Use of fillers

[charger 1]

A chum of mine who has played with the world of cast for 40 yrs now,swears by fillers. He claims you still have to cast and load a good boolit, but that fillers are the final little additive to make all bullets equal. As he says it "If theres one in there that has a desire to be a flier my filler can keep it in check"He is now using the stuff thats used as a shot filler. Of course he uses all these in loads slightly compressed. I had a thread on here that was about a batch of boolits that were consistant,but consistantly low by a few inches. It was more or less concluded that this was as a result of a lesser chamber pressure build,probably by lack of obturation. Out of curiosity I took a couple of those boolits and while loading them cut a felt wad to perfectly fill the space,and guess what. Perked them right up..So heres what I'm wondering..We do our best to keep all batches equal size,hardness,shape, etc etc etc. Well as my buddy says,why not do this as one final equalizer..Thoughts appreciated

[Bass Ackward]

A chum of mine who has played with the world of cast for 40 yrs now,swears by fillers.


Charger,

I swore by a lot of things 40 years ago. Then some of those beliefs changed and changed again. The one thing that you eventually learn in this hobby is that next year you will run across a situation that will cause you to believe in something else. And as I get older, everyday is starting to be something new, only to be found that I had just forgotten what I now relearned.

That is the only given I have found with cast.

Fillers have two uses that I see. They work for solving problems with ignition that result from poor powder selection choices during load development. And the second, solid fillers remove pressure for the base that allow softer lead or PB bullets to achieve much higher pressures / velocities than without their use. A third side barb common to most all fillers is that they do promote cleanliness.

[Bucks Owin]

Besides fillers, one can also use wads in their place in many applications. Something to think about...

Dennis

[charger 1]

Besides fillers, one can also use wads in their place in many applications. Something to think about...

Dennis

So like the felt wad I made. Would you guys recommend a fellow uses them all the time,just as an extra garauntee? Or do they hinder a gas check from doing its job????

[9.3X62AL]

I am a rather recent addition to the ranks of filler users--in my case, dacron fiberfill atop powder colums that take up smaller percentages of case volume in bottle-neck cases. That currently includes the 243, 250 Savage, 30-06, 303 British, and 9.3 x 62.

The powder used in all these calibers has been Alliant 2400, and I've done some chrono work with the two small-bores. 12.0 grains is the load in both, using the 95 grain RCBS in 243 and the NEI 100 grainer in 250. This boolit looks like an RG-4 that got shrunk in the wash.

Summed up, in these two calibers the filler loads both showed slight velocity elevation (about 30 FPS) and substantial ES reduction. SD's with both loads "unfillered" ran about 22-25 FPS, with filler ~10-12 FPS. At 50 yards, there was little accuracy difference noticeable between fillered and unfillered loads, but at 100 yards the 243 shows a consistent 10%-15% smaller groups size with filler on board--"no filler" won't crack the 1.2" barrier at 100, while fillered loads get very close to 1" and throw fewer fliers.

With the 250 Savage (M-99 lever gun) at 100 yards, discerning of grouping superiority is hampered by operator limitations, which is about 1.25" at 100 yards with aperture irons--in this case, a Marble's tang sight. Both loads shot about the same, 1.5"-1.6" at 100.

I am pretty happy with these results, since I don't scale the boolits--just a pretty harsh eyeball is all they get. My conclusion is that use of fillers in these two small calibers has improved performance--not dramtically, but enough to justify the extra loading step of stuffing dacron into case mouths. I think the adage that 2400 isn't especially position-sensitive is largely true, but I have seen subtle improvements as listed above.

[Buckshot]

.............Basicly a fiberous type filler is used to keep a less then caseload of powder oriented back against the primer. You'd think that what would follow would be better accuracy. But that isn't always so. Neither too is more consistent stats. I've had great stats, and poorer accuracy and vice versa. Plus I've had better accuracy by NOT using a filler. Usually it helps, so I always include it in initial testing with powders slower then 2400.

A solid filler like COW, bran, or a ground poly type naturally performs the same thing,but in a more positive fashion. As a fiberous filler elevates pressure (which mainly could be an effect of more positive charge involvement) a solid type adds to this by simply being a more substantial wieght to be moved by the expanding gasses.

Those who have had good results with the entire filler thing use it. Those who haven't seen it don't use it and see it as a useless extra operation. Which in their case it would be. Then you have those who've never used it and never will due to stories of ringed chambers or barrels.

..................Buckshot

[CaptDave]

Buckshot,
I use a dacron filler in my 8-10 gr UNIQUE loads in 8mm and 7.5x55 CB loads and find that it helps with verticle stringing. I avoid tamping it down and use it to position the powder in the base of the case. I use just enough to fill the case to the base of the bullet. It appears to be all conumed on firing since I cant find any traces on the ground down range. and it sure does leave my barrels clean and shiney with no leading or fouling build up. I think it is wworth the extra effort.

Capt Dave

[charger 1]

Well I guess I made up my mind. It appears to me that my 45/70 load likes the air space. Cause I loaded up some with a nice fitting felt wad,and the group looked like you dipped an epileptic spider in ink and set him on the paper..So nay on the filler for this pup

[David R]

Like everything else, I tried filler in a few. It seems EVERYTIME I got better ballistics. Sometimes accuracy was worse, sometimes better. I tried Dacron and toilet paper. Toilet paper made the best ballistic improvment, but never gave me better accuracy. Makes a nice cloud of paper dust when you fire the gun too. Dacron and 2400 improved everything in my '06. So far this is the only load I use it in. I shoot a lot of Red dot, but have not tried any fillers with it yet. This is more for plinking anyhow.

I still like reading other peoples results.

David

[John F. Lang]

I've used fillers with charges as low as 1 gr. of powder with good success.

I find they are something that I use mostly for specialty loads.

Fillers are not the answer for a load that the gun just dosen't want to shoot.

I use fiberfill or kapok and have been happy with the results.

JL

[Bucks Owin]

So like the felt wad I made. Would you guys recommend a fellow uses them all the time,just as an extra garauntee? Or do they hinder a gas check from doing its job????

I don't use felt, I cut them from pressed cork material about 1/8" to 3/16" thick. The thinner material is used for tool box drawer lining and the heavier stuff is made from large sheets (about 4' x 4') used as "anti skid" mats for loading large rolls of paper into semi truck trailers. There are other sources I'm sure. I cut them out with a sharpened cartridge case and then use as over powder wads. One can even coat the wads with liquid alox although I don't know that anything is achieved from doing that....

The idea of shooting a case full of COW down the bore just "bugs" me for some reason. I also have to wonder if the powder charge doesn't get "mixed into" COW with handling...

Fiber fillers don't float my boat either, again I wonder about it's ability to stand much handling as well as a possible fire hazard in tinder dry conditions in the woods....

But a snug fitting cork wad has none of those concerns as well as being much quicker and less messy to use. The wads are shot out the muzzle intact and seem to suffer little damage as evidenced from ones I've recovered. They would also seem to me to give a "wiping action" as each one is fired down the barrel.

I'm still experimenting with them but they certainly DO hold the charge against the primer securely resulting in more consistent velocities when using fast powders in small amounts. There is a reduction in case capacity which may be a concern as far as pressures go so I drop back on the charge a little when I use them...

"The jury is still out" though,

Dennis

Wad cutter:

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a356/BucksOwin/IMAGE061.jpg

[Buckshot]

...............Dennis, I would NEVER use an overpowder wad when there is airspace between it and the bullet's base. However if the bullet's base is sitting on the wad, which is sitting on the charge (or a solid filler) then okay. I don't know if you are doing the former or the later.

For some time I'd been loading PB slugs in my 45-70 with cardwads under the boolit's base. he charge was 12.0 Unique. Then I got this wiold hair to just go ahead and push the cardwad down on the powder. Why not?

Why not, indeed. As I keep my cases in batches one of these batches of 20 had had about 6 firings with this load. One day a case happened to be lying just right so the light hit it a certain way and I noticed an odd appearance about 3/4" down from the casemouth. It looked faintly rumpled. Closer inspection showed barely perceptable kind of shiney rings or partial rings all stacked together.

I think the cardwad over the powder was thrust forward at ignition and was expanding radially when it met the boolit's base and was forming rings in the brass. As I had fired other brass in this rifle with other loads (MAS36 conversion) I checked some of it and they did not display this feature. I think this overpowder wad (with airspace) meets the primary projectile theory for ringed chambers or barrels.

................Buckshot

[Bucks Owin]

...............Dennis, I would NEVER use an overpowder wad when there is airspace between it and the bullet's base. However if the bullet's base is sitting on the wad, which is sitting on the charge (or a solid filler) then okay. I don't know if you are doing the former or the later.

For some time I'd been loading PB slugs in my 45-70 with cardwads under the boolit's base. he charge was 12.0 Unique. Then I got this wiold hair to just go ahead and push the cardwad down on the powder. Why not?

Why not, indeed. As I keep my cases in batches one of these batches of 20 had had about 6 firings with this load. One day a case happened to be lying just right so the light hit it a certain way and I noticed an odd appearance about 3/4" down from the casemouth. It looked faintly rumpled. Closer inspection showed barely perceptable kind of shiney rings or partial rings all stacked together.

I think the cardwad over the powder was thrust forward at ignition and was expanding radially when it met the boolit's base and was forming rings in the brass. As I had fired other brass in this rifle with other loads (MAS36 conversion) I checked some of it and they did not display this feature. I think this overpowder wad (with airspace) meets the primary projectile theory for ringed chambers or barrels.

................Buckshot


I've never encountered any problem using wads and as I said I reduce charge weight somewhat when using them. I'm not "recommending" their use merely sharing what works for me....

As to their safety as opposed to using fillers, I'll quote from IMR's 2006 Smokeless Powder Reloaders Guide for reduced "Cowboy loads" in the .45/70 using lead bullets and Trail Boss powder:

"DO NOT USE ANY FILLER MATERIAL WITH THESE LOADS, as fillers can alter pressure and velocities decidedly".


So which is "safer"? Wads or fillers? I'm not a fan of wads OR fillers and prefer to use a powder with enough "bulk" so that their use is unnecessary. But when such a device is called for, I prefer using a wad. Perhaps I should use enough of them to fill any air space....

I appreciate your concerns and advice, maybe I better rethink the whole process and do some more research on the subject. BTW, my use of wads has been in .357 and .44 mag cases using "shotgun" powders in small charges such as 700X, PB and Green Dot. I've used them in both "under bullet" and "over powder" scenarios and have observed a shrinking of ES and SD when used...

I think I HAVE read that over powder wads should never be used with black powder....

Dennis

BTW, I don't seat a wad down on the powder with any "compression". (I doubt that the cork wads would "hold" any compression anyway). But maybe that had an effect on your load? Also, maybe because my wads are kinda "spongey" they absorb any tendency to "ringing" as they meet the bullet's base?

[sundog]

I'm with Buckshot on NOT using a hard over powder wad if there is still airspace between it and the boolit. But what do I know?

I did win the military bolt match Saturday with a 294-4X. Wx was ideal. I shot this with my CMP Rem 03A3 and LCNM 78 cases (a bunch of times fired and once trimmed) Lee collet neck sized, Rem 9 1/2 primers, 23.0 N120 with a 1/4 TP filler, and heat treated 30-180-SP with group buy GCs and FWFL weighed +/- 0.5 gr sized .311 - not cavity segregated. My problem was that each score target had at least one round out of the ten ring at ten-eleven o'clock that was called in the group. Not really a flyer, but certainly not where it was supposed to be.

I will agree that in some cases a filler will help shrink a group, but I feel like there is one ome thing that makes a difference, and I think I will work to that end. Next match I am going to remove any piece of brass from the batch that does not shoot to the group. Those will be used for bbl warmers. The main batch will then be reloaded with same load and shot again in a match. I'm thinking that there are a few pieces of brass that 'contribute' to the deficiency of a group. I have a match in June and 2 matches in July, so I will continue using this same batch of brass and see what transpires. I know exactly where in the box two of the offenders are, and I will replace them with two that I know shot right. That will at least mark stick 3 and 4 as good. I shot back to back 99s with them, so that's a starting point. sundog

[BruceB]

"Some will listen and heed what they're told. Some will go read and study-up on it. And, others just have to pee on the electric fence to find out for themselves." (GRIN!!!)

Can't say you weren't warned, anyway.

[felix]

Sundog, shooting them is the ONLY way you can find the best cases. Don't tumble them either, until they need cleaning on the inside. Wipe them down only after they are loaded if and when tacky. ... felix

[sundog]

Yup, each case has an appointed position in the box, thus it is always fired in the same sequence in a match of 50 record rounds. There are approximately 25 rounds in another box for sighters and barrel warmers. Some of those will be the replacments for the culls in the match box. Cases are wiped clean at neck size time and remain in sequnce. Granted, this is NOT BR, but that doesn't mean that a case can't be culled that is not like the others. So, for the next several matches I will use only this batch of brass, instead of rotating all four batches. If this works, then the same procedure for each of the other three batches. By then it will probably be trim time (2nd) again, a few more times through the matches, and then replaced. By then, they will probably have 20+ loadings. If they're still good, they stay in service.

Saturday at the match we cast boolit shooters were talking about lots of different stuff to get all this to work. Couple things came out real clear. First, within the limits of this match, cast is every bit as accurate, if not more so, than jacketed. That may be alot to do with recoil. Second, when you get a point that everything is working really good, the last couple of points come really hard, and doing things like weighing boolits (and cases), fooling around with primers and fillers, fiddling with seating depth, and stuff like that is what it takes. Even in these old milsurps. That's alot of extra work for a couple or three points. But, man-o-man, those itty bitty groups in the ten ring are sure worth it!!!

For this particular load, for this match, it seems the 'best' is with a filler. I have not always found this to be so, but you won't know unless you try.

I have one other comment about fillers. They're a royal PIA! sundog

[Bass Ackward]

Saturday at the match we cast boolit shooters were talking about lots of different stuff to get all this to work. Couple things came out real clear. First, within the limits of this match, cast is every bit as accurate, if not more so, than jacketed. That may be alot to do with recoil. Second, when you get a point that everything is working really good, the last couple of points come really hard, and doing things like weighing boolits (and cases), fooling around with primers and fillers, fiddling with seating depth, and stuff like that is what it takes. Even in these old milsurps. That's alot of extra work for a couple or three points. But, man-o-man, those itty bitty groups in the ten ring are sure worth it!!!



Corky,

Guess what? Those same things apply to jacketed too. Absolutely no difference.

So what is the difference between cast and jacketed you ask? Well .... cast teaches you how important those things are fast. You can see the results immediately. With jacketed, you just stumble along for years before you realize it and some people never do. They just asume they have had an off day or that wind got em or a hundred other reasons.

[JohnH]

I was thinking on the way to work several weeks back about the stick form of powder and why is it that no one has come up with a filler of same shape but inert. Hmmmmmm. So I tried some bird seed. Certainly not the shape, but it fit along the lines I was thinking, as a stick powder doesn't fill a case like ball does.

It did actually improve the load I was playing with, but not so much that it made that load more attractive than the one I've chosen as my "go to" load, or a very similar load using the same powder. I've played with fillers in nearly every reduced velocity load I've come up with using both pistol and rifle powders. I think it is Bass Ackward who says that fillers will sometimes help a load that wants to shoot, but does nothing for a load that won't. I know those aren't his exact words, but that is certainly my experience with fillers to date, and in the end, I've generally not seen enough improvement to make use of a filler worth the extra effort. In the end, powder seems to make the best filler.

[35remington]

Throw me in the group that has a use for filler. After trying nearly everything, I've settled on "polyester fiberfill" (dacron). Cheap, easy to use, no shelf life for a loaded round like the granulated poly buffers. I have my doubts about wads that leave airspace between them and the bullet. I also don't like the idea of trying to funnel a hard filler like COW or cornmeal through a small caliber bottlenecked case like a
.22-250.

Properly loaded, dacron will not have problems with movement of the powder charge. Doubters can slam the case against the loading bench to try to dislodge it.

I have noted most of the complaints about chamber ringing combined older, softer steel rifles and improper loading practices. Most I've read about involved airspace and wads.

Two specific comments about topics in this thread:

I tried dacron with Trailboss before I saw the caution against its use with this powder. Interestingly, in the .25-20 the effect was to LOWER velocities when dacron was used; a load that gave 1125 fps without a filler gave barely 1000 fps with the dacron. I'm presuming the small amount of dacron altered the ignition characteristics of the powder, possibly preventing the primer flash from penetrating the powder as deeply.
My intent in using the dacron was protecting the bullet base from powder gasses. I discontinued its use after my results and seeing Hodgdon's comments on the practice. I use dacron successfully with all other powders, though. Usually there is very little velocity difference between the filler load and the case that does not have filler, assuming the unfillered load has the powder positioned at the back of the case. Extreme spreads in velocity are almost always lower with the filler load; gascutting on the base of the plainbase bullet is much less.

Granulated shot buffer should not be used with very low pressure cast bullet loads (like small charges of fast burning powders). Often these low pressure loads do not blow all the buffer out of the case. Some may also lie in the bore, presenting a hazard for followup shots. Reloading a case that has hardened buffer present in it can cause problems on subsequent firing.

[Bucks Owin]

I sourced this from Lyman in "The Complete Reloading Manual For The .357 Magnum":

Filler Wads:

"Dacron filler wads in the form of 1/4" thick batting were used in conjunction with cast bullet loads where indicated. This material can be purchased in most yard goods stores. It should be cut into squares, which seal the case.
When developing a load, if a wad is desired, it should be used from the beginning as the charge weight is increased. It should never be added as an afterthought, once a maximum load has been established, since it's presence could result in a pressure increase of 2,000 CUP or more."

Unfortunately, there is no mention of exactly "how" the wad is positioned but I imagine it would pretty much completely fill any air space....

1/4 inch cork wads? Hmmm...

FWIW,

Dennis

[Slowpoke]

I'm with Buckshot on NOT using a hard over powder wad if there is still airspace between it and the boolit. But what do I know?

I did win the military bolt match Saturday with a 294-4X. Wx was ideal. I shot this with my CMP Rem 03A3 and LCNM 78 cases (a bunch of times fired and once trimmed) Lee collet neck sized, Rem 9 1/2 primers, 23.0 N120 with a 1/4 TP filler, and heat treated 30-180-SP with group buy GCs and FWFL weighed +/- 0.5 gr sized .311 - not cavity segregated. My problem was that each score target had at least one round out of the ten ring at ten-eleven o'clock that was called in the group. Not really a flyer, but certainly not where it was supposed to be.

I will agree that in some cases a filler will help shrink a group, but I feel like there is one ome thing that makes a difference, and I think I will work to that end. Next match I am going to remove any piece of brass from the batch that does not shoot to the group. Those will be used for bbl warmers. The main batch will then be reloaded with same load and shot again in a match. I'm thinking that there are a few pieces of brass that 'contribute' to the deficiency of a group. I have a match in June and 2 matches in July, so I will continue using this same batch of brass and see what transpires. I know exactly where in the box two of the offenders are, and I will replace them with two that I know shot right. That will at least mark stick 3 and 4 as good. I shot back to back 99s with them, so that's a starting point. sundog


Do you have the Fowling shot #163?

A good story in there by a match shooter and his findings about them flyers,actually real good.

Good luck

[JudgeBAC]

I haven't tried it but I have read in Handloader and other mags about Pufflon as a filler. Those that have tried it liked it a lot. Look at Pufflon.com and Google pufflon and you will find a wealth of information on it. It appears that this stuff might be superior to others as it was designed for this purpose. Good shooting.:castmine:

[rebliss]

I've never used a filler, but I'm quite new to casting and reloading. I have a question:

Would it be possible to mix, say, a certain percentage of Cream of Wheat with an appropriate percentage of a similarly-shaped powder, make sure it's mixed very thoroughly (maybe by placing it in a small plastic jar and putting it in the tumbler, with plenty of air space so it mixes), and then throwing charges to give the correct powder weight corrected for the addition of COW? This way you'd have a full case and wouldn't have to do two steps during the loading/filling process.

Maybe it's too technical to mix these properly, maybe it would hinder the efficient burn of your powder, or maybe it's dangerous.

Anyone have a difinitive answer on this?

[Buckshot]

.............rebliss, don't have an answer using smokless although it works with BP. The two propellants are so dissimilar the only thing they have in common is generating volumns of hot gasses. Smokless requires a lot more heat to ignite and requires pressure to burn efficiently. I'm pretty sure that mixing smokless with something like COW would be a miserable failure unless the COW was only an incidental addition, which defeats it's need in the 1st place.

Giving credit where it is due, I think it was Coyote' of the "British & Militaria" BB who devised the 50-50 mix of COW and BP. It's utiized as an 'active' filler over a partial caseload of BP. If he didn't invent it he popularized it.

..............Buckshot

[waksupi]

Just to make it more interesting, how about using surgur for the filler? Combustible oxidizer. Would probably drive pressures crazy! Maybe even blow things up, real good!

[StarMetal]

Waksupi, just mix in a wee bit of Germn Aluminum and you'll really have some FIREWORKS!!!

Joe

[dragonrider]

I have used COW as a filler, did'nt have any problems with it. Accuracy was no better than without it. But I did not mix it up,

[waksupi]

Waksupi, just mix in a wee bit of Germn Aluminum and you'll really have some FIREWORKS!!!

Joe

Joe, I wonder if that is what is in some of those flash charges I see in SGN occassionally?

[StarMetal]

Ric,

I read the brilliant white flashes in fireworks is using a very fine powdered aluminum. I was looking up German Aluminum to see was the govt wanted to ban it for sale to the general public. Then I read it's big use is in fireworks. I had a friend out in Denver that was big on machineguns and making bombs. I know one time he made some home brew plastic explosive and one ingredient was powdered aluminum. I won't give the rest. I wasn't with him and a few other fellows when they set it off up in the mtns. Glad I wasn't too, although nobody got hurt. It wasn't so much that he had made homemade plastic explosive, but the fool set off 4 pounds of it. My one friend dang near got beheaded by a flying sheet of corrugated steel.

Joe