To fill or not to fill? That is the question...

[crabo]

In my thread on interpeting chrono data, Larry suggested I use filler in my 45/70 to see how it would react.

How do you decide if you are going to use filler in large cases, what do you use, and how much?

Thanks,

[rintinglen]

I have used polyester fibre in the past but I just bought some that is allegedly made from bamboo. I lay out the cloth in double folded rolls on a scrap peice of ply wood and using a half inch punch from the cheapy hole punch set I got from harbor freight, I knock out fifty to one hundred plugs for use in my 45-70. I was also using them in 30-30 for light loads, but did not find them to be worth the hassle there. In the 45-70, they do make a significant difference, especially with light loads of Unique. In fact, amongst the projects on the work bench for this weekend is a further batch of 45-70's using a 452-389 boolit that casts large. I am trying to get a useful 50 yard load for steel chickens.

[Larry Gibson]

I use a filler if the load density is 80% or less with medium and slow burning powders. Sometimes I'll use the filler with slow burning powders up through 90% loading density. I use dacron. I use only enough so the filler is down on the powders and slightly compressed by the bullet. Dacron is pretty "fluffy" and fills the sapce easily without to much desity. My own chronograph and pressure tests have confirmed that the use of dacron is preferable to any other filler. I've used cornmeal, cotten, kapoc, tissue paper, and several types of "buffer" materials including "Original".

Larry Gibson

[noylj]

I wouldn't use a filler unless I found that I needed to. Read about a lot of barrels ruined by filler. A very small tuft of Dacron to hold the powder down might be OK. If you are just shooting at the range, just raise the muzzle to get the powder down by the primer. If hunting, you may need a filler. The decision is how do your loads perform.

[44man]

I use a fast powder in my 45-70 revolver, (4759) and have tested many times. A tuft of Dacron DOES improve accuracy.
The stuff is so light and fluffy, I don't think it can ever act as a secondary projectile.
I stay away from dense fillers or wads.

[Rocky Raab]

I stay away from fillers, period. I think the risks outweigh the gains, but won't argue with those who believe otherwise. They aren't using my guns or my body parts, so they can do as they wish.

[mpmarty]

+1 on not trusting fillers. I quit that game years ago and with Unique it is not necessary. Some of my old 2400 loads from the early eighties used a tuft of dacron pillow stuffing and worked OK but caused a ring bulge in my Enfield Martini single shot chamber. No more fillers. Ever!

[nanuk]

I have a 500BPE that I want to make up Nitro for Black loads. I've done lots of reading.
I have loaded black over a 440gr Jword, and it ballooned the case to the generous chamber, so I'm thinking the pressures were up there.

when it comes to fillers, what I have concluded is:
1) use light filler as it IS a projectile and adds to overall projectile weight\
2) use enough to keep powder at the base, and fills the rest so NOTHING moves and the boolit holds everything in place.
3) NEVER use "Just a tuft" against the powder, where there will be ANY open space between filler and boolit. "Just a tuft" can move and allow powder to settle in other locations.
4) I am apprehensive to start loading these, as my rifle is quite valuable to me. But I do want to shoot it more, and BP is not a very good option for me at this time.
5) I have read some pretty convincing evidence that if done right, there is no issues.
6) opinions are just that. I prefer to read and study actual examples/experiments such as Ross Seyfried et al BUT I do research as much as I can every comment, regarless

[Bass Ackward]

I use fillers. But I limit myself to two. They are powder and bullet.

If you got space in the case, you either selected the wrong powder or you ain't tryin.

[Marlin Junky]

I use fillers. But I limit myself to two. They are powder and bullet.

If you got space in the case, you either selected the wrong powder or you ain't tryin.

Bass,

I agree with you in part; however, some of us shoot cast for the reduced velocity aspect. There are a lot of good powders out there for shooting reduced loads in 1/3 to 1/2 capacity charges that don't need fillers. For the straight wall cases, look to the faster shotgun/pistol powders. Unique and 2400 are good choices but there are others.

MJ

[Larry Gibson]

noylj

.....' A very small tuft of Dacron to hold the powder down might be OK"


That is precisely what you don't want to do. You then have a wad, not a filler. If you read the verifyed reports of barrel "ringing" you will find they were all from the use of a "wad" not a filler.

I'm not going to try to convince you or anyone else to use a dacron filler, I only advise that its use will really improve ignition consistency and hence accuracy with certain combinations of cast bullet weight and powder. Consider all the bajillion rounds of shotgun ammuntion fired every year; they have "wads" in them don't they. Problem is the term "wad" is a misnomer in their case as the "wad" is really a "filler", either plastic or fiber. None of them leave a complete empty space between the wad and the base of the shot charge or slug. Most of the plastic wads do leave air pockets. It is the same with dacron. It is not dense and adds little to the weight of the projectile yet it certain (well proven) increases ignition consistencey and accuracy with medium and slower burning powders that are used at less than 80% loading density. Like most things, a dacron filler when used correctly is very benificial. Conversely like most things (including the powder, any powder, used) if misused it can cause damage. I'm well aware of damge caused to chambers from "ringing" but I have to say that I've not heard of a single documented case where a simple wad (I've heard of none using a proper dacron filler) of dacron, kapoc or even tissue paper over an appropriate powder charge has caused any injury to any one. Some of the denser fillers used by some are another story.

I also do not use a filler with every powder. Most of the faster burning powders do not need it with an appropriate bullet/load combination. I shoot thousands of rounds of light weight cast bullets in my .30s/.31s/.35/ .375 and .45 caliber rifles over small charges of Bullseye. No wad (I do not use wads) or filler is used when not needed.

Sometimes given a lighter weight bullet in larger cases over 2400, 4227, 4198, 4759 or 5744 I will use a filler. For example using a filler over 4759 or 5744 is very benificial to economy and accuracy with 300 - 400 gr bullets in my trapdoor 45-70s. I can equal the same velocity with better accuracy using about 3-5 gr less powder at the same psi when a 1 - 1 1/4 gr dacron filler is used. I have verifyed this many times through chronographing, measuring pressure (Oehler M43) and on target results.

When using medium (RL7/3031/4895) up through slower (4350, 4831, RL19, RL22, etc.) burning powders and the loading density is less than 80% I will invariable use a dacron filler. I do this simply because after 40+ years of using and testing the dacron filler over chronographs and also measuring the psi I have the utmost faith that the dacron filler will assist in uniforming ignition and getting the best accuracy possible.

In that 40+ years with thousands upon thousands of rounds tested and shot I've yet to see any example of any damage to the firearm, any goop left in the barrel or of any "pressure spikes". What I have found was improved accuracy and using less powder to get that accuracy at the same velocity. As of late I have also experimented with 3 types of "buffer" as a filler. I have not found it to be any better than dacron so far. I am continuing to experiment and test different loads in different cartridges with it seeking an answer. Until (if?) I find something better a dacron filler is to be recommended with those powder/bullet combinations that will benifit from it. Each us is free to do as they please.

Larry Gibson

[The Double D]

I wouldn't use a filler unless I found that I needed to. Read about a lot of barrels ruined by filler. A very small tuft of Dacron to hold the powder down might be OK. If you are just shooting at the range, just raise the muzzle to get the powder down by the primer. If hunting, you may need a filler. The decision is how do your loads perform.

I'll bet you have never read about one single barrel ruined by a filler. Improper use of a wad, yeas, but not a filler. Do you know the difference?

[The Double D]

I stay away from fillers, period. I think the risks outweigh the gains, but won't argue with those who believe otherwise. They aren't using my guns or my body parts, so they can do as they wish.

Rocky, Have you ever read Schwartz and Dell's The Modern Schuetzen Rifle?

[44man]

noylj

.....' A very small tuft of Dacron to hold the powder down might be OK"


That is precisely what you don't want to do. You then have a wad, not a filler. If you read the verifyed reports of barrel "ringing" you will find they were all from the use of a "wad" not a filler.

I'm not going to try to convince you or anyone else to use a dacron filler, I only advise that its use will really improve ignition consistency and hence accuracy with certain combinations of cast bullet weight and powder. Consider all the bajillion rounds of shotgun ammuntion fired every year; they have "wads" in them don't they. Problem is the term "wad" is a misnomer in their case as the "wad" is really a "filler", either plastic or fiber. None of them leave a complete empty space between the wad and the base of the shot charge or slug. Most of the plastic wads do leave air pockets. It is the same with dacron. It is not dense and adds little to the weight of the projectile yet it certain (well proven) increases ignition consistencey and accuracy with medium and slower burning powders that are used at less than 80% loading density. Like most things, a dacron filler when used correctly is very benificial. Conversely like most things (including the powder, any powder, used) if misused it can cause damage. I'm well aware of damge caused to chambers from "ringing" but I have to say that I've not heard of a single documented case where a simple wad (I've heard of none using a proper dacron filler) of dacron, kapoc or even tissue paper over an appropriate powder charge has caused any injury to any one. Some of the denser fillers used by some are another story.

I also do not use a filler with every powder. Most of the faster burning powders do not need it with an appropriate bullet/load combination. I shoot thousands of rounds of light weight cast bullets in my .30s/.31s/.35/ .375 and .45 caliber rifles over small charges of Bullseye. No wad (I do not use wads) or filler is used when not needed.

Sometimes given a lighter weight bullet in larger cases over 2400, 4227, 4198, 4759 or 5744 I will use a filler. For example using a filler over 4759 or 5744 is very benificial to economy and accuracy with 300 - 400 gr bullets in my trapdoor 45-70s. I can equal the same velocity with better accuracy using about 3-5 gr less powder at the same psi when a 1 - 1 1/4 gr dacron filler is used. I have verifyed this many times through chronographing, measuring pressure (Oehler M43) and on target results.

When using medium (RL7/3031/4895) up through slower (4350, 4831, RL19, RL22, etc.) burning powders and the loading density is less than 80% I will invariable use a dacron filler. I do this simply because after 40+ years of using and testing the dacron filler over chronographs and also measuring the psi I have the utmost faith that the dacron filler will assist in uniforming ignition and getting the best accuracy possible.

In that 40+ years with thousands upon thousands of rounds tested and shot I've yet to see any example of any damage to the firearm, any goop left in the barrel or of any "pressure spikes". What I have found was improved accuracy and using less powder to get that accuracy at the same velocity. As of late I have also experimented with 3 types of "buffer" as a filler. I have not found it to be any better than dacron so far. I am continuing to experiment and test different loads in different cartridges with it seeking an answer. Until (if?) I find something better a dacron filler is to be recommended with those powder/bullet combinations that will benifit from it. Each us is free to do as they please.

Larry Gibson
This is very well said Larry. Done right and Dacron works.

[leadman]

I have used dacron as a filler with good results. As to the question of how much to use I started by weighing the dacron, started a 1/4 grain, and put this in a 30-06 case to see how it fit with the charge of powder. If it contacted the powder and had to be pushed in the mouth slightly to allow the bullet to start I would fire some rounds, if ignition was still poor I would then go to 1/2 gr. Haven't found much need for more than this.

I do not weigh dacron as it is fairly easy to pull off a tuft of the proper amount.

Maybe Larry with add his method. As always reduce your load as dacron usually will increase pressure, especially in bottleneck rounds from my experience.

Use this info at your own risk.

[Marvin S]

I use it in my 1886 in 45-70 as directed in the Lyman manual. Accuracy has been extremely good using it so I will continue.

[1Shirt]

Like Larry says, a little goes a long way and works for me. Well written Larry!
1Shirt!:coffeecom

[MakeMineA10mm]

I stay away from fillers, period. I think the risks outweigh the gains, but won't argue with those who believe otherwise. They aren't using my guns or my body parts, so they can do as they wish.

I almost agree with Rocky, maybe 70%. I've never done it, and have not had an application that required it. The closest I've come is shooting light loads of pistol powder in 30-06 w/ cast boolits, but I just tip the muzzle up in between each shot and I haven't had much trouble.

I think it can very much be safe, as long as you follow the recommended practice. There's load data in some reloading manuals from some generation that included loads with fillers (can't remember which right now, but I want to say it was Lyman's).

Why are you considering using them? I know in my case, with the 30-06, verticle stringing in the group can be a sign suggesting trying fillers. Of course, the alternative is to go to a slower-burning powder that takes up more space in the case. If you want super-light loads, you could try something like Trail Boss. For medium-light loads, everyone sings the praises of 2400 as a bulky, non-position-sensitive powder. In the end though, I'd never dissuade someone from trying it out, as long as they are following safe practices, as you never know what trick will get your gun with your loads to shoot like wildfire (until you try it).

[MT Gianni]

For those of you with a copy of ken Waters Pet loads I suggest you reread his piece on the 32-20. If a filler can be used in that small of a case to improve burning efficiency then it can be used in many others. I have used fillers in the 243 before but currently stay away from a greatly reduced bottleneck case.