Kapok wad "left behind"

[.22-10-45]

:lovebooliHello, I wrote this up in ASSRA jpurnal, got nasty reply about using smokeless in Axtel sharps, voided warrenty, ringed chamber, etc. Well to set matter straight, as gun was being built, Had many phone conversations with Tom Axtel about smokeless use in his rifles. He said with sane loads perfectly safe, in fact he shot quite alot of it in his. Nuff said. Anyway, here is what happened: Trying new load using H4227, 300gr. 20-l lead bullet, 1.0gr.(weighed) tuft kapok, rolled out long and inserted in case but in no way compressing powder..let bullet base push down as bullet was seated. First shot seemed normal. saw hole in backer, as is my custom, blew thru breech and looked in bore..Black. ran rod in breech and felt obstruction right in front of chamber. Not wanting to push what I thought to be stuck bullet all way thru 34" barrel, reversed rod and as I did this thought perhaps that hole in backer was there all along? I got the supprise of my life when I saw what came out the breech...that 3" long tuft of kapok looked the world like a shotshell cverpowder wad! could break apart with fingers but compressed to bore dia. Debated to fire another, but wanted to see if a fluke, 2nd. normal..no obtruction, 3rd. left wad again, now I knew it was no fluke. fired remaining loads without further incedent. Gave up on H4227 as accuracy not equal to other loads I have. Here is question: How did that kapok wad end up at breech end of 34" long barrel AFTER the bullet left bore?? Could it be that by using a light charge of fast burning powder in that long 34" barrel, the muzzle pressure was so low that when the base of the bullet just cleared the muzzle, the wad was sucked back down the bore due to vacume of the leaving bullet?? I have since quit using kapok or any other kinds of wadding over powder charge. The only wad I use is a vegitable fibre one, .03" right at bullet base. Any ideas? Has this happened to anyone else? Thanks guys. Be safe out there!

[elk hunter]

I'll take a guess. Because of the very light weight and small amount of the Kapok, at ignition it was blown forward and balled up behind the bullet prior to the bullet moving, the bullet started down the bore and the gas blew by the Kapok wad and left it in the bore when the Kapok hit the smaller diameter ahead of the chamber. As I said, just a guess. I use Dacron pillow stuffing in some of my bigger cases and follow Ross Seyfried's instructions of using enough to fill the space between the powder and the base of the bullet, but not hard packed, if that makes sense. I use ten grains, weighed, in my 500-450 3 1/4". I wouldn't be able to get reliable ignition if I couldn't use some type of filler.

[The Double D]

The rule for for fiber fillers is to fill the case with as much filler as you can get in the case. Not a tuft . Don't use kapok or any of the fibers as wads use them as fillers.

You were using the kapok as a wad.

[BruceB]

Well, you fellers are doing it PRECISELY OPPOSITE to the way many, many of us are using dacron.

First, I will not use kapok or any natural fiber, because they can and will absorb moisture from the air. Dacron will not. Also, natural fibers are subject to variation, with which I choose not to concern myself.

Second, when you use "as much as you can stuff in", you are adding a meaningful amount of weight to the situation, be it dacron or kapok or whatever. This affects pressure, and requires a compensating reduction in the charge IF we wish to keep the chamber pressure at the same level. Also, natural fibers are combustible, and no dacron I have ever recovered in front of a rifle shows any sign of melting or burning.

Even in my .416 Rigby, using a charge which fills only ONE HALF of the 120-grain volume, my dacron tuft (NOT "WAD") weighs only about one grain, and all it does is keep the charge back against the primer. It does this in fine fashion, and adding one grain of ANYTHING, even nitro-glycerin, will have no practical effect on anything happening inside the rifle, no matter where it ends up. I don't bother weighing the tufts, either...eyeball comparison of a group of tufts is amply accurate. In many thousands of rounds with the synthetic fiber (actually "polyester fiberfill"..."dacron"'s an easier word to use), I have never found any trace of dacron in a rifle after firing, not even in the gas systems of autoloading rifles.

I tested the low-density dacron tuft for its powder-positioning ability. This was done by placing a powder charge in a 1/2"-diameter clear plastic tube, installing a regular-style dacron tuft on top of the powder, and corking the tube by pinning a .50 Sharps' bullet in the mouth. I then carried that tube in my pants pocket daily for a week. No powder worked its way out of position. These "low-density" tufts are thin enough to be seen through before installation.

I've used dacron with smokeless loads in my Shiloh in both .50-2.5 and .45-70, with no problems or complications of any sort. The fill was used with the same low-density technique that I use in my "smokeless-cartridge" rifles, although the tufts in the .50 were probably more like two grains in weight.

Although some powders are said to be position-insensitive, I have found that in SOME situations, even 2400 and 5744 burn more consistently with a bit of dacron over the charge.... with slightly higher velocities, lower velocity spreads, and sometimes better accuracy. Reloder 7 also benefits from the fill in some cartridges with cast bullets.

If "the rule" is to fill the case with as much fiber as you can get in there, then "the rule" is WRONG....at least in the practice and assessment of many cast-bullet-shooters.

[405]

Very odd about the kapok wad staying in the bore! Ordinarily I'd say such a light charge that it was simply left behind. But the location seems really strange. Intuition suggests that the kapok material is the suspect.

Can't add much to what BruceB posted- that's pretty much what I have always done and have had similar results. I have loaded many types/sizes of cartridges with the low density dacron over light charges- 38-40, 44-40, 30-30, 30-06, 32WS, 32-40, 38-55, 40-70 SS, 405, 30-40, 45-70, 45-110, 44-90 SBN, 43 Span. Always with similar results, even with very light charges, and never had it stay in the bore. At most, visible strands and fragments blown out the muzzle. The dacron filler even in my largest cases only weigh about .75 gr. The most accurate cast bullet loads, bar none, I shoot in my 45-70 and 45-110 Sharps use low density dacron filler over light charges of 5744 under grease groove bullets. Those loads more or less duplicate BP velocities. In some cases I can equal that accuracy with BP paper patch in those guns (but those loads involve wads not fillers).

[The Double D]

I use kapok over 80 grains of Fg in a case that has 110 grain capacity and as much as I can stuff in weighs 3 grains.

Can't say I could argue that vegetable fibers absorb moisture and dacron doesn't.

It's a bit of a stretch to think vegetable fibers in a loaded cartridge case absent being dumped a bucket of water, dropped in the river or stored for a long period of time in a damp place are going absorb moisture. If the fiber is going to absorb moisture in a cartridge, so is the powder.

I have used kapok in humid Virginia, really humid Durban, South Africa and dry Montana and I have yet to see the first sign of moisture as an issue with organic fibers. I bought a 10 lb bag of kapok 6 years ago and it is yet to show any sign of moisture absorption and it has been to all three of the mentioned locations..

This is the first time I have heard anyone ever say moisture is a problem with fibers in cartridges. Bruce, I don't want to seem rude, but do you have first hand experience of moisture absorption in kapok?

Yes it is true you didn't want to get a hole in the liner in your kapok life jacket when your ship sank, but that was immersed in water.

Of the fiber fillers the only negative thing I ever saw documented about them by was written by Charlie Dell when he did his test using various materials as wads. Dell found in his test dacron used as a wad was the most likely to ring a chamber, kapok the least likely. That was using dacron as a wad not a filler.

Ross Seyfried also advocates dacron in loading the big British cartridges. He found that to duplicate the pressures of the old loads so they shot to regulated sights, he had to compress as much dacron as he could get in the the cases. Kynoch is using a close cell foam similar to that used in foam ear plugs in there big rounds to get the same results.

[Boz330]

While my experience with both Dacron and Kapok are limited I have used Kapok a lot more than Dacron. The Kapok was used with both BP and smokeless and I did use it as a filler and it takes a lot of Kapok to weigh 3gr. I have seen boolit differences that were more than that. I never ran into any moisture problems or pressure issues with Kapok even with the same loads of powder. I have also never seen any Kapok ignited by either BP or smokeless just a snowstorm of shredded kapok.
With the powders that I have used it with, it was not an advantage as far as accuracy and in some loads it was a detriment. I'm sure that I will give it a try in the future when tweaking potentially good loads but if I can get there without it that is just one less step.

Bob

[Zbench]

+1 to what BruceB said. I use a grain (weighed) of dacron stuffing in my 50-70 cases with loads I've worked up using a 485 grain boolit and IMR 4198. I've never seen traces of it left behind, or left in the barrel. There are perhaps 10 kernels of powder left in the bore after firing, but I've never seen the stuffing.

Further, even after walking around and looking for it, I can't find it on the ground either. I think that such a small amount most get completely melted or vaporized when the hammer drops.

I take the piece and weigh it (plus or minus .1 grain) on the scale. Then I sort of turn it into a ball and use a pair of forceps to put it in the case. Just easier than using my fingers. I get great groups using this method and 28 grains of 4198.

Pete

[BruceB]

This is a good discussion. The topic has arisen many times before, but re-visiting it every now and then is surely not a bad idea.

A few points:

No, I have absolutely zero experience of natural fibers picking up moisture IN A CARTRIDGE. That's a very unlikely scenario. My thinking is just that it MIGHT happen before the fiber was used for loading, and even then only to the extent of possibly altering the weight-per-volume from one loading session to the next. Anyway, that's the source of my opinion that I'd rather not work with natural fibers....just one more *possible* irregularity that I don't have to consider. (I have on occasion run handloaded cartridges ACCIDENTALLY through a complete laundry cycle, and had them fire normally afterward. Moisture contamination of a kapok-fillered round from atmospheric causes is very unlikely indeed.)

I think perhaps I need to expand a bit upon the definition of a "tuft"...at least as seen in my fevered mind. When the powder charge is determined, I visualize the amount of empty airspace left in the case. I then create loose "tufts" LARGER IN VOLUME than that airspace, and install them by pushing them into their cases with about the largest tool that will fit through the case neck....usually a flat-bit screwdriver.

I push the dacron in just until I feel the tool touch the powder, and then stop. At that point, I want a small amount of dacron still outside the neck. That remnant is tucked just inside the mouth, and seating the bullet finishes the installation. This means that the ENTIRE airspace is filled with low-density dacron, and the powder is absolutely immobilized, as outlined in my pocket-carry test above. There is no empty space whatever, and the dacron fulfills its name of "filler".

It's only very rarely that I find much dacron after firing. My shooting van has a carpeted benchrest, and if I'm shooting into the wind the benchrest sometimes collects bit of the fiber. It seems as if the individual strands might be getting shattered, because the bits I find are very short and scattered. None of them show any indication of melting or burning.

On hundreds of load combinations, I've fired direct-comparison tests between cartridges with-and-without dacron. In many such tests, the dacron proved worthwhile. In many others, there was no apparent value to using the fiber, and in a relatively-few others the performance (usually relative accuracy) was WORSE. Therefore, I view it as a valuable tool which warrants testing in many loads, especially those which occupy one-half or less of the case volume.

Interesting comments on this thread, gents.

[Boz330]

Depending on the cartridge being reloaded I am using 3gr to 5gr of Dacron/poly fiber pillow fill. I have found that a smaller "tuft" ain't secure to stay in place. So my preference is 3 to 5 grains which won't make enough difference to projectile weight to matter in most cases.
I use Hercules 2400. Accuracy is very good. My charges are way less then what Zbench lists above, so the volume left in the case would dictate how much poly fiber fill to set between the boolit and the powder charge. I go along with what Elkhunter wrote above.
I'll add that I think it matters how you are going to do or carrying them. If your going to the range and just shoot, or if your going to carry them where there's a lot of shaking and vibration. Like in a saddle scabbard or hiking around hunting. Then I want more then a "tuft" to keep the powder from sifting into the poly fiber fill.
I don't use filler with 4227.
IMR SR 4759 would probably do the job without any filler, depends on what pressure the gun will take.
With the availability, economy, it blows out clean, inert/non hygroscopic of poly fiber fill, I think kapok is obsolete.

Gee Bill don't tell me that, I have an 18"X18"X18" box full of it.:shock:
I got it as a prize to hand out at a match I put on a couple of years back. Everyone participating took what they wanted and I sent some to DD and still have that much left. More than likely at my age a lifetime supply.:bigsmyl2:

Bob

[The Double D]

Bruce thanks for the clarification. From your description of how you are using the dacron we are on the same page. We are using fillers not wads

I know dacron works and I know kapok and 100% cotton works. But when you get a 10 pound bag of kapok for free, you are more inclined to use that than go buy dacron.

And like everyone else I have had mixed results with fillers, but that's not really any different than any other type of load development process.

I am going to be doing some load develoment for a book I am working and I am going compare the different type fillers.

[405]

I'm still bugged about the wad of kapok staying in the bore. I don't use kapok and don't use 4227 in big bore, low load density loads so have no experience with using that combination. I'm running the possible cause scenarios thru my head about the original question.

I know that in squib shotgun loads, wads can be left in the bore. I know that when shooting low pressure loads in revolver, half jackets and gas checks can be left in the bore. Seems low pressure loads point to and can contribute to both situations.

Now for the kapok. Either the pressure was too low to force the wad completely out the bore (very low muzzle pressure). Or in combination with low pressure, something else is also going on. Since low mass objects have such small inertia/momentum they need gas pressure from behind for most of the bore travel for them to be expelled, otherwise friction will exceed the momentum and they will stop inside the bore. If for some reason the pressure was too low behind the kapok filler and/or some of the powder migrated into or in front of the filler then it seems logical that the net pressure from behind wasn't enough to push the filler completely out the bore.

Is there a property of loose kapok that would allow migration of a powder like 4227 into or thru it, particularly after handling, jarring with the cartridges being stored in the bullet down position? I think BW's post hinted at that possibility.

Just thinking out loud.

[The Double D]

I have never seen any evidence powder migration in kapok. Kapok is a denser fiber than dacron.

A couple of things are missing from the opening post in this thread. Caliber of rifle and distance to target.

I have had kapok stick in the throat and case mouth. The load was RL-15 with large pistol primers with 500 grain .462 bullets and 7 grains of kapok in the 577/450 Martini CBC case.

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

The kapok was partially up the throat and partially still in case.

The RL-15 did not ignite. The bullets were seen "landing" 50 yards down range and that's where they were found. When the gun was fired it sounded like the cork being pulled out of a bottle.

Here's a look at one of misfires with the kapok pulled out.

http://www.fototime.com/97B8B25B30FEF37/standard.jpg

The kapok closest to the primer was charred and the fibers were pulverized. We dumped the powder out and ignited it with a match, and it burnt just fine. Tried magnum pistol primers and got some to fire the RL-15. Switched to solid head cases and standard rifle primers and they misfired about the same as the large pistol primers. Magnum rifle primers fired consistently.

Switched to RL-7 and the large pistol primers in the CBC cases it worked just fine. No misfires.

[405]

No way to know about how completely the 1.0gr of kapok, rolled and inserted, actually "filled" the case in all dimensions. If it was in very loose, low density form and rolled, inserted and kinked thus leaving a space on one side???.... that coupled with the very small granule size (about the smallest of the extruded, stick powders) of 4227, I think migration forward is a possibility. Also, except for powder contamination causing a true squib load, I've found 4227 to be easy to ignite. Like I said I don't use it in fillered, large case, low density loads. I use 4227 only in 22 Hornet and 25-20.

[The Double D]

Were you using kapok in .22 Hornet and 25-20? Why?

[405]

No, I don't use any filler in the 22 Hornet or in the 25-20. I use 4227 for two cartridges- the 22 Hornet and the 25-20. Have used 4227 off and on for 357 Mag but have found better powders.

I don't use kapok for any purpose. Seems like a penny wise- pound foolish proposition. I can buy or scrounge a lifetime supply of high loft dacron for nearly nothing. I use high loft dacron for the fillered loads. I use mostly 5744 in the large case, low load density, low pressure, fillered loads.

In the past I've experimented with kapok, toilet tissue, cotton wool, regular cotton fiber puff material for use as filler. They all seemed, more or less, to have a common attribute.... some memory. While the kapok has the least amount of memory within that group, it still has some. Polyester fiber (dacron) on the other has very little if any memory. I figured that a low mass/low density material which needs to take up space inside a cartridge case and maintain that configuration (maintain loft) should not have shape memory.

[oldhickory]

Thank you, Bruce. I've been using Dacron poly fill for years just like you describe, (a little pinch just over the powder) wondering as of late what some of these fellows are talking about...Weighing a pinch of Dacron? This seemed nuts to me, not to mention another step in the loading process that further removes the fun of it. You get more variance from a little smeared and unremoved boolit lube than you would with a small pinch of Dacron.

I've never tried kapoc, cotton balls, tissue, or anything other than Dacron for this. BTW a bag of Dacron will last a long time!..A VERY long time.

[elk hunter]

There are certainly different ideas on the use of dacron, kapok etc. in reduced loads or large cases. I seldom use anything in the smaller cases. My practice of using dacron as a filler is based on the writings of Ross Seyfried and Graeme Wright. Both of those men have way more experience than me in this area. If I were to use a tuft of dacron, as some do, I wouldn't get ignition most of the time much less reliable ignition in my bigger cases such as my 500-450 3 1/4", which was designed to hold 140 grains of black powder. Even when using 10 grains of dacron in front of 56 grains of H4198 I occasionally get a very slight hangfire.

I'm certain the debate on this will continue forever with every side having its true believers.

[The Double D]

I can buy or scrounge a lifetime supply of high loft dacron for nearly nothing.


A key element in our reloading hobby...

I'm not sure, but I think the wheel weights I got for free shoot just a hair better than the ones I had to buy... :)

[chasw]

Recently, I've been loading RL-7 and cast bullets in two different cartridges - 7.5X55mm Swiss and .375 H&H mag. Because the charge weights are relatively small, approx 26 and 36 grains respectively, I've been using dacron filler (from an old pillow) in both cartridges, about .5 grains in the 7.5 Swiss and 1.0 gr in the .375 mag. These hold the powder in place and fluff up to the bottom of the boolit with minimal compression. I tried loads with and without dacron in both cartridges, using my chronograph to measure velocity and variation.

Some observations:
- In both cartridges, velocities were 50 to 75 fps higher with dacron than without. I had to add an extra half grain to a grain of powder to get back to the accuracy sweet spots without dacron.
- The accuracy sweet spot for the 7.5 Swiss with 186 gr boolit is about 1850 fps, the same for the .375 with its 300 grainer is about 1725 fps.
- Using a filler adds one more variable to the mix. Its possible the 7.5 Swiss shoots better without the filler than with, while the larger .375 case with this small charge of RL-7 clearly does poorly without a filler. In fact, I got misfires and hangfires in the .375 when trying to light 36.5 grains of RL-7 with BR-2 primers. Fed 210Ms without filler were reliable, but velocity variation was well over 100 fps (NFG).
- Therefore, I conclude that smaller cases and easy to ignite powders like Rl-7, may do better without filler, but the larger cases like my .375 and Ross SeyFried's double rifle numbers definitely benefit from a grain or so of dacron. The extra variable is more than offset by the consistency of the powder burn. - CW

[leadman]

I think the manner the kapok was rolled and inserted into the case might be an issue. I used kapok for a short time but decided I liked the way poly-fil would expand out inside the case better.
It might be possible the kapok did not unroll to keep the powder back in position.

[Eutectic]

I've used Dacron filler over the years and haven't been totally satisfied with it. My feeling is that all the Dacron you can jam in and seat the bullet is not too good..... The little marble sized 'ball' as I've seen illustrated sitting on top of the powder with air space above it, especially in a bottle-neck case, might even be dangerous....
No free air space is always necessary I believe.... I only use granular material (Winchester Super Grex) in bottle-neck loads and have had better accuracy along this path at times.
Non-hygroscopic has some importance. I shot ducks with a guy years ago that put ordinary white flour in his loads for better patterns. He shot one for pattern and part of the shot load punched through like a slug. His loads had been out hunting; and duck hunting can be wet.....

How about Styrofoam???

I believe it was 'Bullshop' that posted success with Styrofoam peanuts for filler.....

I had some shaped like elk droppings. By cutting them in two with a Stanley knife they seemed just right for a .38-55 I was testing. I was using some surplus 680 ball powder... and ball powder never likes 'air space' in my testing experience. My 260gr gascheck boolit shot superb in my Model 94 at 1700fps! Very uniform velocities!
I played some more with my .375 Winchester, pushing even harder.. Again great results!

Anyone else use Styrofoam? My testing is limited, but shows merit for me so far. I don't know if any 'hidden' disadvantage is lurking in its use or not?

Eutectic

[elk hunter]

[
How about Styrofoam???

Anyone else use Styrofoam? My testing is limited, but shows merit for me so far. I don't know if any 'hidden' disadvantage is lurking in its use or not?

Eutectic[/QUOTE]

Interesting thought. I hope someone works on this further as I'm tired of stuffing dacron in some of the bigger cases just to get ignition. Does the styrofoam melt? If it does I'd be concerned about deposits in the bore. A friend uses styrofoam dissolved in lacquer thinner for clear coating paint jobs on trailers that he builds and it is very tough stuff.

For those that don't like dacron, Graeme Wright, "Shooting The British Double Rifle", is a proponent of using grey packing foam and Kynoch uses foam in some of its current big bore loadings and apparently sells the foam wads. I've not tried them as Ross Seyfried feels they may cause ringed chambers.

The debate continues.

[Pepe Ray]

Over many years and hundreds of postings of this subject, I'm amazed and somewhat discouraged that no one has properly described the condition of the loaded cartridge when "Dacron" is used correctly.
DuPont used the word 'loft' when advertising for the superb insulator/filler in so many of the quality sleeping bags introduced in the '50's. (Many times replacing Kapok as the filler for obvious reasons.)
Loft is what you're trying to attain. It's a combination of air and a substance filling up the remaining space to allow more air while keeping the pocket from collapsing. The more dead air space, the better the insulation. LOFT!
Although in a cartridge the walls of the pocket will not collapse we need to maintain the position of the powder. The spring of the Dacron will do that. This is where the lack of memory comes in.
I have Mr. Seyfried's articles where he uses 'LOFT' to aid his description. He also spends more time on 'technique' in applying the TUFT (thank you Bruce) to the cavity. Whereas many loaders will stuff it in with a rubber tipped pencil R.S. advised dragging it down to the bottom by engaging a bit of the end and inserting it, pulling the remainder thru the neck to minimize the compaction. This may cause some of the TUFT to remain outside the mouth but is easily inserted with a fine instrument such as a flat tooth pick.
This probably sounds too time consuming for our varmint shooting friends and is not for everyone.
I hope this draws a more complete picture of the need for 'LOFT'' and how it is attained.
Pepe Ray

[Eutectic]

Does the styrofoam melt? If it does I'd be concerned about deposits in the bore.

elk hunter,

Not melted as I can see. Shredded would be a better description. I shot 70 yards to my backstop; across my back deck for the first 10 yards. The Styrofoam remnants are from BB size maybe up to 1/8" dia. x 3/8" long max. They are sooted, not melted and have a range of about 10 feet for the larger particles.
I see no bore residue difference other than maybe a little cleaner.

Eutectic

[Mk42gunner]

Gentlemen,

I haven't used dacron for loading cartridges yet, but I am sure there will come a time I want to. The filling of the airspace with a tuft that has plenty of "loft" makes sense to me.

AS to buying dacron, I am cheap, (frugal sounds better). Here is the way to get all the dacron any three people could ever use. Start by having a daughter that likes stuffed animals, but doesn't put her toys up. Add one puppy that is teething. Equals dacron for years. Especially if the puppy survives to operate on more stuffed animals.

Please note that I did not say this is the cheapest way to get dacron, but it is entertaining.


Robert

[NoDakJak]

It may be possible that your light load of power has completely burnt before exiting that long barrel If it has exceeded its maximum expansion ratio it may be forming a partial vacuum in the barrel and sucking the wad back down when the boolit exits the muzzle.
Quite a few years ago i read an article by I believe Jack Oconnor that stated that one of the large ammo companies had ran tests on 22 long rifle rounds to determine the most effective barrel length. It was discovered that with the powder used at that time the most effective barrel length was 16 1/2 to eighteen inches. They stated that maximum expansion had been achieved in that barrel ength and that normally longer barrels actually provided lower velocity due to friction. Nothing was mentioned about a partial vacuam and I don't know if this factor has ever been tested. In the late seventies I encountered a somewhat similar situatation. I was shooting a Australian Martini that had been rebored to 357 Magnum The cases were military surplus 38 specials with the 357429 Lyman and stoked with a full case of Pyrodex. The load was accurate but exceedingly strange sounding sounding. Whenever I pulled the trigger the sound was a hollow "THUNK" as if I had pulled the cork from an empty jug!
Perhaps I am straying up the wrong path but more powder or a slower burning powder should cure this oddity. Hopes this helps. Neil

[Cap'n Morgan]

Strange phenomenon indeed.

Even with a light load, the pressure when the bullet exits the muzzle will be around a 1000 psi - a vacuum simply cannot form. My best guess is that pressure somehow builds up on both sides of the kapok filler before the kapok is fully compressed - perhaps as a result of some of the powder being blown past the filler by the primer before complete ignition.

[softpoint]

My take on Dacron fillers is that it doesn't matter much whether you use "just a pinch" fluffed up, or a bit more slightly packed, as long as there is no air space between the filler and the bullet base. I've done it both ways and cannot tell any difference. Now, I say SLIGHTLY packed, or "poked" into the case, not jackhammer packed! Also, my experience with fillers is limited to Dacron, toilet paper in straight sided cases. I didn't care for the toilet paper. Some folks use Cream of Wheat, and claim it is the best, and claim it forms it's own "gascheck", allowing higher velocity with plainbased lead bullets. I've never tried it. I'd think the Cream of Wheat, if tried, might need to be weighed and the extra weight compensated for? Somewhere here I have an article by Elmer Keith where he used Cream of Wheat. (sort of unusual for Elmer to be looking for a way to occupy extra space in a case, he was usually looking for a way to get MORE powder in![smilie=l:)

[chasw]

Thanks, Softpoint. Good advice - the primary objective is to hold the powder against the flashhole and fill the space right up to the base of the boolit, no airpockets. The weight of the tuft is not particular important. Therefore, I need to stop fussing about how light can I go (.4 grains plus/minus a tenth) and start focusing on avoiding airpockets below the boolit.

Dacron seems ideal for this purpose since one grain puffs up more than needed in most military cartridges. I've tried cream of wheat and cornmeal in the past, results were not impressive and they left a tenacious coating inside the bore. - CW

[onondaga]

I always believed that nightmare scenario was possible with Kapoc. Thanks for verifying. I use BPI Original Ballistic Filler in my .458 Win Mag for reduced loads and get great results.

[The Double D]

My take on Dacron fillers is that it doesn't matter much whether you use "just a pinch" fluffed up, or a bit more slightly packed, as long as there is no air space between the filler and the bullet base. I've done it both ways and cannot tell any difference. Now, I say SLIGHTLY packed, or "poked" into the case, not jackhammer packed! Also, my experience with fillers is limited to Dacron, toilet paper in straight sided cases. I didn't care for the toilet paper. Some folks use Cream of Wheat, and claim it is the best, and claim it forms it's own "gascheck", allowing higher velocity with plainbased lead bullets. I've never tried it. I'd think the Cream of Wheat, if tried, might need to be weighed and the extra weight compensated for? Somewhere here I have an article by Elmer Keith where he used Cream of Wheat. (sort of unusual for Elmer to be looking for a way to occupy extra space in a case, he was usually looking for a way to get MORE powder in![smilie=l:)


I don't recall any writing by Kieth using cream of wheat. But then I don't recall all Kieth writings either. I do know that P.O. Ackley advocated Cream of Wheat for case forming.

The granular solids including in my experience shotgun fillers should work just fine with straight wall cases. Don't put them in bottlenecks, as they will have to extruded to get through the smaller neck.

[August]

1. I have used Dacron filler in straight walled cases (45-70 & 38-55).
2. I have had Dacron burn into a "ball/wad/mass" and remain in the cartridge case upon firing.
3. I have ringed the chamber on an expensive hi-wall.
4. I would love to keep low density powder loads down, next to the primer.

But, after reading this topic for the umpteenth time (seems like we come back to this one every six months or so), I still don't know how to use fillers safely and consistently.

If someone wants to post a concise, bulleted list of precisely how to use fillers successfully, I'd be the first one to appreciate it and the comments (also in brief, bulleted format) to follow it.

I was confused when I came in here, but it is much, much worse now.

That's no way to play with, talk about, or teach about firearms.

[Ohio Rusty]

Is there any synthetic material or plasitc type filler in the kapok? Is it possible the kapok could be melting from the ignition, and that is clinging or what is helping the kapok to stick inside of the bore? Of course by the time you get to is, it has now hardened with no evidence of melting. The gasses behind the kapok should be enough to push everything out of the bore. Can you try something different to see if the result is the same ? (cotton balls maybe?)
Ohio Rusty ><>

[chasw]

August reminds us that we are playing with fire here. Ringing the chamber of an expensive rifle is no small matter. By coincidence, I'm currently working on some cast bullet loads for my .375 mag, an ultra fine left-handed M70 Winchester Super Express. Based on August's cautionary note, I am dropping SR4756 from the short list of powders I am experimenting with.

Although approx 25 grains of 4756 usually gives excellent accuracy and very uniform velocities with my 300 grainer boolits, its these fast powders that probably pose the greatest risk of ringed chambers. I'm guessing some form of secondary explosive effect (SEE) is at work here, akin to what occasionally happens in pistols, where the small charge of fast powder forms some kind of wave similar to a shaped charge of plastique. My tuft of dacron serves well to position the powder next to the primer, as evidenced by the very tight extreme spreads, but perhaps does not entirely mitigate the risk posed by all that space between the powder and the boolit.

Accordingly, I am shifting my powder selections for 300 grain cast loads in the .375 mag to slower numbers, all with dacron filler:
- RL-7 for about 1800 fps,
- IMR4198 for about 2000
- 19 grains of RL-15 for 2150 to 2200 fps

This latter load fills about 80% of the free space under the boolit in the .375 H&H case. If everything jives and produces excellent accuracy, it could suffice as a hunting load for the monster elk that live here in Western Washington. - CW

[The Double D]

1. I have used Dacron filler in straight walled cases (45-70 & 38-55).
2. I have had Dacron burn into a "ball/wad/mass" and remain in the cartridge case upon firing.
3. I have ringed the chamber on an expensive hi-wall.
4. I would love to keep low density powder loads down, next to the primer.

But, after reading this topic for the umpteenth time (seems like we come back to this one every six months or so), I still don't know how to use fillers safely and consistently.

If someone wants to post a concise, bulleted list of precisely how to use fillers successfully, I'd be the first one to appreciate it and the comments (also in brief, bulleted format) to follow it.

I was confused when I came in here, but it is much, much worse now.

That's no way to play with, talk about, or teach about firearms.

There is a book that has been written on shooting the way you describe and address the issues you mention.

The book is called The Modern Schuetzen rifle by Wayne Schwartz and Charles Dell. It is available from http://www.assra.com/Books_For_Sale.htm.

From what you describe, you do not need a filler, you need a wad. You need to learn the difference between a wad and a filler. The book will tell how to properly use a wad in reduced loads.

Charlie talks about the chamber ringing in the book. He demonstrates how it occurs and recreates it in his test. He then tells how to avoid it. Well worth the read from a person of experience and knowledge.