Filler under powder?

[Cap'n Morgan]

Some time ago I read an interesting thread on the AccurateReloading forum. A poster explained how he would place the filler under the powder (between powder & primer, instead of between powder & bullet) to avoid the risc of a pressure wave "ringing" the chamber. He claimed there was no problems with ignition and SD numbers were good - and no "leftovers" in the barrel afterwards. The poster came across as a person who knew what he was doing, and the more I think about it the more sense it makes to me. Has anybody in here tried this approach? I plan on giving it a try in my 45-70 and do a velocity test on two identical loads, except for the filler switcheroo.

[Nobade]

Did he write that on April 1st? I can't imagine that working.

[Beerd]

Cap'n,
If I were you I would hold off on my plan until receiving more feed back here.
..

[Larry Gibson]

I've been prone to test a few crazy ideas and myths. However, there are even some things I won't test.........

[mehavey]

...poster explained how he would place the filler under the powder (between powder & primer,
instead of between powder & bullet) to avoid the risc of a pressure wave "ringing" the chamber. That OP poster was 100% correct.
It won't ring the chamber.
:bigsmyl2:

[RickinTN]

I wouldn't even consider it. Either it was April fools day, or he was drinking or smoking something cheap. It actually makes no sense whatsoever.
Rick

[murf205]

Cap'n, I'm not a ballistician by a long shot but it would appear to me that, in that scenario, you would have to ignite the filler before the powder charge and the term "erratic" is the first thing that comes to mind. Sounds scary to me.

[jsizemore]

Was he using powder as the filler?

[Cap'n Morgan]

Well, I see a lot of skepticismen on the subject, that's why I decided to ask here in the first place. When I first read about it I had my doubt as well, but then it occurred to me that perhaps the idea of the primer flash having to hit the powder charge directly was wrong - after all, a diesel engine runs just fine igniting fuel by compression heat only, just as a sharp rap on a fire piston will ignite a piece of tinder. If the same principle is involved in a cartridge, then, perhaps, the pressure from the primer explosion will ignite the powder even if shielded from the direct flame front.

...or my theory is pure nonsens, but the primer blast is still powerful enough to blast through the filler, be it Dacon, cotton or tissue paper, and do its thing. Anyway, I'll give it a try one of these days. The worst thing that could happen is that nothing happens! The next worse thing would be a boolit stuck in the barrel, but that's what experimenting is all about. Legend has it, it took Edison a thousand tries to come up with a working lightbulb. In the light of that achievement (pun intended) loading a dozen 45-70 should be manageable ;)

[gwpercle]

Sounds like convoluted thinking trying to make you believe what he believes is right .
Were any names , dates , test data offered ... or will you be "the First" to try this theory out ?

Let us know how it goes ... I'm about ready to believe anything now but I would like to see the truth about this one ...putting the filler over the primer between the powder / boolit just doesn't seem logical ... I've been reloading over 50 years but always willing to look at new tested data .
Gary

[Mk42gunner]

I have read of people using a single layer of newsprint next to the primer in black powder cartridges. That to me is not a filler, more like a flash dispersant or repressor.

I never tried it when I was loading BP cartridges.

Robert

[Green Frog]

To be blunt, not only no, but **** NO!! If you did get the primer flash to somehow make it through the filler, you would lose so much power that powder ignition would be spotty at best, nonexistent at worst. :oops:

The only way that could be used with any assurance that it would work is to combine it with another hare brained scheme somebody came up many years ago, a primer flash tube that carried the flash up from the base and bounced it off the back of the bullet to ignite the powder charge from the front. Never heard of it? That’s probably because that didn’t work very well either! It certainly wasn’t worth the expense to hand make the shells. [smilie=b:

I think mehavey is right about it not ringing the chamber... you need the powder to ignite for that to happen.

Froggie

[Old Caster]

If you try this be careful because possibly the primer may not ignite the powder immediately and maybe just glow the filler and ignite the powder later after you remove the cartridge.

[Mr_Sheesh]

That's be exciting but not fun.

[beagle]

That was Emer Keith and it actually worked and they achieved a significant velocity gain with the same or lower pressures. Basically the same system the Army uses today in the 105MM howitzer and .50 Spotter Tracer round. An extended tube ignites the front end of the charge first.

Dunno about the under filler thing. I've seen BP shooters place a kitchen match head over the primer to provide better ignition and John Buhmiller was dropping a live primer in the bottom of his .45 Magnums for elephant hunting in order to ignite Hodgdon 4831 better but he was strange and made .45 solids by pouring steel cased .45 ACP cases full of lead, turning a RN profile on the base and loading them for elephant "cropping". Supposedly worked quite well. Bet barrels didn't last long.

There was a guy several years back that had computed the internal area of a .38-55 case and was cutting precision cardboard squares. He'd roll these and drop in the case before loading and it reduced case volume and gave better ignition much as do the reduced capacity machined cases that are so expensive. Lasted one firing and I'd be afraid of one in the barrel./beagle


To be blunt, not only no, but **** NO!! If you did get the primer flash to somehow make it through the filler, you would lose so much power that powder ignition would be spotty at best, nonexistent at worst. :oops:

The only way that could be used with any assurance that it would work is to combine it with another hare brained scheme somebody came up many years ago, a primer flash tube that carried the flash up from the base and bounced it off the back of the bullet to ignite the powder charge from the front. Never heard of it? That’s probably because that didn’t work very well either! It certainly wasn’t worth the expense to hand make the shells. [smilie=b:

I think mehavey is right about it not ringing the chamber... you need the powder to ignite for that to happen.

Froggie

[McFred]

Some time ago I read an interesting thread on the AccurateReloading forum. A poster explained how he would place the filler under the powder (between powder & primer, instead of between powder & bullet)

Why ask the question without context when it permits such opportunity for speculation?

Was it this thread?
http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9421043/m/9481094362

If it was it seems he posted the details, the load, the velocities and accuracy for a ~120 year old rifle. Seems like it works just fine in that context.

[Cap'n Morgan]

Was it this thread?
http://forums.accuratereloading.com/...3/m/9481094362

McFred

Yes, that's the one. I did a search but couldn't find it. Thanks!

[GregLaROCHE]

I’ve heard all sorts of things about the use of fillers. Using fillers are a must or you don’t need them at all. I’ve even heard it depended if you were using a jacked bullet or plain lead. This idea does seem a little out there, but a good primer should burn through Dacron fillers without any problem. I’d say give it a try and let us know. I wouldn’t be surprised if it doesn’t make any difference.

I’m about to experiment with some reduced power BP loads. I’m sure I’ll need something to fill the void. I plan on using Cream of Wheat.

[MostlyLeverGuns]

Like beagle said, the flash tube is used in artillery ammunition, Artillery ammo powder is bagged and charges varied (number of powder bags used) based on range with a primer cartridge to start things. Elmer Keith did use it also, cost and lost case capacity were problems. Modern powders have solved a lot of those problems. A paper disc to cover the primer has been/is sometimes used to keep fine powders out of the primer. The fine ball powders getting in the primer can give false impressions of high pressure.

[Larry Gibson]

Why ask the question without context when it permits such opportunity for speculation?

Was it this thread?
http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9421043/m/9481094362

If it was it seems he posted the details, the load, the velocities and accuracy for a ~120 year old rifle. Seems like it works just fine in that context.

He's using a very small amount of 1 ply tissue paper in a very small diameter cartridge of relatively small capacity. He's also using Trail Boss which isn't supposed to need any filler. It also is a very specialized cartridge with small diameter and a longish capacity. The flame from the primers is able to burn through the tissue to ignite the TrailBoss. Apparently it works for that cartridge/bullet/powder combination. I would not try it with other cartridges, especially with other fillers (the small amount of tissue is more of a 'wad" than a filler) as we use them. Also, back in my early experiments with "fillers and wads" I had to stomp out several fires in front of the bench from burning cotton and tissue igniting the dry grass. Never a problem with dacron fillers.

[mdi]

I think I'd go with Green Frogs thinking. The primer flash would have to penetrate the filler before igniting the powder (I don't agree with the "diesel" type of ignition but IMO I've experienced primers pushing the bullet out of the case before good powder ignition). To be honest I'd have to try several experiments first. Maybe with "blanks", a round with filler then powder then an over powder wad to see how much powder was blown out the barrel...

But in 40+ years of reloading I have never used a filler and only once did I experiment with COW over a powder charge that would "scrub" the barrel on firing...

[bedbugbilly]

Does the term "hang fire" come ro mind for anyone else?

I am by no means an expert on fillers but it just doesn't make sense to put ruler under powder and I don't really see a description of just "how much" or what type' of filler is being talked about.

The only cartridge that I have ever put anything under the powder is with my Smith Carbine cartridges and they are "their own animal" - a plastic tube with a rear flash hole - loaded with BP and a hand seated boolit. I experimented with a number of ways to cover the flash hole so that BP could not trickle out of the flash hole - a common problem, with the original cartridges. Some Smith shooters say they never have the problem, but I have seen it as well as experienced it. I tried covering the flash hole externally with a layer of coffee filter paper applied with a glue stick - someone suggested using a small punched out circle of either tissue paper or wax paper, inserted internally into the plastic casing and then load the cartridge. We are only talking a very thin piece of combustible paper that is easily burned through with the musket cap flash.

I guess if a person wants to try it . . . it's their dime . . but I can't see how a primer flash is going to burn through a thickness of filler and ignite the charge without the primer during a hole through the filler and thant seems like it would take enough of a nano-second that you would notice the same issue as a "hang fire" presents. "What" is the "filler"? Dacron Cptton? Cream of Wheat? For Meal" And just what is the column height of it in the cartridge case? How tall is the column of filler that the primer has to burn through to reach the powder? Is it a "compressed" load?

A lot of variables that are unknown.

[Electrod47]

Filler under powder?
The best thing about reloading is WE have the opportunity to do unusual things. Though to be honest, there are few things that haven't already been done, be it privately or commercially. Some things with out a real need or purpose are better left alone.

[hoodat]

This kind of reminds me of the time on another forum when someone asked about eating coyote meat. There was numerous opinions that coyote would be rank, stinky, tough, awful, poisonous, totally inedible. -- BUT -- not a single person had actually tried it. :wink: jd

[murf205]

Cap'n, if you do decide to try this, use a powder that is easy to ignite and not a slow burning ball powder. There is a real danger in the incomplete ignition of some powders which produces a gas that is very erratic and spikes pressures quick and high.

[mehavey]

Smith Carbine cartridgesBedBug...just go get a couple of sheets of THESE (https://www.amazon.com/ChromaLabel-inch-Color-Code-Labels-White/dp/B0147CNH4M/ref=sr_1_8?dchild=1&keywords=white+dot+stickers&qid=1617586455&sr=8-8) at Office Depot (or where ever)
and stick over rear of hole

Been using them on Smiths for 40 years....
Musket cap never failed to punch right through

[Cap'n Morgan]

Cap'n, if you do decide to try this, use a powder that is easy to ignite and not a slow burning ball powder. There is a real danger in the incomplete ignition of some powders which produces a gas that is very erratic and spikes pressures quick and high.

That was my plan; some sort of plinking-load using Red Dot or Unique under a 440 grains boolit. I'll be shooting them from an 1885 High Wall replica, and would like a low SD number to keep vertical stringing in check.

[abunaitoo]

I also read something like that a long time ago.
Also asked about it here.
I've never tried it.
To me, it just doesn't seem like it would work.

[Larry Gibson]

This kind of reminds me of the time on another forum when someone asked about eating coyote meat. There was numerous opinions that coyote would be rank, stinky, tough, awful, poisonous, totally inedible. -- BUT -- not a single person had actually tried it. :wink: jd

Well I'm game, ........here....let me hold your beer for you........:not listening:.....:happy dance:.....lol

[waksupi]

This kind of reminds me of the time on another forum when someone asked about eating coyote meat. There was numerous opinions that coyote would be rank, stinky, tough, awful, poisonous, totally inedible. -- BUT -- not a single person had actually tried it. :wink: jd

I've ate it, and don't recommend it if you have anything better, like skunk.

[McFred]

He's using a very small amount of 1 ply tissue paper in a very small diameter cartridge of relatively small capacity... using Trail Boss... It also is a very specialized cartridge with small diameter and a longish capacity.

Apparently, it works for that cartridge/bullet/powder combination. I would not try it with other cartridges

Being such a specific and unique application, is why I was surprised by the lack of context included in Cap'n Morgan's original post, and why I included the link. The CB community's utter dismissal and derision could have been mitigated from the first sentence.

Off Topic: I'll try Coyote meat, it'd be nice to be picky about what it's been eating on before hand though. I bet N. Koreans would love to eat Coyote meat, if they had the opportunity. Afterall, "hunger makes the best sauce."

[mehavey]

Cross-over post might be of interest

Conflating both the H110/QuickLoad/pressure spike issue in https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=611249 and this one, I noted the comment
that the old BPCR practice of a single piece of toilet paper over the flash-hole/under the powder -- would also serve to keep very fine ball powders out
of that flash-channel and out of the primer itself.

Given I could never understand how the H110 loads in the above thread could
spike to actually expand the entire solid portion of the case head -- "belting"
it so to speak -- I tried it yesterday with the offending LEGEND load previously
mentioned -- but with a single 24-lb inkjet paper 'disk' over the flash-hole.

Ten rounds... each case examined on ejection for even any hint of problem.
https://i.postimg.cc/JhQCKwnZ/LEGEND-ACC36-180-H110-effects.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/TwY1JJR2/H110-Legend-Temp.jpg
Note the use of W296 instead, and even when starting burn rate is adjusted to match a higher velocity we still don't hit MaxP

2,156±08 fps -- extremely consistent -- not even a hint of pressure effects.

But I still don't trust the load. READER TAKE NOTE
*** DO NOT USE ***

[beagle]

Well, I've been to Korea and don't know about coyotes over there but they sure served some suspicious looking things. But we're getting off topic here...real bad./beagle


Well I'm game, ........here....let me hold your beer for you........:not listening:.....:happy dance:.....lol

[Cap'n Morgan]

Well, I finally got around to test if placing the powder between the filler and the boolit - instead of the traditional powder-filler-boolit order, actually works.
The test was done using my trusty Uberti High Wall in 45-70 with a load of 15 grains Unique, a 460 grains homemade bore-rider boolit and ordinary cotton wool for filler.

https://i.imgur.com/ZgAobxt.jpg?2

The first picture shows the case, boolit and one grain of cotton wool. I was surprised how little it took to fill out the free space in the case.
The second picture shows the space taken up by the cotton & powder.
The thin black disc is the cotton compressed to a theoretical maximum (or is that minimum?)

https://i.imgur.com/UDr2VVu.png

Anyway, I decided to keep things as simple as possible, at least to begin with. No need to load a bunch of ammo just to have the rifle go "CLICK".

I decided to test 3x3 loads over the chronograph. All loads equal, except for the filler:
Three loads without any filler for reference. Three loads with one grain of cotton and three loads with three grains of cotton.
(Both filler-loads with the powder between filler and boolit)

The first three non-filler loads gave an average velocity of1182 fps with High/Low being 1208/1169 and SD 18 fps.

I then went for the three loads with the 3 grains of filler (this load was a filler maximum, leaving just enough room for powder and boolit after a slight compression)
Not really knowing what to expect I pulled the trigger on the first one... The gun went bang without a hitch! Elated, I ejected the case and looked through the barrel,
it seemed to be blocked, and when I blew lightly into the muzzle, a small tuft of cotton came out.

I then fired the next two shots and checked the chronograph: 1147 fps with High/Low 1163/1131 and SD 14

This was interesting; the numbers were actually a little better with the filler loads, although it would be foolish to draw any conclusions from this small of a sample.
This time, nothing was left in the barrel, but I found remnants of the cotton from ten to twenty yards from the muzzle.

I then tried the three loads with the one grain filler. Now, it could be a fluke, but the numbers were much more uniform this time:

1151 fps - High/Low 1153/1149 and SD 1(!).

Again this time one round left a tiny tuft of cotton in the barrel. It was too small to register on my electronic scale, meaning it was
less than 0.1 grain. If left in the bore it would no doubt be blown out without the boolit ever touching it.

So, here we are. The filler-powder-boolit combination actually works and so far seems to work better than no filler.
Next step will be to try a larger sample with the one-grain-filler load to see if it was just a fluke. I will also try switching the powder/filler position to see which combination
produces the most uniform velocities. This time I will also test for accuracy.

Stay tuned.

[Cap'n Morgan]

Is that crickets I hear..? ;)

[GARD72977]

Am I too late to be a naysayer........

Sorry couldnt help it!

[Oaks&Pines]

Keeping my ears open and my mouth shut... much easier to hear that way:popcorn:
Tell us more.

[Green Frog]

Is that crickets I hear..? ;)

Cap'n, early on I gave my answer based on limited experience and extensive reading and research. Since you write like you are determined to pursue this project in spite of commonly held opinions (they call it "common wisdom") I'm just sitting back now and waiting to see whether everything that has already been said and done is wrong. That's how breakthroughs are sometimes made.

I'd be happy to hold your beer while you touch it off, but I'll stay behind this nice barrier, just in case. No crickets, just waiting to hear what happens next.

Green Frog

[Walks]

The only filler I've ever used is cornmeal ON TOP OF THE POWDER.
Wouldn't care to EVER try anything else.

[GARD72977]

The only filler I've ever used is cornmeal ON TOP OF THE POWDER.
Wouldn't care to EVER try anything else.

We all have our preferences. I have tried fillers. Cornmeal is something I would never use.

[McFred]

I then tried the three loads with the one grain filler. Now, it could be a fluke, but the numbers were much more uniform this time:

1151 fps - High/Low 1153/1149 and SD 1(!).

Stay tuned.

I'm tuned in. Accuracy? Difference in pressure indications? Larger sample size?

[Cap'n Morgan]

I'm tuned in. Accuracy? Difference in pressure indications? Larger sample size?

I'm all out of boolits at the moment. Right now I'm waiting for the wind to slow down a bit to let me go outside and cast some more.

I did an experiment to see if a stepwise increase in the amount of cotton wool filler would still ignite the powder - thereby, perhaps, confirm my lofty theory of diesel ignition.
Well, going from three to four grains of cotton, quickly settled that question! From the look and sound of it the cartridge was a dud, but when I pulled the boolit, all the components were still there, but the pressure from the primer had compacted the powder almost to a solid plug without igniting it - so much for the "diesel" theory!
The three grains filler loads were probably close to maximum to begin with, but one grain will easily do the job.

Some years ago, I did an experiment with paper mache wads for shotgun slugs. They were pretty much a failure, and I ended up using injection molded HDPE wads instead. But I also made a few smaller paper mache wads to use as fillers in my 45-70 (over the powder, of course) They did reduce the velocity variation some, but then I got distracted by yet another project and didn't follow up on the idea.

Perhaps we need some way to differentiate between solid fillers (like corn meal, shot buffer or my paper mache wads) and "fluffy" fillers like tissue paper, Dacon and cotton wool? Obviously powder over filler will be a poor (and unnecessary) choice with solid fillers.

[tmanbuckhunter]

With all of the non-position sensitive, fluffy powders available to us I never understood the need for a filler. In thousands upon thousands of rounds loaded with powders like unique, red dot, trail boss, either 4198, or my favorite, 5744, I've never once needed a filler.

[McFred]

I never understood the need for a filler.
If you can't understand why people use fillers, can you understand that some people have different objectives than you? This entire forum and activities discussed here have nothing to do with "need."

Alternatively, most of the shelves I see today are empty of powder or being sold for $75 per pound by the scalpers. If you can use an "inappropriate" powder with a filler, then the information's nice to have, isn't it?

[tmanbuckhunter]

If you can't understand why people use fillers, can you understand that some people have different objectives than you? This entire forum and activities discussed here have nothing to do with "need."

Alternatively, most of the shelves I see today are empty of powder or being sold for $75 per pound by the scalpers. If you can use an "inappropriate" powder with a filler, then the information's nice to have, isn't it?
Never said to not use a filler. If you want to use one, then by all means go for it, so please un-wad your under garments.

As far as using inappropriate powders for the job? Go right ahead. It's your fingers, your face, and your ringed chamber we're talking about here, not mine. This has been tested a multitude of times, with reduced charges of smokeless not fit for the job with fillers causing ringed chambers. Nothing wrong with a filler if used with the appropriate powder, but the appropriate powders also don't require a filler. At that point, a filler with an appropriate smokeless powder is there to reduce extreme spread and that's about it.

I do use a filler with BPC's that have massive amounts of case volume, like 577 Snider, or bottle necked BPC's but that is an entirely different ball game.

[abunaitoo]

We must have read the same article, because I asked the same thing a while back.
It was tissue paper over the primer hole, under the powder.
Since this chinese virus, I haven't had a chance to try it.
If I rember correct, it is used by bench rest shooters.
Suppose to keep tiny powder out of the primer hole.
I'm thinking the case has to be full to hold the tissue paper over the hole.
I only use dacron as a filler.
I knew a guy who used to use TP.
Sometimes bits of it would puff out when firing.
Was kind of funny.

[Cap'n Morgan]

I did another small test, mostly just to confirm my previous primer/filler/powder experiment.
The weather has been pretty nasty lately. I didn't feel like shooting for groups while laying prone on the wet ground so accuracy test will have to wait.
I fired two loads, four rounds of each, at 50 yards.

The first four was a "normal" load with 15 grains of Unique, topped with one grain of cotton wool and a 460 grains boolit.
Unfortunately, only three of the shots registered on the chrono.

High/Low was 1161/1124 fps for an average of 1147 fps and a spread of 37 fps. The group was a tad under two inches at 50 yards.

The next four were the same load, only with the filler between primer and powder.

High/Low was 1130/1119 fps for an average of 1123 and a spread of 11 fps. The group was 1.5" - slightly smaller than the first.

Two things:
First, I wouldn't put too much value on the group size. I was shooting my Malcolm scoped 1887 High Wall Uberti over the roof of my car,
and my hold was far from steady. Still, I was pleased with the groups. If I can get the rifle to group within 3" at 100 meters, it'll be fine with me.

Next, placing the filler between primer and powder will reduce velocity variation. Though the sample was still too small for any rigid conclusions
some pattern seems to emerge (at least for this caliber/powder combination):

1. Using a fluffy filler with Unique will reduce velocity variation. It may also reduce muzzle velocity slightly, but the numbers are inconclusive.

2. Placing a fluffy filler between primer and powder (instead of powder and boolit) will reduce velocity variation significantly - perhaps as much as two thirds or more.

Next time out, I will test for accuracy. I will also try some LRM primers, maybe LP primers as well, just to satisfy my curiosity.

[mehavey]

Rather than 'filler," I would functionally describe what we seeing as ignition
diffusion/softening -- which BP shooter have long been doing by putting
paper disks over the flashhole at the bottom of the powder column.

One can't do that with partial/light loads of smokeless, however, as there
is no way to keep the paper disk in place as there is w/ compressed BP.

But a small "fluff" of combustible material will stay in place over the flashhole,
perform the same 'diffusion/softening' as the paper disk, and thereby explain
the effect.

[tmanbuckhunter]

Rather than 'filler," I would functionally describe what we seeing as ignition
diffusion/softening -- which BP shooter have long been doing by putting
paper disks over the flashhole at the bottom of the powder column.

One can't do that with partial/light loads of smokeless, however, as there
is no way to keep the paper disk in place as there is w/ compressed BP.

But a small "fluff" of combustible material will stay in place over the flashhole,
perform the same 'diffusion/softening' as the paper disk, and thereby explain
the effect.

Yep, this. I use tracing paper but I've seen people use up to .025 card wads over the flash hole as well. One very good bpcr silhouette shooter recommends coffee filters due to the type of paper. It does shave a few points off of ES and SD. Helps on the turkeys.

[Cap'n Morgan]

Useless tidbit: Black powder has an ignition temperature of 500 °F. Smokeless only 320° F - 360°F. I would have thought it was the other way around.

[tmanbuckhunter]

Useless tidbit: Black powder has an ignition temperature of 500 °F. Smokeless only 320° F - 360°F. I would have thought it was the other way around.

Didnt know that either. With as easy as BP is to ignite, you really would think it's the other way around.

[GARD72977]

Im very intrested. Thanks for the work you have put into it.


It would be nice if people that dont like or understand what you are doing would start thier own thread and stay out of this one.

[Outpost75]

Reading this thread reminds me of a long ago exchange between Frank Marshall and Bob Sears as to whether cat tail fluff or duck feathers gave better patterns in wadding a black powder shotgun. O.H. McKagen chimed in and said you guys are both full of it. When I was a kid in South Carolina we wouldn't think of using anything but cotton picked by an old Mammy by the light of a full moon to the music of bullfrogs singing.

[Bigslug]

Fascinating. The best Science is Weird Science, I always say.

It's going to take some serious wringing out to determine if this is something to swear by or not. We know it is possible to load crazy-consistent ammo without this process, so I guess what needs to be done is to figure out what a given rifle is capable of with it's best filler and non-filler loads worked up without consideration of each other. I don't think we really care if 15 grains of Unique is more accurate with filler than it is without - I think we want to know if filler and non-filler loads worked up with equal care show demonstrable advantage. If that appears across multiple rifles, powder types, and load fill densities, then it's probably time to sit up and say "Hmmmmmmmm".

Any chance that the small quantities of flaming cotton are spreading through the powder stack and igniting it more evenly?

Appropo of I don't know what, this reminds me somewhat of something either the Mann brothers or maybe Townsend Whelan tried. They welded brass flash tubes inside the cartridge cases to carry the flash of the primer forward to ignite the stack front-first. Got good results as I recall, but the practical logistics were a bit daunting.

[barrabruce]

Well I had to have a go a this myself today at range.
I loaded a 310 cadet case with a bit of Dacron then placed the 2 grains of bullseye on top and hand seated a bullet.
I used a small rifle primer.

Me ‘ol mate next to me as I was explaining to him how this is supposed to work; takes two huge steps backwards and off to the side when I load up and take aim.

I take aim and hit my 50 yard swinger which sounded the same as usual and with a decent thud.

Looking down he barrel I see some blobs of burnt plastic here and there.

I wiped them out with a patch and remarked that Maybe it would work with less filler in it.

So I put a small ball in the mouth of the case and pushed it down a little and put the powder on top and loaded another case.

This time I had a shot at a sticky dot on target and the bullet went into the group of the normal way of loading.

Still had some burnt granules of plastic filler in the bore.

By this time some people are watching and listening so they can tell the tale of how I achieved my Darwin Award.

Patched out and tried some 50 wool/50 polyester batting.
Sort of smelt like burnt flesh and still had globs of hard plastic in the bore.

So all I can say is it does work with this small case but I’m getting plastic mummies which I’m reluctant to put another round through my 100 yr ‘ol banger without cleaning first.

I have moved on to finger lubing my bullets after hand seating.
And using no filler is less time consuming and accurate enough for my not so perfect cases and second rate bullets for practicing my off hand shooting and swinger hitting practice.

I don’t know how I can load them his way without plastic hard burnt debri.
I think powder first helps blow it out and is cleaner.

Interesting thou and I may have to try it again.

Just have to get by the debri in the barrel.
It would be good to see how well I could get but I can put a group of ten of around an inch at 50yrds and with open sights off the bags and I seem to be at my limit of ability anyway.

Thanks for the thread.
I’ve enjoyed it.
Bruce.

[Cap'n Morgan]

Hi Bruce.

Nice to see someone daring to challenge death and settled wisdom in the name of science.

I, too, got leftovers in the barrel, but as I was using pure cotton it was only very tiny, slightly blackened, tufts.
Now, cotton either burns or dont burn, but Dacron is made from polyester fibers and will pass through a melting phase before burning
and melted plastics will lump together in the globs you mention.

The obvious solution would be to use nitrocellulose (flash cotton/guncotton) for filler as this would leave only miniscule ashes behind
and the tiny amount necessary would hardly affect pressure. You can buy flash cotton as a magicians prop, and I will probably give it a try later on.
(as a kid, I once made my own flash cotton, back in mum's cellar, but nowadays I think I'll leave it to the pros)

I have a number of 45-70 loads waiting for accuracy testing, and will probably make a new nose-pour mold in the 440-460 grains range.

A report (or gun obituary, maybe) will be forthcoming...

[barrabruce]

Captain.
All that I’ve read about gun cotton is that it becomes unstable after time or breaks down.
That and tends explode instead of burns.
I looked into it once as a power source for light loads as a fluffy wad would seem to work well and easy to produce but I rethought once I had read about it.

Something like it makes a high energy shock wave or something.

As usual I may be wrong.

Be safe.

[Cap'n Morgan]

Bruce.
Unstable guncotton was a very real thing in the beginning and caused some devastating explosions, both during production and in storage.
It took many years before it was discovered that the nitrated cotton must be completely rinsed to remove any trace of acid.

From Wikipedia "The washing and drying times of the nitrocellulose were both extended to 48 hours and repeated eight times over"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrocellulose#:~:text=9%20External%20links-,Production,mineral%20salts%20give%20inferior%20ni trocelluloses.

[Bent Ramrod]

A single shot rifle, or a bolt gun, single-loaded, is the way to go in testing ideas like this.

Make sure you have a stout cleaning rod along in case you stick a boolit in the barrel.

Back when the caliber was obsolete, and ammo and shells hard to find, a friend found some .44-40 reloads at a gun show. We repaired to the desert and he loaded up his half-magazine Model 92. The first shot sounded funny, and the shell popped out of the breech like a champagne cork, trailing a wisp of smoke and a dribble of yellow powder into the action. A light cleaning rod only went halfway down the barrel and stopped. That was the end of that shooting session.

He took it home, tapped a piece of drill rod through the barrel, and out the breech came the jacketed bullet, with another mess of yellow powder. He broke down the rest of the ammo, and we determined that it was loaded with approximately a 50:50 volume mix of 2400 or 4227 and corn meal or Cream of Wheat. What order the two were introduced was unknown. Lesson number XXXVIII of Rule Number 1: “Don’t shoot other peoples’ reloads.”

A more easily ignitable powder and/or a more permeable filler (like cotton or kapok) might allow the shooter to get away with this, but I’d have to see a marked increase in accuracy or some other advantage) before I’d load 50 of them for a shooting session. And I’d have that rod along, too.