Cream of Wheat filler in the Trapdoor

[KirkD]

I'm loading 500 grain cast bullets in my original Model 1888 Trapdoor .45-70. I read some fascinating articles by Mike Venturino about using cream of wheat filler in the .40-82. Now that has me wondering what kind of accuracy I would get if I used it in my Springfield. I've never had the courage to use Cream of Wheat filler in any of my cartridges (although I do use toilet paper filler in most of my old straight walled black powder cartridges when using smokeless, provided the smokeless powder is no faster than 2400). Has anyone tried cream of wheat filler in the 45-70 under a 500 grain cast bullet?

[The Double D]

Cream of wheat is a granulated soild and works pretty good in straight wall cases. Over time, however since the 45/70 case has a slight taper, youwill find that your cases will grow and will constantly in need of trim and may eventually may separate.

I am sure Mike has already found this out in his bottle neck cartridge...the .40-82 is a bottle neck is it not?

As far improved accuracy, in my experience accuracy does improve with fillers. But that takes some experimentation also. I started with a wad of kapok, then tried weighing wads of kapok. Weighing is more consistant. But you can also have to little and to much filler. I had to play with it to find the sweet spot.

[KirkD]

In my experience with toilet paper fillers (a few thousand rounds in various straight-walled cartridges), the filler does two things: First, it gives more consistent burning of powder (lower E.S. and S.D.) and second, it acts as a gas check, especially in poor bores. It does raise the pressure some, however, usually producing around 100 fps faster velocities for the same powder weight. I am thinking that Cream of Wheat filler would give a more consistent seal all around the base of the plain-base cast bullet, whereas toilet paper may not crumple perfectly to give a uniform seal.

I guess the big question I have is how much increase in velocity I will get, for the same powder weight, if I use Cream of Wheat filler with IMR 3031. I like to stay around 1,200 to 1,300 fps with the 500 grain bullet.

[Boz330]

Cream of wheat is a granulated soild and works pretty good in straight wall cases. Over time, however since the 45/70 case has a slight taper, youwill find that your cases will grow and will constantly in need of trim and may eventually may separate.

I am sure Mike has already found this out in his bottle neck cartridge...the .40-82 is a bottle neck is it not?

As far improved accuracy, in my experience accuracy does improve with fillers. But that takes some experimentation also. I started with a wad of kapok, then tried weighing wads of kapok. Weighing is more consistant. But you can also have to little and to much filler. I had to play with it to find the sweet spot.

Douglas, it is more like a straight taper to a 40 cal neck. Basicly what I did for mine was used 45-100 cases to make the 40-82s. There isn't a shoulder like you may be thinking of.

Bob

[oldhickory]

I've never used Cream of Wheat as it adds weight to what's being pushed out the bore. I've always gone with a "tuft" of Dacron, it's all but weight-less and is completely consumed with the powder.

[Boz330]

So is Kapok but it isn't consumed by the ignition. It is all natural though.:mrgreen:

Bob

[Don McDowell]

Kirk you grew up on a farm. I'm sure you remember how the grain augers flighting was always shiny and smooth, and how over time it wore down.
Now just stop and think about the slow, no pressure results on that hard steel auger flighting, and then stop and think about the not so slow , and not so low pressure of that breakfast cereal getting jammed down the bore of that fine old rifle,when you yank the trigger, the firing pin spanks the primer, and the primer scares the beggeebers out of the powder..

[KirkD]

Don, you got a point about the grain augers. Those interiors were nice and shiny alright, and the screw edges did slowly wear down. Now that does raise another question ..... which is more abrasive, Cream of Wheat or toilet paper? I've seen paper sand right through the finish of furniture in just a short move if the paper was sandwiched between two pieces of furniture. Cloth, on the other hand is not at all abrasive. Maybe some sort of cotton batting is the best.

Anyway, just for an experiment, I've loaded up five rounds with 30 grains of IMR 3031, 1/4 teaspoon of cream of wheat filler under a 500 grain boolit. Hope to get to the range to try it out tomorrow.

[chuebner]

I'm loading 500 grain cast bullets in my original Model 1888 Trapdoor .45-70.

Kirk,

I have the same rifle and I have experimented with different BP loadings. My bullet is from a Rapine .460500 mold and casts at .461. Best hundred yard load is 50gr (volume) of GOEX 2F or Schuetzen 2F with 20gr (volume) cornmeal. Load is compressed .525 below case mouth and bullet seated. I believe OAL is 2.900. Recoil is light and accuracy is acceptable for this old trooper. I tried COW several years ago and found something I didn't like when I tried to breakdown some cartridges. The COW formed a solid plug that was all but impossible to break apart. I believe this solid plug is what leads to case stretching. On a whim I broke down several rounds loaded with cornmeal and the compressed cornmeal came apart easily leading me to believe this was better for my cases.
Best smokeless load is 22gr. 5744, no fillers or wads, shoots to same point of aim as BP load.

Have fun,
Charlie

[KirkD]

Charlie, you are right about COW becoming a compressed plug. I took apart a few of my freshly loaded cartridges, and the COW had, indeed formed a plug. Perhaps corn meal is better.

[405]

Can't argue with any of the posts about fillers.

I always approach using fillers with great caution. I have found them to aid accuracy in some loads and see no gain in accuracy in others. Same for bore leading... sometimes it helps sometimes not. I'm afraid of using long columns of COW not so much because of the added weight but because of the added friction thus added unknown pressure. Shouldn't cause much problem using a dab of COW taking up quarter inch of powder column length ahead of black powder so is not much different than using fiber over-powder wads. But filling the long, large space between a load of fast smokeless powder and the bullet with something like COW seems a little tricky! Very low density tufts of tissue or dacron fiber seems to make more sense ahead of small volumes of smokeless. I will not use materials like COW that can form a hard plug when compressed in bottleneck type cartridges.

One material (others have much more experience using this than I) that shows promise is shot buffer. For cast shooting I've tried it over smokeless loads in both the 32-40 and 405. The buffer I've used is from BPI and is the coarser material with a dry lubricant added. So far good results over light charges of 4759 or 5744. I first charge the case with a light charge of the SP then pick a dipper of sufficient volume to fill the rest of the case with buffer to within 1/4" of the mouth. Then seat bullet. Makes for a light compression of the whole column. Time will tell whether or not it is superior to fluffy dacron filler.

[KirkD]

I agree with the caution. I never use fillers with powders faster than 2400 and never in 'real' bottleneck cases. I don't count the 44-40 as a 'real' bottleneck.

[NickSS]

I loaded up a bunch of 45-55 carbine loads to try in my Sharps rifle. The load was a Lee HB 400 gr lubed with my own BP lube over 55 gr of FFG and 10 gr (volume measure) of corn meal. I have shot several hundred of them to date and they seam to be accurate out to 200 yards and reduce recoil compared to full power loads. I have noticed that after shooting 50 rounds there is a rim of baked on cornmeal surrounding the muzzle of my sharps. Does not affect accuracy though.

[The Double D]

Douglas, it is more like a straight taper to a 40 cal neck. Basicly what I did for mine was used 45-100 cases to make the 40-82s. There isn't a shoulder like you may be thinking of.

Bob


Bob,

Now I remember...its a straight taper like a 30-30 neck, wider at the bottom than at the mouth, kinda a cartridge that is all neck.

TP can slug up, but it usually blows to shreds.

Don't use a tuft of dacron. It will act like a wad. Compress as much as you can get in the case.

Forgot about the polishing effect CoW, I usually preach that.

None of these fillers are consumed when fired,they are all blown out the barrel. Some are shredded or pulverized or just blown dow range. Dacron is just blown down range, and if you don't find some you aren't using enough.

[KirkD]

By the way, here's a photo of some 40-82 cartridges I re-formed from Starline 45-90 brass. The shiny top part is from thinning the case wall so that they would chamber a .410 diameter bullet. I thinned it by throwing the case in a chuck and holding a fine file to the outside of the case as it spun. Works beautifully and is a lot easier than trying to thin the case wall from the inside.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v497/3855Win/40-82-cartridges.jpg

So Corn meal looks to be be filler of choice rather than CoW. One thing, however, it occurred to me that grain augers handle whole grain, with the husks contacting the metal. Isn't C0W just the softer interior with the tougher husks removed? Still, I don't like the CoW plugs I found when I pulled my bullets. I think I'll pull the rest and reload with corn meal. However, I'm wondering if it will seal as good, as the corn meal I have seems coarser than CoW.

[chuebner]

However, I'm wondering if it will seal as good, as the corn meal I have seems coarser than CoW.

Kirk,
My local grocery carries two granulations of cornmeal, fine and course. I use fine for BP revolver loading and course for BP cartridge reduced loads. The fine ground cornmeal makes the same kind of plug when compressed as Cream of Wheat so I only it in my cap & ball revolvers.

Charlie

[rockrat]

You might want to think about using Grits instead of cornmeal. It is a little coarser than regualr cornmeal. Might bulk up better and have less weight. I guess you could consider it an extra coarse cornmeal

[The Double D]

All the cereals will slug up...cornmeal included.

[uscra112]

Don't do it.

The extensive testing that Col. Harrison did for his excellent articles in American Rifleman in the '50s and '60s showed that using Cream of Wheat as filler for smokeless loads raised pressures dramatically.

Far better to use the Dacron or kapok tufts, and keep your trapdoor intact.

[hiram]

I seem to remember about possible 'ringing' in a chamber when using a filler in a straight case.

[Larry Gibson]

Of trapdoors, loads and hallucination.......

About 16 or so years ago I ran across a somewhat used H&R Officers Model trapdoor. The price was right so I picked it up. Shot fine but with in a short time the breech block started popping open when fired. This is a problem with some H&Rs as apparently the geometry of cam got changed. I tried all sorts of recommended ways to stop it but nothing was successful for very long. I finally got an original breech block and with a little fitting it works perfectly. The problem with the H&R OMs is that they are basically incomplete. They’ve no rear sight on the barrel and the attachable pistol grip isn’t there either. Also they lack the Beech front sight. Well a short time after picking up the OM I happened across an H&R Little Bighorn Model. These carbines, for some unfathomable reason, had the tang sight of the OM, no rear sight on the barrel and had the metal attachable handgrip. I could tell by looking at it that it also had been popping open on firing. I brought this up to the owner of the shop and with a sheepish grin he made me a good deal. What I really wanted was the handgrip figuring to sell the carbine after the parts swap with the OM. Made the parts swap and then made the mistake of shooting the carbine. Man what a shooter! I replaced the breech block with an original like I’d done on the OM. I’d also picked up 2 M1879 type III original rear sights and mounted them in the correct spot on the barrels. The OM was looking pretty good now all except for the front sight. I’d put a low Redfield aperture sight up front and while quite serviceable it just didn’t look right for an OM. Well I recently found a Beech front sight and put it on. The H&R is now a prêt near perfect replica of a trapdoor OM, and I can shoot mine without worry!

Was at the range today seeing how the new front sight was regulated for elevation. Load I was shooting was my smokeless “M1873 45-70” load. It is a 457124 cast of WWs +2% tin over 34 gr of milsurp 4895 with a ¾ gr Dacron filler ( learned a long time ago that COW does indeed stretch cases when used as a filler) in R-P cases sparked by a WLR primer. Velocity is 1390 fps and out to 1000 yards (farthest I’ve shot it) is pretty closely regulated to the elevation settings on the m1879 rear sight. Was shootin’ at 100 yards with the first group down at 0630 in the white from the bench (elbows and forehand resting on sandbag). Tapped the front sight over a bit and tried her again….oops, a tudge too much! Drifted the sight back and fired the 3 shot group just below point of aim. I like my zero’s to have the group sitting on top of the front post so a little bit with a file and the next 4 sots were just above point of aim, perfect.

About that time I’d noticed hostiles to the front trying get into shooting positions up over the 200 yard berm. I corrected the slight windage problem and set the slide on 200 yards took careful aim and sent the miscreant to the happy hunting ground. As I was reaching for another cartridge from my prairie belt I noticed the pair of dusty, scuffed up cavalry boots, one with the heel shot off, standing next to me.

“ Good shooting, think you can hold them off?”

I answered; “I think so.”

“Good, then I'll get some of my troopers and we’ll push these damn hostiles back over the bluff. Maybe we can send someone down to river for water then. The wounded need it bad. You hold ‘em off best you can ‘til we charge…….LT Godfrey, get your face out of the dirt and get over here and help this man, he can shoot. Gawd only knows there’s not much good shooting here!”

Yes, CPT Benteen” came the reply as the LT jumped up and ran over. Numerous 405 gr slugs were thumping into the ground all around us. It would be found out later these came from the M1873 Carbines and ammo that was taken off Custer’s troopers not too far distant from where we were. LT Godfrey flopped down next to me as I yelled to the departing figure….”Hey Captain, if you see that Reno fella see if he’s got any left in that bottle. I sure could use a pull”. With a wave of his hand he yelled something about putting "that nice looking rifle to work” and was gone rousting troopers of H and M troops to stand up and get into a skirmish line. I rolled back to see another hostile sliding up onto a rock. Sight alignment and sight picture then a smooth trigger pull….”damn, he sure frisbee’d off there!”

“He what? asked LT Godfrey. I’d thumbed the breech block open and was reaching for another cartridge and said, “ Never mind, take too long to explain it. Anyways just keep an eye out and we’ll see if we can keep them at bay.” Godfrey was staring at the rifle….I pointed foreward saying ”watch for hostiles”.

“Sorry, but I just couldn’t help admiring your rifle, one of Custer’s brothers has one. Paid almost 2 months salary for it and it took near a year to get it!” Another hostile slid into view and was quickly dispatched. “What’s that rear sight, ain’t seen one like that ‘afore? And hows come you ain’t makin’ much smoke?”

"The sights an experimental one Springfield Armory is working on, you'll probably see it soon. The powder is a new type the French are working on, don't smoke much.” I didn’t have the heart to tell him he wouldn’t see the new sight for another 3 years and smokeless powder a few more after that.

“Them French need to do something, the Germans kicked there ass with them new needle rifles and they got a bolt action breech loader that's supposed to be better 'an our Springfields.” I just said that was what the Germans did alright. No sense letting him know the Germans would be kicking the French’s ass for the next 100 years! I did tell him not to discount the M1873 as it could hold it's own with the best out there.

“Hey, looks like Benteen’s about ready to charge with that skirmish line, think I should go help? I’m not sure if Benteen is the bravest man or the craziest. He just walks around with all this shootin’ from the hostiles coming in wounding or killing troopers everywhere. Don’t seem to bother him. Why he’s already been hit twice…hit in the hand and had his heel shot off! He keep tellin' us officers it's cowardly to hide with our face in the dirt. He says we should stand up and lead. Hey, there’ another over there. Do you think he's crazy?”

And with that I told him “That’s what a good officer should do, so go help Benteen drive the hostiles back from the bluffs. Then maybe some could go get water for the men”. With that he wished me luck and was off. He would make a fine General some day, indeed he would. I’d turned back to the task at hand and after a couple more shots A voice behind me says……”can we have a cease fire so we can change targets…….”

Sometimes coming back to reality sucks but it was a good day at the range otherwise.

Larry Gibson

[Molly]

All the cereals will slug up...cornmeal included.

Hi Double D. I've heard that claim several times, but you're the first to say it that I'd take seriously. I've had open containers of CoW sitting around my shop for a year or two with no evidence of compaction or hardening. And I've fired CoW based cast bullet loads that varied from minutes to weeks - maybe months old without seeing any difference in results.

Now that said, I will admit that on firing, the CoW will form a hard plug behind the bullet as it goes down the bore. I'm personally convinced this plug is how it keeps the flame off the lead slug, and prevents etching. But that's a far cry from forming a cement-like plug in the case before firing, as I've seen claimed.

Now I suppose it's logical to assume that the same thing that forms a hard plug behind the bullet will also form a hard cake inside the case. At one time, I thought that it probably did, so I went out of my way to try to form such a cake. I tried CoW in light loads and heavy loads. I tried it in bottlenecked and straight walled cases. I succeeded ONCE in forming a case, and that was with a load so light that the plug wasn't pushed out of the case, but formed a bore obstruction. (Fortunately, there was no report either, and checking that out kept me from firing into it.) I even used CoW in full velocity (Chronographed!) cast bullet loads in 6.5 Swedish, and that's a pretty severe neckdown.

I believe (fwiw) that what happens is this: The dry granulated CoW stays that way until the round is fired. Under the pressure of combustion, it will compact into a hard plug all right, but it's not steel: It can't hold up against the pressure inside a bore, or we could make gun barrels out of wood and similar non-steel materials. The plug -though hard - is still quite fluid under the pressures of a firearm. It can - and does - deform readily to accomodate the changes in diameter as it passes from neck to throat to bore.

Yeah, I know; "Never say never." And I suppose it's not beyond all possibility that some of the hard pressure cake could remain in a case aftre firing, though I've never seen it myself. But CoW simply doesn't have the material strength to form a steel-hard cake under any circumstances. The most I've ever gotten was to form a plug that - like a wooden bullet - you sure wouldn't want to get hit with, but - even though the plug wa forming for sure - it had no apparent effect on the 577/450 I was shooting at the time.

Hope this was interesting for you. And if you have any contrary experiences, I'd sure like to hear them.

BTW, I don't think those Cadet reproductions will ever get off the ground. Right now, Lester is working on replacement bolts for about 500 .22 LR match rifles, but I don't think he's likely to ever get tooled up for the Cadets.

[Cap'n Morgan]

“ Good shooting, think you can hold them off?”

Excellent read! I thought these flashbacks only occurred among Martini Henry shooters. :-D

[The Double D]

Molly,

Good to hear from you. Sad we will never see the Martini's, but I never really expected to.

On the need and use of fillers we are the same page. The use of the granualted solids is where we differ.

We both agree that CoW slugs up. You say it will slug up harmlessly behind the bullet as it goes down the bore. I agree with you, well almost any way.

My concern about the slug up is in the cartridge case. The effect in straight wall cases is not noticeable, even though most straight wall cases have a taper. The problem is bottle neck cases.

The case I work with, the 577/450 demonstrates the issue the greatest. When I was working on smokeless loads I needed filler to to take up the massaive amount of left over airspace in that case. I had to put in a filler that filled the .577 interior diameter powder chamber of the case.

That filler when fired has to be extruded under pressure out the .464 diameter neck. Just simple physics says pressure is needed to accomplish that. I don't have pressure equipment to test my theory, so I can't say with certainty pressure is increased.

What I can say that after firing these big lots of filler out that small hole, the case neck were stretched, every shot. That brass was moving from something. I only got stretched necks every firing when using Puffalon and CoW. I did not see stretching from the Kapok. The kapok cases used for the smokeless test used 8 grains of Kapok. I didn't do extended test with this large lot of kapok so long term effects are unknown.

During one set of tests I had misfires becauses the primer would not ignite powder. I got enough pressure to lodge bullets in the throat and push the fillers up in the neck. I have no pictures of the slug from the CoW. But I do have pictures of the Puffalon slug. I had to dig it out of the neck with a screw driver.

http://www.fototime.com/1B73A1294D43252/standard.jpg

http://www.fototime.com/4F827095639E500/standard.jpg

Here's what the misfired kapok looked like.

http://www.fototime.com/7BC54851F480341/standard.jpg

While I am showing pictures. Here is the stretched necks from Puffalon.

http://www.fototime.com/3294C502B57C8DF/standard.jpg

I have CoW pictures, but they must be on the big computer that I haven't set up yet after the move.

I did a bunch of reasearch on fillers. I read Dell, Seyfriend and Wright and their studies on the subject. I learned the difference between wads and fillers and how each is used. Dell's work is primarily with wads, the others worked with fillers. Seyfried and Wright work with the large British BPE and NE cases.

Seyfried advocates the use of dacron. There is a lot of controversy with dacron, but Seyfried says, there shouldn't be. Just compress as much as dacron as you can get in the case. If you use just a tuft you leave alot of air space and that is the villian.

Wright in his book discusses the use of the floral foams and the soft foam like found in ear plugs. Coincidently these foam plugs are whaty Kynoch now uses in their commercial ammunition as fillers.

I have been using kapok in the same manner as recommended by Seyfried for dacron. It's biodegradeable and not made from oil. Besides, I have a bunch of it.

Remember I said Cow slugs go harmlessly down the bore...almost. One thing I have noticed is how bright and shiny the bore is after shooting CoW loads. I also noticed how some bores that seemed to lead easily, leaded less and less after shooting CoW loads. Then I remember what the grating looked like in a grain elevator. It is bright, smooth and shiney with no sharp square edges anywhere. I don't know if the metal is ground smooth or burnished smooth, but I know have a different point of view about putting that stuff in my bore under pressure.

The jury is still out on whether CoW or any of the fillers for that matter raise pressure. This winter I am buying some pressure measuring equipment and we'll see.

[longbow]

Something I haven't heard mentioned in all of the discussions on using fillers ~ especially in bottle neck cartridges:

What happens to large charges of powder in cartridges like .22- 250, .264 Winchester and similar? It certainly doesn't all burn in the cartridge so it must act as it's own filler and be compressed behind the bullet as it goes down the bore.

And what about black powder in cartridges like .577-450? It must also compress behind the bullet like a filler as it burns going down the bore.

Smokeless gunpowders are tough slick grains that wouldn't likely compress to a hard slug but they most certainly must funnel down through the neck as they are driven into the bore. Blackpowder however does compress.

I am with Molly on this. I certainly don't have his experience but I have been using fillers (COW & corn meal largely) for some time with good results. Also, with light loads topped off with filler you cannot double charge as you have essentially 100% loading density.

Certainly a filler is going to raise pressure because it is added mass and it reduces volume. It may also raise pressure through friction as it squeezes through the neck and travels down the bore.

It would be interesting to test a load with various fillers and either no bullet or very light bullet to see if the squeezing and frictional pressures could be determined. Of course this would require a pressure barrel.

As for polishing the bore abrasively, don't forget that COW is crushed wheat without the husk while grain elevators see raw grain and dirt going through them. I can't proove it as I haven't shot enough rounds with filler to wear out a barrel but I don't think crushed food grade grain has significant abrasive qualities.

What needs to be determined is if "grain" fillers cause more or less barrel wear than paper patched bullets, jacket bullets or full power loads. A simple wear test could be done but I'm not sure it would represent what happens in a gun barrel.

Also to be considered is that assuming the COW helps seal the bore there should be less blow by so less flame erosion of the barrel.

The short story is I will continue using fillers unless I run into problems.

Longbow

[Larry Gibson]

I use Dacron as a filler in cartridges from .222 up through 45-70 without any of the problems you guys are reporting. Those problems are why I started using Dacron many years ago, it works.

Larry Gibson

[Molly]

Hi Double D
> Sad we will never see the Martini's, but I never really expected to.

Can't say I never expected to, but I did HOPE to.

> We both agree that CoW slugs up. You say it will slug up harmlessly behind the bullet as it goes down the bore. I agree with you, well almost any way.

OK so far.

> My concern about the slug up is in the cartridge case. The effect in straight wall cases is not noticeable, even though most straight wall cases have a taper. The problem is bottle neck cases.

> The case I work with, the 577/450 demonstrates the issue the greatest. When I was working on smokeless loads I needed filler to to take up the massaive amount of left over airspace in that case. I had to put in a filler that filled the .577 interior diameter powder chamber of the case.

> What I can say that after firing these big lots of filler out that small hole, the case neck were stretched, every shot. That brass was moving from something. I only got stretched necks every firing when using Puffalon and CoW. I did not see stretching from the Kapok. The kapok cases used for the smokeless test used 8 grains of Kapok. I didn't do extended test with this large lot of kapok so long term effects are unknown.

That's interesting, especially since the 577/450 was used for the initial work with COW. I was fireforming cases (Long story) with about 20 grains of bullseye if memory serves, topped with CoW and a wax wad, and getting insufficient pressure to form the case. In desperation, I noticed a box of cast 45ACP slugs, and wondered if they'd put up enough resistance to develop some pressure. I backed off on the Bullseye, and set one of the 45 slugs on top of the wax wad. Much better results: About 80% fill out. I increased the powder (slowly!) until I got 100%. Then I figured I probably had the worlds worst case of leading anyhow (the 45 slugs weren't sized or lubed) so I just went ahead and formed a supply of cases. When done, I decided to see just how bad the leading was. You can imagine my astonishment to see that the bore gleamed like a new penny! Naturally, I investigated, and it didn't take long to pin it on the CoW. Since it was reproducable, I tried the basic concept in a 45-70, where it worked great. Then in a 30-06, etc, etc. I've never seen significant case stretching. Granted, I didn't measure case length as a rule, and can't say it didn't occur at all, but it sure wasn't enough to notice.

> That filler when fired has to be extruded under pressure out the .464 diameter neck. Just simple physics says pressure is needed to accomplish that. I don't have pressure equipment to test my theory, so I can't say with certainty pressure is increased.

Oh, granted. But simple physics will also say that the structural integrity of any organic material won't begin to stand up to the pressures in even a black powder round. Even bone wouldn't do that, and what change does a cereal have, especially one that has already been ground almost into dust? So I suggest that yes, CoW does form a plug, but one so weak that it really flows more like water under the pressure of firing the round.

Now that's not to say that you didn't get stretched necks, because you obviously have them. I just don't understand why. I've not experienced it with CoW, but I've never used Pufalon, and can't comment there. I have used dacron pretty extensively, and never encountered stretching there either.

> I did a bunch of research on fillers. I read Dell, Seyfriend and Wright and their studies on the subject. I learned the difference between wads and fillers and how each is used. Dell's work is primarily with wads, the others worked with fillers. Seyfried and Wright work with the large British BPE and NE cases.

I'm not familiar with their works, but would love to read them.

I have been using kapok in the same manner as recommended by Seyfried for dacron. It's biodegradeable and not made from oil. Besides, I have a bunch of it.

May I suggest a rather different sort of trial? How about some sort of soft, granular material that won't form a plug? Just as a speculation, perhaps a filler of sawdust or wood dust from sanding might shed some light. (I'm not in a positin to try it right now: My wife is having some major health problems.) If you try this, I'd recommend making a slurry in water first, and stirring well for a moment, to allow any grit from the sanding to settle out and not harm the bore. Then of course, dry thoroughly before using.

> Remember I said Cow slugs go harmlessly down the bore...almost. One thing I have noticed is how bright and shiny the bore is after shooting CoW loads. I also noticed how some bores that seemed to lead easily, leaded less and less after shooting CoW loads. Then I remember what the grating looked like in a grain elevator. It is bright, smooth and shiney with no sharp square edges anywhere. I don't know if the metal is ground smooth or burnished smooth, but I know have a different point of view about putting that stuff in my bore under pressure.

I have to admit that the brightly polished bore aspect is disquieting, but perhaps it shouldn't be: I've sure put a lot of CoW down a bore without any visible evidence of erosion or wear. And in any head-to-head between steel and CoW, my money will be on the steel. I suspect that the CoW is simply scouring the surface like a sponge will leave your dinner plate sparkling.

> The jury is still out on whether CoW or any of the fillers for that matter raise pressure. This winter I am buying some pressure measuring equipment and we'll see.

OH! Lucky you! I've done some interesting work trying to measure relative presssure with waxed papers with some success, but have no way of calibrating them. Keep us posted, right?

Molly

[Molly]

Hi longbow, thanks for ringing in.

> What happens to large charges of powder in cartridges like .22- 250, .264 Winchester and similar? It certainly doesn't all burn in the cartridge so it must act as it's own filler and be compressed behind the bullet as it goes down the bore.

> Smokeless gunpowders are tough slick grains that wouldn't likely compress to a hard slug but they most certainly must funnel down through the neck as they are driven into the bore. Blackpowder however does compress.

That's exactly right. We don't often get a chance to confirm that, but it's so. It's been seen for example, in squib revolver loads, where some clown tries to load a .357 with IMR 3031; You do get some initial burn and presssure (mostly from the primer), but the bullet stops in the bore because the pressure bleeds away in the cylinder gap. The powder is found as a plastic mass behind the bullet when the pullet it pressed out.

I am with Molly on this. I certainly don't have his experience but I have been using fillers (COW & corn meal largely) for some time with good results. Also, with light loads topped off with filler you cannot double charge as you have essentially 100% loading density.

> As for polishing the bore abrasively, don't forget that COW is crushed wheat without the husk while grain elevators see raw grain and dirt going through them. I can't prove it as I haven't shot enough rounds with filler to wear out a barrel but I don't think crushed food grade grain has significant abrasive qualities.
> Also to be considered is that assuming the COW helps seal the bore there should be less blow by so less flame erosion of the barrel.

Good points.

> What needs to be determined is if "grain" fillers cause more or less barrel wear than paper patched bullets, jacket bullets or full power loads. A simple wear test could be done but I'm not sure it would represent what happens in a gun barrel.

Ummmm. Actually, a paper patch DOES wear the bore very slightly. Paper contains a number of minerals that act as fine abrasives / polishes. You can read a pretty good summary on the Paper Patching forum, under "Fire polishing, NOT fire lapping". Bue COW contains no mineral additives to the best of my knowledge.

> The short story is I will continue using fillers unless I run into problems.

Me too!

Molly

[Jim]

I posted it before, but I guess it lost through the cracks. Try using ground coffee. No, not coffee grounds, ground coffee. Like before you brew it.

[curator]

A few comments that I might add to the discussion. Wheat hulls are very high in silica and quite abrasive. Hulled wheat is not particularly abrasive. Cream of wheat is "Farina" a high glutin (fat & fiber) variety. That's why it compresses into the nice "plug" that it does.

I have used CoW as filler in half-charge (or reduced) black powder cartridges for nearly a half century without problems. Yes, it makes a "plug" behind the bullet. That's why it works so well: it prevents high pressure gas from cutting past an undersize bullet, creating leading, bore erosion, and poor accuracy. Yes, it definately leads to higher pressures both due to reduced case volume and the added weight/friction from the filler mass.

Some of this is good. Using IMR4895 and reduced loads, CoW raises pressures enough to get efficient burning and reduced velocity variation shot to shot. Yes, you absolutely must work up charges very slowly, paying attention to pressure signs. I have not seen case length increases where I neither crimp nor pull neck expanders through resized case necks. I have a set of R-P .45-70 cases that have been reloaded with more than 40 different loads using CoW filler and bullets ranging from 340 to 540 grains, and I have only lost one from neck cracks. They are not sized, only reprimed and reloaded.

True, some bottle-neck cartridges show problems when using CoW as a filler. I have seen CoW build up on the inside of the shoulder on .223Rem and .243Win brass after firing. CoW probably should not be used in drasticaly bottle-necked cases. I have not found problems with .30-30, .303 british,.32-20Win, .310Cadet, .32-40Win, .35 Whelen, .38-55, .40-65Win, .43 Spanish, .444Marlin, and all the old black powder cartridges EXCEPT 577-450Martini Henry where I think the bottle-neck is a bit too severe. Plastic shot buffer can be used on bottleneck cases as it flows better and doesn't adhere to the inside of cases like CoW and PuffLon does.

One of the very best uses of CoW is in a muzzle loading rifle shooting round ball. A half (normal powdercharge) measure of CoW over the powder will prevent gas blow-by with a losely patched round ball and give very fine accuracy. It saves your hand since you don't have to seat those very tight patch/ball combinations to get good accuracy. It also works great when shooting undersize balls from a smooth bore.

All of this is so because of the way CoW packs behind the projectile and prevents powder gasses from getting past. Once it is propelled into the air it begins to disintigrate. Always be careful with any filler as they can be damaging in the first 20 feet or so. I have both sand-blasted and totally destroyed a few chonographs by setting them up too close to fillered (or black powder) loads.

[Molly]

> A few comments that I might add to the discussion. Wheat hulls are very high in silica and quite abrasive. Hulled wheat is not particularly abrasive. Cream of wheat is "Farina" a high glutin (fat & fiber) variety. That's why it compresses into the nice "plug" that it does.

Interesting. I didn't know that.

I have used CoW as filler in half-charge (or reduced) black powder cartridges for nearly a half century without problems. Yes, it makes a "plug" behind the bullet. That's why it works so well: it prevents high pressure gas from cutting past an undersize bullet, creating leading, bore erosion, and poor accuracy. Yes, it definately leads to higher pressures both due to reduced case volume and the added weight/friction from the filler mass.

Again, our experiences agree 100%.

Some of this is good. Using IMR4895 and reduced loads, CoW raises pressures enough to get efficient burning and reduced velocity variation shot to shot. Yes, you absolutely must work up charges very slowly, paying attention to pressure signs.

Dead on!

I have not seen case length increases where I neither crimp nor pull neck expanders through resized case necks. I have a set of R-P .45-70 cases that have been reloaded with more than 40 different loads using CoW filler and bullets ranging from 340 to 540 grains, and I have only lost one from neck cracks. They are not sized, only reprimed and reloaded.

Now you bring up some good points: I'd expect crimping to have an effect on plug formation. And the COW may leave the neck so dry that an expander plug would stretch it. Sheer speculation of course, but perhaps Double D will know more when he gets his pressure equipment.

True, some bottle-neck cartridges show problems when using CoW as a filler. I have seen CoW build up on the inside of the shoulder on .223Rem and .243Win brass after firing. CoW probably should not be used in drasticaly bottle-necked cases. I have not found problems with .30-30, .303 british,.32-20Win, .310Cadet, .32-40Win, .35 Whelen, .38-55, .40-65Win, .43 Spanish, .444Marlin, and all the old black powder cartridges EXCEPT 577-450Martini Henry where I think the bottle-neck is a bit too severe. Plastic shot buffer can be used on bottleneck cases as it flows better and doesn't adhere to the inside of cases like CoW and PuffLon does.

I can add 6.5 Swedish, 7x57, 7.62x39 and 30-40Krag to your list.

One of the very best uses of CoW is in a muzzle loading rifle shooting round ball. A half (normal powdercharge) measure of CoW over the powder will prevent gas blow-by with a losely patched round ball and give very fine accuracy. It saves your hand since you don't have to seat those very tight patch/ball combinations to get good accuracy. It also works great when shooting undersize balls from a smooth bore.

Didn't know that either! Wonder if the CoW plug grips the patch weave, which grips the ball? It would cause them to rotate with it as it went don the bore. Hmmm. Wonder what it would do with a bare ball, loaded sprue down? (VBG)

[405]

with what curator posted. Without the ability to "watch" ballistically what happens internally we're pretty much stuck with indirect evidence about fillers. I've found, depending on filler type, all fillers increase pressure to some degree. That is based on indirect measurements like head diameter change, shoulder/body fillout, primer shape etc. Some controlled pressure testing of various fillers/loads would be really good info. Lyman has some data but it's fairly incomplete.

On a side note- I've always wondered if a filler like cow or corn meal on top of light charges of fast smokeless, in addition to sealing the bore, also mimics the ignition obturation of a bullet in a way similar to how black powder obturates a bullet???? where the front part of the BP charge is rammed as a compressed, granular mass against the bullet at ignition???? dunno, but have wondered about that.

[Junior1942]

I seem to remember about possible 'ringing' in a chamber when using a filler in a straight case.+ 1. If you insist on using smokeless powder, I'd switch to a powder with much greater bulk for 100% loading density. I use slightly compressed WC860 on top of a felt wad.

[longbow]

That looks like the abrasion question is answered ~ at least for COW. I suspect that the internal parts of grains and beans would have very little if any abrasive content and in most cases should also carry some lubricating qualities as most contain fats and oils (corn oil, coffee has oil, never heard of wheat oil but I bet there's some fatty stuff).

As for the muzzleloader use, that is news to me too. I read an article a few years ago by a fellow who loaded patched RB for good accuracy but also had a mould that cast a ball about half way between bore and groove diameter. He claimed that out to 50 yards or so he got quite good accuracy by loading a card wad (lubricated?) then the naked ball on top. It was quick and easy to load as he didn't need to cut a patch or short start.

Might be interesting to try with COW per curator's comment.

Personally I like the grain (granular) fillers because they are quick and easy to add. I have been using COW under gas check boolits without gas checks and it seems to be working for me. I agree with Molly and curator on their uses and I feel even more confident in using them after reading all this.

Good stuff.

Longbow

[curator]

Black powder does indeed compress into a plug (even if briefly) against the bullet base in large capacity straight-walled cases. Compressed powder seals the bore while the soft lead bullet begins to expand. I have recovered flat-based bullets fired with black powder from the range berm with the same kind of "dimpling" I have seen on bullets fired with CoW filler. This may also be the reason why compressed charges of black powder are the most accurate, compared to loose fill or partially filled cases.

I suspect this is one of the reasons BPCR rifle shooters insert a thin wad under the bullet; so clumps of unburned (or still burning) powder won't cling to the bullet base. The thin card wad under bullets loaded with CoW filler also seem to improve accuracy slightly as long as the bullet base is clean and dry with no trace of lube. If the card wad sticks to the bullet it also effects accuracy negatively.

What we need is pressure gun results and high speed cameras to provide scientific data.

[Larry Gibson]

405

"Without the ability to "watch" ballistically what happens internally we're pretty much stuck with indirect evidence about fillers. I've found, depending on filler type, all fillers increase pressure to some degree. That is based on indirect measurements like head diameter change, shoulder/body fillout, primer shape etc. Some controlled pressure testing of various fillers/loads would be really good info. Lyman has some data but it's fairly incomplete."

I've the ability to conduct such a test. I've an Oehler M43 which measures the peak pressure, the area under the pressure curve and the rise of the pressure curve. It gives the actual pressure curves for comparison. I also have a Siamese Mauser converted to 45-70 that is also fitted with a strain gauge for pressure testing with the M43. This I'm not overly concerned about over pressure with it as I regularly shoot 400 gr barnes bullets at 2300 fps (well maybe not so regularly but pretty often anyways).

Give some thoughts to specific loads with fillers you would like tested and post here. I'll see if I can get around to testing them in a timely manner.

Bulets I have available;

Rapine 460250
RCBS 45-300-FN GC
457483 GC
457124
Rapine 460500
Lee C458-500-F
Midway commercial cast 413 gr FN

Larry Gibson

[Molly]

...On a side note- I've always wondered if a filler like cow or corn meal on top of light charges of fast smokeless, in addition to sealing the bore, also mimics the ignition obturation of a bullet in a way similar to how black powder obturates a bullet???? where the front part of the BP charge is rammed as a compressed, granular mass against the bullet at ignition???? dunno, but have wondered about that.

I think so, 405. When I first developed CoW loads, one of the things I wanted to do was determine the extent of their usefulness. So, in addition to powerful loads, I also did some work with 'squirrel popping loads in a 30-06. I started with a fairly standard load of red dot, and dropped the powder charge a little bit at a time. Results were great until I got down so low that the rifle just went 'CLICK - WHAP" - the whap being the bullet agains the bullet trap. But there wasn't the slightest trace of a normal report. I opened the bolt, and it went 'Pop!' as the gas released. A cleaning rod showed a blockage about halfway down the barrel. I thought "No sweat, I'll just push it out." HAH! That darn thing was solid! When I dropped a cleaning rod on it, the rod actually RANG, like I'd dropped it on an anvil. I couldn't push it out, I couldn't pound it out. I finally ended up drilling it , and then brass brushing the remainder out to give me a clean bore again. But I can tell you for a fact that it takes VERY little pressure to form a hard - a VERY hard - plug w/ CoW. It made me quite leery of high power loads for a while, but I grew in confidence as problem-free experience accumulated.

[Molly]

+ 1. If you insist on using smokeless powder, I'd switch to a powder with much greater bulk for 100% loading density. I use slightly compressed WC860 on top of a felt wad.

I've never experienced it, but the ringing I've read about seems to require a substantial air space between the bullet base and some sort of over-powder card or the like. If it's happened with CoW, I've not heard about it.

[Molly]

> "Without the ability to "watch" ballistically what happens internally we're pretty much stuck with indirect evidence about fillers. I've found, depending on filler type, all fillers increase pressure to some degree. That is based on indirect measurements like head diameter change, shoulder/body fillout, primer shape etc. Some controlled pressure testing of various fillers/loads would be really good info. "

> I've the ability to conduct such a test. I've an Oehler M43 which measures the peak pressure, the area under the pressure curve and the rise of the pressure curve. It gives the actual pressure curves for comparison. I also have a Siamese Mauser converted to 45-70 that is also fitted with a strain gauge for pressure testing with the M43. ...

> Give some thoughts to specific loads with fillers you would like tested and post here. I'll see if I can get around to testing them in a timely manner.

Wow! What an offer! If I were designing such an experiment, I'd try two or more blt wts, with two or more levels of CoW, with and without crimping.
Ergo, 457124, Lee C458-500-F, and the Midway cast 413 gr FN.
I'd try about 3/8" of CoW under the bullet, and 3/4 or 1 inch under the bullet.
I'd use Kapoc or (preferably) Dacron to hold the CoW in place.
And I'd use a moderate powder charge - say something like 35.0g of IMR 3031. (No point in pushing luck, even with a strong action!)
For controls, I'd like to see the same loads without the CoW - Dacron and all.

Hmmm. I seem to recall something about geometric progression that hits home about now. I don't mean to occupy the rest of your life, so perhaps we could just use 457124 for a first approximation.

Is that reasonable?

[mooman76]

I used COW in my Trapdoor and started seeing pressure signs. I haven't used it since!

[405]

"Give some thoughts to specific loads with fillers you would like tested and post here. I'll see if I can get around to testing them in a timely manner."

Sounds like a great offer to me also!

Keep is simple for your own sake. I can see how this could become long, tiring and expensive.

To start maybe a "universal type" 45-70 bullet in the 400-425 gr range.
Seems like 5744 would be a good candidate powder for this. Pick a midrange pressure load. 5 rounds each test should be enough to start with?


Test Loads:

5 rnds with 5744-- no filler
5 rnds with 5744-- plus cow filler with no air space
5 rnds with 5744-- plus fluffy dacron with no airspace
5 rnds with 5744-- plus tighter dacron with no airspace
5 rnds with 5744-- plus shot buffer like BPI with no airspace

Keep the load specs., OALs, brass, bullets, primers, powder charges, etc. as constants. Vary only the filler. Describe the bullet BHN, style, lube. Record weight of filler and amount of compression of filler.

[Larry Gibson]

Molly

Well I got carried away with my hallucinations up on the Little bighorn so I'll need to cast some more 457124s. That's not a problem, may get to it today. So we'll try 35 gr 3031 with 3/8, 3/4 and 1" of COW, any particular flavor? Cases will be FC and primers WLRs.

I do have the Midway commercial cast bullet and am planning on a range trip tomorrow if that bullet is ok? Could have the results posted tomorrow evening.

One more question; is the dacron between the powder and COW or between the COW and bullet?

Larry Gibson

[Larry Gibson]

405

Now we're getting a little more complicated. Have to get some 5744 as I don't have enough left to load 25 rounds at say, 25 gr for a 400 gr bullet?

GC or PB bullet?

Since I don't use COW, how much compression?

Have to get some shot buffer.

This test may take some time to complete as I need to get the ingredients.

Larry Gibson

[Molly]

I used COW in my Trapdoor and started seeing pressure signs. I haven't used it since!

Moonman, everyone agrees that loads have to be worked up with CoW already in the formula. You can't just pour some into an existing load - particularly a warm load - and expect good results. If you want, PM me with the details of your load, and I'll try to help.

Or how about someone posting a few developed CoW loads with moderate presssure signs?

[Molly]

Hi 405,

> Well I got carried away with my hallucinations up on the Little bighorn

(VBG)

> So we'll try 35 gr 3031 with 3/8, 3/4 and 1" of COW, any particular flavor? Cases will be FC and primers WLRs. I do have the Midway commercial cast bullet and am planning on a range trip tomorrow if that bullet is ok? Could have the results posted tomorrow evening.

405, you'd just be amazed how easy I am to please when someone else is doing the work. [smilie=1: Any bullet is fine, so long as it's a constant.

One more question; is the dacron between the powder and COW or between the COW and bullet?

First powder, then dacron (it's to hold the CoW on the bullet base), then CoW (unflavored please). Then the bullet.

There should be just enough loose dacron to hold the CoW up above where base of the bullet will be when seated. I judge by eye and by volume - doesn't seem to be critical. Just pull off a chunk the size of my thumb tip or a little less, and push it in with a pencil.If it bulks up just above the bottom of the seated bullet, that's fine. If not, I'd add a little more. But you don't have to try to jam all the dacron in you can. Use as little as you can would be a better rule.

Then pour in the CoW and seat the bullet. The CoW won't be compressed much - it just pushes the dacron down a little more. There's no real pressure on either one until the primer barks.

Molly

[mooman76]

Moonman, everyone agrees that loads have to be worked up with CoW already in the formula. You can't just pour some into an existing load - particularly a warm load - and expect good results. If you want, PM me with the details of your load, and I'll try to help.

Or how about someone posting a few developed CoW loads with moderate presssure signs?

I guess I didn't tell the whole story but I was working up loads when I ran into pressure signs and decided to back off. That and the fact that the TD has a weak action anyway, I just desided not to use it anymore. I now use other things for filler instead. I'm not trying to say it's not ok to use. I just was saying it's not for me because I don't feel comfortable using it. By the way just for information I was using Unique and the Lee 405g HB. The signs didn't show up until I got to 14g and I saw no improvment in any of the loads with COW in this particular gun.:Fire:

[The Double D]

I have never seen any signs of excessive pressure using CoW. My CoW loads for fireforming never fully form the case, unless a bullet is used for forming. For space filling standard loads with a bullet the case will fully form. I am not shooting reduced power loads like you guys. I am shooting standard velocity loads. Could that be a difference?

I am seeing case stretching in the neck. I don't equate this to pressure, I equate it to the extrusion process of the solid mass of CoW squeezing through the smaller neck. The brass is getting extruded down the chamber neck. I see this using the granular solids. I don't see it from firing full loads with out fillers or when I use fiber fillers.

About the "abrasiveness" of CoW. I don't know how valid this test will be, but I have a Martini Barrel that is a bit dark, and I am going fire Cow Smokeless Martini loads in it to see if it "brightens" the barrel.

My own experience with CoW says its doing something to scrub or smooth the bore. Something is going on.

Molly, like you I have heard a lot about this ringing chamber thing. Most antcedotal. But the ones where I have been able to talk first hand to the "victim", they were using a wad and not a filler.

Ross Seyfried has written quite a bit on duplicating original loads for the Old British rifles and he advocates as much dacron filler as possible and eliminate the airspace.

Greame Wright wrote a book on shooting Britsh Doubles rifles. In order to get the rifles to shoot to regulation Wright researched the original ammo. He learned when Eley and Kynoch adapted the old Black Powder Express cartridges to Nitro they had to use fillers to eliminate the airspace that resulted from the the smaller nitro charges in the big cases and still achieve the correct working pressures for the guns to shoot to regulation. Wright in his development work had the old originals as well as his new pressure duplicating rounds fired by the Birmingham Proof. His book is well worth the reading and talks a lot about the use of fillers. You should get it and read. He advocates floaral foam and the foam used by Kynoch.

Charlie Dell wrote Shooting the Schuetzen Rifle. He has a chapter just on wads. It is a must read. Charlie was able to demonstrate ringing from shot one. He also determined how to control ringing. It makes for a some very interesting reading.

[405]

Larry,

I guess it doesn't matter about the exact powder, bullet, GC, PB etc. Just a first step in getting insight into what commonly used fillers do to pressure in commonly used loads.

I just tried to list the commonly used fillers- namely:

None (the control)
Fluffy dacron (teased or high loft, low mass/weight)
Denser dacron (low loft)
CoW
Shot buffer

and add to the list as was suggested....
Dacron with CoW on top

25 grs 5744 under the 400 grain bullet sounds fine. Either GC or PB

The test should be primarily to measure the effects of the commonly used fillers on pressures (with SD and ES of course) in common loads.

The amount of compression shouldn't be critical to the basic test. I would think just enough to ensure no air space between powder and bullet base. That is the way most reloaders use fillers. Would be best to clean between each 5-shot string.

The next or parallel tests logically would be to use a slower powder commonly used for 45-70 cast bullet loading. Maybe in burn range of 4895 or Varget?

Then on to the bottlenecks!:roll:

Custer, Reno, Benteen.... anybody.... help!:mrgreen:

[Molly]

... it's not for me because I don't feel comfortable using it. By the way just for information I was using Unique and the Lee 405g HB. The signs didn't show up until I got to 14g and I saw no improvment in any of the loads with COW in this particular gun.:Fire:

There's no better reason to stop than discomfortable feelings. That, and a lack of any improvement are solid grounds for taking another road.

But, if you ever try some slower powders, it may be worth another look.

[Molly]

Hey, Double D,

Back in 1962, there was a very limited printing of a book titled "DWM Cartridges, 1896 to 1956" by Datig. Some interersting historical notes in the forward, but otherwise it's just drawings of 'pert near every DWM case ever made, with major dimensions. I've got one of the only two I've ever seen. It's available for loan, if some of yours are.

[mooman76]

Molly

I did try some slower powders and since slower powders tend to fill the case more I didn't see the need to use a filler. I even tried som BP and BP substiutes. Didn't do any better with them either. Not saying it shoots bad but I was hoping for a little more. Best I could do was 2" at 50y. The TD is an original 1873 long barrel not the carbine. I think it would have been a bit more fun with a carbine. The barrel is so long and front sight so narrow I have to wear my glass to see it. Anyway it was pretty much like shooting my ML's and not as much fun so I put it on the back shelf for now at least and shoot my MLs. Troble is I have too many projects and not enough time. I would like to load it up and try it with a couple of RB's though and see what it does.

[Molly]

Best I could do was 2" at 50y. ... The barrel is so long and front sight so narrow I have to wear my glass to see it.

Hey Mooman (Dairy farmer?), could the problem be blurry vision? What led you to try CoW in the first place? Heavy leading or what? How was the bore after shooting?

My guess is that if you'd stopped with say 13g powder, you'd have gotten the same velocities with cleaner bores. (Easy to say, right? Well, you were there, and I wasn't.)

[Larry Gibson]

Okay guys, I'll load some up and test them. Hopefully tomorrow for the first batch.

Larry Gibson

[The Double D]

There's no better reason to stop than discomfortable feelings. That, and a lack of any improvement are solid grounds for taking another road.

But, if you ever try some slower powders, it may be worth another look.

Molly,

I don't loan books anymore, they tend to never return.

However, Greame Wright's 3rd edition Shooting British Double Rifles is coming out before the end of the year.

Ross Seyfried writes I believe for Rifle Magazine.

Charlies Dells book Shooting Schutzen Rifles is available from the American Single Shot Rifle Association.

When you come to Montana to shot gophers, you are welcome to read my copies. You are coming to Montana aren't you.

[Larry Gibson]

Diidn't get to the range today as I just managed to get to the store for the COW this afternoon. Looks like I've just enough 5744 for that test an have a whole pound of 3031. I am loading them up this evening. I stopped at two shops and no one has any shot buffer.

I'll use W-W case (my FC are all loaded)
WLR primers
The midway commercial cast (413 gr .459 and hard cast-BHN is 16-18 the best I ca measure it)
5-25 gr 5744 w/no filler
5-25 5744 w/fluffy dacron filler
5-25 5744 w/ compressed dacron filler
5-25 5744 w/dacron and COW slightly compressed

35-3031 w/ no filler
35-3031 w/fluffy dacron filler
35-3031 w/dacron and COW slightly compressed

That should give you guys some idea. Any changes make 'mem quick as I'll be loading soon.

Larry Gibson

[mooman76]

Molly
Yes I am getting older and eyes not as good as they once was but this gun is so long I have a hard time fitting it in my car(with my other gear). I tried COW to see if it would improve the load. The case on the 45-70 is so large 13 or 14g of unique doesn't put a dent in the capacity so I thought it would help to add a filler to keep the charge at the baack of the case. I did do 13 grains. The barrel was ok after. Not that dirt but not completely clean but then again I was testing several different loads with different powders. Dairy farmer, not likely here in Vegas. Actually is is a partially from my name and partially from a nick name I picked up from the wife.

[The Double D]

One other thing of the fiber fillers. Plucking of a tuft and stuffing it in won't work. Just like any other component you stuff in case you must be consistant. Weighed tufts produced better results than unknown plucked off amounts. I weighed out each ball of kapok or dacron I used.

[doctorxring]

.




Why would anyone use a filler, cream of wheat or others, when
there are non-position sensitive propellants available ??




.

[The Double D]

.




Why would anyone use a filler, cream of wheat or others, when
there are non-position sensitive propellants available ??






.

...and Doctorxring, just which smokeless powder is that in the 577/450 case?

[longbow]

doctorxring:

My simple reasoning for using fillers:

- to protect the base of a non-gascheck boolit
- to help seal the bore
- to provide 100% loading density
- to push velocity a little higher with pb boolits
- to allow use of position sensitive powders ~ not all of us have access to a wide variety of reloading supplies so we make do

Other may have different reasons or goals but these suit me. Different strokes...

Longbow

[mooman76]

Even so called nosensitive powders shoot more consistant when positioned at the base or back of the complete round.

[Larry Gibson]

I conducted the test today. The rifle is a Siamese Mauser I converted to 45-70 back in the ‘70s. It has a 24” Star Barrel and is steel bedded in a Fajen Stock. The scope is a 2.5X Leupold with a heavy duplex reticle. I built the rifle for going into pole patches after elk. The cross hairs cove close to 4” at 100 yards so really fine aiming is difficult. However I can consistently shoot close to 2 MOA with it. The M43 Oehler was attached and set up. The targets were at 100 yards and I was shooting off a rest on a very, very solid cement benchrest. There was a slight wind of 2-3 mph coming out of 10-11 o’clock. The test went without any hitches. I have the targets and the Oehler printout data, if you want to see it let me know and I’ll scan/photo and post. The COW filler for the 5744 load was measured with a Lee 108 dipper (my dippers are the old one and not in CCs.), for the 3031 load it was measured with a 069 dipper. The COW was about 1/8” below the case mouth with both and was compressed seating the bullet.

Data is listed as;

Load wad/filler FPS/SD/ES psi(M43) in thousands, hundreds/SD/ES(0’s left off) group size; ctc

Notes are listed with loads where appropriate.

Control load was the standard load I use in my H&R Officers Model TD with this bullet. It is a smokeless duplication of the service rifle load of 1873 with the Midway cast bullet. Data is’

36-milsurp 4895......¾ Dacron filler.....1391/15/38......22,4/1,2/4.3......2.3” for 10 shots
Note; the above is an accurate load in the OM and also in this rifle. This was a 10 shot group. The following test groups are 5 shots except where noted.

25-5744......no filler.............................1166/4/13 ..............18,4/7/1,9........2.1”
25-5744....... ¾ Dacron filler .............. 1226/4/13.......... 22,4/9/2,1......... 1.45”
25-5744......... 2.5 gr Dacron compressed........ 1245/5/10...... 22,3/6/1,5...... 2.3”
25-5744....... ¾ Dacron wad + COW filler........ 1288/5/14...... 27,1/9/2,5....... 3.7”

35-3031...... no filler.................... 941/21/45............ 13,6/7/1.5.......... 3”
Note; this is for 4 shots with no effort made to “position” the powder. I thought this was pretty low data and was suspecting if I had 3031 or 4891. On the 5th shot I elevated the barrel and that shot gave 1223 fps and hit 9” higher. I then shot the next 5 shots elevating the barrel after loading before each shot.

35-3031........ no filler/muzzle elevated............ 1203/31/71........ 18,4/1,5/3,6.......... 3”
35-3031........ ¾ Dacron filler................. 1230/18/51.......... 19,1/5/1,2 ......... 2.1”
35-3031......... ¾ Dacron wad + COW filler ................... 1179/9/26............ 19,0/6/1,4....... 3.5”

You all can draw your own conclusions. I’ll only note that while the SD & ES were not the smallest the control group and the other test groups where only a ¾ Dacron filler were used gave the best accuracy. Thanks guys for asking me to conduct this test, it was informative to me and I look forward to your discussion/comments.

Larry Gibson

[The Double D]

Define 3/4 dacron?

[Larry Gibson]

3/4 grain piece of it. When used as a filler it is pushed into the case without tamping it down on top of the powder. It is fluffy stuff and fills the air space between powder and bullet base when the bullet is seated.

Larry Gibson

[The Double D]

Thanks Larry, didn't know if you were filling 3/4 of air space or some thing.

[405]

Thanks Larry for taking the time, putting in the effort and resources to test the loads! :drinks: .... very useful info.

A couple of questions.

1) Any reason you didn't use the "all CoW" filler load? That bolt gun would surely handle higher pressures than any of our TD single shots. I know that some shooters just load powder with lightly compressed CoW on top.

2) The pressures you recorded (for all the 5744 loads) seem high compared to published pressures for comparable loads as listed by Lyman. Any thoughts? The trends appear to track as expected but the base line pressures seem high for the 5744 loads. The velocities however compare well with the published data.

Example: the Lyman data for 405 cast over 26 gr. 5744 (no filler) shows 1189 fps and 12,200 CUP. 12,200 CUP translates way below the 18,400 PSI in your test. I think 12,200 CUP is equivalent to something quite a bit less than 10,000 PSI if my math is working. :confused:

No big deal just curious if any ideas about the high recorded pressures.

BTW that 1.45 5shot @ 100 is impressive by any standard!

[longbow]

Interesting report Larry, thanks for that.

I have been using COW filler in .303 British over Unique, IMR 4227, IMR 4198 and IMR 4895 under a Lyman 314299 without gas check resulting in groups about the same size as no filler and boolit with gas check.

Groups are running 1 1/2" to 2" at 50 yards using Enfield No. 5 with stock sights. Not match winning accuracy but a big improvement from the 4" to 6" groups I was getting. Now that I have gotten acceptable groups I will try to do a run them over the chronograph to see how they do.

Is there a reason for using dacron and COW rather than just dacron and just COW? Just curious about the combination is all. One of the reasons I use COW is I am lazy and it pours in like powder ~ no tearing, no tamping, just scoop and pour.

Anyway, thanks for that and I'll see if I can add my results here too. Maybe a week or so though.

Longbow

[felix]

405, it is just the opposite. Piezoelectrics produce an excellent transient response and the devices are quite linear in that response. This is in opposition to copper crushers, which are quite sluggish in any kind of transient force. However, the crushers produce a fine, but well rounded, average peak pressure. When I want a pressure trace, I want a piezo gadget. When I want to measure damaging pressures, I want to see CUP, not the PSI measurement. For example, the latest Marlin lever guns are proofed to 80K PSI, but operated normally 40K CUP. Guns can tolerate a lot of peak pressures provided the peaks are really short in duration. Modern steels, anyway. ... felix

[405]

felix,
Agreed, they are different. The piezo recorded pressure in PSI is a one point peak pressure effect reading while the CUP is a dwell response indirect index measurement of pressure effect.

But, the 25 gr 5744 powder test of 18,400 PSI recorded pressure seems to exceed the published comparable load pressures by both Lyman and Accurate Arms. Lyman's pressures for these loads are listed in CUP so there is room for debate about the validity of the conversion formula between PSI and CUP.

However, AA uses PSI. AA's PSI pressures using 27 gr 5744 under one style 405 cast shows 16,100 PSI and 27.5 gr 5744 under another 405 cast shows 18,000 PSI. AA data also shows 28.5 gr 5744 under a 420 cast at 16,100 PSI.


Here's a compendium of trapdoor recommendations by bullet/powder companies...... makes me scratch my head for sure:confused:

Lyman states that trapdoors should not be loaded to pressures beyond 18,000 CUP.

Accurate Arms states that trapdoors should not be loaded to pressures beyond 18,000 PSI.

Hodgdon states that trapdoor loads should not exceed 28,000 CUP.

IMR indicates about a 28,000 CUP max for the trapdoor.

Vihtavuori indicates about 25,000 PSI max for the trapdoor.

Barnes re-states an 1878 US Arsenal max black powder load pressure for the trapdoor of 28,000 PSI. (I didn't know that they had direct PSI measurement capability back then- maybe? dunno).

Hornady seems to indicate about a 25,000 CUP max for the trapdoor

Speer states 28,000 CUP max for the trapdoor

NOTE: corrected the Lyman, AA units of measure typos for their TD max recommendations.

[Larry Gibson]

[QUOTE=405;401344]Thanks Larry for taking the time, putting in the effort and resources to test the loads! :drinks: .... very useful info.

A couple of questions.

1) Any reason you didn't use the "all CoW" filler load? That bolt gun would surely handle higher pressures than any of our TD single shots. I know that some shooters just load powder with lightly compressed CoW on top.

One good reason; I mentioned I was short of 5744 and I ran out of 5744. If you guys want a repeat or a refinement of this test let me know. I need to get some more 5744 anyways and I can run that test.

2) The pressures you recorded (for all the 5744 loads) seem high compared to published pressures for comparable loads as listed by Lyman. Any thoughts? The trends appear to track as expected but the base line pressures seem high for the 5744 loads. The velocities however compare well with the published data.

Example: the Lyman data for 405 cast over 26 gr. 5744 (no filler) shows 1189 fps and 12,200 CUP. 12,200 CUP translates way below the 18,400 PSI in your test. I think 12,200 CUP is equivalent to something quite a bit less than 10,000 PSI if my math is working. :confused:

No big deal just curious if any ideas about the high recorded pressures.

The pressures are in line, it's just that you've got it backward. CUP pressures are always lower than transducer, piezo or strain gauge readings. Some try to make a correlation between CUP and current psi.. It can be done to an extent but is not reliable. Modern MAP and PAP (Maximum Alloable Pressure/Peak Average Pressure) for the 45-70 in a TD is 28,000 psi. The 18,400 psi(M43) is where it was supposed to be with that load. A further example is the 30-06 GVM'T. Under the old psi converted from the crushed cylinders of the CUP system the PAP was listed at 47,000 psi. Under the measuring system the PAP is 60,000 psi when measured with transducers, piezos and strain gauges.

BTW that 1.45 5shot @ 100 is impressive by any standard!

That it is! Photo below. I never should have looked through the spotting scope after the 4th shot....made the 5th shot very difficult!

Larry Gibson

[Larry Gibson]

Interesting report Larry, thanks for that.

Is there a reason for using dacron and COW rather than just dacron and just COW? Just curious about the combination is all. One of the reasons I use COW is I am lazy and it pours in like powder ~ no tearing, no tamping, just scoop and pour.

Anyway, thanks for that and I'll see if I can add my results here too. Maybe a week or so though.

Longbow

It was requested. I ran out of 5744 before I could load just the powder and COW. If some requests further refinement tests I'll include it. Need more 5744 anyhows. Glad you enjoyed the test results.

Larry Gibson

[Larry Gibson]

405

Now you have me looking.....

"Agreed, they are different. The piezo recorded pressure in PSI is a one point peak pressure effect reading while the CUP is a dwell response indirect index measurement of pressure effect."

I believe you also have this one backwards. The piezo records the not only the peak pressure but the time pressure curve. The CUP measures the amount of "crush" done to a copper cylinder based on a given tarage tabel. It measures the peak pressure only.

"But, the 25 gr 5744 powder test of 18,400 PSI recorded pressure seems to exceed the published comparable load pressures by both Lyman and Accurate Arms. Lyman's pressures for these loads are listed in CUP so there is room for debate about the validity of the conversion formula between PSI and CUP.

However, AA uses PSI. AA's PSI pressures using 27 gr 5744 under one style 405 cast shows 16,100 PSI and 27.5 gr 5744 under another 405 cast shows 18,000 PSI. AA data also shows 28.5 gr 5744 under a 420 cast at 16,100 PSI."

Obviously different styles of cast bullets plus the hardness of the alloy among other thisgs effect pressures. As I mentioned in the earlier post trying to do a direct correlation between CUP and current PSI can be misleading. The psi was within limits of industry variation standards. Please do not expect actual test results to agree exactly with published pressures. Like velocities taken of two different strings of the same ammo in the same rifle will disagree so do pressures from any given chamber/barrel system.


"Here's a compendium of trapdoor recommendations by bullet/powder companies...... makes me scratch my head for sure:confused:

"Lyman states that trapdoors should not be loaded to pressures beyond 18,000 PSI."

That is probably old Lyman based on CUP, new Lyman says 28,000 psi with the new Lyman #48 listing 18,000 CUP for the TD 45-70 loads.

Accurate Arms states that trapdoors should not be loaded to pressures beyond 18,000 CUP. That is about right for CUP

"Hodgdon states that trapdoor loads should not exceed 28,000 CUP.
IMR indicates about a 28,000 CUP max for the trapdoor."

Yup, that's what Hodgdon says and it sure is enough to make one scratch his head! This is a prime example why I always say that manuals are a guide and not the gospel! 28,000 CUP would be 37-40,000 psi which in definately in Marlin lever action territory.

"Vihtavuori indicates about 25,000 PSI max for the trapdoor."

"Barnes re-states an 1878 US Arsenal max black powder load pressure for the trapdoor of 28,000 PSI. (I didn't know that they had direct PSI measurement capability back then- maybe? dunno)."

That was based on the CUP method with that "psi" made from tarage tables. Arsenals up to the 7.62 NATO used that same CUP system. It was standard for the ammuntion industry and SAAMI still uses it. With the 7.62 NATO the arsenals began using gas piezo-electric transducers placed at the case mouth.

Hornady seems to indicate about a 25,000 CUP max for the trapdoor"
I found Hornady's "these loads did not exceed 25,000 CUP in our pressure barrel" to be interesting.

"Speer states 28,000 CUP max for the trapdoor""

My Speer #11 refernces the 28,000 CUP as for the marlin lever guns and 1886 Winchesters and that is about correct for them.

I've had an interesting time with the M43. I've gauges attached to 21 of my own rifles. I've found old loads that I thought were high pressure weren't. I've also found some of my old favorite loads that I thought were within pressures are actually over pressure. I quickly found my favorite '06 hunting load is running 62, 800 psi(M43)! I'll probably not back that one off in my new M70 as it also uses cartridges with a 65,000 psi PAP. However in my old M98 Mauser which has already devoured a couple thousand of this load I'll probably back it off. Interesting to know though.

Larry Gibson

[Molly]

Fascinating data! I'll have to study on it a bit, but I'm curious what happened to the staged levels of CoW?

> So we'll try 35 gr 3031 with 3/8, 3/4 and 1" of COW, any particular flavor?

Molly

[Larry Gibson]

Fascinating data! I'll have to study on it a bit, but I'm curious what happened to the staged levels of CoW?

> So we'll try 35 gr 3031 with 3/8, 3/4 and 1" of COW, any particular flavor?

Molly

I very quickly found that there was just a little more than 3/8" of space between the dacron wad and the bottom of the seated bullet when using 35 gr of 3031. The 069 Lee dipper of COW (not very much COW BTW?) then filled the case to within 1/4" of the case mouth and the next dipper filled it to the case mouth. The bullet when seated compressed the COW. As I said earlier, I gave up on COW years ago (a lot of years ago!) and probably am not doing this quite like you guys do. I'd be glad to retest or conduct further tests for you guys. I'll obviously need a little more detailed direction in exactly how you want the reloads assembled. I've no problems with that as this test is for you guys so doing it your way is best.

Larry Gibson

[405]

Larry,

You're correct... I fixed my typos in the above post for the Lyman and AA max TD units.... had them reversed... doh!.

Thanks for staying on top of this! I've looked at the data you generated with the current "filler" tests and can see no problem with it. Everything seems to track correctly. The only anomaly I noticed was in the pressures of the 3031 powder with the dacron plus CoW load. May just be an artifact of load technique???

I don't think I'm looking at the comparison between PSI and CUP backwards. The conversion from one unit of measurement to the other may make it seem so tho.

The main reason for staying on this PSI vs CUP thing as the published data compares to your data is that I shoot a lot of old originals and need to make absolutely certain of each load I try. I'm sure many others are in the same boat.

I am familiar with both the copper crusher method and the piezo electric method for determining relative pressure values. Kinda like apples vs oranges in interpretation. Seems like the conversion formula breaks down a little as the pressures drop towards the lower useful threshold of the CUP method. I think that's one reason the LUP method was used for the lower pressure cartridges :mrgreen:

Anyway, the accepted conversion formula is PSI = (1.51586 X CUP) - 17902
the statistical reliabiblity of this has been tested at about .93 which is pretty good.... but may start to break down at the lower pressures we're talking about here.

Wish all data was in PSI. Would certainly simplify life as a reloader.

Yes, I understand about running low on 5744. Would still like to see the 25 gr 5744 load with only lightly compressed CoW on top of powder. In addition to the pressure data, it may also shed some light on the case stretching issues as brought up by others.

[Larry Gibson]

405

"Thanks for staying on top of this! I've looked at the data you generated with the current "filler" tests and can see no problem with it. Everything seems to track correctly. The only anomaly I noticed was in the pressures of the 3031 powder with the dacron plus CoW load. May just be an artifact of load technique???"

I've no idea why the velocity was lower as was the pressure than the same load with just dacron. I though you guys would tell me?

"I am familiar with both the copper crusher method and the piezo electric method for determining relative pressure values. Kinda like apples vs oranges in interpretation. Seems like the conversion formula breaks down a little as the pressures drop towards the lower useful threshold of the CUP method. I think that's one reason the LUP method was used for the lower pressure cartridges :mrgreen:

Anyway, the accepted conversion formula is PSI = (1.51586 X CUP) - 17902
the statistical reliabiblity of this has been tested at about .93 which is pretty good.... but may start to break down at the lower pressures we're talking about here."

Yes it is like apples and oranges. As Dr. Oehler has written it would be nice if published pressures were also annotted as to the type of measurement it is based on. Since there is some statistical variations in the different methods of psi measurement it would be nice to know.

That is indeed the current accepted correlation formula but as you've noted there are discrepancies. Some are indeed at the bottom but there are also some at the top end. The 93% figure is "statistically good" but it still leaves 7% error. So far we have no way of telling when that "error" will happen until after we shoot it. A 7% error on a 60,000 psi load could mean as much as a 4,200 psi overpressure. Makes me wonder what those blown primers in my younger and dumber reloading days were really pushing for psi! Wonder is all I'll do because I won't go there now as I haven't for some years.

"Wish all data was in PSI. Would certainly simplify life as a reloader."

That it would, that it would!

"Would still like to see the 25 gr 5744 load with only lightly compressed CoW on top of powder. In addition to the pressure data, it may also shed some light on the case stretching issues as brought up by others."

Looks like I need to get some more 5744 and load some up.

Larry Gibson

[The Double D]

Is this powder being used XMP 5744 or AA5744?

[Molly]

I very quickly found that there was just a little more than 3/8" of space between the dacron wad and the bottom of the seated bullet when using 35 gr of 3031. The 069 Lee dipper of COW (not very much COW BTW?) then filled the case to within 1/4" of the case mouth and the next dipper filled it to the case mouth. The bullet when seated compressed the COW. As I said earlier, I gave up on COW years ago (a lot of years ago!) and probably am not doing this quite like you guys do. I'd be glad to retest or conduct further tests for you guys. I'll obviously need a little more detailed direction in exactly how you want the reloads assembled. I've no problems with that as this test is for you guys so doing it your way is best.

Larry Gibson

Larry,

Mis-communications are generally the fault of the speaker for lack of precision in his speech. Mea Culpa. I should have explained that when I measure CoW, it's as loosely poured, with a little shake or a light benchtop tap to settle it.

That said, I was expecting loads where the dacron was pressed down sufficiently to allow the specified volume ('inches') of CoW to be added and contained within the case before the bullet was seated. Seating the bullet would then compress the dacron sufficiently to accomodate the settled volume of CoW. The dacron will then keep the CoW at the base of the bullet, and act as a separator over the powder charge, keeping the CoW and the charge from mixing. In early work, before I realized how little CoW would do the job, if I needed to tamp the dacron down a little more to get all the CoW in the case, so be it: that's what I did. Not according to proper experimental protocols, but still quite effective.

I expected the amount of dacron to be set by sight at the time of loading. As a rule of thumb, when I was loading 45-70, I'd pluck out a wad that would bulk up to the (seated) bullet base with little tamping, and check weigh it. My mesurement of force wasn't too precice: If the dacron would hold up a wood pencil, I figured it was tamped enough to hold up the CoW charge. Then I'd pull similar sized wads of dacron to use as I went along, with only a visual comparison to the first wad, and an occasional check weigh to assure reasonable consistency. It's amazing how uniform the weights can be by such a primitive 'measurement'. It's also amazing how much the dacron can be compressed without affecting results.

FWIW, when I was first starting the CoW work, I did my 45-70 work in a Numrich Rolling Block, which was watched carefully for signs of excessive pressures. I have actually fired some fairly substantial loads of IMR 3031 (enough for recoil to be objectionable in an 18 lb rifle) with CoW poured in to the top of the case, and a 500g cast bullet seated over it, compressing the CoW substantially. While I had no pressure measuring equipment, I know the significance of the pressure ring creeping closer to the head of the case, and I can tell a flattened primer from a normal primer. These loads didn't produce any signs of increased pressures (over comparable loads with no CoW) that I noticed - and yes, I looked for them. My techniques didn't have the sensitivity that yours have, but they were not totally without merit either. That's why I was really interested in the results of various CoW levels.

[The Double D]

Molly,

If I read what you wrote correctly, you are using the dacron as a filler and CoW as a under bullets wad, is that correct?

Interesting concept. Bet it seals better than a card.

[Larry Gibson]

Molly

Ahhhh....soooo....grasshopper now understand! New tests under way. Was using last of 2 jugs of XMP5744...that may well explain difference in reported psi (always going to be a slight difference anyways as previously discussed). Maybe 10-12 days (sorry guys but I've got to go away for 6 days to work) before I report back, ok?

Larry Gibson

[Molly]

Molly,
If I read what you wrote correctly, you are using the dacron as a filler and CoW as a under bullets wad, is that correct?
Interesting concept. Bet it seals better than a card.

Hi DD,

I really hadn't thought of it that way, but you're right. And it seals so well that there's no need to lube or GC the bullets either!

I'd always thought of it as the CoW being the filler, and the dacron just as a sort of spacer to keep it at the base of the bullet. I suspect you'd get exctly the same thing if you just used a cardboard or felt wad to hold the CoW in place. In retrospect, the only reason I didn't use a wad was that I was planning tests with bottlenecked cases while putting the 45-70's together, and naturally, a cardboard wad wouldn't work with them, while dacron worked with either.

[Molly]

Molly... New tests under way. ... Maybe 10-12 days (sorry guys but I've got to go away for 6 days to work) before I report back, ok? Larry Gibson

Ah so, reality rear ugly head again, eh grasshopper? :mrgreen:

You have absolutely NO idea how patient I can be when someone is trying to help me. :-D

[The Double D]

I had a series of exchanges of emails with Johnan Laubser of AA several years ago when I was building smokeless loads for the Martini. XMP5744 would misfire without a filler. Add the kapock and it still misfired until I changed to a magnum primer. Emailed Johan and he said that magnum primers were not needed with AA5744. That didn't click until I went to a gunshop to get some more XMP5744 and noticed a slight difference in the color of the label the different prefix AA. When I got home I compared the two powders and they were a different color.

I loaded the last of the XMP and some of the AA and shot them across the chronograph and they were vastly different.

Later I loaded some of the AA without filler and with filler and standard primer. The w/o filler still misfired. The standard primer fired just fine.

Emailed Johan and he said XMP and AA were the same. He suggested perhaps the issue with ignition had to do with different lots, . . I know about retesting loads from lot to lot especially with loads near maximum or target loads. But I have never heard of differences in ignition. To me that is a pretty significant change.

Molly, I will carry your theory one step further. You say that the CoW serves to protect the base of the bullet from the flame and thus no need for a GC or lube. I have no doubt your theory is correct. But I don't believe it is just the sealing effect, I believe the scouring effect of CoW has a part in it.

Several years ago I built 4 .219 Donaldson Wasps. For each gun I had to make 250 rounds of brass. I used Cow for the final form step, under a bullet. As I fired I also did fire and clean break in process. fire one 5 times and clean after every shot, Fire two, 5 times and clean after every two. etc. I usually conituinue this routine for 100 rounds. I noticed right off the start that I wasn't getting any of the copper fouling that I normally see when breaking in a new barrel. After all the fire forming the rifles like every gun I have ever fired CoW had bores that were bright and shiny. I still have one of these guns and shoot it regular and it is a smooth clean shooting barrel and does not foul.

I have a nice Westly Richards 577/450 Martini that I picked up in SA, that was used with black powder and has a very rough black bore. I am going to try to photograph the bore before and after firing and see if the bore is "brightened" by shooting CoW. I don't expect much and certainly not what might occur when fire lapped. It's one of those "why not" experiments.

I'll report back.

[Molly]

Hi DD,

> Molly, I will carry your theory one step further. You say that the CoW serves to protect the base of the bullet from the flame and thus no need for a GC or lube. I have no doubt your theory is correct. But I don't believe it is just the sealing effect, I believe the scouring effect of CoW has a part in it.

> Several years ago I built 4 .219 Donaldson Wasps. ... I still have one of these guns and shoot it regular and it is a smooth clean shooting barrel and does not foul.

Doug, I'm still not convinced that the CoW has a serious scouring effect in the abrasive sense. The CoW plug - hard though it is - is still softer than steel by orders of magnitude. I've been wrong before, but I'd be very surprised if what happened wasn't more along the lines of the CoW preventing hot gas from ironing jacket residue in the bore.

Check my logic on this: It's pretty well accepted that jacketed fouling is caused by a combination of jacket abrasion as the bullet goes down the bore and some by leakage of incadescent gas past the bullet. This gas is hotter than the Mp of steel, and should have little trouble melting copper scrapings and brazing them to the bore itself. This leaves an even rougher bore, etc.

Now introduce a CoW plug: Now there is NO escape of incadescent gas past the bullet. The plug is hard too, so it can sweep up jacketed fouling residues before they are brazed to the bore. The only real effect is to polish the bore by the passage of the bullet. And as the bore is polished, it becomes less prone to accumulating jacketed fouling. So more shooting with CoW could lead to smooth, non-fouling bores without abrasive scouring.

Seems to me that this would account for your observations without requiring any abrasiveness on the part of the CoW. Am I off base somewhere?


> I have a nice Westly Richards 577/450 Martini that I picked up in SA, that was used with black powder and has a very rough black bore. I am going to try to photograph the bore before and after firing and see if the bore is "brightened" by shooting CoW. I don't expect much and certainly not what might occur when fire lapped. It's one of those "why not" experiments.

Why not indeed! Give it a good conventional cleaning first, so that any cleaning or polishing that IS done by the CoW isn't just ordinary fouling removed by the plug.

[longbow]

I see the 577/450 mentioned again and had a thought (treat it gently they can be few and far between!).

The Double D mentioned earlier that he was getting case stretching and it occurs to me that if the rimmed cartridge is full length sized then loaded to below the case neck and filler added that case stretching is likely going to be exaggerated because the filler "plug" will push up against the unsupported shoulder and probably pull on the body of the body of the cartridge.

Without the filler, gas pressure would be evenly distributed and be forcing the brass larger in diameter while also pushing the shoulder ahead.

I have not noticed significant stretch in my .303 brass but I am only neck sizing so the shoulder is always supported.

Like I said, just a thought.

Longbow

[The Double D]

I see the 577/450 mentioned again and had a thought (treat it gently they can be few and far between!).

The Double D mentioned earlier that he was getting case stretching and it occurs to me that if the rimmed cartridge is full length sized then loaded to below the case neck and filler added that case stretching is likely going to be exaggerated because the filler "plug" will push up against the unsupported shoulder and probably pull on the body of the body of the cartridge.

Without the filler, gas pressure would be evenly distributed and be forcing the brass larger in diameter while also pushing the shoulder ahead.

I have not noticed significant stretch in my .303 brass but I am only neck sizing so the shoulder is always supported.

Like I said, just a thought.

Longbow


Such a novice mistake could indeed lead to problems. But pushing the shoulder back excessively ususally manifests its self as a case body separation and not as a lengthing or stretching of the neck.

Beside haveing been around long enough to know better, I am neck sizing only.

The other telling feature, stop using CoW neck stretching stops

As to the scouring effect, perhaps a better description is burnishing. And remember the grain in the grain elevator and the smooth finish on the gratings.. The grain may still be in its hull, but that hull is still softer than steel. If you feel that steel you will find the surface is extremely smooth almost glass like. That is burnished. It'd not an abrasive finish at all. It's the pressure that does the work.

Load a sand blaster up and I guarentee it will peel the paint as well as the road salt rust off your car in a second.

It doesn't take heat to create fouling. Demonstrate this to your self. Rub a jacketed bullet on the out side of your gun barrel a see if it doesn't leave a mark. A matte blue gun will be even worse. Rougher the surface the more it marks. Next take a pinch of CoW and rub the mark and it comes right off.

[Larry Gibson]

Latest on test COW pressure test.

Sorry guys, but things have gotten in the way. I did pick up a lb of new 5744 and am ready to load. I have to go back to NC through the 18th so it will have to wait until I get back. I will get the retest done just be a couple weeks is all.

Larry Gibson

[Dale53]

I know that you don't want to hear this, but I stay away from fillers entirely.

I have shot BPCR's extensively and would vote for straight black powder. However, if dealing with the fouling bothers you, you might want to try duplex loads. 10% smokeless (I prefer RL-7) to 90% black powder by weight works beautifully. The Lyman Cast Bullet handbook has pressure data for duplex loads, if you are interested. You end up with slightly more velocity than straight black (100 fps or so) but they shoot clean. They do NOT require wiping nor use of a blow tube, either. After a whole day of shooting (I have shot 200 rounds in a day) you just clean with a good black powder solvent. Two-three wet patches, a couple of dry patches, then a good preservative and you are "good to go".

Dale53

[Larry Gibson]

I conducted the retest today. The loads were loaded the same and the test rifle was the same Siamese Mauser. The 5744 was a new pound recently purchased. The new retest data is in bold and under the previous test data where applicable. I fired 5 shot of the control load and it performed the same as in the previous test.

Data is listed as;

Load wad/filler FPS/SD/ES psi(M43) in thousands, hundreds/SD/ES(0’s left off) group size; ctc

Notes are listed with loads where appropriate.

Control load was the standard load I use in my H&R Officers Model TD with this bullet. It is a smokeless duplication of the service rifle load of 1873 with the Midway cast bullet.

36-milsurp 4895......¾ Dacron filler.....1391/15/38......22,4/1,2/4.3......2.3” for 10 shots

Note; the above is an accurate load in the OM and also in this rifle. This was a 10 shot group. The following test groups are 5 shots except where noted.

25-5744......no filler.............................1166/4/13 ..............18,4/7/1,9........2.1”
25-5744…….no filler…………………………………1138/6/14 ……………….22,0/4/11 ………2.03”

25-5744....... ¾ Dacron filler .............. 1226/4/13.......... 22,4/9/2,1......... 1.45”
25-5744…….. ¾ Dacron filler ……………….1370/23/53…………25/16/41…………….1.95”

25-5744......... 2.5 gr Dacron compressed........ 1245/5/10...... 22,3/6/1,5...... 2.3”
25-5744……….. 2.5 gr Dacron compressed………. 1240/11/30……26,7/6/1,8………..2.1”

25-5744....... ¾ Dacron wad + COW filler........ 1288/5/14...... 27,1/9/2,5....... 3.7”

25-5744……….COW filler (to 1/8” of case mouth)..1294/11/28…..33/9/2,1………..3.22”

35-3031...... no filler.................... 941/21/45............ 13,6/7/1.5.......... 3”
Note; this is for 4 shots with no effort made to “position” the powder. I thought this was pretty low data and was suspecting if I had 3031 or 4891. On the 5th shot I elevated the barrel and that shot gave 1223 fps and hit 9” higher. I then shot the next 5 shots elevating the barrel after loading before each shot.

35-3031........ no filler/muzzle elevated............ 1203/31/71........ 18,4/1,5/3,6.......... 3”
35-3031........ ¾ Dacron filler................. 1230/18/51.......... 19,1/5/1,2 ......... 2.1”
35-3031………. 3/4 Dacron filler…………………1218/17/42…………..19,5/7/1,8…………….2.25”

35-3031......... ¾ Dacron wad + COW filler ......1179/9/26............ 19,0/6/1,4....... 3.5”
35-3031………. ¾ Dacron wad + COW filler (Lee 065)..1179/11/27…..25,5/1,0/2,4…...3.45”
35-3031………. ¾ Dacron wad + COW filler (Lee 069)..1183/14/33…..25,5/7/1,9……..3.3”
35-3031………. ¾ Dacron wad + COW filler (Lee 108)..1211/8/19……..26,1/5/1,4……..2.75”
35-3031………. ¾ Dacron wad + COW filler (Lee 129)..1205/24/59……26,8/1,1/2,8…..1.85”

My observations; the new 5744 produced consistently higher pressures with the same loads as with the old 5744. Accuracy remained consistent. The load with only COW as a filler produced a pressure above the 28,000 psi limit for trapdoors.

The COW levels with the 3031 loads (shown with Lee dipper # used) gave levels of 1/3 bullet seating depth (compression), 2/3s and level with case mouth. Accuracy improved with the greater amount of COW and compression. Added during edit; The load with the 065 dipper of COW was to base of bullet with slight compression.

I’ll leave the rest of the story to you guys.

Larry Gibson

[Larry Gibson]

Dale 53

I also prefer duplex loads in my original trapdoor. I uae 7 gr 4759 under 54 gr GOEX Cartridge and a Rapne 460500 bullet. Excellent accuacy, no need for blow tube and I also can shoot all day without cleaning. For smoke less loads I'll stick with the 4895 and dacron filler. Works for me.

Larry Gibson

[405]

Thank you Larry!
The new data tracks similarly with the first run. This IS useful info for those who shoot smokeless in the older BPCR guns.... Win 73s, 76s, 85s, 86s along with the trapdoors and the rolling blocks, etc. I'll have to copy it to table form and ruminate on it. :mrgreen:

[Dixie Slugs]

Just a couple of thoughts on fillers. A few years ago I decided to try cut wads made from styro meat trays, I made some wad cutters for old screw-in chokes. Made up some and sent some to friends...that worked great. Did not blown to pieces...compressed nice and flat. I have often thought they would work great for fillers in centerfire staright cases....no weight.
Just some random thoughts.
Regards, James

[Bob Maerdian]

Don't do it.

The extensive testing that Col. Harrison did for his excellent articles in American Rifleman in the '50s and '60s showed that using Cream of Wheat as filler for smokeless loads raised pressures dramatically.

Far better to use the Dacron or kapok tufts, and keep your trapdoor intact.

Charlie Dell did a number of expirements ringing chambers with both Dacron and kapok. I have ruined (ringed) two 30-06 Springfield barrels using Dacron tufts, years ago. I NEVER use case fillers now!

Bob

[.22-10-45]

I have an original Ballard chambered in .25-25 Stevens. Since it has a cast action, only Swiss 3FG is used. Wanting to experiment with slightly reduced charges, I used COW to fill extra space to bullet base. 2 out of 3 cases were lengthened 1/4"!..3rd. seperated at neck. Now these are turned from solid on CNC lathes by RMC Co. and I suspect the fine machining marks inside neck were catching the COW. I switched to Puff-Lon and had no more trouble.

[Larry Gibson]

Charlie Dell used the Dacron and Kapok as wads, not fillers. There is a difference.

Larry Gibson

[Turkeygunner]

When loading a 450 grn pure lead pp bullet, I go by the Hogdon reloading site and experienced all kind of hang-fires and delayed ignition. I decided to get some cotton balls, but a full cotton ball was too much so I cut them in two with scissors. I loaded 38 grns of benchmark and pressed the cotton down to the powder with a wad between the cotton and the powder. No more ignition problems, but no appreciable accuracy either. Then I decided on a slower powder and used 4064 within the recommended charge weight. I pushed the cotton down against the powder with no wad and compressed with a little tool I fashioned from a 7/16 bolt using a nut for a stop so I could set the depth just right. It would spring back about 1/16" with the 1/2 cotton ball (4.3 grns) and the bullet did the rest of the work. Result was 3 bullet holes touching each other at 112 yds. The paper patches were water proofed and lubricated with graphite flake.

[Chill Wills]

Be careful of wads pushed down against the powder. A fluffy cotton ball becomes a wad when you take the air out of it by 'pushing it down' on the powder with 'little tool'.