of 100% time for shooting to try every load, with every powder, in every load source! let alone keep track of all the information so you can make more of the good loads.

[Wayne Smith]

I agree that we ought to have a Reloading Safety sticky, but this is not 101 level. This is at least 400 level reloading. Any time we talk about going outside of published data we are well above a starting level. This ought to be thought out and posted in the appropriate level of reloading. There are a lot of advanced reloading posts and thinking on this board. I would not want these to be combined in a "101" level sticky.

[Texantothecore]

yes, i know that there are always exceptions, and that no manufacturer would ever make such a statement for any powder. i have no idea what a 7mm shooting times western cartridge is. never heard of it. sounds like some kind of wild cat round. i suppose a person could neck down a howitzer cartridge to 20 caliber, and call it a 20 howitzer improved, and there would be no powder in the world safe enough for a case full of that.

as for a shoulder pad, i will have to look into that. though i have no idea what a .s0caliber shooter is. we are out in the sticks, no real matches are close by around here. if you want to shoot, you walk out your back door, or if it is to many houses, drive 3 miles to the woods.

as for a definition of a reduced load, to me, it means a load that is less than any starting load, in published data. i have 7 reloading manuals (including lymans cast bullet data book) , and 4 manufacturers web site load data sites in my computer. so data is not a problem. trying to find soft shooting or cast boolit data, is not so easy. the only real source i have for cast boolits is the lyman book. some of the loads there do not work for me/my guns/ bullets/powders. and trying to buy every different powder, from every manufacturer, is crazy at best. and i certainly do not have the room, or the budget for 228 (that is the highest number on a burn rate chart i found) pounds of powder in my home! you would need to be a Billionaire, and have 90 years of 100% time for shooting to try every load, with every powder, in every load source! let alone keep track of all the information so you can make more of the good loads.

Sorry for the confusion concerning the shoulder pad posting. I was posting on a Blackberry and it sometimes doesn't do what I wish it to do.

The PAST shoulder works beautifully and it is a favorite of the heavy caliber crowd, say .460 and up. Although comfortable, they seem to really knock off a lot of recoil and I use them every time I shoot my .45-70. It is a good solution.

[44man]

Good thinking, good posts.
I still have a fear with powders because a slow powder can act like a fast one and so on. A list is a start but any of the powders can do a reversal.
Like Varget that I found works like a champ in very small cases like the 7BR, it reversed roles and acts like 748.
XWrench3, bear with me here. The 30-30 is very low on the recoil scale with proper loads. It is about the best deer caliber ever.
You would do better by getting the boy used to it. One way is to let him shoot larger with a lot of recoil until it does not bother him, then go back to the 30-30. Yes, it works. I am one that does not believe anyone that gets expert with a .22 can handle larger because the brain will defeat him.
Yesterday my friends son had to be talked into shooting my BFR in .500 JRH. He centered steel at 50 on the first shot, grinned like crazy and went through a pile of my loads. Now he wants one. It is that easy and all I told him was to hold the gun firm with a low grip.
I was a little red faced because he was shooting it better then me! :-)

[XWrench3]

last time we went shooting, i let him and his buddy shoot my 300 win mag, with full power varmint loads (110 grain bullet @ 3500 fps). the first shot went well enough. he concentrated on hitting the target, which he did (exploded a 2 liter pop bottle full of water). his buddy did the same thing. the second, third and fourth shot got worse and worse, due to a building fear of that recoil. by the third shot, both of them were closing their eye, and yanking on the trigger, instead of squeezing like he had been taught to do. i told both of them what was going on. and let them try one more time. and it was painfully obvious that if i let them keep on, i would be trying to get rid of a flinch for some time to come, even on the 22's. the 30-30, is not nearly as bad, because of the much lesser recoil. it has been 3 weeks since they have been out, so i hope he has forgotten about the recoil, and the flinch. only time will tell. but he WILL be shooting the 22 next time out. so i can asses if he has a flinch, and if so, so we can work on that, and try to break it. then we can work on the 30-30. at 10 years old, a 300 magnum is a LOT of gun. i was 11 the first time i shot my dad's 300 H&H magnum. of course, that was a late 50's model 70, with a steel butt plate. not a nice soft Limbsaver like my Remington 700 has. the Marlin 30-30 does not have a recoil pad either. i would put one on just for him, but it is already a bit on the long side for him. i have been watching for another stock (eBay, gunbroker,etc.) to put on it, to cut down, and add a recoil pad. but they get pretty pricey for what they are. i think that would help him a lot. but i am not willing to cut up the original stock. i still like to shoot that ol' 30-30 myself. and it is already on the short side for me.

[Larry Gibson]

I really hesitate to use or recommend a "list".

My experimce of many years of reloading reduced loads in all sorts of cartridges with manydifferent powders PLUS my last few hears of measuring psi/time pressure curves in numerous cartridges with thousands of loads tells me that "exceptions" is not correct. It is more of "it depends".

The "depends" have to do with the case volume, the bullet weight, the powder burning rate, the throat length and condition and the intended velocity . Those are the determining variables as to whether an SEE is a potential. It is those variable combined together (very dangerous to take one of them sperately as a "list") as they all equally influence each other. When on is out of balance things don't work well. When 2 are out of balance the potential SEE can readily be measured. When 3 are outof balance an SEE is more than probable. That is the reason that an SEE or a potential SEE can easily be set up and measured.....yes I have set up several potential SEEs but have stopped short of creating the actual SEE.

Larry Gibson

[44man]

Thanks Larry, you said it better then I did.
You just don't know what a powder will do.

[44man]

last time we went shooting, i let him and his buddy shoot my 300 win mag, with full power varmint loads (110 grain bullet @ 3500 fps). the first shot went well enough. he concentrated on hitting the target, which he did (exploded a 2 liter pop bottle full of water). his buddy did the same thing. the second, third and fourth shot got worse and worse, due to a building fear of that recoil. by the third shot, both of them were closing their eye, and yanking on the trigger, instead of squeezing like he had been taught to do. i told both of them what was going on. and let them try one more time. and it was painfully obvious that if i let them keep on, i would be trying to get rid of a flinch for some time to come, even on the 22's. the 30-30, is not nearly as bad, because of the much lesser recoil. it has been 3 weeks since they have been out, so i hope he has forgotten about the recoil, and the flinch. only time will tell. but he WILL be shooting the 22 next time out. so i can asses if he has a flinch, and if so, so we can work on that, and try to break it. then we can work on the 30-30. at 10 years old, a 300 magnum is a LOT of gun. i was 11 the first time i shot my dad's 300 H&H magnum. of course, that was a late 50's model 70, with a steel butt plate. not a nice soft Limbsaver like my Remington 700 has. the Marlin 30-30 does not have a recoil pad either. i would put one on just for him, but it is already a bit on the long side for him. i have been watching for another stock (eBay, gunbroker,etc.) to put on it, to cut down, and add a recoil pad. but they get pretty pricey for what they are. i think that would help him a lot. but i am not willing to cut up the original stock. i still like to shoot that ol' 30-30 myself. and it is already on the short side for me.
That is where you come in with teaching. You can do it.
I had to show my friends son that a .500 JRH shot with one hand was really nothing. Gun rise was no more then with 2 hands, rather easy in fact.
Explain it is mental, not pain. Expectation of recoil that does not change no matter what you do. You will be surprised how much a youngster can take and laugh about it. Keep the gun tight to the shoulder, no gap or loose hold. A .410 can hurt if shot wrong.

[303Guy]

I once shot a 357 Rossi Puma over a bench using my hand loads that were quite moderate really and it began to hurt! Shooting position is key. For me as an adult, leaning over a car roof with a pillow under the fore-end for steadiness and leaning onto the car is very gentle on the shoulder. It's like shooting off-hand. Now I'm thinking, you shoot a 300 and your youngster will be a chip off the old block - see what I mean?

My eight year old son (or was he six?) fired my 44 mag revolver. Perhaps he shouldn't have as the recoil sent the muzzle whipping up and onto the earmuff strap on his head! Oops! He was a lightly built little chap at the time (he's more like Arnold now - even looks a little like him).

I still suggest the heavy boolit with a slower powder trick. No less actual recoil but it's the delivery that's much more gentler.

[XWrench3]

ok 303 guy, i have some 180g cast boolits, i will make some loads up using imr4831 (i have made some loads up using that powder with "J" bullets). and see how they turn out. i just hope it does not smear the bore with lead. not that i do not know how to remove the lead, it is really only a minor chore. i just do not like doing it. the reason i am worried about leading, is for the 30-30 i normally shoot 0.310-0.311" sized boolits, and all of the 180's (actually 188 w/checks) are sized at .309". and they do not get sized much at that. if he shoots a few of those, and likes them, i may have to try to beagle the mold a bit, and size them larger. but i am not going to go thru all of that for a few shots if i cant make them work for us. we had a major storm last night, we are on generator power intermittently for the time being. i have a lot of things to straighten up as well (trees down, torn tarps, debris all over the place), so it may be a few days until i get to all of this.

[badgeredd]

I guess I don't understand the theory of using "reduced" loads here. My question is why not load with Unique, 700x, or Bullseye? One can achieve very light recoiling loads extremely easily. I guess I missed something about the reduced load idea. It seems to me that light recoiling loads with proven powders is the way to go, both from the safety aspect and the light recoil aspect. One CAN load heavier loads when the time comes with appropriate powders. I speak from experience with 5 grandchildren and light recoiling loads made for them is many pistol and rifle loads. They will shoot them up!

Edd

[243winxb]

http://firearmsid.com/Feature%20Articles/McCord_gunpowder/index.htm The Manufacture of Smokeless Powders and their
Forensic Analysis: A Brief Review Improvised Explosive Devices
The safest and most powerful low-order explosive is smokeless powder. These powders decompose at rates up to 1,000 meters per second and produce a propelling action that makes them suitable for use in ammunition. However, the slower burning rate of smokeless powder should not be underestimated. The explosive power of smokeless powder is extremely dangerous when confined to a small container. In addition, certain smokeless powders with a high-nitroglycerine concentration can be induced to detonate. On the other hand, high-order explosives do not need containment to demonstrate their explosive effects (Saferstein 1998). These materials detonate at rates from 1,000 to 8,500 meters per second, producing a shock wave with an outward rush of gases at supersonic speeds. This effect proves to be more destructive than the fragmented debris.

A lot more at the above link. http://www.photobucket.com/kabooom

[Texantothecore]

http://firearmsid.com/Feature%20Articles/McCord_gunpowder/index.htm The Manufacture of Smokeless Powders and their
Forensic Analysis: A Brief Review Improvised Explosive Devices A lot more at the above link. http://www.photobucket.com/kabooom



Go with the PAST pad.

[44man]

Slow powder works!
Recoil is what you make of it. A gun shot right will not hurt until the caliber gets so large for the gun weight it gets brutal. A lot of guns show up here that I will not shoot. I am not sensitive to recoil but there is a limit and common sense must be used, a 6" case in a 6# rifle is left for another nut to shoot! [smilie=1:
I spent the day yesterday with a Weatherby Mark V in .300 Win. I had trouble with the old Loopy scope jumping clear off paper at 200 yards with just a tiny adjustment and sometimes the POI never moved.
The rifle is amazing and every time I shot 2 shots, they were 3/4" to 1" apart at 200 but the scope drove me nuts. I shot a LOT but think the scope needs sent in.
But recoil was very pleasant, never bothered me a bit and I am 74 and a half.
Kids are tough. When I was a kid I would pull both triggers at once on a 12 ga double, it spun me around and I had to quit when the forearm fell off and the barrels hit the ground!
We actually laughed at recoil, it was fun.
Light loads never appealed, the difference is not enough to squirm over.
A friend would bring his daughter to deer hunt with a .223. I said to stop, get her a 30-30. She was afraid at first but now loves the gun. Don't hide recoil or baby your kids, they really can take it.

[madsenshooter]

I enjoy reading these things, but the fact is, a lead bullet isn't likely to produce the conditions needed to create an SEE! The lead boolit, no matter how hard cast or heat treated, isn't likely to create the barrel obstruction situation that precedes an SEE. Because the pressure needed to get them moving again is so much less than that of a jacketed bullet, moving again is what is more than likely to happen. Pressure could spike up a bit, but not as high as with a jacketed bullet. In one case of SEE the bullet being used was a very thick jacketed Swift bullet. Many of the powders listed as suspect were tried by Richard Lee, and some of Lee's data was produced by Hodgdon's lab. I don't think Lee or Hodgdon would have allowed the publication of this data if it was deemed likely to produce an SEE when used with cast bullets. And slower powders do, in many cases, work better, most especially when working with higher velocity loads. In some cases, you can't get there with faster powders with any degree of accuracy.

[felix]

Rebounding wave forms are most likely with flat surfaces. That specific criteria trumps whether the surfaces move or not because of the speed of the various wave forms in respect to the surfaces.

Next time out, shoot a 311291 in your 308W with 25 grains H322, regular primer, sloping downwards at about 15 degrees. Your chamber will be different than mine, so the powder amount might need to be varied 10 percent or so, especially if the weather is not dry feeling and about 85 degrees. If your bolt does not get stuck after a few playful rounds, you are reasonably safe with that particular load. ... felix

[44man]

I enjoy reading these things, but the fact is, a lead bullet isn't likely to produce the conditions needed to create an SEE! The lead boolit, no matter how hard cast or heat treated, isn't likely to create the barrel obstruction situation that precedes an SEE. Because the pressure needed to get them moving again is so much less than that of a jacketed bullet, moving again is what is more than likely to happen. Pressure could spike up a bit, but not as high as with a jacketed bullet. In one case of SEE the bullet being used was a very thick jacketed Swift bullet. Many of the powders listed as suspect were tried by Richard Lee, and some of Lee's data was produced by Hodgdon's lab. I don't think Lee or Hodgdon would have allowed the publication of this data if it was deemed likely to produce an SEE when used with cast bullets. And slower powders do, in many cases, work better, most especially when working with higher velocity loads. In some cases, you can't get there with faster powders with any degree of accuracy.
Please do not believe that.

[paul h]

There is a huge difference between static friction and sliding friction. The force required to keep a bullet moving through a barrel is much lower than the force required to move a bullet that is lodged in a barrel. Once a bullet gets stuck in the bore, using powder is never going to be the right way to remove it.

I have no doubt that an SEE event could occur with a cast bullet, and believe it has occured at least once with reduced loads of H-110 in a handgun.

To the OP, if you don't have a .223, you really should get one for training youth to shoot centerfire rifles. I was amazed how quickly my sons shooting skills advanced by getting him a youth model 223 and giving him as much ammo as he wanted to shoot per session. In only took a few range sessions for him to go from finding clay targets challenging at 100 yds to using 12 ga hulls as targets.

I've used reduced jacketed and cast bullet loads in the .308, but for some reason full power 223 loads have worked out better. Perhaps part of it has been him growing a bit older.

[303Guy]

In addition, certain smokeless powders with a high-nitroglycerine concentration can be induced to detonate.Very interesting!


To the OP, if you don't have a .223, you really should get one for training youth to shoot centerfire rifles. I was amazed how quickly my sons shooting skills advanced by getting him a youth model 223 and giving him as much ammo as he wanted to shoot per session. In only took a few range sessions for him to go from finding clay targets challenging at 100 yds to using 12 ga hulls as targets.My initial thought was "why not go straight for a 25?" But reading on I get your point. It's a very good point. Even when the 223 becomes 'inadequate' it will still always have a place. If one loads unholy bullets they are the cheapest available and filling those shotgun hulls with water makes them more impressive to hit. You can't go wrong with that one. I would go the 222 route but those are not so readily available and 55gr bullets (which might be too heavy for a 222, depending on twist) are the cheapest. The rifles are smaller and lighter and if you can fit a suppressor they are as quiet as a suppressed 22LR shooting high velocities. That one gets my vote.

[44man]

I can't disagree, anything children can shoot a lot, cheap, is good.
Only to prepare for hunting should be considered. One loss of a deer to a kid from a mouse gun is one too much. I seen it with the young lady using the .223. She made a good hit but no blood. The disappointment from her could be cut with a knife.
A little later I found her deer over 100 yards away, gutted it and called them to pick it up.
Doing a necropsy when I gutted showed no more then 6" of lung damage. The tiny hole in could not leak.
Using the wrong thing to hunt can remove a child from the hunting fields, it really hurts them more then you think.
Do you want smiles and high fives or tears over a loss and a vow to never wound and lose another animal?
You are my friends, I am not blowing smoke. Treat children that shoot as adults, not a baby.

[KYCaster]

Treat children that shoot as adults, not a baby.



AMEN!

Jerry

[44man]

You will never know how important you all are to me.
I am still crying about a person with cancer.
Children are so important, make them responsible for actions.
Don't give me the junk that he will not eat carrots or peas and only wants a Twinky. Do not let him hunt with a "TWINKY" gun.
Death as soon as possible to the animal is important, it is not a game, it is serious and hurtful to a hunter. A real hunter feels pain and regret. I hate the videos where a jerk jumps up and down with glee. He has taken a life, thank the lord first.
My friends, it was a life so please respect it.
Do the very best you can.

[badgeredd]

i did a search, and looked around to try to find a list, but i could not find what i was looking for. maybe it has already been posted, or not. i really am not even sure if this can be done, but here goes. i was looking for a lit of powders that are known to detonate when reduced. i know that Hodgdon H110 will, and a freind told me that imr 4831 will. are there more? or will most powders detonate if reduced to a point. i have successfully reduced several pistol powders to the point of sticking a bullet in the bore without detonation (young kids shooting). i also have a 10 year old that is a bit sensitive to recoil, so i am looking at downloading rifle loads now. i really do not want to have a detonation for either of us, but especially him! if a list could be compiled, it might be a good sticky.

What am I missing? The question is about reducing loads to reduce recoil for a child that is ALREADY recoil sensitive. What is wrong with a Unique load to start with and building up to a honest hunting load? Why are some insisting on making a child even more recoil sensitive with hunting loads? AND I would have to say some 10 year olds are physically larger and more capable of handling recoil. To me this IS NOT a one size fits all question. My assumption is the child will be practicing to gain confidence in his/her own ability. Trigger pull, and sight alignment are more likely in a majority of cases going to be learned a little at a time and recoil that half scares a kid is likely to scar the child mentally.

Edd

[felix]

Some folks are more sensitive to noise than recoil. I am such a person, and have always subconsciously confused the two impulses as the same. If something makes a noise, it kicks. ... felix

[9.3X62AL]

If you've ever eaten a burrito from one of the Mexican catering trucks around here, you will understand through experience a precise definition for each of your three quoted terms.

LOL! No doubt about it, BLT! And the farther south you go, the hotter the food gets. Spoken from experience (and survival) with a Calexico taco truck, as inspired by 2 Imperial Co. sheriff's deputies and a USBP agent, whose assurances of safety were utter falsehoods. This was early Spring 1989, and the only good that came from the event was an absence of flu or colds well into 1993.

[303Guy]

A real hunter feels pain and regret. Quite so. I always have a sense of regret when I kill a critter. Making a quick kill gives me a sense of relief. It's very important to me.

It may be true that the kid is already recoil shy. Nothing wrong with that. Muzzle blast may be an issue too. Perhaps the cheapest option is to pay the licence fee for a suppressor and get one. It solves both problems. I would only go the over-barrel short overhang type. Then a reduced load only needs to be a starting load and the rifle, even a light one would be sweet shooting for the kids.

[44man]

Noise is so important. But it is not heard when hunting. Strange as heck but one shot on the range without muffs will drive you nuts but a shot at a deer is never heard.
I wish silencers were allowed without paying big bucks. Every gun should have them and they should be sold in every store but it is the liberal thing. Like a bayonet on a rifle is more deadly then the bullet. Even the lug for one is deadly and the appearance of a gun takes it into an assault rifle. Liberal junk!
A SAA is fine but tweak it into a Buck Rogers gun and it is wrong. Stick a knife on the front and go to jail.
A gun that makes noise and wakes the whole neighborhood is fine but a quiet gun is not legal.
You get a ticket for a loud muffler.

[S.B.]

No gun powder detonates, it burns. It is conditions for burn speed and where the pressure is applied that will get you in trouble.
Stay with book loads, never take it upon yourself to reduce loads.
Change powders for light loads but only by the book.
You flirt with danger reducing loads by yourself. I fear for your kids.
I want to SCREAM at you and shake you like a rag.
STOP RIGHT NOW!

I agree, being a licensed powder monkey with LIUNA for years, no powder will detonate, it may burn at an unusual fast speed thou.
Steve

[felix]

I do not understand the term detonate. ... felix

[44man]

I do not understand the term detonate. ... felix
It is when you hit your toe with a sledge hammer! :groner: