Ringing the chamber

[stubbicatt]

Fellas, what is it causes chamber bulges or "ringing"?

Thanks.
Stubb

[country gent]

Normally its using a light charge of powder ( smoleless is mre prevalant than Black but would imaigne both can do this) with a wad holding powder down and airspace between wad and bullet. How it was explained to me. On firing the wad becomes the projectile and bullet acts as a obstruction. bullet may start moving some lightnening the force but it is an obstruction to the wads moving faster. Have seen ringed chambers but never been present when it happened.

[Outpost75]

No wad is necessary. All it takes is a significant free airspace in the case and delayed ignition of the charge.

When I was at Camp Perry, OH in 1967 I witnessed DOZENS of M1 Garand rifles which were turned in for rebarreling, after having fired WCC Ball M2 ammunition loaded with WC852 powder (H380) in which a "ring" had formed adjacent the bullet base, partway up the chamber neck. One of the rifles was MINE! I also had a Winchester Model 70 with ringed barrel and the government paid for it to be returned to Winchester for rebarreling.

I have also examined DOZENS of Ruger No.1 single-shots which had been returned to Customer Service, mostly .45-70s, which had been ringed by shooters using wads pushed down against the powder. The service department had sectioned the barrels and had them mounted on the wall at the New Hampshire factory where they were and probably still are plain to see by students attending the police armorer's school. Some rifles had multiple rings corresponding to the bullet base location of various weight bullets they had tried.

Easily-ignited, relatively fast-burning pistol or shotgun powders, having NO deterrent coating, and which tolerate the free airspace in the case, such as Bullseye, Unique, PB, Universal, SR7625, Herco are not the problem.

Most prone to chamber ringing are heavily deterrent coated, spheroidal powders such as 296, H110, 680, 1680, H335, Ball C2, 748, H380, H450, etc. in which there is a high percentage of deterrent coating, and a small particle size in the base grain.

In pressure testing I did attempting to develop suitable .30-'06 loads to operate the M1 Garand, having correct breech and port pressures, using the government test barrel, I was not able to do so with 150-grain bullets using powders such as 748, H335, or Ball C2. I fact, I RINGED THE $5000 government combination breech-port pressure barrel! The results were EXACTLY the same as those observed with the WCC Ball M2 loaded with WC852.

My advice is that if a powder requires use of a filler in order to obtain acceptable ballistic uniformity, than IT IS NOT SUITABLE for those particular conditions of loading.

For reduced rifle charges, lightly deterred, perforated flake and extruded tubular powders such as #2400, 5744, RL7, 4227, 4198 will give best results. Of these Alliant #2400 is the only one which in my experience, performs normally at loading densities below 50% of case capacity. 5744, RL7, 4227 and 4198 should not be loaded at less than 50% of available case capacity. Extruded powders slower than RL7 or 4198 should not be loaded at less than 70% of case capacity. The Hodgdon 75% rule is sound!

For full charge loads, choose a powder in which a safe charge occupies not less than 80% of the powder space and in which velocity standard deviations of a 10-shot sample fired with the powder uniformly positioned using a "SAAMI roll" do not exceed 1% of the sample average. The military procedure is more severe and consists of 5 rounds fired "base tap" and five rounds fired " nose tap" in the sample.

[tigweldit]

Outpost75, Great post. Thanks for the detailed information. I hope all reloaders will read this and follow your advice. Might save some good steel from being turned into scrap.

[M-Tecs]

No wad is necessary. All it takes is a significant free airspace in the case and delayed ignition of the charge.

When I was at Camp Perry, OH in 1967 I witnessed DOZENS of M1 Garand rifles which were turned in for rebarreling, after having fired WCC Ball M2 ammunition loaded with WC852 powder (H380) in which a "ring" had formed adjacent the bullet base, partway up the chamber neck. One of the rifles was MINE! I also had a Winchester Model 70 with ringed barrel and the government paid for it to be returned to Winchester for rebarreling.

I have also examined DOZENS of Ruger No.1 single-shots which had been returned to Customer Service, mostly .45-70s, which had been ringed by shooters using wads pushed down against the powder. The service department had sectioned the barrels and had them mounted on the wall at the New Hampshire factory where they were and probably still are plain to see by students attending the police armorer's school. Some rifles had multiple rings corresponding to the bullet base location of various weight bullets they had tried.

Easily-ignited, relatively fast-burning pistol or shotgun powders, having NO deterrent coating, and which tolerate the free airspace in the case, such as Bullseye, Unique, PB, Universal, SR7625, Herco are not the problem.

Most prone to chamber ringing are heavily deterrent coated, spheroidal powders such as 296, H110, 680, 1680, H335, Ball C2, 748, H380, H450, etc. in which there is a high percentage of deterrent coating, and a small particle size in the base grain.

In pressure testing I did attempting to develop suitable .30-'06 loads to operate the M1 Garand, having correct breech and port pressures, using the government test barrel, I was not able to do so with 150-grain bullets using powders such as 748, H335, or Ball C2. I fact, I RINGED THE $5000 government combination breech-port pressure barrel! The results were EXACTLY the same as those observed with the WCC Ball M2 loaded with WC852.

My advice is that if a powder requires use of a filler in order to obtain acceptable ballistic uniformity, than IT IS NOT SUITABLE for those particular conditions of loading.

For reduced rifle charges, lightly deterred, perforated flake and extruded tubular powders such as #2400, 5744, RL7, 4227, 4198 will give best results. Of these Alliant #2400 is the only one which in my experience, performs normally at loading densities below 50% of case capacity. 5744, RL7, 4227 and 4198 should not be loaded at less than 50% of available case capacity. Extruded powders slower than RL7 or 4198 should not be loaded at less than 70% of case capacity. The Hodgdon 75% rule is sound!

For full charge loads, choose a powder in which a safe charge occupies not less than 80% of the powder space and in which velocity standard deviations of a 10-shot sample fired with the powder uniformly positioned using a "SAAMI roll" do not exceed 1% of the sample average. The military procedure is more severe and consists of 5 rounds fired "base tap" and five rounds fired " nose tap" in the sample.

That is more detail than I have seen on this subject. Thanks.

[historicfirearms]

Thank you Outpost75. That post is printed off and going in my reloading notes.

[leftiye]

This should be a sticky.

[leebuilder]

Plus one. STICKY

[sharps4590]

Great post, Outpost. Very informative. I do have a request. I am ignorant of the terms "base tap" and "nose tap". I've never heard them mentioned before. Would you give a brief definition? I have an idea but honestly am a bit embarrassed to state it so I'll ask.

[shredder]

Holy sticky! That is one of the most valuable "been there seen that" posts ever.
I too printed this off and emailed a copy to my son.

[Outpost75]

Great post, Outpost. Very informative. I do have a request. I am ignorant of the terms "base tap" and "nose tap". I've never heard them mentioned before. Would you give a brief definition? I have an idea but honestly am a bit embarrassed to state it so I'll ask.

GREAT QUESTION!

"Base Tap" - cartridge is pointed with bullet end straight up, gently tapped on its base to settle the powder against the powder and then SLOWLY AND GENTLY ROTATED so the bullet is oriented to the 3:00 position as it is GENTLY pressed into the chamber and the breech on the Universal Receiver closed.

"Nose Tap" - the cartridge is held with the bullet pointed straight down, and gently tapped on the bullet NOSE so settle the powder in the front of the case, then SLOWLY AND GENTLY rotated upward to the 3:00 position, inserted into the chamber and the breech closed.

"SAAMI Roll" - Starts with the cartridge held with bullet straight up, being then grasped between thumb and forefingers of both hands while being SLOWLY rotated clockwise in a 270 degree arc, ending at the 3:00 position, whereupon the cartridge is GENTLY inserted into the chamber and the breech closed.

[marlinman93]

The late Charlie Dell experimented with ringing chambers, and discussed it at length in his book, "The Modern Schuetzen Rifle". Charlie figured out that with the right powder and a wad against the powder he could ring the chamber every time he fired. He cut back a barrel and rechambered it, then repeated his test with the same results, until he ran out of barrel to shorten and rechamber.

[John Taylor]

Ringing the chamber is getting very close to having a gun come apart. My brother was trying for a light load in a 45-70 and used RX7. When he fired it he had a bunch of pieces, some never found. The chamber end was like a banana peal and the top of the action was gone as well as about 4" of stock.

[NSB]

I've used Rel 7 for years in a number of 45-70s. It's my "go to" powder for those guns and several others. Never had even one problem following book loads in safe guns. Not enough info in the above post to tell anything.....bullet, gun, amount of powder, filler, etc?

[Outpost75]

Ringing the chamber is getting very close to having a gun come apart. My brother was trying for a light load in a 45-70 and used RX7. When he fired it he had a bunch of pieces, some never found. The chamber end was like a banana peal and the top of the action was gone as well as about 4" of stock.

Agree completely! The tested "book" Trapdoor loads from Lyman are OK, but below those there are better powders. I DO like RL7 in the .44-40 using a compressed nominal caseful 24-26 grains with 200-230 grain bullet, safe in the Winchester '73 and very consistent grouper with Accurate Molds 43-215C or 43-230EB cast in 1:30 alloy!

[Frank46]

That is probably the best written post regarding chamber ringing that I've seen ever. Thanks. Frank

[stubbicatt]

So, I'm shooting 32-40 using IMR4227 at 13.8 grains with a 200 grain Saeco tapered bullet, fixed ammo, no wad. Bullet seated to just engage the tapered throat of the rifle. There are several exposed lube grooves with this ammunition. This charge is within loading manual range, do I run a risk of bulging or ringing a chamber with said load?

A photo of example of one cartridge:

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j187/stubbicatt/1909%20Winchester%2032-40/IMG_0389_zpse6hwa0r0.jpg (http://s80.photobucket.com/user/stubbicatt/media/1909%20Winchester%2032-40/IMG_0389_zpse6hwa0r0.jpg.html)


Is it recommended to do a "base tap" at this charge weight? It most surely is less than 50% of the volume of the case.

I ask because I am experiencing difficult extraction on some empties. I do not see a bulge in the chamber, and the empties don't have a pronounced bulge on them. Perhaps I would do well to full length resize them each time, rather than just the neck portion. --Just trying to rectify the difficult extraction issues.

I suppose I could use 4759 or 5744, as I have both powders on hand, and they are "bulkier" powders, which should get closer to a 50% fill. I could change over to a 10 grain Unique load too I suppose.

When shooting breach seated bullets this same 13.8 grain load does not exhibit any issues with extraction, using an unsized and simply re-primed and powder charged case, no wad.

I would have thought that perhaps what I was seeing was excessive pressure, but there are no pressure signs on the primer, which is a large pistol CCI primer. The other possibility is that bullet lube is coming back into the tapered portion of the chamber upon firing, then working as a glue of sorts, as there is often soot on some brass. I suppose I could flare the case mouths to tightly fit the chamber in effort to reduce blowback.

If it is a lube issue, I can always start casting 8mm "silhouette" bullets with the single grease groove which would be contained in the case, and a gas check. --It's just that this ammo shoots so well, sub 1" groups at 100 yards using a scope.

Sorry fellas, I'm vexed.

[leftiye]

I've used Rel 7 for years in a number of 45-70s. It's my "go to" powder for those guns and several others. Never had even one problem following book loads in safe guns. Not enough info in the above post to tell anything.....bullet, gun, amount of powder, filler, etc?

"Trying for a light load" Probable SEE. Boolit gets kicked into bore and stops when powder fizzles. Then the powder takes off and it's over. It's not about safe book loads. Usually doesn't happen with powders as fast as Relodr 7.

[augercreek]

So then by reading all this I get the feeling that Mouse fart loads in all my rifles could be a problem?

[357Mag]

Outpost -

Howdy !

Not intended to hijack the thread....

Did your tests happen to include IMR4759, and if so.... what results were seen ?

Did you encounter any instances where primers started to " back out ", when shooting reduced loads ?

When you say " % of available case capacity ", does that notionally mean up to base of the neck, or.... percent of
H2O measured case capacity; or.... percent of proven max charge of a given powder ?

Would use of a light weight wad, such as tissue paper or some such.... mitigate onset of the ringing phenominon any ?


With regards,
357Mag

[Hickok]

Not trying to be a "know it all."

Just for clarification, and safety, we need to distinguish between "wads" and "fillers."

A wad being a cardboard, vegetable fiber, felt, etc., cylinder shape cut in a particular diameter usually about the caliber of the gun.

A filler being Dacron, kapok, etc, something light and fluffy to fill the air space between powder and boolit.


Just a word of caution, for those who don't already know.

You take a straight wall case like a 45/70, or 38/55, and push a "wad" down on the powder and leave an airspace between the wad and the base of the boolit, you are going to have a catastrophe sooner or later.

NEVER leave an airspace between a wad and a boolit.

[John Taylor]

I guess I should have been a little more clear. The load that blew up the 45-70 was a very light load with a very light bullet. If I remember right the bullet was 260 grain and the powder charge was around 40 grains. This would leave plenty of air space and the fact the barrel was pointed down when the cartridge was loaded would have the powder at the base of the bullet. What caused the explosion is called detonation. I had read stories about this but it's the first time I have seen one. The same load was fired twice in a Martini but the barrel was not pointing down when loaded. What was amazing other than that no one was hurt is the breach block was still in place on the trapdoor Springfield. The top of the action was gone and the pivot of the block was gone but the remainder of the breach was still there.

[Screwbolts]

to much pressure

[marlinman93]

So, I'm shooting 32-40 using IMR4227 at 13.8 grains with a 200 grain Saeco tapered bullet, fixed ammo, no wad.

I suppose I could use 4759 or 5744, as I have both powders on hand, and they are "bulkier" powders, which should get closer to a 50% fill. I could change over to a 10 grain Unique load too I suppose.

.

10.0 grains of Unique is a pretty stout load for that combo. My old Ideal manuals show 8.0 grs. with a 185 gr. bullet is 1255 fps. I use 8.0 grs. in all my .32-40 single shot rifles, and it works well.
I'm also surprised you have enough free bore to allow a bullet to be seated out that far and still chamber! None of my guns will allow that kind of seating.

[Gunlaker]

Stubbicat and Marlinman93, I've shot the same bullet in one of my .32-40, with that bullet seated about the same. I have a 0.050" freebore, and a 1.5 degree per side chamber. The bullet is tapered so it fits the throat well. I breech seat it now as i shoots better that way.

Many schuetzen shooters use similar, or slightly heavier charges of 4227 with that type of bullet in a .32-40 case. Following the instructions of Charlie Dell I doubt you'll have a problem. His book is very informative. It's too bad that prices have gone through the roof since it went out of print.

Chris.

[Rick B]

Something you rarely ever read about is P. O. Ackley's observations about reduced charges of slow burning powders. He stated that he had a number of rifles show up in his shop that had experienced pressure excursions. The owners had been shooting reduced charges of WW 2 surplus 4831. Interesting read.
Rick

[flounderman]

There are 2 different WC 852 powders. One is like H380 and one like 414. The one I have in some calibers isn't far from 4831. Did these differences have anything to do with ringing chambers? Was the formula changed after they found one would ring a barrel and the other was an improvement, or was it just the difference from one batch to another?

[Outpost75]

There are 2 different WC 852 powders. One is like H380 and one like 414. The one I have in some calibers isn't far from 4831. Did these differences have anything to do with ringing chambers? Was the formula changed after they found one would ring a barrel and the other was an improvement, or was it just the difference from one batch to another?

WC852 is WC852 regardless of who made it or when. The specifications and composition are the same whether it was made by the Badger Army Ammunition Plant in Baraboo, WI, or by Olin in St. Marks, FL. But when you buy surplus WC852 from various suppliers, you may not get powder all of one lot, you may get a blend of different lots, or from different plants, perhaps made years apart, and you know nothing about its age or conditions of storage.

Hodgdon at least attempts to blend lots to produce relatively uniform charge weight to pressure relationships, so that if you take a "book" tested load with H380 you bought yesterday, a different canister you bought ten years ago will have similar performance.

Specifications for non-canister military powders would allow lot-to-lot variation in burning rate ranging from "like H380" to "like H414" because charge establishment firings are determined by firing samples in a pressure barrel whenever a different powder barrel is brought to the loading machine. In wartime loading ordinary ball ammunition it was not unusual to have the first part of a production run to be assembled using a different powder lot than the end of a run. A "lot" is usually the production of an entire shift from one machine.

[stubbicatt]

10.0 grains of Unique is a pretty stout load for that combo. My old Ideal manuals show 8.0 grs. with a 185 gr. bullet is 1255 fps. I use 8.0 grs. in all my .32-40 single shot rifles, and it works well.
I'm also surprised you have enough free bore to allow a bullet to be seated out that far and still chamber! None of my guns will allow that kind of seating.

Thanks for the clarification. I have a throated barrel designed for breach seating, but I'm shooting this ammo in it. I really do appreciate your clarification re: load data.

Regards,
Stubb

[McLintock]

I shot both 45-70 and 38-55's for over ten years in both single shots (hi walls) and lever guns ('86's and '94's), for long range events in Cowboy Action shooting with no problems using lighter loads. My load for 45-70 was 22.5-23.5 grs of 5744 and 405 gr bullet, and for 38-55, 18 grs of IMR4227 and a 250 gr bullet. No wads or filler and both were very consistent and accurate. I think the type of powder used is very important, 5744 was developed for this type use.
McLintock

[Frank46]

Check out the assra.com website in the handloading section. Most of the 32-40 loads I've seen use basically two powders. 4227 and IMR 4759 with generally at or near the same charge weights. And no fillers. When breech seating some shooters use a piece of what they call "floaral foam" which florists use to position flowers in floral arrangements. Since you are using the fixed ammunition check that site about primers used. That may be your problem. I use 4759 at 20.0 grains in the 7.62x54r cartridge with winchester LRP primers shooting a 210 grain lyman 314299 bullet in a Finn my 27 moisin nagant. No problems with this load and extraction is flawless. Frank

[rfd]

imho, this is where ALL straight wall rifle cartridge type cases are best & safest loaded full up (and at least somewhat compressed, if not a lot compressed) with real black powder (not subs). that being done, yer rifle and you will both be happy campers in more ways than one.

with smokeless loads for any cartridge/case, the no wad, no filler rule applies big time.

ymmv on all of the above, and if it does, best of luck to ya.

[Outpost75]

In limited testing I did with 4227, using space fillers such as Cream of Wheat, Farina, etc. in bottlenecked cases (we tested the .308 Winchester, specifically), the additional weight of the fill added to projectile weight, combined with the effect of increased loading density, by use of the filler, increased pressure predictably, based on the total weight of ejecta, and the reduced effective powder capacity produced by the filler.

But using a fluffy, light, inert filler such as Dacron fiberfill, well fluffed and LOOSELY tucked into the case, so that there was no airspace between the bullet base and the filler, limiting the amount to that which was COMPLETELY CONSUMED UPON FIRING, so that no material could be observed being ejected from the muzzle (about 1 grain in the .308, WEIGHED on a scale), did noticeably improve ballistic uniformity with a minimal measurable, but not dangerous increase in pressure. Larry Gibson has long recommended this method, pioneered by the late Col. E.H. Harrison, USA (Ret.), who was Senior Technical Advisor to the NRA Staff and member of the SAAMI Technical Committee.

[rfd]

i wouldn't wanna pioneer messing around loading smokeless in cartridges that were meant for black powder. IF i hadda go smokeless with a straight wall cartridge case, i'd use aa5744, without any wads or fillers, and just carefully follow the powder maker's load instructions. did that for a number of years before seeing the black (powder) light.

[Hickok]

Outpost, I think you have given more "hands-on" hard evidence and data than I have ever read before on this topic. Thanks.:-D

[flounderman]

I shot small bore with Ted Church years ago. Ted was from Baraboo, a gunsmith in a wheel chair. He said they came and asked him to head the testing department at Badger when they activated it, without him applying for the job. A guy in my class went there and worked in the plant, so I heard some stories.

[marlinman93]

i wouldn't wanna pioneer messing around loading smokeless in cartridges that were meant for black powder. IF i hadda go smokeless with a straight wall cartridge case, i'd use aa5744, without any wads or fillers, and just carefully follow the powder maker's load instructions. did that for a number of years before seeing the black (powder) light.

I wouldn't be the "pioneer" either. But there is plenty of data for safely loading smokeless in old black powder cartridges and rifles that dates back many decades. I shoot nothing but smokeless loads in all my old single shot rifles, and have done so for over 40 years; safely.

[Gunlaker]

There is some pretty extensive experience out there with 4227 and the .32-40. On the target ranges 4227 might be the single most used powder for that cartridge. You have to be careful not to double ( or even triple ) charge the case, but works.

When you look at how tiny the 25 ring is on the German Ring target, you'll see that it's about 3/4 of a minute of angle. To make a good score you have to have your ducks in a row.

I'm a big fan of black powder, and I've done a fair bit of shooting on the German Ring target with various .32-40's and black powder. Although it can be quite accurate, I've not been able to approach the accuracy I get with 4227 in any of my rifles. With that said, I still enjoy shooting black powder the most for some reason. I very much want to shoot a 250 score with black powder.

Chris.

[marlinman93]

4227 is a great powder, and lots of data for it's use in .32-40 and .38-55 today. But oddly there are no loads for either caliber in old Ideal and Lyman manuals I own from the 1940's and 50's? I never understood that, because there was plenty of load data for 2400 in the same manuals, and they're not that far apart. I like 4227, and have good results with it also.

[Plastikosmd]

Stubbi
Not sure in your case but it is not much different than my breech seating which has a 1/16" air gap between case and boolit base along with a similar load to yours and wad to keep powder from dumping, agree with above

[EDG]

There is no pioneering to it. BP rifles have been loaded with smokeless powders for over 100 years by both factories and hand loaders a like.


i wouldn't wanna pioneer messing around loading smokeless in cartridges that were meant for black powder. IF i hadda go smokeless with a straight wall cartridge case, i'd use aa5744, without any wads or fillers, and just carefully follow the powder maker's load instructions. did that for a number of years before seeing the black (powder) light.

[McLintock]

My load of 18 gr IMR4227 with 250 gr bullet came from a Ken Waters Pet Loads article in Handloader Magazine on the 375 Winchester; it was his most accurate cast bullet load. It worked great in my Browning Traditional Hunter in 38-55, for out to 300 yards targets.
McLintock

[Chill Wills]

In limited testing I did with 4227, using space fillers such as Cream of Wheat, Farina, etc. in bottlenecked cases (we tested the .308 Winchester, specifically), the additional weight of the fill added to projectile weight, combined with the effect of increased loading density, by use of the filler, increased pressure predictably, based on the total weight of ejecta, and the reduced effective powder capacity produced by the filler.

But using a fluffy, light, inert filler such as Dacron fiberfill, well fluffed and LOOSELY tucked into the case, so that there was no airspace between the bullet base and the filler, limiting the amount to that which was COMPLETELY CONSUMED UPON FIRING, so that no material could be observed being ejected from the muzzle (about 1 grain in the .308, WEIGHED on a scale), did noticeably improve ballistic uniformity with a minimal measurable, but not dangerous increase in pressure. Larry Gibson has long recommended this method, pioneered by the late Col. E.H. Harrison, USA (Ret.), who was Senior Technical Advisor to the NRA Staff and member of the SAAMI Technical Committee.

Are there (were there) burn rate powders you tested that do not respond well to the Dacron fiberfill loading method. I use the addition of Dacron fibers for fast rifle powders but have not tried the unique class powders in ....say (and I am making this up off the top of my head) a 38-55 - 255 w/ 8 grains unique and a 1/2 grain of fibers?

yup-this is good stuff....

[rfd]

here we go ...

yes, it's true that smokeless powders have been used in bp firearms since before the turn of the last century. however, this is not a matter to be taken lightly with true vintage firearms and old metallurgy used in their construction. do so at yer own risk. don't think it's a risk? no problemo, hombre, just lemme know that if we're both on the same firing line so i can move waaay back at the least.

messing around with fillers or wads over double based smokeless powder is something that's been learned to be living on the edge. in fact, fillers and wads in smokeless cartridges has been banned starting this year at the quigley match, read up on it here ...

http://www.quigleymatch.com/safety.html

for me, smokeless powder has been a passing fancy for cartridge guns for too many decades. i'm glad i switched because i do believe very strongly that i was wrong for too long and real bp devil's dust is just better and safer than any white powder, imho and ymmv.

[Outpost75]

Are there (were there) burn rate powders you tested that do not respond well to the Dacron fiberfill loading method. I use the addition of Dacron fibers for fast rifle powders but have not tried the unique class powders in ....say (and I am making this up off the top of my head) a 38-55 - 255 w/ 8 grains unique and a 1/2 grain of fibers?
yup-this is good stuff....

The testing was done back in the 1970s. IMO a minimum Dacron filler with Unique as described would be completely consumed and shouldn't cause a problem. I'm not certain with Unique that it is even necessary, but I don't believe it does any harm as long as the filler is thoroughly fluffed and is in contact with the bullet base as-loaded.

[Chill Wills]

Outpost 75
That is good to know. Thank you for following up and posting.

I do use floral foam (for wet floral application, there is also a dry kind - its different) with AA-9 or H-108 as well as AA-1680 in my 32 cal Schuetzen rifles. That pretty much removes most of the volume in a 32 Miller or 32-20 CPA. I cut the green sheets from foam blocks one caliber thick on a bandsaw and then press the thin sheet down on the charged case. That cuts a foam disk out of the sheet and leaves it in the case mouth. Accurate #9 would be the fasted double based powder I have experience with.
I am looking to do something smokeless for an offhand rifle also, a Schuetzen rifle 38-55. Just not sure yet what I will do.

I need to look up Larry Gibson's old posts again on fibers and see what is in there. I remember reading his posts until my brain hurt so some review might be easier the second time through.

[Gunlaker]

Michael do you follow the ASSRA site much? If I remember correctly John Louis posted some really excellent targets, I think they were all 250's, using 300MP powder in the .38-55 a couple of years ago. If he used a filler I'll bet it was the same floral foam as you are using now. I know the load data was written on his targets.

Chris.

[Gunlaker]

Michael, if you are interested here is one of John's threads on that powder. Unfortunately I see no mention of wads.

http://www.assra.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1297634358

I don't think he posts there much anymore but you could send him a p.m. If you wanted to bounce an idea off of him.

Chris.

[357Mag]

ALL -

Howdy !

FWIW -
" PUFF-LON " says this about use of their filler: " All powder charges should be 5% below SAAMI recommendations ".

I have used PUFF-LON in a variety of bottle neck cartridges. In .357AutoMag ( chambered in a .358" cal barrel ) I used PUFF-LON placed directly-on a 24gr charge of WW296. The combo was hyper accurate in that benchrest quality bolt rifle, w/ 22" 1-16 barrel.

For recent .35 Rem shot from a M-336 XLR, I placed a folded layer of tissue paper between the powder charge and the PUFF-LON fill.
My reduced charges have been things like: 18.7gr IMR4759 under 150gr "J"-words, 16.2gr IMR4759 under swaged 195 SPBT patched, 25.8gr IMR8208 and 180gr "J"-words, 24.0gr IMR4895 and 180s.

Next range cession will test IMR4198 charges within the span of 20.4 - 24.7gr in .35 Rem.
These will also use a layer(s) of tissue over the powder charge, then top-off w/ PUFF-LON.

None of the above have produced " ringing of the chamber ", including my testing of the " .35 Rem neckless " ( see pic ).


With regards,
357Mag

[leeggen]

Outpost I bet they appreciated a $5,000 barrel being ringed? You have done a great job in descibing a ringed barrel and how it happens. Thanks
CD

[Outpost75]

Outpost I bet they appreciated a $5,000 barrel being ringed? You have done a great job in descibing a ringed barrel and how it happens. Thanks CD

Actually, Dr. McCoy was pleased with the result because things which happen in the field often cannot be duplicated predictably in the lab, so he bought me lunch at the club that day and the damaged barrel was eagerly sectioned and examined with great curiosity by all.

[Good Cheer]

Thanks for all the good info.
I've been pondering on the long straight length of the 9.3x74R and how to not screw up light loads.

[MakeMineLead]

Outpost 75,

Fantastic discussion of fillers! I have all the out-of-print material the NRA a published by Col Harrison.

About 15 years ago, there was a gentleman writing articles on the old Surplusrifledotcom site, where he built on Col. Harrison's work, by using spherical shot buffer under cast bullets in 30/06, .308 and 45/70.

As as I recall, the spherical shot buffer achieved 100% loading density. As you say, he also found, the shot buffer's weight has to be added to the weight of the Boolit. He found increased accuracy and the shot buffer scrubbed the barrel, so the gun was effectively seeing each shot as the first shot. The buffer was also protecting the base of the boolits. Some Candian shooting clubs adopted his methods with great success.

The writer from Surplusrifledotcom was writing and experimenting about this while Veral Smith was indisposed. When Veral's book was again available, he too mentions good results with shot buffers and 100% loading densities.

I miss the old Surplusrifledotcom site. They had lots of great articles on reloading, cast boolits, etc.

Have you worked with spherical shot shell buffers in either bottleneck or straight cases? Any ideas on the subject?

[Outpost75]

Outpost 75,

Fantastic discussion of fillers! I have all the out-of-print material the NRA a published by Col Harrison.

About 15 years ago, there was a gentleman writing articles on the old Surplusrifledotcom site, where he built on Col. Harrison's work, by using spherical shot buffer under cast bullets in 30/06, .308 and 45/70.

As as I recall, the spherical shot buffer achieved 100% loading density. As you say, he also found, the shot buffer's weight has to be added to the weight of the Boolit. He found increased accuracy and the shot buffer scrubbed the barrel, so the gun was effectively seeing each shot as the first shot. The buffer was also protecting the base of the boolits. Some Candian shooting clubs adopted his methods with great success.

The writer from Surplusrifledotcom was writing and experimenting about this while Veral Smith was indisposed. When Veral's book was again available, he too mentions good results with shot buffers and 100% loading densities.

I miss the old Surplusrifledotcom site. They had lots of great articles on reloading, cast boolits, etc.

Have you worked with spherical shot shell buffers in either bottleneck or straight cases? Any ideas on the subject?

Never tried it.

[Lead pot]

Good post Outpost.
Unfortunately what you put down many wont take this post to heart. A light load of double based powder is just as dangerous as a over load in large capacity cases like the .45-70 and above.
Placing a wad over the powder is a potential of a rifle ending up like a M-60 fragmentation grenade. If your fortunate enough to just ring a chamber you are very fortunate. Using smokeless in these large bore rifles. The terms I hear is, I been using it for years with out a problem or it's my go to powder for this caliber.
Here is a rifle that was loaded with 5744 and the powder was held down with a wad. It's not if but ratter when.
I rung a .45-120 chamber with a compressed load of black powder that had a hang fire and the primer pushed the bullet ahead in the bore before the charge went off. The only thing I can figure is how this happen is the case must still have been wet from cleaning them the day before and this was enough for the delayed ignition.

The guy that shot this rifle still has his hand but spent several days in the Hospital. Parts where picked up in a 50' radius.
Two years before this I was standing next to a Lady blew up her rifle using smokeless I saw that barrel fly up in the air spinning.
Some day a shooter other then the one behind the butplate will get hurt also.
http://i704.photobucket.com/albums/ww43/Kurtalt/P1000466_zps95ysy7qg.jpg (http://s704.photobucket.com/user/Kurtalt/media/P1000466_zps95ysy7qg.jpg.html)

I saw this one blow. Yes it's an old Ballard .40-65 so are a lot of other rifles shot with smokeless.

http://i704.photobucket.com/albums/ww43/Kurtalt/IMG_0768.jpg (http://s704.photobucket.com/user/Kurtalt/media/IMG_0768.jpg.html)

Don't hurt the person shooting along side of you.

[Outpost75]

Thanks or posting. I've done my share of stupid things, but still have all my fingers, both eyes and learned from the experience. I prefer well engineered strong guns having a more than adequate margin of safety.

A prime requirement of plainbased loads using fast burning pistol or shotgun powders is that they be limited to a level were an accidental double charge will not blow up the gun! I have double charged .45 ACPs which blew out the magazine and shattered wooden grips, but no harm was done and I took the puistol to Camp Perry afterwards. I ringed an 1884 Trapdoor, I double charged an 03A3 with cast and blew the prner, but the rifle is fine and I still use it. Over 50 years of experimentation you see lots of things. Be ever vigilant and don't get distracted. EVERY incident I experienced occured when loading at the range, when some curious nitwit interrupted what I was doing. I don't load at the range anymore! IMPORTANT SAFETY TIP!!!

[stubbicatt]

Note to self: No overpowder wads with AA5744. Nor any other smokeless powders. Check.

[rfd]

Note to self: No overpowder wads with AA5744. Nor any other smokeless powders. Check.

smart man. no wads or fillers of any kind. or better yet, go black and never look back. :smile:

[stubbicatt]

I appreciate that some folks like black powder. I've used it myself. But sometimes the fanaticism that accompanies it is not warranted by a comparative performance analysis.

[rfd]

i hear ya, stubbictt, and would comment that ...

real black, when loaded properly - which is not at all hard to understand or do, IF taught well - and therein lies the main stumbling block for newbies - will perform well (if not best), and safer, whence compared to any nitro based powder. this is in part due to the low chamber pressures of black powder and the fact that there will be no concern over case air space.

yes, after firing bpcr there is the issue for the immediate need to clean both brass and gun, but even that's not a big deal, nor at all time consuming, once you have a viable process in place.

i've spent more than a few years loading .45-70 and .40-65 with smokeless, primarily aa5744, and bp is actually easier and more accurate, at least for me. one other key plus for loading bpcr is the use of fire formed brass and zero neck tension, which offers a goodly benefit to consistent accuracy, and near press free loading.

on the down side, bp loads are "full house", unless lotsa wadding is used to curtail the powder charge (which will typically inhibit consistent accuracy for long range), while low charge weight loads of smokeless powders like trail boss allow even a light weight .45-70 to be used by kids. i know of at least a few folks dabbling in bpcr who choose a smaller caliber/cartridge if recoil is an issue. 'course, hunting versus target is yet another issue that might crop up where caliber/cartridge can make a difference.

and perhaps getting some comments on the shooting line about the stink factor. :)

lotsa things to weigh and consider. it's all good as long as yer a happy shooter.

[Good Cheer]

Does fiber pressed upon the powder behave as a wad?
Don't think I want to find out.

Over the years I used a little poly batting to hold powder against the base in 7-08. Even used batting and lithium grease under the boolit. Don't laugh it worked great, even if the cloud in front of the muzzle looked like a miniature snow flurry. But got to thinking about the 9.3x74R. That's the relatively longest narrowest case I've worked with. When you shove the batting down into the case it is creating a plug. It might turn into a fused plastic piston. Maybe so maybe no, even with a very little bit of material.
Maybe I'll just go black on this one, lube cookie and 358009 soft paper patched hollow point.

[Black Beard]

My thoughts on ringing are that it is because you get something slamming in to the back of the bullet. The bullet is really dense so the back of the bullet is squashed between the thing that hits it and the heavy front of the bullet. When things hit each other that energy has to go somewhere. It can’t go forwards as the inertia of the bullet stops it. The only way is outwards (in to the metal of the barrel) or backwards (bouncing back or destroying the impacting object). Unfortunately the impacting object is hard (more of that later) so it mushrooms the back of the bullet and forces it out sideways in to the barrel. Now you have a bullet that is wider at the rear trying to get out of a case neck that is too small for it so pressures are going to go up a lot. Possibly a total barrel failure will follow.

But that fluffy material filler isn’t hard, it can’t do that, can it? Man made materials are made up of long chains of molecules. Normally the bonds between the molecules are weak and the chains can slide over each other- plastics creep under stress. At very high stresses done in short times the molecules don’t creep. They will break under tension. In compression the molecules lock together and there is no way they can unravel. Plastics become very hard in fast compression. That fluffy material won’t be weak if it is driven in to the back of the bullet. The same should apply to starch, cotton, etc as they are all made of of long chains.

I bet the cartridge cases from guns with ringed barrels were hard to extract and had had thinned sections where the ringing took place.

I think the original cause of some problems might be down to the coatings on the powder. If you get bad ignition then the coatings may burn off all at once. Not much should happen when they are burning (the bullet doesn’t move) but when the coatings are gone you have a charge that is too big/fast for the chamber, just as if you had put the same weight of faster powder in there. This process would depend upon the exact position of the powder in the case so would be unpredictable. If the powder is at the back of the case then the primer flame gives good ignition so this would happen less So people put some nice fluffy material or a wad in there to keep the powder back and make velocities consistent. Unfortunately this rings the chamber.

Of course I can’t prove any of this and it could be completely wrong.

BB

[marlinman93]

I saw this one blow. Yes it's an old Ballard .40-65 so are a lot of other rifles shot with smokeless.

http://i704.photobucket.com/albums/ww43/Kurtalt/IMG_0768.jpg (http://s704.photobucket.com/user/Kurtalt/media/IMG_0768.jpg.html)

Don't hurt the person shooting along side of you.

The reasons for that Ballard blow up are numerous, and sad. Not only a possible double charge, but also a wad over a double base powder. And if you look at the picture you'll see the void under the barrel in the receiver! It's a cast Ballard #2 action, which was designed for .44RF, .38RF, and .32RF cartridges! It was never meant to be barreled and chambered for a CF rifle caliber of any kind! The numerous mistakes made in this particular rifle are unforgivable!